Internet News

A pre-roll ad for a Comedy Central programme called East Mode with Nigel Ng featured a young man and his parents sitting together over tea. At the beginning of the ad, the mother said, Son, we're worried about you. The father then said, It's just you are nearly 30 years old now and you have never brought a girl home to meet us. Or a boy. No-one. The mother continued, So we've arranged something for you. The young man interrupted, I told you, I'm not into this whole arranged marriage thing. The mother replied, It's not that, that's such an antiquated tradition, so intrusive. The son asked, OK, so what have you arranged? The parents were shown taking each other's hands before the father said, We have arranged for you a f[bleep] buddy. The word fuck was partially censored. Both parents looked pleased and proud. The son looked shocked and said, A what? The mother said, Oh sorry, maybe you kids call it something else these days. You know, someone you have casual sex with, friend with benefits. The father continued, Cum chums, pound pals. They then interviewed a series of potential partners. The interview conversations included the claims d in the v action, penis to enjoy, if you do decide to try some pegging and I'm more into mutual masturbation these days.

The ad was seen before a YouTube video called 10 Most Powerful Prehistoric Animals that Ever Existed on the Facts Machine channel.

A complainant challenged whether:

1. the sexually explicit and profane language in the ad was offensive; and

2. the ad was irresponsibly targeted, as it was shown before a programme that they believed would be of interest to children. Response

Paramount acknowledged that the ad was not suitable for children and said they had not intended it to be seen by children or served alongside content served to children. They said that their agency set its audience targeting to 18+. They said that the Facts Machine YouTube channel was not labelled as Made for kids and that this meant that adult content would not be completely restricted, and some ads suitable for adults might be shown, especially if the channel was viewed via a device logged into an adult user's account.

Paramount said that the ad was no longer running and that they had initiated a review of their compliance procedures relating to age-restrictions of programme content advertising and issues such as bleeping and adult content warnings.

ASA Assessment: Complaints upheld

1. Upheld

The ASA acknowledged that the ad was intended to be humorous and irreverent and that it reflected the content of the advertised show. We noted that the ad did not include any explicit visuals and that the humour in the ad was generated in part by the contrast between the polite, formal situation and the profane conversation. However, we considered the profane comedy and language and explicit sexual references were likely to cause serious offence to a general audience. Viewers who were not familiar with the advertised show and who had not been warned of the adult content of the ad were particularly likely to be offended.

We concluded that, in the context and media in which it had appeared, the ad was likely to cause serious offence.

2. Upheld

We noted that Facts Machine described itself as a channel where you will find videos about interesting stuff from various topics. We considered that, although it was not explicitly targeted at children, the channel showed content that was likely to appeal to children, such as short-form content about animals. In light of the ad's use of profane comedy and language and explicit sexual references, we considered that the ad should have been appropriately targeted to avoid the risk of children seeing it.

We noted the targeting exclusions and keywords placed by Paramount and we considered it reasonable for them to have expected that, by placing them, the ad would not have appeared around content of interest to children. However, those exclusions had proved insufficient to prevent the ad from being seen around videos on Facts Machine channel, before an animal video. Because the ad appeared before a video likely to appeal to children, we concluded that it had been inappropriately targeted.

We concluded that the ad had been irresponsibly targeted.

We told Paramount UK Partnership to take care to avoid causing serious or widespread offence in future and to ensure their ads were appropriately targeted and that ads that were unsuitable for viewing by children did not appear in media that was likely to appeal to children.

The Christian Institute has been reading a report by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) and has realised that the Christians will be first against the wall when the UK government empowers US internet Goliaths partnering with the easily offended to control what people are allowed to say.

The Christian Institute explains:

A report titled An Unsafe Bill , published by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), outlines the Online Safety Bill's impact on free speech, privacy and innovation

The Bill gives strong incentives for social media companies and search engines to restrict content which is legal but harmful to adults and empowers Government ministers to decide what this covers.

The IEA warns this will give the Secretary of State for Culture and watchdog Ofcom unprecedented powers to define and limit speech, with limited parliamentary or judicial oversight.

The report highlights that because tech companies could be fined up to ten per cent of their annual global turnover if they fail to uphold their new duties, platforms may use automated tools in a precautionary and censorious manner.

The briefing also warns that the Bill's free speech protections appear wholly inadequate, with the risk that those claiming distress will request the removal of speech with which they disagree.

Writing in The Times, its co-author Matthew Lesh called the Bill a recipe for automated over-removal of speech on an industrial scale, to ensure compliance and placate the most easily offended. He commented:

Is the government trying to out-compete Russia and China in online censorship?

 

An Unsafe Bill

29th June 2022. See full report [pdf] from iea.org.uk

Here is the summery of the quoted report.

An Unsafe Bill: How the Online Safety Bill threaten s free speech , innovation and privacy

By Matthew Lesh, Head of Public Policy, Institute of Economic Affairs, and Victoria Hewson , Head of Regulatory Affairs , Institute of Economic Affairs

Summary

• - The Online Safety Bill establishes a new regulatory regime for digital platforms intended to improve online safety.

• - The Bill raises significant issues for freedom of expression, privacy and innovation.

• - There is a lack of evidence to justify the legislation, with respect to both the alleged prevalence of what the Bill treats as ' harm ' and the link between the proposed measures and the desired objectives.

Freedom of expression

• - The duties in the Bill, in respect of illegal content and legal content that is harmful to adults, combine d with the threat of large fines and criminal liability, risks platforms using automated tools in a precautionary and censorious manner .

• - The Bill appears designed to discourage platforms from hosting speech that the Secretary of State considers to be harmf ul, even if that speech is legal. The Bill allows for the expansion of the category of ' legal but harmful ' content with limited parliamentary scrutiny .

• - The Secretary of State and Ofcom will have unprecedented powers to define and limit speech, with limited parliamentary or judicial oversight.

• - The introduction of age assurance requirements will force search engines and social media to withhold potentially harmful information by default, making it difficultforadults to access information without logging int o services, and entirely forbidding children from content even if it could be educationally valuable.

• - Some small to mid - sized overseas platforms could block access for UK users to limit their regulatory costs and risks, thereby reducing British users ' acce ss to online content .

• - Safeguards designed to protect free expression are comparatively weak and could backfire by requiring application in a ' consistent ' manner, leading to the removal of more content.

Privacy

• - The safety duties will lead platforms to profi le users and monitor their content and interactions including by using technologies mandated by Ofcom .

• - The inclusion of private messaging in the duties risks undermining encryption .

• - The child safety duties will infringe the privacy of adult users by requir ing them to verify their age, through an identity verification or age assurance process, to access content that is judged unsuitable for children.

• - The user empowerment duties will further necessitate many users verifying their identities to platforms.

Innovation

• - The Bill imposes byzantine requirements on businesses of all sizes. Platforms face large regulatory costs and criminal liability for violations, which could discourage investment and research and development in the United Kingdom.

• - The Bill ' s regulatory costs will be more burdensome for start - ups and small and medium - sized businesses, which lack the resources to invest in legal and regulatory compliance and automated systems, and therefore the Bill could entrench the market position of ' Big Tech ' companies.

• - The likely result of the additional regulatory and cost burdens on digital businesses will be the slower and more cautious introduction of new innovative products or features , and fewer companies entering the sector. This will lead to less competition and less incentive to innovate, with resulting losses to consumer welfare

California state lawmakers are discussing proposed legislation to require age and identity verification for all internet users. The proposal is bassed upon the UK's Age Appropriate Design Code that requires websites likely to be accessed by under 18s to implement data protection according to age. Younger viewers will be restricted from handing over personal data. But of course the rub is that the websites needs to know the age of the reader to implement this.

The bill, AB2273, is known as The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act.

Critics of the legislation contend this requirement threatens the privacy of adults and the ability to use the internet anonymously. Eric Goldman, Santa Clara University School of Law professor commented:

The bill pretextually claims to protect children, but it will change the Internet for everyone. In order to determine who is a child, websites and apps will have to authenticate the age of ALL consumers before they can use the service. No one wants this.

The bill will put an end to casual web browsing, forcing companies to collect personal information they don't want to store and protect -- and that consumers don't want to provide -- in order to authenticate the age of visitors. And since age authentication generally requires identity details, that threatens the ability to use the internet anonymously.

China's internet censors at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the State Administration of Radio and Television have said that qualifications will be required for posting online content that requires a higher professional level such as medicine or law.

Subjects who want to comment online about health or legal matters, for example, will need to have an appropriate qualification and will even be required to submit their qualifications to the streaming platform they use. The platform should then review the qualifications.

From the South China Morning Post:

The 18-point guideline, published by the National Radio and Television Administration and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism on Wednesday, requires influencers to have relevant qualifications to discuss some topics, such as law, finance, medicine and education, although authorities did not specify the qualifications needed.

The release also contained other rules for live streamers. They are not allowed to post content that distorts or weakens the CCP, like using deep fake technology on state and party leaders. Influencers are also prohibited from showing an extravagant lifestyle, excessive food wastage, sexually provocative or suggestive content, and a lot of luxury goods.

Instagram is testing new options for people on Instagram to verify their age, starting with people based in the US. If someone attempts to edit their date of birth on Instagram from under the age of 18 to 18 or over, we'll require them to verify their age using one of three options: upload their ID, record a video selfie or ask mutual friends to verify their age. We're testing this so we can make sure teens and adults are in the right experience for their age group. We are also partnering with Yoti, a company that specializes in online age verification, to help ensure people's privacy.

In 2019, we began asking people to provide their age when signing up for Instagram. Since then, we've made this a requirement. Knowing people's age allows us to provide appropriate experiences to different age groups, specifically teens.

We require people to be at least 13 years old to sign up for Instagram. In some countries, our minimum age is higher. When we know if someone is a teen (13-17), we provide them with age-appropriate experiences like defaulting them into private accounts, preventing unwanted contact from adults they don't know and limiting the options advertisers have to reach them with ads.

In addition to having someone upload their ID, we're testing two new ways to verify a person's age:

Video Selfie: You can choose to upload a video selfie to verify your age. If you choose this option, you'll see instructions on your screen to guide you. After you take a video selfie, we share the image with Yoti, and nothing else. Yoti's technology estimates your age based on your facial features and shares that estimate with us. Meta and Yoti then delete the image. The technology cannot recognize your identity 203 just your age.

Social Vouching: This option allows you to ask mutual followers to confirm how old you are. The person vouching must be at least 18 years old, must not be vouching for anyone else at that time and will need to meet other safeguards we have in place. The three people you select to vouch for you will receive a request to confirm your age and will need to respond within three days.

You will still be able to upload your ID to verify your age with forms of identification like a driver's license or ID card. We will use your ID to confirm your age and help keep our community safe. Your ID will be stored securely on our servers and is deleted within 30 days.

The government of Nigeria has ordered all open-access online platforms to remove, disable or block access to all pornographic content.

Although the introduction to the order, which was issued last week, specifically targets any non-consensual content, which displays partial or full nudity, sexual acts, deep fake or revenge porn, a less-prominent section expands the ban to all illegal material and orders platforms to inform users through the terms of service not to create, publish, promote, modify, transmit, store or share any content or information that is defamatory, libelous, pornographic, revenge porn, bullying, harassing, obscene, encouraging money laundering, exploiting a child, fraud, violence or inconsistent with Nigeria's laws and public order.

The order was made public last Tuesday, with all platforms available given only 24 hours to comply.

It is unclear what the reach and success of the measure has been in practice.

Saint-narcisse is a 2020 Canada film by Bruce La Bruce
Starring Félix-Antoine Duval, Tania Kontoyanni and Alexandra Petrachuk

When a young man who thought his mother was dead discovers that she may still be alive, he goes on a quest to find her. His journey takes him to a remote cabin in the woods where his mother lives in exile with a mysterious young woman.

The BBFC rated the film 18 uncut for strong sex, sexual violence. The BBFC explained further its decision:

There are scenes of strong sexual activity, some of which include nudity. There are also strong sex references.

There is a scene of incest between adult males. There is sexual abuse and harassment from a priest in a position of power and trust.

There is strong violence in scenes in which men are stabbed, accompanied by injury detail and blood in the aftermath of violence. There is also drug misuse and infrequent strong language ('fuck')'

UK gay-focused (non-porn) distributor Peccadillo Pictures has claimed that Amazon Prime Video UK is refusing to make Canadian artist and filmmaker Bruce LaBruce's provocative dark comedy Saint-Narcisse available on its online store.

Company MD Tom Abell said its request to list the title on Amazon's UK online offering had been turned down without explanation. Abell said:

We are totally mystified as to why Amazon Prime Video is refusing to make the critically acclaimed Saint-Narcisse available to its customers, both here in the UK and internationally. The DVD continues to be sold by Amazon but they won't stream it.

Abell noted that the company had a similar experience with Chilean prison drama and Venice Queer Lion winner The Prince in 2020. In that instance, Peccadillo was informed the movie contained offensive content that clashed with the streamer's guidelines.

The film had previously been available on Amazon Prime Video in the U.S. and France but was removed in May, also without explanation.

Japan has passed a law criminalizing online insults. Breaking the law will result in up to one year in jail or a fine.

As reported by the Japan Times, the law was passed this week and its enforcement will begin this summer. It was passed as a knee jerk response to a public outcry after professional wrestler Hana Kimura committed suicide in 2020 after being insulted online.

Before this latest law update insults were still an offense with a punishment of a maximum of 30 days in jail and a ¥10,000 (approximately $75) fine.

The new online insults legislation carries a maximum of one year in jail or a ¥300,000 (approximately $2,870) fine.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has reacted to a recent mass shooting in Buffalo by signing as many as ten new laws, including one that concerns social media.

Hochul said that New York will require social media companies to report hateful content:

In the state of New York, we're now requiring social media networks to monitor and report hateful conduct on their platforms, Hochul announced.

According to the governor, the state will set up a task force whose focus will be violent extremism and social media, and this body will also investigate the role of social media in promoting domestic terror.

Authorities in Russia have confirmed a that a new crackdown to prevent citizens from accessing VPN services is underway. Internet censor Roscomnadzor says that measures are being taken to limit access to VPN services that violate Russian law, ie providing access to content previously deemed illegal by the government.

Just like the UK, Russia introduced its internet censorship law claiming it to be a measure to ensure the safety of its citizens online. The Extremist Websites Blocking Law created a national blacklist for ISPs to block access to banned websites.

Over the last decade Russia has introduced more laws to expand its blocking powers to encompass pirate streaming sites and torrent portals, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and any news sites that stray from the Kremlin's definition of factual reporting.

In response, citizens got accustomed to unblocking unlicensed media sites using their VPN and Tor skills to get an unrestricted view of the world. Russia responded by placing strict rules on VPN servers in Russia and then via the VPN Law, outlawing internet tools that enable access to illegal information.

Russia has been using its anti-VPN legislation to remove hundreds of thousands of VPN-related links from Google and since the invasion of Ukraine, has stepped up the pace . Tor is also in the middle of a blocking drama and now faces a court battle .

Over the past few days, Russian VPN users reported fresh issues when trying to access well-known providers such as NordVPN, which does not even have servers in Russia. Problems were also experienced when accessing Switzerland-based Proton VPN, peer-to-peer censorship circumvention tool Lantern, Windscribe, and related services including VPN creation tool Outline .

In a statement to local media, telecoms watchdog Roscomnadzor reiterated that website unblocking tools are illegal and measures are being taken to limit access to them.