Free Speech & Cancel Culture

Canada's ruling 'Liberal' government has announced that it plans to make online hate speech a crime punishable by as much as $20,000 ($16,250 US) for the first offense and $50,000 ($40,600 US) for the second.

The proposal would punish social media users who broke the law but exempt social media companies that host such content from fines.

Canada's Attorney General David Lametti has claimed that the proposed law would not target simple expressions of dislike or disdain during a virtual press conference. Instead, Lametti said, the law is only designed to punish the most extreme forms of hatred that expresses detestation or vilification of a person or group on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

The government, headed by Prime Minsiter Justin Trudeau, released a statement outlining the goals of the proposed legislation , known as Bill C-36, as well as other steps being taken in the name of online racial abuse. The government also notes that it will released a detailed technical discussion paper in the coming weeks to inform Canadians about the nitty gritty of this proposed law.

GB News was the subject of a widespread boycott in the first week of its broadcast as several companies pulled advertising from the new channel. The boycott was largely coordinated by the censorial campaigning group StopFundingHate.

GB News chair criticised the boycott and now presenter Nigel Farage has said that some companies have already U-turned on their decision to remove advertising from the channel. In particular IKEA and Vodafone both clarified they may resume advertising following a review.

In a TV debate on the channel, Dehenna Davison, the MP for Bishops Auckland, agreed with Farage the cancel culture movement was especially concerning as calls for a boycott had begun long before GB News had even begun to broadcast. She added:

Just because GB News is daring to do something a bit different and talk about topics the mainstream haven't been talking about, I think it makes it dangerous.

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden also gave support to GB News when he called GB News a welcome addition to Britain's media sphere. In a column for the Sunday Telegraph, Dowden wrote:

When he launched the channel, veteran broadcaster Andrew Neil vowed that GB News would not be 'an echo chamber for the metropolitan mindset', and that it would 'empower those who feel their concerns have been unheard'

Update: Ofcom boss does not see anything problematic with GB News

25th June 2021. See article from dailymail.co.uk

An Ofcom boss said he has seen nothing problematic on GB News after brands pulled advertising from the new channel. Group director of content and media policy Kevin Bakhurst said there was nothing that would worry me as a regulator about its content.

Bakhurst, a former BBC news executive, said he was not part of Ofcom's formal monitoring but had been tuning in. He told a media industry event everything he had seen was accurate and looked like it achieved due impartiality:

From what I've seen so far, and I was watching it through my news background but also through my regulator's eye now, overall there's nothing that leaps out at me as thinking "that's problematic".

Call for evidence: racial and ethnic stereotyping in advertising

The death of George Floyd in 2020 and the global, high-profile reaction which followed brought to the forefront discussions about racial inequality. From its perspective as the UK advertising regulator, the ASA has been reflecting on what can be done to address factors that cause racial and ethnic minorities to experience disproportionately adverse outcomes in different aspects of their lives.

The ASA has a strong record of banning ads that are likely to cause serious or widespread offence on the grounds of race and ethnicity. As a proactive regulator, the ASA must ensure that we are aware of how societal values and prevailing standards are constantly evolving and what this means for our interpretation and application of the advertising rules.

We are now putting out a call for evidence to help us establish whether and, if so, to what extent racial and ethnic stereotypes, when featured in ads, may contribute to real world harms, for example, unequal outcomes for different racial and ethnic groups. In the context of the call for evidence, we're particularly interested in the following areas:

• The depiction of race and ethnicity in advertising, including examples of racial and ethnic stereotypes.

• How the issues of objectification and sexualisation relate to race or ethnicity in advertising.

• How particular cultures, or racial and ethnic groups with particular religious affiliations, are portrayed in advertising.

• The use of humour relating to race or ethnicity in advertising.

We recognise that evidence can take many forms. Stakeholders may choose to submit existing evidence, secondary analysis, bespoke research or examples. Both quantitative and qualitative evidence would be useful to us.

We are also interested in hearing from members of the public about how this type of advertising has affected them and we would welcome your own personal observations or views.

Novelist Elin Hilderbrand suffered a woke lynching on Instagram for a passage in her new summer 2021 book, Golden Girl. The passage is an exchange between two teenagers, Savannah and Vivi, where they discuss how Vivi will hide in the attic of Savannah's home without Savannah's parents knowing.

You're suggesting I hide here all summer? Vivi asks. Like... like Anne Frank? she adds. The narrator then says, This makes them both laugh -- but is it really funny, and is Vivi so far off base?

The passage was criticized through a post on the Instagram page of Little, Brown and Company, Hilderbrand's publisher. The original post, which has since been deleted, described the passage as horifically antisemitic, and demanded an apology from both the publisher and Hilderbrand.

Others accused Hilderbrand of thinking antisemitism is funny, described the passage as gobsmacked in every way with insensitivity, and disgusted.

The lynching forced the author to apologize, promising to remove the passage from all future printings. Hilderbrand wrote in her apology:

In a flashback scene in GOLDEN GIRL, p. 144, my main character Vivi compares herself to Anne Frank. I want to wholeheartedly apologize for this. It was meant as hyperbole but was a poor choice, that was offensive and tasteless. I have asked my publisher to remove the passage from digital versions of the book immediately and from all future printings.

Another similar example of book censorship targeted Casey McQuiston for her book Red, White & Royal Blue , a popular 2019 romance novel. This time the 'offending' post referenced Israel. A supporting character says:

Well, my UN ambassador fucked up his one job and said something idiotic about Israel, and now I have to call Netanyahu and personally apologize.

A Twitter user claimed the passage was unnecessary, and another insisted that the passage : normalizes the genocide & war crimes done by Israel that will always be backed up & unashamedly supported by America.

McQuiston responded that the line was "not a statement of my beliefs" but "a dig at US presidential diplomacy." She also caved to the complainers and stated that the line has "been changed from all future printings."

Last month, the Oversight Board upheld Facebook's suspension of former US President Donald Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts following his praise for people engaged in violence at the Capitol on January 6. But in doing so, the board criticized the open-ended nature of the suspension, stating that it was not appropriate for Facebook to impose the indeterminate and standardless penalty of indefinite suspension. The board instructed us to review the decision and respond in a way that is clear and proportionate, and made a number of recommendations on how to improve our policies and processes.

We are today announcing new enforcement protocols to be applied in exceptional cases such as this, and we are confirming the time-bound penalty consistent with those protocols which we are applying to Mr. Trump's accounts. Given the gravity of the circumstances that led to Mr. Trump's suspension, we believe his actions constituted a severe violation of our rules which merit the highest penalty available under the new enforcement protocols. We are suspending his accounts for two years, effective from the date of the initial suspension on January 7 this year.

At the end of this period, we will look to experts to assess whether the risk to public safety has receded. We will evaluate external factors, including instances of violence, restrictions on peaceful assembly and other markers of civil unrest. If we determine that there is still a serious risk to public safety, we will extend the restriction for a set period of time and continue to re-evaluate until that risk has receded.

An in-game ad for the online game Dream Zone: Interactive Story , was seen on 4 January 2021 in the online property trading game, Landlord. It featured a cartoon video of a woman being splashed in her face with water by a faulty tap. On-screen text stated Turn it off. She bent down and looked into a cupboard under the sink and saw a leaking pipe. Behind her was a woman wearing a towel about to hand over a mobile phone. Two buttons were shown with the options Help her and Take advantage. A super-imposed cartoon hand selected the Take advantage button. The woman wearing the towel bit her lip and the video shot to the first woman's face. She displayed a startled expression and then smiled. Beneath the video, text stated Play and have fun You choose your destiny.

The app was described by SWAG MASHA in the Apple App store as a series of interactive stories for guys and a thrilling game for men.

A complainant, who believed the ad was sexually suggestive, challenged whether the ad:

1. was irresponsible and offensive because it objectified women; and

2. had been irresponsibly targeted.

Reality Games, the publisher of the game app in which the ad appeared, said that since they were notified of the complaint, they had blocked ads for the game Dream Zone: Interactive Story from being served.

ASA Assessment: Complaint upheld

1. Upheld

The ad, which was for a dating and love simulation game for men, featured two women; one looking into a cupboard and the other behind her wearing a towel. Two options appeared on-screen for the woman standing up: to either help her or take advantage of the woman looking into the cupboard. We considered that the option to take advantage had sexual connotations and alluded to non-consensual sexual activity where the woman looking into the cupboard would be unaware of the second character's intentions. We considered that the ad objectified and stereotyped women by presenting them as objects in a scenario designed for the purposes of titillating viewers. Overall, we considered that the ad was likely to cause serious offence and included a gender stereotype in a way that was likely to cause harm. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible and breached the Code.

2. Upheld

The ad was for a game that featured adult themes and sexually suggestive content, which was seen in an unrelated online property trading game. We considered that because this specific ad was irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence it was not suitable to be featured in any game. More generally, we expected Dream Zone to have targeted their ads for adult games to users aged 18 and over by using age-verification measures including interest-based targeting factors that described an adult audience and excluded a child audience. However, the ad was seen in a game that had an age rating of 4+ years and therefore could be downloaded by children. The Dream Zone game had an age rating of 17+ years but did not feature any verification measures that would prevent the game being downloaded by children who had seen the ad.

Furthermore, we considered that those playing an unrelated game would not expect to be served an ad for a dating game which featured adult content. We acknowledged that on receipt of the complaint the publisher of the game in which the ad was seen had taken measures to ensure that the ad would not be shown in the game. Nevertheless, Dream Zone were responsible for ensuring that their ads were correctly targeted and had not done so. We therefore concluded that the ad had been irresponsibly targeted.

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Swag Masha LLC to ensure that their ads were socially responsible and did not cause serious or widespread offence by objectifying women. We told them to ensure that they did not present gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm and to ensure that their ads were responsibly targeted.

Woke Britbox bosses have added a trigger warning to Sacha Baron Cohen's Da Ali G Show.

The Streaming platform is warning viewers sensitive to racist terms. Viewers are warned episodes contain crude humour, including racist terms which may offend, sexual references and strong language.

The show first aired on Channel 4 in 2000. Cohen won a string of awards playing the wannabe urban rapper and spoof interviewer for several years.

The Sun quotes a TV insider saying:

The warning will be greeted with disbelief by anyone who watched the original series which was almost universally liked.

There were some voices who criticised the show for allowing people to laugh at black, urban street culture, but the majority of viewers thought Ali G was hilarious.

The classic comedy Keeping Up Appearances, which originally ran from 1990 to 1995, has also suffered similar treatment by Britbox.  A trigger warning has been prefixed saying that episodes contain language and attitudes of the era that may offend.

The Sun speculates that the offending lines were about Polish imigrants and phrases such as bent as a £4 note.

Offsite Comment: Is it cos I is racist?

20th May 2021. See article from spiked-online.com

Da Ali G Show, an anti-racist satire, has been slapped with content warnings about its racist content.

Google announced during its I/O developer conference, that editing capabilities of Google Docs have been expanded to police text for political incorrectness.

Google Docs will start suggesting changing words like mailman to mail carrier and chairman to chairperson , it has been revealed.

Users will also be prompted to avoid using passive voice or what Google determines to be offensive language.

CEO Sundar Pichai is said to have made implementing PC tenets a priority for the whole of Google.

China has launched a mobile app for citizens to report online comments against the ruling Communist Party and the country's history ahead of the party's upcoming 100th anniversary. China's Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) explained:

The new programme allows internet users to report those who spread mistaken opinions online in order to create a good public opinion atmosphere.

The offences that can be reported include distorting the party's history, or any comments against its leaders and policies, defaming national heroes and denying the excellence of advanced socialist culture.

We hope that most internet users will play an active role in supervising society and enthusiastically report harmful information.

The CAC notice did not explain what the punishment would be for people who are snitched up..

A paid-for Instagram post by @babyboofashion, an online clothing retailer, seen in October 2020, depicted various shots of women wearing lingerie and angel wings or animal ears. A voiceover stated, Halloween is the one night a year when a girl can dress like a total [bleeped out slut] and no other girls can say anything about it. The hard-core girls just wear lingerie and some form of animal ears. The video ended with a black screen with BABYBOO. BABYBOOFASHION.COM in white writing and a voiceover stating, Babyboofashion.com.

A complainant, who believed the ad was sexist, objectifying, and gave a harmful message to young women, challenged whether it was offensive and irresponsible.

Babyboo did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.

ASA Assessment: Complaint upheld

The ASA was concerned by Babyboo's lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code. We reminded Babyboo of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.

The ad depicted various models wearing lingerie and animal ears or angel wings. We considered the bright lighting and clothes rails in the background of some of the shots suggested the models were in the Babyboo shop and modelling the clothes. Although the models were shown in lingerie, we considered that most of the poses were not overly sexualised. However, in contrast, one shot depicted two models in lingerie and angel wings, kneeling on a bed with their legs apart. Both models looked at the camera seductively, while one of them twirled her hair and the other model moved her hands along her thighs. We considered that the shots of the models on the bed were suggestive, the poses were unnecessarily sexualised and had the effect of objectifying the women.

The accompanying voiceover stated, Halloween is the one night a year when a girl can dress like a total [bleeped out] and no other girls can say anything about it. We understood that the bleep censor was to obscure the word slut, but considered that it would be obvious to viewers what the obscured word was. The voiceover further stated that, The hard-core girls just wear lingerie and some form of animal ears. We understood that the voiceover quote was taken from a film. However, we considered it was presented out of context and was likely to be taken at face value.

We considered viewers were likely to understand from the ad that women who dressed and presented themselves in a similar way to the models shown were sluts. The term slut was a negative stereotype of women and was commonly used to refer to women who had or were perceived to have many sexual partners, in a derogatory way that passed judgment on those behaviours. We considered that the use of that word in the context of the ad was likely to be seen as demeaning to women. Further to that, the models were depicted in an objectifying way, accompanied by a message that this type of look and behaviour was aspirational -- for example, the reference to hard-core girls alongside images of girls in animal ears and lingerie implied that taking the idea to its extreme was to be admired.

While there was nothing inherently wrong with dressing in the way shown in the ad, or having multiple sexual partners, we considered that linking those things with the denigrating term slut, and implying women should aspire to being objectified, was problematic. Overall, we considered that the ad was likely to cause serious offence and included a gender stereotype in a way that was likely to cause harm. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible and breached the Code.

The ad must not appear in its current form. We told Babyboo Fashion Pty Ltd to ensure their advertising was socially responsible and did not cause serious or widespread offence by objectifying women. We also told Babyboo Fashion Pty Ltd to ensure they did not present gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm in their future advertising.

Intel is planning to enable gamers to filter strong language and 'hate speech' from their video game experience by creating an AI censor program called Bleep.

The company is working with Spirit AI to create a 'safe space' for sensitive souls.

Bleep allows gamers to adjust a sliding scale that bocks problematic speech including xenophobia and racism, ableism, misogyny, and name-calling. The system includes an on-off switch for the N-word.

Intel plans to launch the tool later in 2021.

New York Assembly Member Rebecca Seawright has announced bill A6540 which defines consent to sex as a freely given, knowledgeable and informed agreement obtained without the use of malice such as forcible compulsion, duress, coercion, deception, fraud, concealment or artifice.

If passed, this would be the first time lawmakers formally define the meaning of consent in the state's penal law for sexual assault and all crimes.

Seawright menacingly threatened in a statement:

The United States Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that a sex crime is committed every 73 seconds. We must stop this rising trend by clearly defining consent, thereby empowering our police and prosecutors to take action. The proper definition of consent in New York's laws will clarify lawful sexual conduct, guide behavior, and make it possible to hold sexual predators accountable.

Offsite Comment: If lying to get yourself laid is made a crime, no one will ever want to have sex again

10th April 2021. See article from rt.com by Charlie Stone

Being less than truthful to get your leg over could become a criminal offence if New York lawmakers get their way. This crazy intrusion into private lives ignores the fact everyone tells white lies to impress potential partners.

If you want to have sex with someone new these days, you'd better draw yourself up a contract... or you could end up in jail.

...See full article from rt.com

Previous editions of the American Library Association list have been dominated by complaints about books attempting to normalise gay or transgender relationships to children. This year marks a dramatic change and now most books have received complaints about racism issues and about divisive racial politics.

Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2020

The American Library Association Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 156 challenges to library, school, and university materials and services in 2020. Of the 273 books that were targeted, here are the most challenged, along with the reasons cited for censoring the books:

• George by Alex Gino
  Reasons: Challenged, banned, and restricted for LGBTQIA+ content, conflicting with a religious viewpoint, and not reflecting "the values of our community"

• Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You by Ibram X. Kendi and Jason Reynolds
  Reasons: Banned and challenged because of author's public statements, and because of claims that the book contains "selective storytelling incidents" and does not encompass racism against all people

• All American Boys by Jason Reynolds and Brendan Kiely
  Reasons: Banned and challenged for profanity, drug use, and alcoholism, and because it was thought to promote anti-police views, contain divisive topics, and be "too much of a sensitive matter right now"

• Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson
  Reasons: Banned, challenged, and restricted because it was thought to contain a political viewpoint and it was claimed to be biased against male students, and for the novel's inclusion of rape and profanity

• The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie
  Reasons: Banned and challenged for profanity, sexual references, and allegations of sexual misconduct by the author

• Something Happened in Our Town: A Child's Story About Racial Injustice by Marianne Celano, Marietta Collins, and Ann Hazzard, illustrated by Jennifer Zivoin
  Reasons: Challenged for "divisive language" and because it was thought to promote anti-police views

• To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
  Reasons: Banned and challenged for racial slurs and their negative effect on students, featuring a "white savior" character, and its perception of the Black experience

• Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
  Reasons: Banned and challenged for racial slurs and racist stereotypes, and their negative effect on students

• The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison
  Reasons: Banned and challenged because it was considered sexually explicit and depicts child sexual abuse

• The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas
  Reasons: Challenged for profanity, and it was thought to promote an anti-police message