Mediaboss Marketing

Opinion: Banning the teaching of critical race theory in Arizona schools is a slippery slope. What does Gov. Doug Ducey fear?

Joseph Russomanno| opinion contributor

What is Critical Race Theory?

CRT examines systemic racism as a part of American life and institutions and how it can give white people an advantage.

Erin Davoran and Dwight Adams, Wochit

When a government prohibits a specific message, thats censorship. Its also anti-democratic, despotic and disrespectful of its citizens, suggesting they are not equipped to handle the truth or even to consider alternate views.

Its also the sign of a weak government, one that fears new ideas that may challenge the status quo and expose existing myths. Controlling those ideas is mistakenly viewed as the best response.

When Gov. Doug Ducey signed legislation forbidding the teaching of critical race theory in Arizona schools, he checked all of these boxes and joined the truth deniers.

Another view: Sorry, Gov. Ducey, but you did NOT ban CRT

Truth doesnt magically appear. It comes from hard work that includes the serious consideration, discussion and debate of various ideas.

That discussion is not only protected by the First Amendment. Its also a primary reason our founders safeguarded speech and press from government interference with the First Amendment.

Exchanging ideas is the best path to truth discovery. Its an ongoing process with the possibility that what is regarded as truthful may be modified later when better evidence is discovered and considered. Limiting speech is an affront to truth discovery.

This loop of reconsideration is vital. Certainty is a trap. As the great jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes noted, Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so.

Existing beliefs need to be tested. The United States has committed itself to the idea of uninhibited, robust and wide open debate on public issues, at the same time recognizing that those discussions may be caustic. Both teachers and learners go to sleep at their post as soon as there is no enemy in the field, wrote philosopher John Stuart Mill.

Looking for the other side of the story? Subscribe today for access to even more opinions.

By closing discussion on an issue, one short-circuits the truth, becomes complicit in its cover-up and denies learning opportunities.

No issue merits more analysis than Americas tumultuous history with race. The new Arizona law, however, suppresses that effort, apparently steeped in misunderstanding of critical race theoryand the belief that it makes some people uncomfortable.

Guess what? Sometimes discovering the truth is uncomfortable.

In what has become a beacon for the exchange of ideas in schools, a University of Chicago report concluded that education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think.

No venue is more appropriate to conduct the exchange of ideas so cherished by our founders than our schools. Reminders surface frequently, a notable example stemming recently from Chapel Hill, N.C.,and the botched hiring of Nikole Hannah-Jones, the chief architect of the Pulitzer Prize-winning 1619 Project. The classroom is ideal for considering ideas, including that white supremacy is far more ingrained in our culture than many believe.

This law banning teaching critical race theory is not only unconstitutional, but its supporters step onto a very slippery slope. If critical race theoryis off limits today, then what topics become inappropriate in the future? Climate change? Voting rights?

What happens to books on these topics, including those on CRT itself? Are book bans on the horizon, too? It seems that 1984was not in the past. Oceania beckons.

It is important to remember that critical race theory, though based in fact, is just that a theory subject to examination.

But theories are often the seeds of truth. Imagine if other theories had been banned from schools or general discussion over history: Newtons gravity, Galileos Heliocentric model of the solar system or Einsteins theory of relativity. These were thought to be heretical in some circles, yet today we think of those opposition views as backward and ignorant.

How will our descendants view the July 2021 version of us?

Joseph Russomanno is an expert on First Amendment law and theory and a professor at ASU's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Reach him at russo@asu.edu.

Link:
If critical race theory is off limits in Arizona schools today, what's next? - The Arizona Republic

Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images

Governments are increasingly demanding the removal of journalist content from Twitter, the company's latest Transparency Report shows.

During the second half of 2020, says Twitter, it received 361 legal requests from governments to remove content from the verified accounts of 199 journalists and news outlets, up 26 per cent on the first half of the year.

Overall, the company says it received 38,524 legal demands to remove content specifying 131,933 accounts.

"Although there was a nine per cent decrease in the number of legal demands Twitter received, compared to the previous reporting period, these requests sought removal of content from the largest number of accounts ever in a single reporting period," says Twitter.

Twitter removed some or all of the content concerned in 29 per cent of cases almost all of which came from Japan, India, Russia, Turkey and South Korea.

Meanwhile, India has overtaken the US as the country making the most legal requests for information about accounts, representing a quarter of the total global volume and 15 per cent of the total number of accounts.

India has recently introduced new legislation aimed at regulating social media companies more tightly, and requiring them to appoint India-based chief compliance officers, nodal officers and grievance officers. The government has also stripped Twitter of its safe harbor immunity, meaning it is no longer protected from legal proceedings in the event of unlawful content posted by users.

The US, meanwhile, accounted for 22 per cent of information requests, and more than a third of emergency requests.

Twitter has also introduced a metric for tweets that violate its policies, and says that impressions on these tweets accounted for less than 0.1 per cent of all impressions for all tweets globally.

Of the 3.8 million tweets it removed for violating rules, more than three quarters received fewer than 100 impressions before they were pulled, with only six per cent getting more than 1,000 hits.

Enforcement of rule violation was up in several categories by 142 per cent in the case of abuse and harassment, 194 per cent for non-consensual nudity, 77 per cent for hateful conduct and 175 per cent for civic integrity violations such as the sharing of misleading election information.

Meanwhile, the number of accounts targeted for promoting suicide and self-harm nearly tripled.

There was only a six per cent rise in the number of accounts suspended for violations of Twitter's child sexual exploitation policy, and a 35 per cent fall in suspensions for terrorism and violent extremism.

However, says Twitter, "Varying country-specific Covid-19 restrictions and adjustments within our teams affected the efficiency of our content moderation work and the speed with which we enforced our policies."

Link:
Governments Increase Pressure On Twitter To Censor Journalists - Forbes

Its not necessarily a surprise that these videos make news. People make their videos because they work. Getting views has been one of the more effective strategies to push a big platform to fix something for years. Tiktok, Twitter, and Facebook have made it easier for users to report abuse and rule violations by other users. But when these companies appear to be breaking their own policies, people often find that the best route forward is simply to try to post about it on the platform itself, in the hope of going viral and getting attention that leads to some kind of resolution. Tylers two videos on the Marketplace bios, for example, each have more than 1 million views.

"Contents getting flagged because they are someone from a marginalized group who is talking about their experiences with racism. Hate speech and talking about hate speech can look very similar to an algorithm.

I probably get tagged in something about once a week, says Casey Fiesler, an assistant professor at the University of Colorado, Boulder, who studies technology ethics and online communities. Shes active on TikTok, with more than 50,000 followers, but while not everything she sees feels like a legitimate concern she says the apps regular parade of issues is real. TikTok has had several such errors over the past few months, all of which have disproportionately impacted marginalized groups on the platform.

MIT Technology Review has asked TikTok about each of these recent examples, and the responses are similar: after investigating, TikTok finds that the issue was created in error, emphasizes that the blocked content in question is not in violation of their policies, and links to support the company gives such groups.

The question is whether that cyclesome technical or policy error, a viral response and apologycan be changed.

There are two kinds of harms of this probably algorithmic content moderation that people are observing, Fiesler says. One is false negatives. People are like, why is there so much hate speech on this platform and why isnt it being taken down?

The other is a false positive. Their contents getting flagged because they are someone from a marginalized group who is talking about their experiences with racism, she says. Hate speech and talking about hate speech can look very similar to an algorithm.

Both of these categories, she noted, harm the same people: those who are disproportionately targeted for abuse end up being algorithmically censored for speaking out about it.

TikToks mysterious recommendation algorithms are part of its successbut its unclear and constantly changing boundaries are already having a chilling effect on some users. Fiesler notes that many TikTok creators self-censor words on the platform in order to avoid triggering a review. And although shes not sure exactly how much this tactic is accomplishing, Fielser has also started doing it, herself, just in case. Account bans, algorithmic mysteries, and bizarre moderation decisions are a constant part of the conversation on the app.

Continued here:
Welcome to TikToks endless cycle of censorship and mistakes - MIT Technology Review

Last March, as the first big clusters of coronavirus cases started to appear in this country, media executives in Silicon Valley coordinated with officials in Washington to determine how much the public was allowed to know about the growing epidemic that was killing them.

Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook emailed Tony Fauci at NIH, to assure him that Facebook users would see only Tony Faucis approved guidance on COVID-19. Twitter and Google effectively did the same.

Twitter and Google eliminated any post that deviated from Washingtons official line. In many cases, they censored information from front-line physicians that was both medically sound it was the science and potentially lifesaving. Posts about treatments for example were downplayed. They have never apologized for this, they probably never will.

Historians will assess it. They will likely record the early days of COVID-19 as a turning point in our society an unprecedented assault on our most basic civil liberties, that somehow very few people seemed to notice when it first started happening. The usual stooges and think tank libertarians assured us at the time none of it was a big deal. Soulless multinational media monopolies censoring essential medical information? No problem. Thats how the free market works. Build your own Google if you dont like it. Start your own NIH. And anyway, in private you can still say what you want. Youre still free. Its not like this is North Korea. So calm down, conspiracy nut. Youre starting to sound like Alex Jones. Most of us obeyed, we dutifully calmed down, and went back to Netflix.

We shouldnt have. Today we learned the Biden administration considers censorship is applicable to private speech as well. What you say in private, when youre alone with your phone, you wont be able to say or read what you want because the DNC plans to control and apparently have the ability to control the flow the information you receive on your phone. Nothing that questions official regime policy will reach you. According to a report in Politico and believe it or not, we're quoting here directly:

"Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively, and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages."

We'll say that again because its a sentence we never thought wed see written in English: The DNC is planning to censor any quote, "misinformation about vaccines" that you receive privately over text message. What does "misinformation" mean? Its not the same as false information, as factually inaccurate information. Misinformation can be factually true. In fact, it very often is factually true. Thats why theyre angry about it.

Misinformation is anything the Biden administration doesnt want you to know including, for example, how effective the COVID vaccines actually are, and what the potential side effects from them might be from taking them.

Lets say youre interested in finding out that information and looked it up from the administrations own official websites, starting with the VAERS database. Youre no longer allowed to text what you find on their database to other people in this country the country you were born in. Your private conversations will be controlled by the DNC. Is that the picture of a free country?

Looks like we should have worried about civil liberties last year when all this started. "Its a global health emergency. We have no choice. Things will go back to normal when it ends." But will they go back to normal? If the government can ban discussion of the drug theyre making you take, what cant they do? And by the way, are they doing this now, expanding censorship on the conversation about the pandemic as the pandemic recedes? The COVID vaccines have been around for more than seven months. Pretty much everyone who wants a shot has had one. You can get the shot very easily theyre free.

According to the administration, the vaccine works perfectly, so vaccinated people are protected from COVID. Theyre bulletproof. They cant get sick. Thats why they took the vaccine in the first place. So why is official Washington so angry at the people who wont get vaccinated? How precisely do they propose a threat? It makes you think that maybe none of this is really about COVID. Maybe its about social control. Tony Fauci all but admitted that the other day. Heres what he said:

Jake Tapper: I know you have been very clear that the government isn't mandating vaccines, but do you think it's generally a good idea for businesses or schools to require vaccinations? Anthony Fauci: Right. I have been of this opinion, and I remain of that opinion, that I do believe, at the local level, Jake, there should be more mandates.

"There should be more mandates." Actually, they didnt tell us that. Do you remember hearing that when they first rolled out the vaccine, that were for mandates? No, they said theyre not for mandates actually but now they are. These drugs will be mandatory, in many places they already are. If you want to get an education, for example, you need to take one. Many questions arise from this deep questions about civil liberties and what it means to be a free country. But even on a medical level, questions arise for example: Do we know enough to make these drugs mandatory?

Just today, The Washington Post reported that the FDA is preparing to announce a new warning for the Johnson and Johnson coronavirus vaccine, saying it's been linked to a nerve DISORDER called GBS, which can cause paralysis and has. Millions of people in this country alone have taken the Johnson and Johnson shot, but other vaccines could be implicated, too. According to the government's own VAERS database, which tracks vaccine side effects, GBS has been reported as a potential symptom for every other COVID vaccine too. Thats not a small thing. If that sounds familiar, you must be over 40 and have a decent memory.

You may recall that in 1976, the federal government ended its mass vaccination program for influenza after several hundred people came down with GBS. People started asking questions, and very quickly, the Ford administration determined the vaccine wasn't worth the risk. But that's not happening now. People are not asking those questions because they cant theyre not allowed to in public. This is one of the only platforms in all of American media that can operate outside the control of tech monopolies and ask obvious questions. Its not because we're against vaccines we certainly are not but because you have a right to know a lot before you take a medicine. But Tony Fauci isn't stopping the vaccines in the United States. Instead, he's accusing anyone who has questions about the vaccine of having a sinister political motivation. They must be QAnon:

Anthony Fauci: You know, Jake, it's an inexplicable pushing back on the part of some people about getting vaccinated. // I mean, we have got to put aside this ideological difference or differences thinking that somebody is forcing you to do something.//I really don't have a good explanation, Jake, about why this is happening. I mean, it's ideological rigidity, I think. There's no reason not to get vaccinated. Why are we having red states and places in the South that are very highly ideological in one way not wanting to get vaccinations?

So Fauci on the one hand says this should be mandatory and then moments later says for some reason people think we are forcing this on them and thats "inexplicable." They must be right-wingers. You think if you were interviewing them youd say, "Wait a second, didnt you just say it should be mandated? Maybe thats why they think its mandated because you said it was."

But Faucis claim the resistance to the vaccine is somehow political is a bad-faith attack posing as science. In fact, it has been the Democratic Party, very much Anthony Faucis party, that has engaged in partisan discussion about the vaccine from the very first day. Less than a year ago, in September 2020, Kamala Harris announced that the coronavirus vaccine might be dangerous. Why? Because Donald Trump oversaw its development, she said, "is going to be an issue for all of us." Really? No longer an issue because Kamala Harris is in charge. So now that shes in charge anyone asking obvious questions, even nonpartisan questions, must be a White supremacist. Heres Dick Durbin of Illinois doing his best today to divide the country further along partisan lines, because that helps him, and tar anyone who wants more information about a specific drug as a lunatic who is against all vaccines:

Dick Durbin: There are two hosts of programs on Fox Primetime that can only be characterized as anti-vax quacks. Im referring of course to Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham. They have been spreading what I consider to be irresponsible information about vaccines across America and about effort of this nation to deal with them.

Spreading irresponsible information. Notice Durbin doesnt accuse us of spreading false information. He did not accuse us of being factually wrong. We havent been. Nor are we against vaccines. Few Americans are against vaccines. Virtually every American has had a ton of vaccines and was expecting to take this one. But when you refuse to answer basic questions about the vaccine and when you dodge them with partisan talking points like that, you make people nervous, Americans have the right to have basic questions answered before taking a medicine, that is their right. But Durbin, and hacks like Fauci, persist in pretending that any resistance to mass vaccination is somehow partisan. That's a lie its a provable lie. Take a look at numbers from the government's own accounting. It turns out that it's African-Americans the Democratic Partys most faithful voters who are still the most hesitant to getting vaccinated. Its not an attack, just an observation.

According to the CDC, from the period of Dec. 14, 2020, to July 12, 2021, a total of 26.2% of African Americans have gotten one dose of a COVID vaccine. Only 23.7% of African Americans are "fully vaccinated."

Those are the lowest number of any racial or ethnic group that the CDC tracks, by a significant margin. We dont judge anybody for taking or refusing to take the vaccine. Medical choices are by definition personal choices. They are not choices that politicians get to make for you. You should never be forced to take medicine you dont want, period. That used to be a common observation. In fact, many people like Dick Durbin, who are attacking anyone who has questions as partisan or racist, are the very same people who told us for decades that they were very upset about the Tuskegee syphilis experiments and they were right to be upset about those experiments, Now theyre telling you that anyone who resists mandatory vaccination is a White supremacist this is the talking point of the moment. You know that because it was on MSNBC from their in-house doctor:

Dr. Chris Pernell: I dont have any tolerance for the anti-vaxxer movement. And I dont have any tolerance for politicians who befriend, who cozy up to, or become allies of that movement. I actually see that as another example of the proliferation of White supremacy. Because in particular, they are targeting communities of color, and they are targeting the historical injustices, the atrocities, that communities of color have experienced, as a way to play on their vulnerabilities.

Imagine someone who would say something so provably untrue, factually untrue, so irresponsible and so divisive having a medical license in this country. That person does. Something is very wrong with our system. Shes claiming African Americans aren't taking the vaccine because White supremacists have asked questions about the vaccine. That's lunacy, of course. A reporter at CNN recently spoke to someone else who offered another explanation for it. It turns out there are people out there maybe because of doctors you just saw who no longer believe the medical experts on cable news anymore:

Amara Walker, CNN correspondent: Do you plan to get vaccinated? Destiny Britt: No time soon. WALKER (voice-over): Twenty-one-year-old Destiny Britt says she's given the COVID-19 vaccine a lot of thought. BRITT: Don't take it as being rebellious. Listen to and understand and be compassionate and sympathize of the history of black people, black and brown people, and the medical industry. WALKER (voice-over): The Atlanta native is skeptical of the vaccines thanks in large part due to the legacy of the unethical Tuskegee study in which Black men with syphilis were deliberately not treated // BRITT: And the more that it's a push for me to go get vaccinated, it makes me not want it even more.

"The more that it's a push for me to go get vaccinated, it makes me not want it even more." And of course, that makes sense. If the vaccine is so great wouldnt it sell itself? There would be no reason to force people to take it.

But people are being forced to take it. The people who are trying to force us are the ones who lectured of for decades about "my body my choice"they are leading the way. The levels of irony here are exhaustible.

The former head of Planned Parenthood, who is a truly irresponsible person called Lena Wen, just went on television to explain how to force millions of Americans to take the drug. It's easy, she said. Just make their lives as miserable as possible until they comply:

CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Lena Wen: It needs to be hard for people to remain unvaccinated. Right now, its kind of the opposite. Its fine. Its easy if youre unvaccinated. You can do anything you want to do anyway. At some point, these mandates by workplaces, by schools, I think it will be important to say, hey, if you want to opt out, but if you have to sign these forms, get twice-weekly testing. Basically, we want to make getting vaccinated the easy choice. That is what its going to take for us to actually end the pandemic.

You wonder the damage this is doing to the credibility of the medical establishment. Most Americans grew up believing in science, believing their doctors, they had every reason to, we led the world in science. Our health care was the best in the world expensive, granted but very effective and the outcomes were remarkable compared to any other place on the planet. That was a system like all systems that worked on trust. You trusted what the medical authorities said. But when they start talking like that, when they start making claims that have no logic, no clear medical justification, theyre just transparently political in that case clearly illegal when they start talking about punishing Americans who dont want to do their will, follow instructions they refuse to explain, policies that will not account for using data, instead they throw talking points at you and bumper stickers and attacking you as immoral whos going to believe them ever again? The damage they are doing to our system is profound. And you think people on the other side would stand up for Americans the Republican Party anyone? Some are, most arent.

And mediocrities like Asa Hutchinson, who pretends to be governor of Arkansas, are in fact joining in and promoting it. Adam Kinzinger, a Republican congressman from Illinois, just demanded that every American take the coronavirus vaccine on national television:

Adam Kinzinger: This is outrage politics thats being played by my party and its going to get Americans killed. Our party has been hijacked, my party has been hijacked. It is on its way to the ground and for some people its a fun ride but this plane is going to crash into the ground. (edit) I call on Leader McCarthy. I call on every leader in the Republican party to stand up, say 'get vaccinated,' and to call out these garbage politicians, these absolute clown politicians playing on your vaccine fears for their own selfish gain.

Adam Kinzinger, in his defense, has a low IQ and cannot be held fully responsible for most of the things he said. But neither he nor anyone else who is making that case has answered a very simple question: why should people whove recovered from COVID-19, and there are millions in this country who are immune to the virus, why should they be forced to get the vaccine? Whats the answer? Whats the harm rate from the vaccine? Why cant we ask? Whats the answer? When you attack people rather than answer their questions they dont trust you anymore and they dont trust the drugs you say they must take and thats a shame. Were not attacking the vaccine, never have. We dont judge anyone who takes it and we never will. We judge people like that.

And where are the Republicans when they learned the Biden administration decided they can police your text messages? That the DNC is in charge of what you text to other Americans? There is almost no resistance to it in Washington. That means it's likely going to get worse.

And for people who are working in the United States military, who must obey, its going to get much worse. It's clear now that the military is going to expel anyone who doesnt get the shot.

The Department of the Army headquarters just announced an executive order to make the vaccine mandatory by Sept. 1. It's the first time since the Army forced soldiers to take a vaccine since the anthrax vaccine a decision that killed and injured several soldiers. One naval officer explained how he's being coerced.

Quote: "I'm a naval officer who's spent the last 15 years on active duty. I'm now potentially facing forcible discharge if I won't submit to taking the COVID vaccine. ... I've spoken to two command chaplains regarding religious exemption (I'm a Christian abortion abolitionist and cells from aborted children were used in the vaccines' development), and am told exemptions won't likely be granted. So, my choices are vaccination and forcible discharge."

There's no scientific basis for this. In the thread, the naval officer lays out the data to prove how unnecessary this is. The numbers are straight from the Department of Defense's website.

Quote: "202,567 active duty service members have had COVID, of whom 26 have died. [That's] better than a 99.987 percent survival rate."

Those are the numbers, no ones disputing them. Not Adam Kinzinger or Dick Durbin. No one disputes the number so whats the answer? There is no answer. The government is purging the military, and spying on its own citizens, because of a virus that isn't killing very many people anymore. And keep in mind: vaccination isnt like voting. They dont trust you to do it yourself at home and mail in the results. Theyre keeping track. How East German is this country becoming? The FBI just announced in a tweet that it's encouraging Americans to snitch on family members who exhibit signs of "extremism." The federal government the Biden administration is encouraging your family to snitch on each other. Does extremism apply to people who have questions about the vaccine? Of course, it does.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

In March, the FBI put out an official bulletin announcing they'd be cracking down on fake vaccine cards. Since then, undercover agents all over the country have been arresting people for distributing unapproved vaccine documents bearing an official government logo. They just conducted a sting operation that nabbed the owner of the Old Corner Saloon in the small town of Clements, California, for example. What's interesting is that the FBI hasn't put out any bulletin on illegal immigrants using fake driver's licenses or Social Security cards lately thats endemic, thats everywhere. They haven't shut down any businesses or harassed any California bar owners for hiring illegal immigrants at a time of mass unemployment. Why havent they done that?

You know the answer. The people running the government have one standard for enforcing the law for people who agree with them, and a different one for those who don't agree with them. That is third world. Now those same people just gave themselves the power to read and censor your text messages. We got to resist this, you cant let this continue. Or else youre going to wake up in a very different place from the place you were born.

This article is adapted from Tucker Carlson's opening commentary on the July 12, 2021, edition of "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

Read this article:
Tucker Carlson: Your private conversations will be controlled by the DNC - Fox News

the Buhari administration is not interested in these technologies to fight crime. Right now, the mobile telephony operators can help them catch terrorists and bandits using various cell phones to communicate and ask for ransom. Instead of facing the real threats, they are afraid of their shadows, they are seeking these tools to suppress dissent and punish anyone who disagrees with them and their policies.

Letting words roll off the tongue without having to second guess ones thoughts is one of the greatest gifts of being human. The Nigerian Constitution guarantees our rights to say what we want without censorship or restraint, as long as it is not injurious to anyone or group. Does freedom of speech apply online if the government actively seeks to monitor speech? Has the right of individuals to express themselves freely become smudged? The answer lies in the latest misadventure of the Buhari administration. In the supplementary budget approved by the National Assembly last week, the executive asked the legislators for N4.8 billion, for the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) to monitor phone lines and social media communications, including WhatsApp messages, calls, text messages. Of the N4.8 billion, N1.93 billion is for WhatsApp Intercept Solution and N2.93 billion for Thuraya Interception Solution these are communications system used for monitoring voice calls, text messages and data traffic. The Intercept Solution is the kind the Saudis used to monitor Jamal Kashoggis messages, itineraries and online footprints, until he was butchered in their embassy in Turkey.

As long as people have evolved language and personal conversations, those who eavesdrop have tried to listen in. Our people say, the wall have ears. They say so because before the phone, before the internet and the social media platforms it birthed, when important matters were discussed in homes, people listened in through the eaves. Literally they slither in, within the eavesdrop, to hear what was being said. Technology has made it even more convenient with the telephone; just tap the wires. Why talk if someone is eavesdropping on your conversation? What the government is trying to do is to mute our voices and create a police state. Intercept Solution is designed to invade our privacy interests. It is a shame that a government that cannot protect us from terrorism, banditry, armed robbery, is seeking to prevent us from talking about and showcasing their ineptitude to the world.

By this approval, the government will acquire the technology to overhear and record all conversations of their targets and persons they are interested in. They will gain access to homes and offices and will have access to information that is extremely private in nature. We know how a Nigerian wields power without a just judicial system to rein him in.

No doubt, the government has the right to use electronic surveillance to investigate crime. However, we know this government, the Buhari administration is not interested in these technologies to fight crime. Right now, the mobile telephony operators can help them catch terrorists and bandits using various cell phones to communicate and ask for ransom. Instead of facing the real threats, they are afraid of their shadows, they are seeking these tools to suppress dissent and punish anyone who disagrees with them and their policies. With electronic surveillance, the thin line between privacy interests and effectual law enforcement is effectively blurred. It is totally shameful that we have an unquestioning, pliant National Assembly membership who are mere agents of the Presidency. They really do not care what we think. By this approval, the government will acquire the technology to overhear and record all conversations of their targets and persons they are interested in. They will gain access to homes and offices and will have access to information that is extremely private in nature. We know how a Nigerian wields power without a just judicial system to rein him in. Left to the discretion of officials, the potential for clandestine use, abuse and elimination of personal privacy is huge!

I am worried that this government is oblivious of the fact that social media has helped to keep Nigerians sane amidst buffetting winds of economic incapacitation, insecurity, and hopelessness. On the positive side, it has become the refuge for many, the village square, a place to keep up with news, gossip, to do business, and a sanctuary where people can say their minds. Government does not have to regulate Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. These platforms are making conscious effort to regulate content posted on their platforms. Users of these platforms are empowered to report abuse. That is why President Buhari was hit. He violated the rules and he was reported. Does being a President hold you to a different standard on social media? No! It is up to a platforms algorithms to control what ideas or speech are censored. What Nigeria is trying to do is to stifle dissent and control the narrative by creating polices that impose on our rights and destroy positive user experience on platforms they did not create.

Bmidl Adml-Oltj a farmer, youth advocate and political analyst writes this weekly column, Bamidele Upfront for PREMIUM TIMES. Follow me on Twitter @olufunmilayo

Donate

TEXT AD: To advertise here . Call Willie +2347088095401...

Here is the original post:
Eavesdropping, censorship and the voyeuristic state, By Bmidl Adml-Oltj - Premium Times