Mediaboss Marketing

Responding to the news that the Kremlin has censored domestic media as it disperses anti-war protests and persecutes those who publicly oppose Russias invasion of Ukraine, Marie Struthers, Amnesty Internationals Eastern Europe and Central Asia Director, said:

As thousands of protesters take to the streets across Russia to denounce the war, the Kremlin remains hellbent on stifling state critics as it coerces domestic media into supporting its policies. By using force to disperse anti-war rallies and censoring the press, the Russian authorities are plunging deeper and deeper into repression as public sentiment against the war grows.

As thousands of protesters take to the streets across Russia to denounce the war, the Kremlin remains hellbent on stifling state critics as it coerces domestic media into supporting its policies

Amid its desperation to silence dissent, Russia is also using state-controlled companies to muzzle those who speak out against the conflict. The removal of television presenter Ivan Urgant and the sidelining of respected journalist Elena Chernenko, who was excluded from a government press pool for composing an anti-war letter, speaks to the states sheer disregard for press freedom.

As Russia engages in indiscriminate attacks in violation of international humanitarian law as part of its invasion of Ukraine, the authorities are trampling on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in Russia while promoting its narrative of the conflict. The authorities brutal crackdown on those who express their dissent regarding the war must stop now.

Background

On 24 February 2021, Russian media watchdog Roskomnadzor ordered all media to only use information provided by official state sources while covering Russias invasion of Ukraine. Anyone caught disobeying this order could see their websites blocked and be fined up to $62,600.

On 28 February, the watchdog blocked the site of Nastoyashchee Vremya (Current Times), a RFE/RL subsidiary, for spreading unreliable publicly important information about the conflict. On 27 February, the Prosecutor Generals office issued statement threatening prosecution under high treason charges for any type of assistance to a foreign state, international or foreign organization or their representatives in activities directed against the security of the Russian Federation.

Over the first four days of invasion, Russian police routinely used force to disperse nationwide anti-war protests. According to human rights NGO OVD-Info, over 5,900 peaceful protesters have been arrested in at least 67 cities and towns across Russia. On 24 February, political philosopher Grigory Yudin was beaten unconscious by the police and briefly hospitalized.

Right now, people in Ukraine are facing a catastrophic human rights crisis. People are dying, including children, and many thousands of lives are at risk. Take action to demand that the Russian authorities stop this act of aggression and protect civilians now.

Read the original post:
Russia: Kremlin censors media and disperses protesters opposed to Ukraine invasion - Amnesty International

By Albert Chang-Yoo

House Bill 1807, is circulating in the Washington State Legislature and echoes a rising GOP talking point about the need for transparency in schools. Representative Joe Walsh (R-19) first filed the bill on January 6th, stating that the legislature believes parents have become discouraged by the radical rhetoric of some state consultants who speak of their goals to destabilize and tear down the states basic education system and curricula.

HB 1807 proposes banning K-12 teachings which suggest that the United States is structurally racist or sexist, disincentivizing student activism, requiring a U.S. civics course with specified readings, and a provision which states that classes may not be compelled to discuss a particular current event or currently controversial topic in public policy or social affairs, including writings derived from or related to such resources as The 1619 Project.

The Republican sponsored bill will most likely fail as the Washington state legislature is controlled by Democrats in both houses. However, the bill is indicative of the nationwide push by conservatives to reform the education system. States such as Ohio, Georgia, and Michigan are introducing bills which would mandate teachers post their curriculum online for parental review. Some Texas school districts have banned childrens books about race and gender identity. In Florida, a bill to discourage discussion about sexual orientation deemed Dont Say Gay is advancing through the legislature.

Since President Joe Bidens inauguration, 37 states have proposed bills challenging so-called woke teachings. Of that total, 14 states have successfully passed laws censoring classrooms, and 16 states still have bills going through the legislature.

For the GOP, education transparency is a winning political message. In the 2021 Virginia Gubernatorial race, Democrat Terry McAuliffe cost himself when he stated, I dont think parents should be telling schools what they should teach in a debate over schools. The issue of parent choice was seized by Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin, who shot up in suburban polling and ultimately won the Governors seat in the blue state.

Professor Terry Beck has spent 19 years working in public schools and 23 years at the University of Puget Sound. According to him these bills are designed to avoid tough conversations, specifically for white children: They dont say white children, they say anybody uncomfortable due to race, but they mean white children. He believes that although the concerns should not be entirely dismissed, this couching it as transparency is Its disingenuous. Because Ive been a teacher And I never felt like I was getting away with anything.

Clearly, parents have an interest in their childs education, nobody would deny that. Nobody cares about that child like the parent does, Professor Beck said. He says that the interest of education also lies with other citizens and state: I have an interest in whether a child is raised to hate people or not; whether their child is raised with principles of equality and of the value of a human.

Professor Beck says the most important thing that these bills are omitting are the interests of the children themselves. They have an interest in their own education that goes beyond their parents, beyond the stateAnd in schools, we have some obligation to help all children see beyond the parochial and to see what, what life is and what life might be.

According to Professor Beck, bills appealing to supposed parental concern play into a consumerist notion that the school works for the parent. In reality, Professor Beck believes that teaching is built on foundations of a working relationship.

The idea of total parental control in education is nothing new, he says, we argue about this constantly. And it comes up in different iterations, different formats, around school reform around schools all the time. Professor Beck points to the debate over the teaching of secular humanism. At the time, parents in several states accused public schools of being anti-Christian and objected to books like The Diary of Anne Frank.

Education is an inherently political endeavor, Professor Beck says. Its always contentiousthese sort of perennial issues about who controls education? What is the role of the parent, the teacher, the school board is? Those are not going away.

Nonetheless, Professor Beck wants schools to be a place for reconciling social and political issues: schools were originally conceived as a place where we learn to live together. We learn to talk across differencesI hope we will choose that were going to be an intelligent, informed citizenry in the future, and empathetic and caring about people.

See original here:
GOP pushes new education bill: 'transparency' or censorship? - The Trail - The Puget Sound Trail

Conservatives are rallying against what they call collusion between Big Tech and the federal government, fearing the two powerful entities will censor them under the guise of preventing domestic terrorism.

Large tech platforms from Facebook and YouTube to Spotify and GoFundMe have ratcheted up bans and censorship of users and organizations.

The companies, once viewed as neutral platforms and marketplaces, are increasingly behaving as left-wing activist organizations because of cancel culture, conservatives say.

There seems to be a pretty universal cultural collusion among a bunch of these companies that they dont want dissenting voices to use their products," said Inez Feltscher Stepman, a senior policy analyst at the conservative Independent Womens Forum, on her podcast earlier this month.

At the same time, the federal governments counterterrorism apparatus under President Joe Biden has taken multiple actions recently aimed at curbing speech deemed as extremism and misinformation.

Conservatives challenge the government's definition of misinformation and say new Biden policies will target them.

For example, the Justice Department announced in January the creation of a new domestic terrorism unit that will investigate those who ascribe to extremist anti-government and anti-authority ideologies.

House Republicans also say an FBI whistleblower email shows the agency is using "counterterrorism tools" to monitor violent threats against school employees and teachers in relation to parents protesting local school board decisions.

RUMBLE OFFERS ROGAN $100 MILLION TO QUIT SPOTIFY AND JOIN CENSORSHIP-FREE

Conservatives are perhaps most concerned about a February bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security saying the federal government plans to work with public and private sector partners to reduce the "proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions."

Republicans say that, depending on how the government defines "false or misleading narratives," those who are against mask and vaccine mandates or raise questions about the origins of the coronavirus could be classified as terrorists.

For the government to characterize mainstream political disagreements as something approaching criminality is frightening and sends shivers down my spine, said Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina. Thats what happens in totalitarian regimes. Normal Americans engaging in normal activity and speech shouldnt be conflated with terrorism. Thats very dangerous for the government to be doing."

He added that the federal government and its agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, can and should put out their point of view on problems in society. They can even criticize certain information online as being incorrect, Bishop said, but its not the government's role to criminalize or deter certain speech on private platforms.

At the end of January, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy urged tech platforms to censor comedian Joe Rogan and use the power that we have to limit the spread of misinformation."

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in early February she supported Murthys advice regarding content moderation.

Conservatives say the federal government has threatened to crack down on right-leaning speech for years.

The desire to criminalize certain speech has been brewing for a very long time, and now the Biden bureaucracy is free to make moves that they couldnt under Trump, said Kara Frederick, a tech research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. Some high-level bureaucrats want to use counterterrorism tools to suppress mainstream conservative views expressed, and the Jan. 6 attack has given them the perfect excuse to use these new tools."

She added she had met with 21 Republicans in Congress in the past three months, including members in leadership, and they were all concerned about tech companies and the federal governments efforts to reduce misinformation.

GOP Rep. Bishop said he expects Republicans to take back control of the House of Representatives after the midterm elections and will then investigate the federal government's recent actions related to misinformation and domestic terrorism.

"The Republican leadership has a very robust oversight effort planned, with all investigative tools at our disposal to be used," Bishop said. "We will examine the administration and the tech companies very closely, and if that fuels successful litigation, so much the better."

Until 2023, Bishop said, Republicans can only use their platform to express concerns and hold the Biden administration accountable.

Conservatives say Democrats would be equally concerned if a Republican administration were in charge of defining illegal misinformation.

How would the Left feel if it was Trump and his people deciding what is misinformation and we're locking up people based on that? said Dan Gainor, vice president at the Media Research Center, a conservative media watchdog that tracks censorship on Big Tech platforms.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Everybody has to stand their ground and not give in to cancel culture and these misinformation policies. Theyll never be satisfied. You cant placate a pack of hungry lions and ever make them happy. Youve got to fight it, Gainor said.

See the article here:
Conservatives warn of Big Tech-federal government 'collusion' on censorship - Washington Examiner

Former President Donald Trump's new social media app, Truth Social, is surging with new users but facing criticism from some on the Right for what they claim is censorship.

The critics say Truth Social, which has billed itself as a free-speech alternative to Big Tech platforms, has some of the same problems with content moderation and data privacy that led them to seek alternatives to companies such as Facebook and Twitter.

A right-wing broadcaster who has pushed conspiracy theories about the coronavirus in recent months was censored for posting what the platform classified as "sensitive content." Another user has been banned from the app for creating an account that made fun of Devin Nunes, the CEO of Trump Media and Technology Group, the parent company of Truth Social.

Right-wing personality and radio host Stew Peters complained his speech was suppressed by having a Show Content label placed on one of his posts on Truth Social, forcing users to click to see his content.

Im ALREADY being censored on Truth Social, Peters said on Telegram, another free speech-focused social media platform.

I said, The people in our government responsible for allowing our kids to be killed with these dangerous Covid shots, should be put on trial and executed,' Peters said, along with a screenshot of his post on Truth Social. Free speech isnt free."

PARLER ATTEMPTS TO REBRAND ITSELF AS NONPARTISAN AND MAINSTREAM

Truth Social was the most downloaded free app on Apples app store earlier this week, with nearly 400,000 people receiving notices they were on a waitlist upon trying to sign up.

Nunes said Thursday that Truth Social's top priority is bringing people on to the platform's app as soon as possible.

Since its launch on Sunday, Truth Social has been swamped with people seeking to sign up and been plagued by sign-up errors and delays, with many users being unable to create an account successfully or receiving confusing error messages.

A Truth Social user who attempted to register an account intended to make fun of Nunes with a new account titled '@DevinNunesCow' wasoutright bannedfrom the platform.

The account name was a reference to a satirical Twitter account called "Devin Nunes cow," created by web developer and internet personality Matt Ortega, which gained notoriety and a large following on the platform after Nunes sued the account for defamation in 2019.

Ortega tried to create a Truth Social account that also pretended to be Nunes's cow but was removed from the platform for doing so.

I may be the first officially cancelled Truth Social user, Ortega said on Twitter.

Truth Social said his account was permanently deleted because the account name violated its social community guidelines.

"This is censorship," Ortega tweeted.

Trump removed from almost every major social media platform, including Facebook and Twitter, following his role in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol announced he was creating Truth Social last October as an alternative to the Big Tech companies and to promote free speech.

Thus far, social media platforms popular with right-leaning users, such as GETTR and Parler, have had difficulties attracting a more mainstream user base as they try to expand, a major obstacle to conservatives hoping to end the liberal chokehold on social media.

Conservatives have pointed out that Truth Socials content moderation policies are significantly stricter than Twitter's and are not free speech-oriented.

Unlike Twitter, Truth Social users can get suspended or kicked off the platform for posting content that moderators consider to be false, defamatory, or misleading.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

"It isn't a censorship-free experience at all, its rank hypocrisy to ban the DevinNunesCow account," said Patrick Hedger, executive director of the conservative Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

"I think they should abide by how they advertise themselves as a censorship-free platform or recognize that striking a balance between free speech and palatable consumer content is not easy, as other platforms have realized," Hedger added.

Original post:
Truth Social criticized by far-right talk show host for 'censorship' as it surges in popularity - Washington Examiner

The International Press Institute (IPI) global network condemns the efforts by Russian authorities to censor independent media reporting on the invasion of Ukraine and the multiple detentions of domestic and international journalists covering anti-war protests across the country on February 24.

IPI condemns efforts to silence reporting on anti-war movement

Hours after the invasion began, Russias government-controlled communications and media regulator, Roskomnadzor, issued an ominousstatementwarning that media outlets were obliged to only publish verified data and information on the conflict from official Russian sources.

The department said that media knowingly disseminating false information could face sanctions under article 13.15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, which carries a maximum administrative fine of up to 5 million rubles (53,200).

Roskomnadzor stressed that spreading false information on the internet would result in the immediate blocking of such materials under Article. 15.3 of Federal Law No. 149-FZ, a restrictive piece of legislation passed in 2019 which allows extrajudicial blocking of media websites accused of spreading misinformation.

Soon after the warning was given, there were reports in media and on social media that Russian media platforms were being contacted directly by Roskomnadzor and instructed to take down articles or delete certain information or images from published articles.

Among them was the Krasnoyarsk edition of Prospekt Mira, whose editors reported they wereorderedto remove news about the strikes on Ukrainian cities. Roskomnadzor said the report contained false reports about acts of terrorism and inaccurate socially significant information, without providing details. Thenews article entitled Media reports explosions in cities and the capital of Ukraine was taken off the website.

Journalists detained covering anti-war rallies

Later that evening, three correspondents from the Russian service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty weredetainedin Moscow while covering a protest against the war, despite one of them repeatedly identifying himself as a journalist. The trio were taken away from the crowd on Pushkinskaya Square and taken to a nearby police station. They were released without charge shortly after.

There weremultiplereportsof other journalists being detained or facing pressure from security officials, despite being clearly identifiable as members of the press. In St. Petersburg, Interfax correspondentDmitry Gavrilovwas detained at an anti-war rally as he was taking a photograph of a No to War poster. Police refused to release him after she showed his journalistic ID.

In the western city of Pskov, the editor-in-chief of the Pskovskaya Guberniya newspaper,Denis Kamalyagin, and three of his colleagues were detained.Nataliya Vasilyeva, the Moscow correspondent for the British newspaper the Telegraph, reported that she was briefly detained by police in the capital. Many of the professional media workers who attended rallies as citizens rather than in a journalistic role were also detained.

IPI strongly condemns the cynical efforts by Russian authorities to supress and censor independent reporting on Russias invasion of Ukraine, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. We strongly oppose the attempts by the government and security forces to threaten media outlets into silence with fines or stifle independent journalism which threatens to puncture the Kremlins narrative. The arrest of clearly identifiable journalists who were simply covering a peaceful anti-war demonstration is a worrying sign of the increasing censorship likely to follow.

IPI praised the courage of journalists in Russia who have been resisting state censorship and speaking out in the name of peace. On Thursday, more than 200 Russian journalists, including those from Novaya Gazeta, Ekho Moskvy, Kommersant, Dozhd, Ekho Moskvy, Mediazona and state outlets signed anopen letteropposing what the Kremlin called an special military operation against Ukraine.

In response, Elena Chernenko, a special correspondent from Kommersant who organized an open letter from journalists, wasexpelledfrom the Russian Foreign Ministry pool of journalists and barred from attending Ministry events.

Independent media under attack

Over the past year, as IPI hasdocumented, independent journalism in Russia faced the biggest crackdown in more than a decade, as the authorities moved to solidify control by weaponizing a Soviet-styleforeign agent lawto blacklist independent media outlets and impose crippling fines, forcing advertisers to pull out and starving media financially.

The law requires branded outlets to disclose sources of funding and put a disclaimer in capital letters above every text they publish, warning viewers they are about to read content from a foreign agent. If media do not comply, they face large fines and criminal charges. Almost every single major investigative media outlet in Russia was added to the justice ministrys register, as well as major broadcasters such as Dozhd TV, meaning citizens reading independent reporting on the war will see the foreign agent label.

At the start of the coronavirus pandemic, lawmakers passed new additions to the criminal code, articles 207.1 and 207.2, under which media found to have deliberately spread false information about serious matters of public safety such as COVID-19 would face fines of up to 23,000 and up to five years in prison. The countrys media regulator Roskomnadzor continuously issuedtake down and correction ordersand threatened to block news websites over coverage, while one journalists were placed under criminal investigation after critical articles. International correspondents working from Russia were also refused visa extensions and forced to leave the country.

-

IPIs global network expressed support for and solidaritywith our members and journalist colleagues in Ukraine and demanded that journalist safety and the right to cover developments independently and without fear of retaliation be protected.

IPI joined dozens of organisations in calling on the international communityto provide any possible assistance to those who are taking on the brave role of reporting from the war zone that is now Ukraine.

Go here to see the original:
Russia: Journalists reporting on Ukraine war face censorship and detentions - European Interest