Archive for the ‘Censorship’ Category

Christian blogger accuses Facebook of continual censorship – Premier

Elizabeth Johnston - known online as the Activist Mommy -told CBN News that her followers have reported that they have difficulty accessing her page and sharing her posts.

Elizabeth Johnson at a pro-life rally last year

"People are contacting me saying, 'I cannot access your page at all--my app shuts down when I click on your page.' They say, 'I cannot share your page--there are no share buttons on your videos' or 'I cannot like your page--when I like your page and I go back the next day it is unliked,'" she said.

Johnston went on to accuse the site of censorship and said that there should be a congressional hearing on the matter.

Facebook said that they were looking into the issues raised by Johnston.

In February, Johnston had her account frozen for seven days after she re-shared comments she made about homosexuality which were previously removed by Facebook.

Johnston, who has nearly more than 83,000 followers on Facebook, said: "Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 similarly call homosexual sex 'detestable' and an 'abomination'."

After the incident, aFacebook spokesperson said the post had been removed in error.

The spokesperson added: "Our team processes millions of reports each week, and we sometimes get things wrong. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused."

Read the original:
Christian blogger accuses Facebook of continual censorship - Premier

Another View: Trump-era PIO censorship – The Saratogian

President Trump has already labeled major press outlets the fake news media and the enemy of the people. His administration has blocked major news outlets from a briefing because it didnt like what they published.

With that in mind, the public should understand censorship by PIO at the federal level: For years, in many federal agencies, staff members have been prohibited from communicating with any journalist without notifying the authorities, usually the public information officers. And they often are unable to talk without PIO guards actively monitoring them.

Now, conversations will be approved or blocked by people appointed by the Trump Administration, some of them political operatives.

The information about the administrative state that impacts our lives constantly is under these controls. They also cover much of the data through which we understand our world and our lives.

Advertisement

In January, according to the Washington Post: Trump called the governments job numbers phony. What happens now that he is in charge of them?

Some of us may feel less comfortable with Trump people controlling this information flow. But actually a surge in these controls has been building in the federal government and through the U.S. culture for two decades or more.

In many entities, public and private, federal, state, and local those in power decree that no one will talk to journalists without notifying the PIO. Congressional offices even have the restrictions.

They are convenient for bosses. Under that oversight staff people are unlikely to talk about all the stuff thats always there, outside of the official story.

Beyond that, PIOs often monitor the conversations and tell staff people what they may or may not discuss. Frequently agencies and offices delay contacts or block them altogether. An article on the Association of Health Care Journalists website, advising journalists about dealing with the Department of Health and Human Services, says, Reporters rarely get to interview administration officials

Remember, those HHS people journalists cant talk to are at the hub of information flow on what works and doesnt with Obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid. Or they know whether there are other perspectives on the numbers the agency publishes. Not to speak of the understanding about food and drugs, infectious disease, and medical and health policy research. Many of them could quickly stun us with the education they could give, if they were not gagged.

Another fact that gives pause is these restraints are just for journalists. There are no special rules or offices to stop staff people from having fluid communication with lobbyists, special interest groups, contractors, people with a lot of money, etc.

Fifty-three journalism and open government groups wrote to President Obama asking him to lift the mandate that PIOs be notified of contacts and the related restrictions in federal agencies. We met with people in the White House in 2015 to leave that message for the President. A year ago we pleaded in an editorial that Obama not leave these constraints in place, given the authoritarian rhetoric on the campaign trail and the fact no one can know how these controls will be used in one year or 20 years.

We wonder how former Obama officials feel now about their medications, given that FDA officials cant talk without Trump controls.

But is it ever even rational to just believe staff people who are under such coercion?

Some journalists - given our proclivity for believing we always get the story profess to not be concerned about the PIO controls, saying people on the inside will leak. But do we have any sense of how often that happens? Do we have a 75-percent perspective on an entire agency, or a 2-percent? Nobody leaked when EPA staff people knew that kids in Flint were drinking lead in water or when CDC had sloppy practices in handling bad bugs.

Understandably in shock at President Trumps attacks on the press, some feel these PIO controls are not a primary priority. Actually, this era makes it clearer than ever why we dont need to leave these networks of controls to people in power.

Kathryn Foxhall, currently a freelance reporter, has written on health and health policy in Washington, D.C., for over 40 years, including 14 years as editor of the newspaper of the American Public Health Association. Email her at kfoxhall@verizon.net.

Read the original:
Another View: Trump-era PIO censorship - The Saratogian

Michael Rosenthal’s Barney: Fighting censorship – Hudson Valley One

Barney Rosset, the spirited subject of Michael Rosenthals new biography,Barney: Grove Press and Barney Rosset, Americas Maverick Publisher and His Battle against Censorship which will be the subject of a reading and book signing event at 4 p.m. Saturday, March 18at the Golden Notebook, 29 Tinker Street, Woodstock seems to have made only one key trip to Woodstock in his lifetime. That was in summer of 1951 when he headed here to buy half of the fledgling publishing company hed make his name with from Robert Phelps for $1500. Within weeks hed bought the other half and, while simultaneously studying at the New School, began a career.

Which isnt to suggest that Rossets ties to Woodstock ended there. Consider the nature of what this mischievous Chicago native, who based himself in the Hamptons for decades, created and eventually lost at Grove and its offshoots Evergreen magazine and Grove Press Films. He was the guy who brought Beckett and Gide, Robbe-Grillet and the Beats to mass markets. His taking on the nations once-strict censorship laws on behalf of D.H. LawrencesLady Chatterleys Lover, Henry MillersTropic of Cancer, and William BurroughsNaked Lunchcost him years and fortunes, but also ended all such fights against books while also earning him huge profits for a small, idiosyncratic indie publishing firm. Evergreen, during its short but noteworthy run, premiered Sartre and Camus essays, Albee plays, and Che Guevaras deathbed diaries alongside nudie photos and the first underground comics. Rossets distribution ofI Am Curious (Yellow)broke down screen taboos against nudity, opening the floodgates for the New American Cinema (while also, according to Rosenthal, sounding the death knell for a burgeoning foreign art film cinema in the U.S.).

Barney Rosset was born and raised during a time where liberal, and even socialist or communist, was not a bad word. He came out of a Chicago known for its art and progressivism; worked in the Army during a war that championed democratic values over bullying fascism. And he found his way with the help of a family fortune small enough to have limits yet big enough to allow him a bit of playing. He flourished at a time when literature and the arts in general, alongside science and philosophy, were as respected as business acumen. It was a brief era when you could sell hundreds of thousands of copies of edgy books such asThe Autobiography of Malcolm Xor the early self-help pioneerGames People Play, or push anti-colonial theses into the nations classrooms with ease.

It was what led to a wave of well-to-do, hard-charging New Yorkers finding ways to set up alternative lives outside of their city, in a Quonset hut in East Hampton as Rosset did, or upstate as many others (including his fellow Chicagoan Albert Grossman) would do. Which in turn led to a bettering of circumstances for creators of all stripes, even without the incomes a Rosset and his peers could boast.

Rosenthal, who splits time between NYC and Woodland Valley outside Phoenicia, is expert at zooming in on the societal elements that make Barney Rosset and Grove Press story important. We get the crusading free speech battles, the confident manner in which our best and brightest business folks were once able to push their own tastes on a culture not yet fully enamored with bottom lines and prurient mass tastes, and what life during the Great Society final years of progressivisms golden age could be like, from all-day rum and cokes to open sexuality.

But Rosenthal, while never supplying the novelistic touches many readers have come to expect from these life and times style biographies, is also pitch-perfect at demonstrating the underbelly of Rosset and Groves success, as well as that of the entire 1960s. Publication of works by Che and Castro lead to someones shooting of a missile into the publishers offices (no one was hurt), which much later leads to his paranoia about having been targeted by the CIAwhich even later proves to be partly true. The mans fondness for women and open sexuality, rushes through a slew of marriages (including his first to noted Abstract Expressionist painter Joan Mitchell) to distanced kids and eventual charges of misogyny that led, in combination with his employees wish for better terms, to union pressures and a much-publicized labor battle. Moreover, Groves very success pushed Rosset to overestimate his own prowess as a tastemaker and business force, which led to over-expansion and the loss of his business first to the Getty family, and later to Atlantic Press (where it still hobbles on).

Barney: Grove Press and Barney Rosset, Americas Maverick Publisher and His Battle against Censorshipis much more than a local interest book, although its local connections are still strong (including its editor, Nick Lyons). Its a book for book lovers, culture mavens, and all who still harbor interest in the 1960s and how we got to where we all are now from where we thought we were then.

Michael Rosenthal, also known for his years as a professor at Columbia University, reads from and signs copy of this fun and deep book at Golden Notebook, 29 Tinker Street in Woodstock, at4 p.m.onSaturday, March 18. Seewww.goldennotebook.comfor further information

Read the original post:
Michael Rosenthal's Barney: Fighting censorship - Hudson Valley One

People can call us stupid, M’sia’s censorship board chair says amid ‘Beauty’ censorship – TODAYonline

KUALA LUMPUR Malaysias Film Censorship Board (LPF) said it could not ignore rules on editing movie scenes, especially those with LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) elements.

LPF chairman Abdul Halim Abdul Hamid told the Sunday (March 19) edition of local New Straits Times that Malaysia does not recognise the LGBT ideology and thus had to propose cuts of four minutes and 38 seconds long in the highly-anticipated Disneys live remake of Beauty and the Beast.

If we let these scenes go, people will wonder if Malaysia recognised LGBT.

People can call us stupid or ignorant for the censorship we have imposed. I can accept it, but I dont have to respond to it, he was quoted as saying in the New Sunday Times.

Mr Abdul Halim explained that three parts from the movies were deemed as inappropriate for Malaysian audience.

The first is during the performance of a song, where a male character (Le Fou) hugs the other (Gaston) from behind.

Second is the suggestive song lyrics with sexual innuendoes, he was quoted as saying.

As for the third scene that ostensibly takes place at the end of the movie, the report said it could not be mentioned for spoiler reasons.

Mr Abdul Halim reportedly said that LPF could have allowed the film with minor cuts if film director Bill Condon had not announced that the movie contained a first exclusively gay moment.

We could have let it go with potentially minor cut and this whole thing would not have become an issue.

But the moment the gay element is thrown into the mix, we had to protect ourselves, so what was initially three second, has become more than four minutes, he was quoted as saying.

Homosexuality is not illegal per se in Malaysia, but the country heavily criminalises sodomy that is punishable with imprisonment, corporal punishment and fines.

He attributed the uproar over LPFs decision as a natural knee-jerk reaction.

On our part, we have a job to do and we cant make mistakes. If there is a public outcry when the movie is released, we will have to bear the consequences, he was quoted as saying.

On allowing gorier and supposedly violent movies like Deadpool and Logan with 18-above classification, Mr Abdul Halim said this showed that LPF has depicted a more lenient stand on editing these days.

For horror movies, he said so long a movie does not use Quranic verses for the wrong reasons, such as bringing back dead people or communicating with the dead, it will be allowed.

These guidelines are issued by Jakim (Islamic Development Department). If none of these elements are present, then we will consider them as fantasy, he was quoted as saying.

On censorship, Abdul Halim said LPF was only tasked to notify local distributors of the scenes needed to be censored, adding that the film studios will then edit the movies themselves.

He added that film distributors and producers could then appeal against the decision with the Film Appeals Committee.

In the case of Beauty and the Beast, Disney Malaysia has reportedly submitted the film for an appeal to overturn LPFs decision.

The news report said that the censor board had banned 10 movies last year and 11 in 2015 because they contained sex scenes, obscene utterances, and excessive violence as well as scenes that touched on political, religious and cultural sensitivities. MALAY MAIL ONLINE

Follow this link:
People can call us stupid, M'sia's censorship board chair says amid 'Beauty' censorship - TODAYonline

Malaysian Censor Says Sought 4+ Minutes of ‘Beauty And The Beast’ Cuts – Deadline


Deadline
Malaysian Censor Says Sought 4+ Minutes of 'Beauty And The Beast' Cuts
Deadline
Disney's Beauty And The Beast is enjoying a fantastic run in its offshore and domestic debut this weekend with full numbers to come later today. As reported last week, the film is not screening in Malaysia after the local censor approved it with what ...
'Beauty and the Beast' Malaysia Ban Is Just the Latest Foreign CensorshipInverse
Sir Ian McKellen slams censorship of Beauty and the Beast over gay characterPinkNews
China declines to censor gay kiss in 'Beauty & the Beast' despite objectionsLGBTQ Nation
Tribble Agency -NextShark -RocketNews24
all 1,245 news articles »

Read more:
Malaysian Censor Says Sought 4+ Minutes of 'Beauty And The Beast' Cuts - Deadline