Mediaboss Marketing

Google has asked the High Court of Australia to overturn a 2020 ruling it warns could have a devastating effect on the wider internet. In a filing the search giant made on Friday, Google claims it will be forced to act as censor if the countrys highest court doesnt overturn a decision that awarded a lawyer $40,000 in defamation damages for an article the company had linked to through its search engine, reports The Guardian.

In 2016, George Defteros, a Victoria state lawyer whose past client list included individuals implicated in Melbourne's notorious gangland killings, contacted Google to ask the company to remove a 2004 article from The Age. The piece featured reporting on murder charges prosecutors filed against Defteros related to the death of three men. Those charges were later dropped in 2005. The company refused to remove the article from its search results as it viewed the publication as a reputable source.

The matter eventually went to court with Defteros successfully arguing the article and Googles search results had defamed him. The judge who oversaw the case ruled The Ages reporting had implied Defteros had been cozy with Melbournes criminal underground. The Victorian Court of Appeals subsequently rejected a bid by Google to overturn the ruling.

From Googles perspective, at issue here is one of the fundamental building blocks of the internet. A hyperlink is not, in and of itself, the communication of that to which it links, the company contends in its submission to the High Court. If the 2020 judgment is left to stand, Google claims it will make it liable as the publisher of any matter published on the web to which its search results provide a hyperlink, including news stories that come from reputable sources. In its defense, the company points to a 2011 ruling from the Supreme Court of Canada that held a hyperlink by itself is never a publication of defamatory material.

Weve reached out to Google for comment.

See original here:
Google claims court ruling would force it to 'censor' the internet - Yahoo Tech

Politicians need to focus on issues that have an impact on Iowans lives, not enforcing the pledge of allegiance.

Yet again, Iowa Republicans are introducing harmful and unnecessary bills in the Legislature.

In an effort to uphold blind patriotism, Sen. Adrian Dickey introduced a bill that would require teachers to stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Teachers would also be barred from talking about the pledge in an unpatriotic manner. The only exception is if the teacher has a disability that prevents them from standing and reciting the pledge.

This bill infringes on the freedom of speech of teachers and enforces the harmful censorship that has been used to erase marginalized identities.

Besides the freedom of speech and censorship concerns, teachers respecting the pledge doesnt even seem to be a problem in Iowas public schools.

Without any legislation in place, we started every morning with the Pledge of Allegiance when I was in elementary school. Most students stood and mindlessly recited the words. However, some students did not due to religious beliefs. Nevertheless, it was a daily practice that my teachers never commented on, and students paid very little attention to.

This is not the first time in recent Iowa history that Republicans introduced a bill about the Pledge of Allegiance. At the end of last years legislative session, a bill was passed that required schools to present the flag and require the school to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every day.

Ultimately, students cannot be forced to recite the pledge because of their right to free expression. This was established in 1943 with the Supreme Court ruling case, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette.

Because it is established that students cannot be forced to recite the pledge, why would teachers be any different? In fact, this bill takes these free speech infringements a step further by censoring the language used surrounding the pledge.

Instead of improving the public school system in Iowa, this seems to be another attempt to uphold conservative ideas of patriotism, which often means erasing minority voices.

Through this proposal, teachers would not be allowed to say any unpatriotic commentary on the United States, or language that has any political influence on students. Along with possible infringement on free speech, this bill is further complicated by how we view patriotism.

Republicans have made attempts left and right to censor teachers. However, it all seems rooted in the same silencing of minorities. Bills were put into place last year to bar teachers from teaching the 1619 Project in schools because of concerns it is not historically accurate and misrepresents the values of America. Iowa schools are also facing increasing attention and possible bans of several books being taught, mostly ones highlighting minority experiences, such as The Hate u Give, and The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian.

The abundance of censorship and backlash when it comes to language or teaching that involves minority experiences suggests this legislature is not about protecting students its about continuing to erase and censor certain identities.

Censoring the language teachers use about the pledge is a step in the same direction, attempting to control unpatriotic language in the classroom. But what do we define as unpatriotic, and who is creating these definitions?

It seems Republicans focus is less about unifying the country and more about making sure certain ways of thinking about America are controlled. This is being done through book bans, attempting to erase the 1619 Project, or controlling speech surrounding the pledge. Conservative powers are infringing on what information can be shared or spoken.

Classrooms can be powerful places to grow through education. Instead of investing in bettering the education system, Republican senators are focused on censoring language and upholding their definition of patriotism.

Columns reflect the opinions of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Editorial Board, The Daily Iowan, or other organizations in which the author may be involved.

Read the original:
Opinion | Iowa Republicans need to focus on real issues rather than patriotism - UI The Daily Iowan

The Biden administration is determined to appoint partisan left-wingers to key positions in the federal bureaucracy. In addition to Alvaro Bedoya, the George Soros linked, pro-illegal immigration professor that Biden has selected as his nominee for FTC commissioner, the Biden administration also wants the pro-censorship radical Gigi Sohn to serve on the Federal Communications Committee (FCC).

With jurisdiction over internet and telecoms policy, the FCC is an increasingly important arm of the federal government. During the Trump administration, it was at the center of the Presidents efforts to fight back against Big Tech censorship.

US President Joe Biden buys ice cream as Michigan Senators Debbie Stabenow (R) looks on at Moomers Homemade Ice Cream in Traverse City, Michigan on July 3, 2021. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

But the FCC is a double-edged sword. Just as the commission can protect consumers from tech censorship, it can also use its regulatory might to pressure tech companies to submit to a partisan left-wing agenda.

There is a convention that the five commissioners should remain relatively nonpartisan, even though they are allocated along party lines, with three commissioners from the party occupying the White House and two from the opposition.

The Biden administration has broken that convention, sending a far-left radical, Gigi Sohn, to the Senate for confirmation.

Sohn was the co-founder and CEO of the leftist advocacy group Public Knowledge, which recently called on cable and satellite providers to drop the conservative One America News Network (OAN).

As an FCC commissioner, Sohn will be in a position of influence over cable and satellite providers.

She has also personally called on the FCC to investigate whether the Sinclair Broadcast Group, a conservative-run network of local TV stations, should hold a broadcast license. As a commissioner, she will be able to do just that.

She has also said that both Fox News and social media are dangerous to our democracy, arguing that Fox is the greater danger and calling for a hearing about the network, which she labeled state-sponsored propaganda.

She has also denied even the possibility that Big Tech companies might be engaged in censorship, or otherwise biased against conservatives, even though leaks from inside the tech companies have repeatedly shown this to be the case.

Instead, Sohn accused tech companies of trying to appease President Trump, whom she labeled a right-wing extremist.

Beyond internet and broadcast issues, Sohn has revealed her far-left attitudes in other areas.

She labeled Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh an angry white man during his confirmation hearing, and has accused Republicans of packing the courts and trying to suppress the vote in elections.

Republican Senators are speaking out against Sohn.

Gigi Sohn is a complete political ideologue who has disdain for conservatives. She would be a complete nightmare for the country when it comes to regulating the public airwaves, said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) earlier this week.

Sohn, obviously, her views are going to be very far apart from where mine are on all the issues, Sen. John Thune (R-SD) told Politico earlier this month. Shes very left, shes going to be a heavy hand in regulation.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News.He is the author of#DELETED: Big Techs Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election.

More:
Biden Pushes Pro-Censorship Partisan Leftist Gigi Sohn for ...

It was as early as 2007 that Oren Peli, director of "Paranormal Activity" manufactured his first version of the movie. This was screened on several American film festivals and distributed on the festivals and sent to film studios as a DVD-Screener by Peli himself. Initially, a complete remake was planned, but after a test-screening of the DVD-sampler, the audience's reactions were so positive it was decided to release Peli's original film. But it was recut for a national theatrical release. Among other things, a completely new ending was implemented. Most cuts are small, dispensable detail-shots that only have an effect as an accumulation. Short as well as alternate scenes also were removed, though. The following cut report is supposed to give a good insight into that.

The festival version from 2007 has been compared to the theatrical version from 2009, released on DVD and Blu-ray by Paramount Pictures.

Theatrical version

Length: 87 minutesRated: R

Festival version

Length: 97 minutesRated: -

All in all, the original festival version is about 10 minutes and 29 seconds longer.

Theatrical Version:

Paramount Pictures would like to thank the families of Mica Sloat & Katie Featherstone and the San Diego Police Department.

Festival Version:

The producers would like to thank the families of Micah S. and Katie F. and the Rancho Penasquitos Police Department for providing this footage.

no time difference

0:00.21The text was faded in later in the theatrical version.

4 Sec.

0:00.29A short tracking shot to the mirror was removed.

1.5 Sec.

0:00.29Micah testing his camera in front of the mirror is shown slightly longer.

2 Sec.

0:00.33Micah goes to the ringing cellphone.

8 Sec.

0:02.00Micah and Katie talk toward the camera a little.

17 Sec.

0:03.18Katie teases Micah a little.

3 Sec.

0:03.59Micah zooms away from Katie.

2 Sec.

0:03.59Micah returns from the refridgerator.

0.5 Sec.

0:06.06Micah turns the camera from Katie.

1.5 Sec.

0:06.12Alternate footage: As Micah builds up the tripod, the take is a whole lot more wobbly, but the sound track is identical.

no time difference

0:07.03Katies laughter lasts a little longer.

1 Sec.

0:07.03Micah returns to the bed room.

2.5 Sec.

0:09.24Katie is telephoning with a friend while Micah films and teases her.

16 Sec.

0:09.53Katie films Micah at the edge of the swimming pool, while he jokes about George Bush and the NRA.

20 Sec.

0:10.03Katie moves on to Micah who is sitting in front of the computer.

2 Sec.

0:10.19Katie keeps on filming Micah.

6 Sec.

0:16.23The house's inspection with the psychic takes a little longer.

5.5 Sec.

0:16.50

The psychic tries to explain the difference between angels and demons to Katie and Micah and explicitly point out they should by no means try to contact the demon.They also couldn't just leave the house and move somewhere else, because it was not the house that is cursed, but Katie.

37 Sec.

0:18.08Once more, the psychic emphasizes that people have already been killed by demons and that you shouldn't dare them in any case.

18 Sec.

0:18.25Katie saying goodbye to the psychic is shown a bit longer, she also promises to contact the demonologist.

9 Sec.

0:21.37Micah approaches the bed a little longer, turns on the light before that.

5 Sec.

0:21.42Katie fixes her hair in bed.

5 Sec.

0:22.15Micah and Katie look longer at the night before's recordings.

11 Sec.

0:22.34A short scene of Micah and Katie was removed. Micah practices playing the guitar, Katie her spanish. Content-wise, the scene added nothing, but showed their normal life for a short time.

14 Sec.

0:23.20Micah brings out the spider he has caught before.

3 Sec.

0:23.48Micah films the door that was moved by the demon the night before a little longer.

5 Sec.

0:24.24Alternate footage of the demon-book. Content-wise almost identical, with the same sound track.

no time difference

0:27.41After Micah and Katie have heard a loud bang during the night, Micah decides to pursue it. This is slightly longer.

2 Sec.

Link:
http://www.movie-censorship.com

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) The United Arab Emirates announced on Sunday that it will no longer censor films released in cinemas, the countrys latest effort to boost its brand as a liberal hub attractive to foreigners.

Instead of cutting sensitive scenes that could offend traditional Islamic sensibilities, the Emirati Media Regulatory Authority will introduce a new 21+ age category for viewers.

The movies will be screened in cinemas according to their international version, the authority said in a Twitter post.

Censors in the UAE, like elsewhere in the Middle East, have long removed scenes in cinematic releases that show nudity, homosexuality, sex and other content deemed inappropriate sometimes leading to plot holes.

Foreigners outnumber locals nearly nine to one in the federation of seven sheikhdoms. The diversity of culture and religion in the tourism-dependent country has at times been at odds with its Islamic laws and traditions.

But thats changing as the nation promotes its socially liberal environment to lure international workers. The government has reformed its Islamic legal code and next year will change its weekend to Saturday-Sunday to align with the Western businesses and markets.

More here:
United Arab Emirates to end censorship of cinematic ...