Archive for the ‘Censorship’ Category

Censorship of addiction research is an abuse of science – Nature.com

Christopher Furlong/Getty

Addiction research can produce results that governments and funders are not keen to share.

Kypros Kypri was pleased to receive funding from a government agency in the Australian state of New South Wales to study problem drinking. But when the contract arrived in 2012, he was surprised to find a demand that the agency could review and sign off on any reports before they were published. Other language allowed the agency to terminate funding without notice or explanation.

Kypri, who now studies the epidemiology of alcohol-related injuries at Australias University of Newcastle, saw this as a threat to academic freedom and so fought for months to have the fine print removed. Eventually, it was. But he has since realized that his experience is not unusual. In March, Kypri and his colleagues published the results of a survey indicating that many researchers who study addiction think that funders have interfered with their work most commonly by censoring it (P. Miller et al. Addict. Behav. 72, 100105; 2017).

The survey was completed by 322 authors who had published in the journal Addiction, and a little more than one-third of them reported interference at least once in their careers. That proportion must be taken with a pinch of salt it is possible that researchers who had experienced interference were more motivated to respond to the survey than those who had not, for example. And some of the reports go back almost a decade. But the survey nevertheless captures more than 100 experiences of research interference, spread across Europe, Australasia and North America.

There is a long and well chronicled history of private companies striving to keep tight reins on the results of research that they fund, particularly when it comes to studies of tobacco or pharmaceuticals. The survey showed that this remains a problem despite public attention, which is disappointing. Indeed, respondents reported their perception that such interference is on the rise.

But there has been less attention paid to censorship by government agencies, which is perhaps motivated by fears that politically sensitive results will highlight flaws in public programmes and so generate bad publicity. Some researchers and academic institutions accept clauses such as those that Kypri encountered as standard contract language. More should object, as he did.

Survey respondents highlighted a fear that standing up to funders could jeopardize their future funding opportunities particularly given that emerging for-profit research organizations might be more willing to accept limitations on their publications and study designs. Other researchers may believe the clauses to be harmless and unlikely to be brought to bear on their work.

To accept such limits, however, runs counter to the public interest. And the addiction-research survey shows that such clauses are not harmless. One European respondent said a epidemiology publication had been blocked because it was not in the interest of the sponsoring government department; another, from North America, said the government had enforced a request from an industry representative to remove recommendations in an epidemiology report. Researchers from Australasia looking at fatal drug overdoses said that after they published data that were embarrassing to the government department, they were denied access to that departments data. Interference can also come in other forms. Researchers must be wary of limits that public or private funders may attempt to place on study design or data sharing. For example, one senior researcher in North America said that his team was allowed to access a particular data set only if it agreed not to ask a politically sensitive question about the effectiveness of a government policy. Journals and journalists should make it a habit to inquire about the conditions, if any, imposed on researchers by their funders, so that those conditions can be disclosed when results are disseminated to the wider public.

Trends in some countries are encouraging. Kypri has encountered many researchers in the United States who say their institutions would not let them accept research contracts with clauses that allowed funder interference. In 2016, the UK government was forced to exempt scientific research contracts from new rules that would have banned government-funded organizations from lobbying for change.

Since his experience in 2012, Kypri has begun to systematically collect examples of clauses in government contracts that could enable interference in research. He worries that in some areas, particularly his own Australia, the clauses have become so common that they are viewed as normal. But his experience shows that it is possible to push back and perhaps even find compromises that satisfy both funder and researcher without compromising research integrity.

Read the original:
Censorship of addiction research is an abuse of science - Nature.com

Wikipedia Is Turkey’s First Major Censorship Target, Post-Referendum. What Will Be Next? – Global Voices Online

Screenshot from Wikipedia's English-language page on Turkey.

Just two weeks after a referendum in which voters narrowly approved far-reaching constitutional amendmentsthat will increase thepower of the presidency, a Turkish court ruled that the volunteer-driven international online encyclopedia Wikipedia should be blocked in Turkey.

Amid growingtension between the pro and anti-government camps, the decision providedcitizens with yet anothersnapshotoftheir futureunder President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and hisruling AKP party as they adjust to growing political upheavaland theextension of emergency rule in the country by afurther three months.

Hurriyet Daily News reported that the website ban was ordered by an Ankara court on April 29 after the sites administration refused to remove two English language pages which claimed that Turkey channeled support to jihadists in Syria.

The Ministry of Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communications Ministry appeared to confirm this viewpoint when it saidthe site was blocked for becoming an information source with acting with groups conducting a smear campaign against Turkey in the international arena.

As a result, Turkey joined China as one of the fewcountriesin the world to order a complete block on Wikipedia, rather than simply censoring individual pages. The sledgehammer attack on the resourceechoes the zeal with which the government seemingly blocked Twitter after Erdogan promised to wipe out the social mediaservice in 2014.

According to aWikipedia pageon the topic of the website's censorship by countries across the world, previous censorship attempts by Turkey had only been partial, and apparently focused on Turkish-language articles about human genitalia.

The block comes at a time of deepening political schism in Turkey, after Erdogan lashed out against OSCE/ODIHR observers and their reports of vote fraud in the country's tightly contested referendum.

President Erdogan, Turkey's leadingpolitician for the last 14 years, publicly told themas well as other international actors and critics of the governmentto know your place.

The AKPgovernment's strong aversion to the Internet can be traced back at least as far as the Gezi park protestsin 2013 in which social networks helped mobilize opposition to the government in one of the first major tests of Erdogan's enduring leadership.

Just months later, they had reason to hate it some more after recordings allegedly capturing Erdogan and his son discussing illicit financial schemes went viral across YouTube and Twitter, triggering the Turkish leader's now infamousbroadside against the micro-blogging service Twitter.

Turkey has blocked bothYouTube andTwitterin the past, the latter onmultiple occasions. According to EngelliWeb (a platform no longer available online that tracked websites blocked since 2006)there are over 100,000 blocked websites in Turkey today.

Internet speeds have slowed considerably, meanwhile, and are especially sluggish during anti-government rallies, counter-extremism operationsor elections, pointing to likelyinterference by state actors.

In November 2016, the government shut down the internet in the Kurdish-populated south-east of the country for 10 days.

Turkish netizens were quick to turn to Twitter to channel their frustrations with the court decision blocking Wikipedia.

World's most heavily used information source Wikipedia blocked in Turkey. Whats the aim, to stay uninformed?

I have been banned. I have been in hiding all the time. Good morning, I am leaving (play on the words of a popular pop song)

The darkness that blocked Wikipedia

Wikipedia blocked, marriage TV shows shut down. Even Hames Harden would not have been able to do all these blogs.

The marriage programs mentioned in this tweet refer to acourt orderalso on April 29 that blocked reality dating programs which are popular in Turkey, citing these TV shows as unfitfor Turkish traditions and customs.

On the same day,another 3,900 peoplewere dismissed from their jobs, including more than 400 academics for alleged ties to Erdogan's arch-nemesis Fethullah Gulen, who Ankara accuses of engineering a bloody coup attempt in the country last year.

Since the coup took place 120,000 people have been sacked from both public and private sector jobs, and as many as 40,000 arrested, mostly on the basis of suspectedaffiliations to Gulen, an Islamic preacher and educator thatonce wielded formidable behind-the-scenes influence in Turkey.

The fact that Erdogan's Yes campaign secured51.41% of the vote indicates that a large part of the country is supportive of what amounts to a giant social engineering project to permanently change the face of the Turkish republic.

For the 48.59% who votedNo, cue disillusion, alienation and a world in which circumvention tools are needed to access the internet's largest, crowd-sourced educational resource.

Go here to read the rest:
Wikipedia Is Turkey's First Major Censorship Target, Post-Referendum. What Will Be Next? - Global Voices Online

This week in Unnecessary Censorship, it’s f-bombs a-plenty – Rare.us

Every week, Jimmy Kimmel Live presents Unnecessary Censorship, which is a segment that shows some of the most memorable moments of the week, but re-imagines them with a touch (and sometimes a handful) of vulgarity.

This week was an especially good week since Hillary Clinton reappeared in the public eye and the Republican House of Representatives signed a bill repealing Obamacare.

RELATED: Nobody is safe in this weeks Unnecessary Censorship

It opens with a hilarious moment in the White House Rose Garden with Paul Ryan declaring, Thank you, Mr. President, thank you for your leadership. Of course, the crew of video editors over at Jimmy Kimmel Live changed the word thank into something a bit less flattering. But perhaps, the best clip is the shows take on the story of a person in Virginia who is kidnapping and shaving cats. They hilariously revamp it into a bizarre story out of Virginia where police are looking for the person or people sh***ing cats.

RELATED: Jimmy Kimmels week in unnecessary censorship featuring Trump, Obama and The Bachelor is just too funny

See the original post here:
This week in Unnecessary Censorship, it's f-bombs a-plenty - Rare.us

On World Press Freedom Day, Censorship and Repression Reported Globally – Truth-Out

Censorship tactics have become more complex, posing new challenges for journalists and non-journalists alike, a new report finds.

In its annual "Attacks on the Press"report, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has documented a range of censorship cases from around the world and revealed a new world of media repression.

"[Censorship] is definitely becoming more sophisticated and complex and is occurring at a variety of levels," CPJ's Advocacy Director Courtney Radsch told IPS.

CPJ's Executive Director described these new strategies as "repression 2.0" in the report, stating; "Repression 2.0 is an update on the worst old-style tactics, from state censorship to the imprisonment of critics, with new information technologies including smartphones and social media producing a softening around the edges."

At the end of 2016, there were almost 260 journalists in jail, the most CPJ has ever documented.

Turkey is the world's leading jailer of journalists with over 145 imprisoned journalists, more than China, Egypt, and Iran combined.

The country's media crackdown deepened following the July 15, 2016 coup attempt and the subsequent imposition of a state of emergency which the Turkish government allegedly used to shut down over 50 newspapers, 30 TV channels, and three news agencies.

The government also reportedly used anti-terror laws to imprison journalists, including the chief editor of Turkish daily newspaper Cumhuriyet Can Dndar who was sentenced to six years in prison on charges of disclosing state secrets, espionage, and aiding a terrorist group. Most recently, life sentences are being sought for 30 people with ties to Zaman newspaper, which is associated with Muslim cleric Fethullah Glen whom the government accuses of organising the coup attempt. The newspaper has since been under government control.

In Kenya, authorities are increasingly using a new mechanism to control the media: money.

"As revenues drain away from traditional media due to the inroads of digital technologies, the use of financial-induced self-censorship, or 'fiscing', can also ensure that journalists are more 'reasonable' in their reporting," said journalist Alan Rusbridger in the report.

"Murder is messy. Money is tidy," he continues.

However, the control of information is not unique to developing countries, said Rasch.

In the US, President Donald Trump has raised anti-media hostility to levels "previously unseen on a national scale," said journalist Alan Huffman in the report.

President Trump has consistently described some media organizations as "fake news," most recently reiterating the claim that media fabricate stories during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). "They have no sources, they just make them up when there are none," he told attendees.

Trump's rhetoric often emboldened his supporters who would boo journalists. Huffman described one case in the report where a Trump supporter wore a T-shirt that suggested the use of lynching, stating: "Rope. Tree. Journalist. SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED."

The president has also restricted and even denied access for reporters perceived as unfriendly, including those from Buzzfeed, the Huffington Post, and the Washington Post, and has threatened to change libel laws to make it easier to sue journalists and news agencies.

In one chapter, Christian Amanpour noted the similarities in such "poisonous" trends in the US and around the world.

"The same dynamic has infected powerful segments of the American media, as it has in Egypt, Turkey, and Russia, where journalists have been pushed into political partisan corners, delegitimized, and accused of being enemies of the state. Journalism itself has become weaponized. We cannot allow that to happen," she stated.

In Ecuador, the government has allegedly used social media as a way to suppress journalists.

After tweeting that Ecuador's former Vice-President Lenin Moreno had not paid income taxes, journalist Bernardo Abad's twitter account had been blocked for violating its terms of service. By the end of the week, nine accounts had been temporarily suspended after also tweeting about Moreno's taxes.

Radsch told IPS that with the internet and social media, there are now "more outlets for repression and threats."

China has taken this to the next level, making plans to link journalists' online posts to their finances.

Under the country's proposed social credit plan, journalists who write or speak critically of the government could face personal financial consequences including decreased credit score or a denied loan. Such censorship goes beyond the business as usual tactics of shutting down reporters' social media accounts to affecting journalists' daily activities.

Rasch highlighted the need to advocate for an open internet and the rights of journalists.

"[We must] remember the importance of the press that continues to help us make sense of all the information that we are bombarded with all the time," she told IPS.

She also recommended journalists adopt secure communication practices in order to maintain their privacy and their sources' privacy.

Most importantly, journalists must stand strong and commit to fact-based reporting.

"This is the best and most important way to fight back against the new censorship," said Simon.

"Journalists cannot allow themselves to feel demoralized. They need to pursue their calling and to seek the truth with integrity, honestly believe that the setbacks, while real, are temporary," he concluded.

Read the original:
On World Press Freedom Day, Censorship and Repression Reported Globally - Truth-Out

Kansas community college student reporters allege censorship – Inside Higher Ed


Inside Higher Ed
Kansas community college student reporters allege censorship
Inside Higher Ed
Hutchinson Community College student journalists say they are being squelched. The journalism professor who advises the paper has been suspended.

and more »

See the original post here:
Kansas community college student reporters allege censorship - Inside Higher Ed