Mediaboss Marketing

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 ...

By GARRY RAYNO, InDepthNH.org

CONCORD A bill to update a Cold War teacher loyalty law drew a crowd in opposition Thursday calling it censorship and an attempt to whitewash the nations history.

But bill sponsors said it is intended to ensure teachers are educating students not indoctrinating them, offering anecdotal evidence that they said is happening in schools today.

Only one person beyond bill sponsors spoke in favor of the bill or the amendment they are working on, while the remainder of people testifying opposed the bill saying it will ultimately hurt students who will not learn the good and the bad history of this country.

A tally of people signing in to the public hearing on House Bill 1255 before the House Education Committee, was 2,232 opposed, 26 in favor and 1 neutral.The bill as written would prohibit a teacher from advocating any doctrine or theory promoting a negative account or representation of the founding and history of the United States of America in New Hampshire public schools which does not include the worldwide context of now outdated and discouraged practices.Such prohibition includes but is not limited to teaching that the United States was founded on racism.

The bill would also add socialism and Marxism to a list that teachers would be prohibited from advocating.

A violation of the law, would be a violation of the states codes of ethics and conducts for educators which could result in the loss of a teachers state credentials.

Opponents of the bill said it would double down on the provision passed last year in the budget that has already chilled the teaching of some subjects.

Devon Chaffee, executive director of the ACLU New Hampshire, said the best way to discourage free and open discussions is to have vague limitations coupled with serious and career ending consequences for teachers.

That is what this bill does, Chaffee said. This is fundamentally about censorship.

History teacher Jennifer Given said she took a personal day to represent herself, and her kids, both biological and those in her classroom.

Given told the committee she teaches the slavery of Rome, China and Egypt, and compares types of forced labor around the world.

She took issue with the anecdotes supporters used and their vague assertions.

In trying to solve a problem, Given said, you are reaching so far into my classroom to say what I can and cannot say.

The prime sponsor of the bill, Rep. Alicia Lekas, R-Hudson, said her intent is to ensure teachers are educating students not indoctrinating them.

She has had conversation with high school students who believe slavery only occurred in the United States, she said, a war was fought over it and that it is over.

That is clearly not the case, she said, noting it is important for students to understand slavery happened all over the world and it is still going on.

My intent is to expand the worldwide content, that is my goal to get it out there, Lekas said, so it is not limited to the U.S. did this, it happened and its over. I want to ensure it does not happen again.

Lekas said the fact that there was a civil war over slavery indicates there were people opposed as well as those favoring it not that the founders were racists.

She asked for help to produce an amendment that better explains what she wants to accomplish.

A bill co-sponsor, Rep. Erica Layon, R-Derry, said the intent of the bill is to make sure teachers teach kids how to think, not what to think.

I have heard of teachers saying all our founders were racist, she said. These things do happen in our schools.

Students should not have to parrot what a teacher believes, she said, to receive a good grade.

But Oyster River School District officials told the committee it is reaching too far and any anecdotal incidents should be handled at the local level.

Superintendent James Morse said the bill is vague and unnecessary.

I would suggest legislation that would fit the majority, not anecdotes, Morse said. Those should be addressed at the local level.

Board chair Tom Newkirk said many districts have a policy that prohibits teachers from using their position to advocate their personal political beliefs.

The greater danger is teachers are reluctant to teach subjects of American history that have been suppressed and desperately need to be taught, Newkirk said. With their teacher credentials at stake, who can blame them for not touching certain subjects.

The presidents of the two largest teachers unions in the state, The National Education Association-NH and American Federation of Teacher-NH, both opposed the bill saying the law passed last year has already chilled open and honest discussions.

Deborah Howes, president of AFT-NH said the bill is so vague it would be impossible for teachers to know what is permissible in the classroom.

She said the bill would limit teachers ability to teach and would take away tools students need to learn.

It is subjective. These laws do not help kids learn, Howes said. Indoctrination is in the eye of the beholder.Dover teacher Eric Schlapak and the 2021 recipient of the Christa McAuliffe Sabbatical, noted her picture hanging on the wall of the committee room.

We know her story, he said, noting she wanted her students to understand specific perspectives, humanizing her lessons, something the bill would stifle.

I wonder if she would be able to tell her story with this bill without having her credentials threatened, Schlapak asked.

Jonah Wheeler of Peterborough said he was the only black student in all white schools.

But his third grade teacher pulled him aside to talk openly about what Martin Luther King Jr. stood for, his teachings and the reality of what he was doing at the time.

Without that meeting, I may not be here today and probably would have already taken my life. It is that real for (people of color.)

He noted in his work, teachers are coming to him and saying they are already feeling the chilling effects of the new law.

If they dont have the same conversation with kids today, what if kids feel as isolated as I did, Wheeler said. Thats a real fear. I hope we try our best not to chill this speech.The bill was also opposed by the NH Council of Churches.

The Rev. Heidi Heath, the organizations executive director, called the bill harmful and dangerous saying the nation and state need to face systemic racism if the country is to reach its goal of a more perfect union.

As religious leaders, we believe in the power of truth telling, Heath said. We want to empower our teachers to tell the truth, nothing more, and nothing less.

The committee did not make an immediate recommendation on the bill and will wait for Lekas to come back with her amendment.

Garry Rayno may be reached atgarry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Read more here:
Opponents Say Bill Is Censorship and Whitewashing History - InDepthNH.org

Facebook Twitter LinkedInPinterestReddit EmailPrint

According to Irans state-run media, the clerical regimes parliament is about to pass an internet protection bill, restricting the countrys internet and online freedoms even further.

The bill, which is officially called the Cyberspace Users Rights Protection and Regulation of Key Online Services, will disrupt citizen access to international services, primarily social media, and allow the regimes security apparatus to control internet gateways in order to intensify suppression of dissent.

In his speech on July 20, 2021, the mullahs Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, expressed his utter fear of social media, describing the need to control it as his regimes significant task at hand. He added that officials should pay attention to it as a key issue.

The cyberspace and social media are out of our control. This is a [serious issue]. Social media shouldnt be used any way [people] want. Like water, it should be channeled properly. Others are now managing social media, and we shouldnt stand idly by, Khamenei said, according to Tasnim News Agency, an outlet linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force.

The enemy has taken a combat formation through social media. The [regime] should also take its own position and prepare itself, Khamenei acknowledged.

Other regime officials have expressed similar fears. It is like handing [the social media] to the enemy so it could perform psychological operations amid the economic warfare, Brigadier General Gholamreza Jalali, head of the regimes Civil Defense Organization, told the state-run ISNA news agency in March 2021.

Two major nationwide protests shook the regimes foundations in 2018 and 2019. People called for regime change and democracy. When the regime started its brutal crackdown, citizen journalists and the social network of the main Iranian opposition quickly spread the news of the regimes vicious actions and peoples calls for democracy to the world community. In addition, protesters and the opposition used social media to organize further protests.

The Iranian regime had to impose an internet blackout to prevent additional uprisings and to stop news and information flow to the outside world.

Iranians from all walks of life use social media to organize daily protests due to exacerbating economic and social woes.

In recent years, despite the regimes extensive demonization campaign against the main Iranian opposition, Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), thousands of youths have joined the MEKs Resistance Units network The MEKs Resistance Units have been shattering the regimes atmosphere of suppression and fear by conducting daring daily operations under the nose of the mullahs overt and covert agents.

The MEK, stationed in the capital of a European country, are busy night and day creating an ambiance against the Islamic Republic on Twitter, Instagram, and Telegram, General Ebrahim Golfam, Cultural Deputy at the Joint Chiefs of the regimes Armed Forces, said in May 2019.

So, by adopting the new bill to restrict the internet, the regime intends to prevent the ruling theocracys downfall. It will also have severe economic consequences for millions of Iranians who earn a living through social media, particularly during the worsening Covid-19 crisis.

For roughly over one million Iranians, social media platforms such as Instagram, Telegram, and Twitter serve as virtual businesses. The proposed bill requires international technology firms to have a legal representative in Iran as a means of cooperating with Tehran to increase online surveillance.

Companies that host unregistered social media apps in Iran would risk penalties. Millions of Iranians must either turn to regime-affiliated platforms and risk their basic freedoms or risk sinking deeper into poverty.

The regimes former Minister of Information Technology, Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi, acknowledged that the bill curtails access to information and leads to a complete ban on popular messaging apps.

In a letter to Reza Taghipour, Chairman of the Joint Commission to Review the protection bill, the Parliamentary Research Center warned about the economic and social consequences of adopting this bill.

According to the parliaments Research Center on December 31, 2021, the bills adverse impact on the digital economy will induce a significant capital exodus while encouraging corruption and embezzlement. It added that the bill will deliver an irreparable blow to small online businesses while increasing the rate of brain drain and further aggravating the peoples grievances against the ruling regime.

While the regimes ultimate goal is internet censorship and control, some institutions and individuals are directly involved and will stand to benefit from the so-called protection bill. These include: Research Institute of Islamic Culture and Art, Research Institute of Islamic Culture and Thought, Center for Deep Strategic Studies and Institute for Research and Explanation of the Discourse of the Islamic Revolution.

These entities receive budgets from the government but are private institutions under the IRGC and Khameneis control. The Institute of Islamic Culture and Thought alone receives 293 trillion rials from the 2022-2023 general budget. Meanwhile, the share of the Cancer Research Institute of the University of Tehran in the 2022-2023 budget is 50 billion rials.

Nepotism and corruption also play a role. Abbas Moradi, Sina Kalhor, Massoud Fayazi, and Ruhollah Momen are some notable individuals and relatives of regime officials behind the measure. They promote domestic social media platforms.

Massoud Fayazi, the Scientific supervisor of the bills review has no background in computer science. He told the state TV that the era of filtering social media is over, and that the regime should instead establish basic regulations for internet services.

By forcing international social medial platforms out of Iran, companies like Sharif Amid Computer Company will take over the market. This company is headed by Maryam Zakani, daughter of Tehrans Mayor Alireza Zakani, and her husband Hossain Heydari. Heydari also works in Arsh Ideographer Company, another application-developing company, whose most prominent application is Rubika.

Currently, Irans service providers allow users to download this application for free. However, there is some speculation that after social media platforms like Telegram are forced out of Iran, Rubika would shift to a paid subscription model.

Another so-called domestic application is Instagram Plus. In a TV debate on July 31, 2021, Abbas Mordai, another planner of the protection bill, acknowledged that, On Instagram Plus we will have online banking. Moradis words revived the bitter experience of previous attempts to produce local copies of social media platforms such as Golder Telegram, or search engines. These actions resulted in squandering millions of dollars of the countrys wealth, the state-run Hamshahri daily reported on August 2, 2021.

Quoting Nima Namdari, Member of the Board of Directors of Tehran Computer Guild System, Hamshahri wrote that adopting the internet protection plan will result in a 10,000 trillion rials embezzlement [equivalent to $35 million based on the current free-market exchange rate].

According to this plan, 10% percent of the shares of private companies providing telecommunication services will be provided to the Ministry of Communications to develop replacement apps for filtered platforms. If the Ministry of Communications does not meet this objective, this credit will be handed over to the Secretariat of the High Council for Cyberspace, which is controlled by Khamenei.

Like other decisions adopted by the regime, limiting the internet will spark major protests, a bitter nightmare already predicted by state-run media. While people are crushed under the burden of poverty and Covid-19 has damaged many businesses, the parliament is seeking to pass a law [restricting] internet. This plan has shocked society, as people fear the loss of their businesses. This will have consequences, the state-run Khabar-e Fori website reported on December 1, 2021.

Despite Khameneis direct order for controlling social media, his handpicked deputies in parliament are hesitating. The most basic issues are left unattended in our country due to mismanagement. Then we seek approval to intrude on peoples privacy, and under the pretext of protection, reduce the speed of the Internet and bandwidth, said a member of parliament, Ruhoallh Hazrat-Pour, on November 14, according to Khan-e Mellat News Agency.

The regime is in a serious bind. If it adopts the bill, it would risk major protests by an already angry population. And if it doesnt, then more youth will join the MEK, and protests would become more organized and more frequent. This is the very definition of a desperate regime whose days are numbered because it has run out of options and can find no way out of compounding crises.

Read the original here:
Exclusive Report: Iran Regimes Internet Censorship Plan and Its Consequences - National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)

The arrival of February might mean Valentine's Day for some, but for Shudder, it's another business-as-usual month of bringing in great new movie exclusives, great TV shows, and classic catalog horror.

Shudder's latest batch of new movies kicks off on February 1 with Censor, the well-received 2021 movie about a British film censor linking a disturbing horror movie to her own sister's mysterious disappearance. According to an official synopsis, Enid "sets out to solve the past mystery of her sister's disappearance, embarking on a quest that dissolves the line between fiction and reality."

On February 14, a pair of horror movies striking quite different tones will come to Shudder. Corporate Animals stars Demi Moore as a delusional CEO who takes her staff on a "disastrous" team-building retreat led by an overeager guide played by Ed Helms. Also hitting the platform that day is XX, an all-female helmed horror anthology featuring four stories written and directed by "fiercely talented" women: Annie Clark (St. Vincent), Karyn Kusama (The Invitation), Roxanne Benjamin (Body at Brighton Rock), and Jovanka Vuckovic (Riot Girls), featuring a cast that includes Natalie Brown, Melanie Lynskey, Breeda Wool, and Christina Kirk.

Take a look at the complete list of everything arriving on the platform next month below. Additionally, you can also check out our similar lists for Disney+ and Netflix.

See the original post here:
New On Shudder February 2022: Censor, XX, And More - GameSpot

If you care about book challenges and censorship, one Supreme Court case you should familiarize yourself with which hasnt been cited nearly during this flux of challenges is Board of Education, Island Trees School District vs. Pico (Island Trees). This landmark 1982 case was the first to address the removal of books from school libraries across the country. Though it was a 5-4 split within the court, the ruling in favor of Pico meant that no school board could remove books from a library once itd been added, simply because they disagreed with the content within it.

Justice Brennan, in announcing the judgement which did not have a majority opinion to it, stated:

The Island Trees case came from an incident in the school district located in Levittown, New York, in 1975. A group which called themselves Parents of New York United submitted a list of 11 books they considered inappropriate to the school board, which then removed the books from the library and proceeded to send them through the review committee. Even though the committee said five of nine titles should be returned to shelves, the school board overruled the decision, returning only two (the other two books in question were a book in the junior high school that contained the satirical essay A Modest Proposal, and a book in the 12th grade curriculum, and both were removed).

The school board made this decision because they were anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Sem[i]tic, and just plain filthy, according to the case syllabus.

Today In Books Newsletter

Sign up to Today In Books to receive daily news and miscellany from the world of books.

Thank you for signing up! Keep an eye on your inbox.

High school senior Steven Pico, in the case, helped bring the voices of four fellow high school students and one junior high school student into the story. All of them pushed back against the boards decision. They believed thanks, in part, to the precedent set with the Tinker vs. Des Moines case that their First Amendment rights were being violated.

One possible reason why this case hasnt been cited is that it wasnt legally binding because there wasnt a majority opinion. But because it also hasnt been challenged, it stands as a powerful reminder of a few things: this isnt and never has been the first time books in school libraries have been challenged, let alone that books by authors of color have been at the center of the discussion (the 11 titles included books by Piri Thomas, Langston Hughes, Richard Wright, Alice Childress, and Eldridge Cleaver); its not the first time that students have been forced to speak up for their First Amendment Rights; its noteworthy that the ruling stated this means books cannot be removed from school libraries because of disagreement with what they present (i.e., stories of those from the global majority and queer stories); that school boards have exerted more power than granted to them; and more.

When and if we begin to see lawsuits arising from todays censorship landscape, watch for Island Trees to be cited and revisited. The Supreme Court isnt stacked in favor of intellectual freedom right now, given the appointments made by the treasonous former administration, but prior rulings give weight to the reality that book censorship denies rights granted to young people in the First Amendment.

Onto this weeks book censorship news, with a toolkit for how to fight book bans and challenges, as well as how to spot fake news sites many of which are fueling these censorship attempts. Note: This will be the final roundup of 2021. Roundups will continue beginning the first full week of 2022.

Heres this weeks intellectual freedom hero:

And a couple more must-reads from authors experiencing challenges or outright censorship: author Jo Knowles talks about two of her queer-positive books being challenged in Texas and Derf Backderf talks about why his graphic memoir My Friend Dahmer has been banned.

See the article here:
Can The 1982 Island Trees Case Impact Todays Book Censorship? This Weeks Book Censorship News... - Book Riot