Mediaboss Marketing

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

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

By Kathryn Foxhall

President Donald Trump has already labeled major media 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.

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? No one leaked when EPA staff people knew that kids in Flint were drinking lead in water or when the CDC had sloppy practices in handling bad bugs.

Meantime, we have much more to worry about than just the gagged feds. In surveys sponsored by the Society of Professional Journalists, over half of political and general assignment reporters around the country said their interviews must be approved at least most of the time. Seventy-eight percent said the public is not getting the information it needs because of barriers imposed on reporting, and 73 percent said the controls are getting tighter.

Education and science reporters cited similar controls.

Perhaps most chillingly, 56 percent of police reporters said they can never or rarely interview police officers without involving a PIO.

Almost 80 percent of police PIOs said they felt it was necessary to supervise or otherwise monitor interviews with police officers. Asked why, some PIOs said things like: To ensure that the interviews stay within the parameters that we want.

However people in power characterize it, censorship is a moral monstrosity. It leaves people on the inside to control information with their own ideas and motivations. It debilitates all of us with a lack of understanding or, just as bad, skewed information. It takes away trust in our systems. It puts democracy itself in question.

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.

Continued here:
Guest essay: PIO censorship in the era of Trump - Irondequoit Post

On Nov. 4 when China's Dalian Wanda Groupannouncedit would shell out $1 billion to acquire Dick Clark Productions, the real estate conglomerate thought it had just landed another marquee entertainment company forits growing coffer of U.S. assets that already includes cinema operator AMC Entertainment Holdings (AMC) and film-production company Legendary Entertainment.

But bubbling under the surface of the deal for theAmerican Idol producer was concerns from investors, regulators and entertainment executives in the U.S. and abroad about the deal's viability. Specifically from the typical CFIUS or censorship concerns that normally occur when Chinese buyers target U.S. companies.

"Most of the leaders of China's entertainment industry are here in Los Angeles this week, and there are discussions between them about the concerns in Washington," Rob Cain, a Los Angeles-based film producer and entertainment-industry consultant to Hollywood studios operating in China, told the Wall Street Journal at the time.

And those concerns have proven well-founded, because on March 10, Eldridge Industries, which owns the production studio, said that it had terminated the deal after Beijing-based Wanda "failed to honor its contractual obligations."

But the collapse of Dalian Wanda's $1 billion deal to buy Dick Clark Productions could actually signal a future where U.S.-China deals are increasingly difficult to consummate. And that's because of concerns about the outflow of cash from mainland China overseas.

"It is very likely that 2017 will represent a very difficult year for any outbound China deals to get done. This is due almost exclusively to the increased capital controls," said Christopher Balding, associate professor of finance and economics at the HSBC Business School of Peking University Graduate School. "Beijing has simply been cracking down on capital leaving China so that even many non-investment currency transactions are unable to obtain clearance for international transactions of any kind."

Read the original:
CFIUS and Censorship Aren't the Only Threats to China, US M&A - TheStreet.com

For-profit newspapers have been banned from the Bruce Township hall after action taken by the Board of Trustees Wednesday.

At the center of the action is The Record Newspaper, a Romeo-based publication that began publishing in January 2015.

The topic arose after Treasurer Debbie Obrecht accused Supervisor Richard Cory of throwing away copies on display at the township hall left there by Record Editor and Publisher Larry Sobczak.

The treasurer claimed that coverage critical of Clerk Susan Brockmann led to Corys action.

Advertisement

Brockmann was arrested on Sept. 11, 2015 at the township hall after setting of an alarm attempting to enter the building at 3 a.m. A Michigan State Police crash report from that night listed her blood alcohol content at .20, more than double the level of intoxication in Michigan and above the .17 super drunk standard.

I think it is censoring the press, Obrecht told the board. We may or may not like stories that appear, but the idea is that it does benefit the community overall.

Cory denied that he removed the newspapers.

I dont know of anyone throwing them out. This has turned into a political thing for you, Cory told Obrecht. There are articles in there that you want people to read.

Sobczak said that he has been leaving a few copies of The Record at the township hall since December of 2015.

Cory said the Treasurer gave away copies of The Record to residents coming into her office for them to read articles relating to Brockmanns arrest, which is being adjudicated through the 42-2 District Court in New Baltimore. Sobczak said that he never told Obrecht to personally distribute The Record, but stands by her right to do so.

It is her First Amendment right to pass out whatever she wants, he said.

Treasurer Paul Okoniewski backed up the supervisors claim.

Should we talk about the email I got from a resident citing you for handing them (newspapers) out while people were paying their taxes? Okoniewski asked Obrecht. The person sent an email to the board asking you to cease and desist.

That is absolutely untrue, Obrecht quickly responded.

Brockmann did not acknowledge articles written about her were the issue with The Record, it was their inaccurate reporting of other stories in the past.

He (Sobczak) doesnt report the news, said Brockmann. I dont think that is the kind of journalism we want in this township.

Obrecht said that if Cory could be handing out materials advocating for Greater Romeo-Washington Chamber of Commerce businesses, then The Record should also be available to the public at the township hall along with publications such as Macomb Now.Magazine.

The Chamber and the Macomb Now are not causing the problems in this building, The Record is causing the problems, Cory told Obrecht. You are only doing this for one reason, because you dont like somebody in this building.

You are wrong, Obrecht replied.

Okoniewski offered a motion not to provide any for-profit newspapers in the hallway at the township hall.

The motion passed 4-1 with Obrecht as the lone opposition vote.

They are stomping on the peoples right to free speech and freedom of the press, Sobczak said. I hope he board gains some wisdom and rescinds their motion.

The Record Publisher said that he has spoken with Cory since the meeting, but the two did not come up with a solution to getting the newspaper back into the township hall.

Michigan State Police (MSP) responded to an alarm at the Bruce Township Hall at 3:00 a.m. on Sept. 11 for a possible breaking and entering incident.

According to an MSP crash report from that night, Brockmann backed her Jeep Commander into the responding vehicle of Trooper Roger Haddad. The damage was listed in the report as minor.

Brockmann was then taken into custody and transported to the Chesterfield Police Department for booking and a chemical test on the charge of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) with a high blood alcohol content. She was released on $100 bond.

Brockman is due back in Chesterfield Township district court March 22.

Visit link:
Censorship allegation made as Bruce Township officials toss newspaper from hall - The Macomb Daily