Mediaboss Marketing

Renowned Pakistani poet, social activist and academic Salman Haider was abducted on January 6 from Islamabad Highway while he was on his way back home. His wife received a text from his own number, telling her to pick the car from a place few hundred meters away from their house. As the news about his abduction emerged in the mainstream media, the families of two other bloggers, Aasim Saeed and Ahmed Waqas Goraya, reportedto the police that they had been missing since January 4. Two other activists, Ahmed Raza Naseer and Samar Abbas, also went missing in the following days. All of them are well-known for holding a progressive worldview, often critical of the militarys policies.

After weeks of speculation and widespread protests across the country, fourof them returned to their families on January 28. Two of them have since left the country after an active media campaign framing them as blasphemers threatened their lives. The other two, although still in Pakistan, have relocated along with their families, uncertain about their future.

While several quarters suspect military spy agencies of being behind the abductions, the director general of the militarys Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), Major General Asif Ghafoor, in his first press conference, denied the armys involvement. Still, abold editorial appearing in Dawn newspaper on January 11 read, The sanitized language missing persons, the disappeared, etc. cannot hide an ugly truth: the state of Pakistan continues to be suspected of involvement in the disappearance and illegal detentions of a range of private citizens.

Dawns editorial predicted that a dark new chapter in the states murky, illegal war against civil society appears to have been opened.

After protests against the disappearances erupted, a popular Twitter and Facebook hashtag #WhoAreTheyDefending accused the protesters of supporting blasphemers, with many tweets calling for their deaths. TV anchor and televangelist Aamir Liaquat Hussain launched an attack against leading journalists like Owais Tohid, media outlets like Jang and Dawn group, as well as several members of the civil society, accusing them of committing treason and blasphemy. In doing so, Hussain who hosts a controversial talk show in a recently-launched TV channel repeatedlydefied a banon such accusations laid down bythe Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority(PEMRA), which called Liaquats commentshate speech.

Renowned activist and analysts Marvi Sirmed, who herself has come under personal attacks from Aamir Liaquat Hussain, believes there is no way to know if he is parroting someones line. However, looking at who else is taking the position that Aamir Liaquat is taking, it becomes clearer which unseen power wants that line to be propagated, she says.

In October last year, Dawn newspaper staffer Cyril Almeida reported the details of an off-camera meeting where the civilian leadership confronted the then-director general of Inter-Services Intelligence(ISI), Lt. General Rizwan Akhtar, about not allowing action against banned outfits in Punjab. Almeidas story drew a strong backlash from the government, andhis name was put on the Exit Control List only to be removed a few days later after a strong response from the English press and overall media platforms.

Daily The Nation, in aneditorial following the ban on Cyril Almeida, wrote, how dare the government and military top brass lecture the press on how to do their job. How dare they treat a feted reporter like a criminal. And how dare they imply that they have either the right or the ability or the monopoly to declare what Pakistans national interest is.

While the media attempt to push back, the state-sponsored censorship seems to be expanding from topics like Balochistan to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC); from mainstream to social media. Marvi Sirmed has observed the same phenomenon. I havent received any direct censorship directions from anywhere ever. Its just that they show their displeasure through hundreds of anonymous Twitter accounts, she says.

Sirmed, who writes a weekly column for Pakistan Today, recounts how her voice was censored: Recently, my regular column in The Nation has been stopped abruptly in the wake of pressure from some known unknowns.

The Nation became a target of social media abuse under the hashtag #ShameOnTheNation after publishing some op-eds criticizing the states policies. After a barrage of abuse and threats online, the publication was forced to remove some of the op-eds from its website.

After The Newsrecently broke the news that 90 acres of land had been allotted to the former chief of army staff, General Raheel Sharif, an organized campaign, both online and offline, called Jang Group treasonous and a blasphemer. Overnight, banners calling for the death of Najam Sethi a senior journalist and analyst associated with Jang Group appeared in front of the Karachi Press Club.

Shad Khan, a U.K.-based Pakistani journalist, was recently removed from the country while he was filming for a documentary on the effects of investment brought by CPEC on the people of Gwadar.

I was granted permission by the Gwadar Port Authority to shoot around the area, Khan says.

Known for The Secret Drone War, which won him an Amnesty Award, Khan was provided with a security official in Gwadar. I filmed with Pakistan Navy for a day after they verified all of the documentation provided by me, he says. However, on the fifth day of shooting, I started receiving visits from officials in civilian clothes who asked for my identity card and I was interrogated by an army major.

Khan was asked to leave Gwadar without his equipment and the intelligence officials accompanying escorted him to a plane for the U.K.

Khan explains the apparent reason for his removal. I had to cover a rally of Sardar Akhtar Mengal, the head of Balochistan National Party, when they came to me and asked me to not cover the rally at all, Khan recalls. Upon my refusal to comply with their demand, they requested to cover the rally positively, which, as a journalist, is not a good practice.

Im a Pakistani citizen but not sure if I was just removed or deported. Im not sure if I still hold the Pakistani nationality or not. Pakistani High Commission in the U.K. hasnt returned my queries, he laments.

A similar incident happened with two New York City-based filmmakers, Rehana Esmail and Sina Zekavat, who have been working on a documentary called Boats Above My House for the past 18 months. The film is about a landslide in the northern areas of Pakistan and the chain of environmental, social, political, and economic events that followed. We focus on a group of people in Attabad village who are not formally recognized as citizens and are attempting to build their lives back after they lost their homes after this landslide, Zekavat says.

Their film received an on-site stop order on November 3, 2016from the Pakistani security agencies. Our line producer and DP (all locals) were forced to undergo a prolonged and unclear investigation process, Zekavat says, adding, all of our gear (including rental equipment and personal cell phones) and footage is being held for a forensic investigation and weve been informed that there are possibilities of serious charges against our fellow crew members.

One of the people they were filming with was Naz, who is the sister of the Baba Jan a left-wing activist and politician currently imprisoned for life. Naz is partially involved in her brothers release from prison as well the general human rights situation for people of Gilgit-Baltistan, Sina Zekavat says, adding, however, the footage that we got up until the stop, mainly consisted of Naz and her family cooking and eating together and doing very ordinary things.

The line of questioning by the investigators focused on filming Baba Jans house, which the co-directors insist wasnt the highlight of the documentary. Human rights activist and lawyer Asma Jahangir has decided to take up their case in the court.

In another sign of a growing crackdown, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) recently banned Khabaristan Times, a satire news website famous for taking on politicians, the military, and religious extremists.

Khabaristan Timeseditor Kunwar Khuldune Shahid considers the ban a continuation of the states crackdown on dissent in online spaces. Our content was published without any bylines, and the author only revealed their name to their audience if they chose to. Article 23 of the cybercrime law itself outlaws spoof and parody, and hence could be triggered to ban the satirical publication, he says.

Khuldune adds: Whether it was to target satire or anonymity, it is evident that secular and liberal voices are being targeted. For many jihadist groups are open to express themselves many do it anonymously as well.

Islamabad-based journalist Taha Siddiqui believes the attempts by the state to coerce journalists into toeing their narrative line are increasing. State has financially squeezed news networks if they tried to challenge the state narrative or openly report on taboo topics like Pakistani military affairs independently, since manages stories on such topics.

Siddiqui predicts tougher days for dissenting voices in Pakistan. The worst part is that journalists and activists have no idea what the red line is anymore and the state has started to react even more violently when it wants to clamp down on those who are vocal about critically evaluating sociopolitical issues in Pakistan, he asserts.

Kunwar Khuldune Shahid, who is a keen observer of current affairs himself, agrees.

This targeting of secular pages and websites could be a way to appease the Islamist sections at a time when a crackdown against jihadist groups and leaders has become inevitable owing to international pressure.

Hafiz Saeed being under house arrest, and members of LeT and JuD being put under the ECL [exit control list], highlights this. Maybe the states action against liberal voices, and the fact that it preceded the crackdown, was designed to forestall the Islamist backlash, he concludes.

Umer Ali is a freelance journalist based in Pakistan. He reports on human rights issues, social problems and more. He can be reached on Twitter at @iamumer1.

See the article here:
Pakistan's Censorship Takes a Dangerous Turn - The Diplomat

Arizona Bill Would Stop Censorship Of High-School Newspapers KJZZ A Supreme Court decision has ruled student newspapers don't have the same constitutional rights as other publications. But an Arizona state senator saw that as having a chilling effect and introduced a bill to stop school administrators from censoring ...

Original post:
Arizona Bill Would Stop Censorship Of High-School Newspapers - KJZZ

Internet censorship in Pakistan is government control of information sent and received using the Internet in Pakistan.

Pakistan made global headlines in 2010 for blocking Facebook and other Web sites in response to a contest popularized on the social networking site to draw images of the Prophet Mohammad. In general, Internet filtering in Pakistan remains both inconsistent and intermittent, with filtering primarily targeted at content deemed to be a threat to national security and at religious content considered blasphemous.

In mid-2012 Pakistanis had relatively free access to a wide range of content, including most sexual, political, social, and religious sites on the Internet. The OpenNet Initiative listed Internet filtering in Pakistan as substantial in the conflict/security area, and as selective in the political, social, and Internet tools areas in August 2012.[1] Additionally, Freedom House rated Pakistan's "Freedom on the Net Status" as "Not Free" in its Freedom on the Net 2013 report.[2] This is still true as of 2016.[3]

Internet filtering in Pakistan is regulated by the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) under the direction of the government, the Supreme Court of Pakistan, and the Ministry of Information Technology (MoIT). Although the majority of filtering in Pakistan is intermittentsuch as the occasional block on a major Web site like Blogspot or YouTubethe PTA continues to block sites containing content it considers to be blasphemous, anti-Islamic, or threatening to internal security. Online civil society activism that began in order to protect free expression in the country continues to expand as citizens utilize new media to disseminate information and organize.[1]

Pakistan has blocked access to websites critical of the government or the military.[1] Blocking of websites is often carried out under the rubric of restricting access to blasphemous content, pornography, or religious immorality.[4] At the end of 2011, the PTA had officially banned more than 1,000 porn websites in Pakistan.[4][5]

The Pakistan Internet Exchange (PIE), operated by the state-owned Pakistan Telecommunication Company Ltd (PTCL), was created to facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic between ISPs within and outside of Pakistan.[6] Because the majority of Pakistan's Internet traffic is routed through the PIE (98% of Pakistani ISPs used the PIE in 2004), it provides a means to monitor and possibly block incoming and outgoing Internet traffic as the government deems fit.[7]

Internet surveillance in Pakistan is primarily conducted by the PIE under the auspices of the PTA. The PIE monitors all incoming and outgoing Internet traffic from Pakistan, as well as e-mail and keywords, and stores data for a specified amount of time. Law enforcement agencies such as the FIA can be asked by the government to conduct surveillance and monitor content. Under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance (PECO), ISPs are required to retain traffic data for a minimum of 90 days and may also be required to collect real-time data and record information while keeping their involvement with the government confidential. The ordinance does not specify what kinds of actions constitute grounds for data collection and surveillance.[1]

In April 2003, the PTCL announced that it would be stepping up monitoring of pornographic websites. "Anti-Islamic" and "blasphemous" sites were also monitored.[8] In early March 2004, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) ordered Internet service providers (ISPs) to monitor access to all pornographic content. The ISPs, however, lacked the technical know-how, and felt that the PTCL was in a better position to carry out FIA's order. A Malaysian firm was then hired to provide a filtering system, but failed to deliver a working system.

In March 2012, the Pakistan government took the unusual step of touting for firms that could help build it a nationwide content-filtering service.[9] The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority published a request for proposals for the deployment and operation of a national level URL Filtering and Blocking System which would operate on similar lines to China's Golden Shield, or "Great Firewall".[9] Academic and research institutions as well as private commercial entities had until 16 March to submit their proposals, according to the request's detailed 35-point system requirements list. Key among these is the following: "Each box should be able to handle a block list of up to 50 million URLs (concurrent unidirectional filtering capacity) with processing delay of not more than 1 milliseconds".[9]

The Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy began after 12 editorial cartoons, most of which depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad, were published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005. This led to protests across the Muslim world, some of which escalated into violence with instances of firing on crowds of protestors, resulting in more than 100 reported deaths,[10] and included the bombing of the Danish embassy in Pakistan, setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming of European buildings, and the burning of the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, French, and German flags in Gaza City.[11][12] The posting of the cartoons online added to the controversy.

On 1 March 2006 the Supreme Court of Pakistan directed the government to keep tabs on Internet sites displaying the cartoons and called for an explanation from authorities as to why these sites had not been blocked earlier.[13] On 2 March 2006, pursuant to a petition filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, the Supreme Court sitting en banc ordered the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) and other government departments to adopt measures for blocking websites showing blasphemous content. The Court also ordered Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan to explore laws which would enable blocking of objectionable websites. In announcing the decision, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, said, "We will not accept any excuse or technical objection on this issue because it relates to the sentiments of the entire Muslim world. All authorities concerned will have to appear in the Court on the next hearing with reports of concrete measures taken to implement our order".

Consequently, the government kept tabs on a number of websites hosting the cartoons deemed to be sacrilegious. This ban included all the weblogs hosted at the popular blogging service blogger.com, as some bloggers had put up copies of the cartoons particularly many non-Pakistani blogs.

A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Chaudhry, summoned the country's Attorney General as well as senior communication ministry officials to give a report of "concrete measures for implementation of the court's order". At the hearing on 14 March 2006, the PTA informed the Supreme Court that all websites displaying the Muhammad cartoons had been blocked. The bench issued directions to the Attorney General of Pakistan, Makhdoom Ali Khan, to assist the court on how it could exercise jurisdiction to prevent the availability of blasphemous material on websites the world over.[14]

The blanket ban on the blogspot.com blogs was lifted on 2 May 2006.[15] Shortly thereafter the blanket ban was reimposed and extended to Typepad blogs. The blanket ban on the blogspot.com blogs was later lifted again.

Allegations of suppressing vote-rigging videos by the Musharraf administration were also leveled by Pakistani bloggers, newspapers, media, and Pakistani anti-Musharraf opposition parties. The ban was lifted on 26 February 2008.[16][17]

In 2006 the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority blocked five websites for "providing misleading informations".[18] Some allege that the websites' real crime was reporting on the Balochistan separatist conflict.[19]

YouTube was blocked in Pakistan following a decision taken by the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority on 22 February 2008 because of the number of "non-Islamic objectionable videos."[17][20] One report specifically named Fitna, a controversial Dutch film, as the basis for the block.[21] Pakistan, an Islamic republic, ordered its ISPs to block access to YouTube "for containing blasphemous web content/movies."[22] The action effectively blocked YouTube access worldwide for several hours on 24 February.[23] Defaming Muhammad under 295-C of the Blasphemy law in Pakistan requires a death sentence.[24] This followed increasing unrest in Pakistan by over the reprinting of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons which depict satirical criticism of Islam.[22] Router misconfiguration by one Pakistani ISP on 24 February 2008 effectively blocked YouTube access worldwide for several hours.[23] On 26 February 2008, the ban was lifted after the website had removed the objectionable content from its servers at the request of the government.[16]

On 19 and 20 May 2010, Pakistan's Telecommunication Authority (PTA) imposed a ban on Wikipedia, YouTube, Flickr, and Facebook in response to a competition entitled Everybody Draw Mohammed Day on Facebook, in a bid to contain "blasphemous" material[25][26] The ban imposed on Facebook was the result of a ruling by the Lahore High Court, while the ban on the other websites was imposed arbitrarily by the PTA on the grounds of "objectionable content", a different response from earlier requests, such as pages created to promote peaceful demonstrations in Pakistani cities being removed because they were "inciting violence". The ban was lifted on 27 May 2010, after the website removed the objectionable content from its servers at the request of the government. However, individual videos deemed offensive to Muslims that are posted on YouTube will continue to be blocked.[27][28]

In September 2012, the PTA blocked the video-sharing website YouTube for not removing an anti-Islamic film made in the United States, Innocence of Muslims, which mocks Mohammed. The website would remain suspended, it was stated, until the film was removed.[29][30] In a related move, the PTA announced that it had blocked about 20,000 websites due to "objectionable" content.[31]

On 25 July 2013, the government announced that it is mulling over reopening YouTube during the second week of August. A special 12-member committee was working under the Minister of IT and Telecommunication, Anusha Rahman, to see if objectionable content can be removed. The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority, the telecom watchdog in the country, has already expressed its inability to filter out select content.[32]

On 21 April 2014, Pakistan's Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights requested the Federal Government remove the ban on YouTube.[33][34]

On 8 February 2015, the government announced that YouTube will remain blocked 'indefinitely' because no tool or solution had been found which can totally block offensive content.[35] As of June 2015 1,000 days on the ban was still in effect, and YouTube cannot be accessed from either desktop or mobile devices.[34]

The ban was lifted due to technical glitch on December 6, 2015 according to ISPs in Pakistan.[36] As September 2016, the ban has been lifted officially, as YouTube launched a local version for Pakistan.[37]

In June 2013, The Citizens Lab, an interdisciplinary research laboratory uncovered that Canadian internet-filtering product Netsweeper is functioning at the national level in Pakistan. The system has categorized billions of URLs and is adding 10 million new URLs every day. The lab also confirmed that ISPs in Pakistan are using methods of DNS tampering to block websites at the behest of Pakistan Telecommunication Authority.

According to the report published by the lab, Netsweeper technology is being implemented in Pakistan for purposes of political and social filtering, including websites of secessionist movements, sensitive religious topics, and independent media.[38]

In July 2013, Pakistani ISPs banned 6 of the top 10[39] public Torrent sites in Pakistan. These sites include Piratebay, Kickass torrents, Torrentz, Bitsnoop, Extra Torrent and Torrent Reactor.[40] They also banned the similar site Mininova.[41] However proxies for these torrent sites are still active and P2P connections are working normally.[42] This move lead to a massive public backlash, especially from the Twitter and Facebook communities of Pakistan. In the aftermath of such critique, the IT Minister of Pakistan, Anusha Rehman, deactivated her Twitter account.[43]

View original post here:
Internet censorship in Pakistan - Wikipedia

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The popular digital currency Bitcoin, witha market capitalization of over $16 billion, was in the news over the weekend after it recrossed the $1,000/Bitcoin value threshold. Despite the buzz around Bitcoin, there is another cryptocurrency-related project that is poised to revolutionize the way in which we exchange.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The Ethereum Project, an open source platform developed by 22-year old programmer Vitalik Buterin, is seeking to build upon the blockchain technology established by Bitcoin by allowing developers to use the blockchain to build decentralized applications.

The blockchain is a decentralized database where records and entries are virtually unchangeable. While Bitcoin utilizes blockchain technology to manage a currency, the Ethereum Project provides an open source environment where programmers can create applications on the blockchain.

Tristan Winters, a reporter at ETHNews, the leading online Ethereum news site, explained to me the Ethereum project in laymans terms: Ethereum is a world computer. Instead of hosting apps on a server, you host them on the Ethereum blockchain and p2p network (world computer). So the apps are censorship resistant and no one can shut them down, even if they want to.

Ethereum is driven by Ether, a cryptocurrency that acts as fuel for the system. According to the projects website, Ether is a necessary element that ensures that developers are writing quality applications:

Ether is a necessary element a fuel for operating the distributed application platform Ethereum. It is a form of payment made by the clients of the platform to the machines executing the requested operations. To put it another way, ether is the incentive ensuring that developers write quality applications (wasteful code costs more), and that the network remains healthy (people are compensated for their contributed resources).

Because of the open source nature of Ethereum, its has almost limitless functions. Developers have proposed and began work on decentralized file storage systems, financial systems, and business management systems.

Ethereum allows actors to create smart contracts, which are programs that run on the blockchain that can handle currency in a way that is unchangeable. Smart contracts can be used for a variety of business functions, such as the representation of shares, organizational voting, and fundraising.

The decentralized nature of the Ethereum blockchain would allow for social networks that are truly resistant to censorship. Unlike Facebook or Twitter, a social network operating on Ethereum wouldnt be accessed via centralized servers. Such a network would exist as a peer-to-peer network that lives on computers throughout the world. Because such a network would have no centralized body, censorship would be extremely difficult.

Although it is unclear what the future holds for the Ethereum Project and the value of Ether, it seems likely that there is increasing interest in decentralized applications that have the potential to liberate an increasingly centralized world.

Tom Ciccotta is a libertarian who writes about social justice and libertarian issues for Breitbart News. You can follow him on Twitter @tciccotta or email him at tciccotta@breitbart.com

More:
Ethereum Project Offers Censorship Resistant 'World ...

The bill would require schools to notify parents of any potentially sexually explicit classroom material and require that schools offer an alternative for the students of any parents who opt out. (Thinkstock)

WASHINGTON Virginias House of Delegates could take a final vote Monday on a bill that would require schools to notify parents of any potentially sexually explicit classroom material and require that schools offer an alternative for the students of any parents who opt out.

Opponents of the bill said it amounts to censorship in schools. Supporters said it is simply a requirement to keep parents informed and in control.

This does not prohibit any teacher from assigning any type of material they deem necessary or appropriate. It does not ban books. It does not ban any materials that teachers or school systems would like to have on their reading list and the like. It doesnt do that, the bills patron Del. Steve Landes, R-Augusta, said Friday.

This legitimately addresses a legitimate concern that parents raised, he said.

Del. Dave Albo, R-Springfield, described the bill as a compromise that strikes a fair balance.

I think that 99.99999 percent of the parents in Virginia would like to know if someone assigned a book that has scenes about sexual abuse of a child and infected sexual battery, Albo said.

Del. Alfonso Lopez, D-Arlington, said that even though this years bill set for a final vote is narrower than the bill that was vetoed by Gov. Terry McAuliffelast year, there would still be significant unintended consequences and problems.

More than likely, a teacher will not be able to do two entire lesson plans for the same class, sometimes on a very quick turnaround, after an objection from just one parent. This makes it much less likely that theyd be willing to even attempt to use anything that might be considered objectionable in their lessons, Lopez said.

He said it would be a form of censorship that could limit all kinds of classic art and literature.

For a junior taking AP English and learning iambic pentameter, what is less objectionable literary work that is the equivalent to any of Shakespeares plays? Lopez said.

Most importantly, what is an equivalent work to Toni Morrisons Beloved, which teaches us in a very raw and unflinching manner and terms about the horrors of slavery? he added.

The bill was originally triggered by a Fairfax County mother who protested the use of Beloved in her sons class when he was a senior in high school.

Lopez and Del. Vivian Watts, D-Annandale, warned of a potential black eye for Virginias reputation if the bill passes, and it becomes widely reported or mentioned on late-night TV.

Lopez cited the widespread reaction to the recent move in Accomac, Virginia, to pull To Kill a Mockingbird and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn following a parents complaint.

We will end up with excluding for all what might be objectionable to just a few, she added.

The bill advanced Friday on a voice vote to a final vote that is expected on Monday. The bill would then go to the state Senate.

Del. Nicholas Freitas, R-Culpeper, said this is simply a service for parents.

I dont care how many Pulitzer Prizes it has. If its sexually explicit material, that might be something as a parent that I want to be notified of, Freitas said.

Read the proposed bill on theVirginia General Assembly website.

Like WTOP on Facebook and follow @WTOP on Twitter to engage in conversation about this article and others.

2017 WTOP. All Rights Reserved.

Read this article:
Censorship or parental control? Va. lawmakers divided on bill - WTOP