Mediaboss Marketing

The Center for Biological Diversity sued the Trump administration Tuesday to uncover public records showing that federal employees have been censored from using words or phrases related to climate change in formal agency communications.

Tuesday's lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, seeks to require four federal agencies to release climate-censorship records, in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. The U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of State have failed to provide records requested by the Center for Biological Diversity or indicate when they might do so, violating deadlines established under the law.

"The Trump administration's refusal to release public information about its climate censorship continues a dangerous and illegal pattern of anti-science denial," said Taylor McKinnon at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Just as censorship won't change climate science, foot-dragging and cover-ups won't be tolerated under the public records law."

On March 30 the Center for Biological Diversity filed Freedom of Information Act requests for all directives or communications barring or removing climate-related words or phrases from any formal agency communications. The records requests followed news reports that federal agencies had removed climate information from government websites and instructed Department of Energy staff to avoid using the phrases "climate change," "emissions reductions" and "Paris agreement."

The Center for Biological Diversity has filed identical requests with the Council on Environmental Quality, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

On March 23 the Center for Biological Diversity joined conservation biologist Stuart Pimm and the Center for Media and Democracy in a separate Freedom of Information Act request to prevent the administration from removing hundreds of environmental data sets on government websites.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, when federal agencies receive requests for the same records three or more times, they must make the records freely available to the public on their websitesa rule known as "the Beetlejuice provision."

Records responsive to the Center for Biological Diversity's climate censorship requests will be made available to the public and the media.

Excerpt from:
Trump Sued for Censorship of Climate Change Data - EcoWatch

"Knowledge is power," as the old saying goes, so it's no surprise that Wikipediaone of the largest repositories of general knowledge ever createdis a frequent target of government censorship around the world. In Turkey, Wikipedia articles about female genitals have been banned; Russia has censored articles about weed; in the UK, articles about German metal bands have been blocked; in China, the entire site has been banned on multiple occasions.

Determining how to prevent these acts of censorship has long been a priority for the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, and thanks to new research from the Harvard Center for Internet and Society, the foundation seems to have found a solution: encryption.

In 2011, Wikipedia added support for Hyper Text Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS), which is the encrypted version of its predecessor HTTP. Both of these protocols are used to transfer data from a website's server to the browser on your computer, but when you try to connect to a website using HTTPS, your browser will first ask the web server to identify itself. Then the server will send its unique public key which is used by the browser to create and encrypt a session key. This session key is then sent back to the server which it decrypts with its private key. Now all data sent between the browser and server is encrypted for the remainder of the session.

"The decision to shift to HTTPS has been a good one in terms of ensuring accessibility to knowledge."

In short, HTTPS prevents governments and others from seeing the specific page users are visiting. For example, a government could tell that a user is browsing Wikipedia, but couldn't tell that the user is specifically reading the page about Tiananmen Square.

The researchers saw a sharp drop in traffic to the Chinese language Wikipedia around May 19, 2015, indicating a censorship event. This did in fact turn out to be the casethe site had been blocked in anticipation of the upcoming anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. Image: Harvard

Up until 2015, Wikipedia offered its service using both HTTP and HTTPS, which meant that when countries like Pakistan or Iran blocked the certain articles on the HTTP version of Wikipedia, the full version would still be available using HTTPS. But in June 2015, Wikipedia decided to axe HTTP access and only offer access to its site with HTTPS. The thinking was that this would force the hand of restrictive governments when it came to censorshipdue to how this protocol works, governments could no longer block individual Wikipedia entries. It was an all or nothing deal.

Critics of this plan argued that this move would just result in more total censorship of Wikipedia and that access to some information was better than no information at all. But Wikipedia stayed the course, at least partly because its co-founder Jimmy Wales is a strong advocate for encryption. Now, new research from Harvard shows that Wales' intuition was correctfull encryption did actually result in a decrease in censorship incidents around the world.

The Harvard researchers began by deploying an algorithm which detected unusual changes in Wikipedia's global server traffic for a year beginning in May 2015. This data was then combined with a historical analysis of the daily request histories for some 1.7 million articles in 286 different languages from 2011 to 2016 in order to determine possible censorship events. At the end of their year-long data collection, the Harvard researchers also did a client-side analysis, where they would try to access various Wikipedia articles in a variety of languages as they would be seen by a resident in a particular country.

Read More: Jimmy Wales to China After Blocking Wikipedia: I Can Outwait You

After a painstakingly long process of manual analysis of potential censorship events, the researchers found that, globally, Wikipedia's switch to HTTPS had a positive effect on the number censorship events by comparing server traffic from before and after the switch in June of 2015.

Although countries like China, Thailand and Uzbekistan were still censoring part or all of Wikipedia by the time the researchers wrapped up their study, they remained optimistic: "this initial data suggests the decision to shift to HTTPS has been a good one in terms of ensuring accessibility to knowledge."

See the original post here:
Wikipedia's Switch to HTTPS Has Successfully Fought Government Censorship - Motherboard

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

By Andrew Minik

Evanston, IL Northwestern University has become the latest battleground in the fight for free speech and academic liberty. Sociology professor Beth Redbird invited a public relations officer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to participate in a lecture series on Inequality: Race, Class, and Power. To the activist organizations on campus, this invitation was unacceptable. I attended the protest to experience first hand the tactics employed by activists to silence professors.

MEChA, Black Lives Matter, Asian Pacific American Coalition, NU QTIPOC, NU Rainbow Alliance, and Immigrant Justice Project organized a protest to prevent the ICE representatives from attending the lecture. According to their official statement regardless of arresting power dialogue with any ICE official legitimizes their position as state actors of violence. The flier goes on to warn students that engaging with ICE creates harmful discourse that hinders critical conversation about state violence. Following a paragraph of fear mongering, the activist manifesto presents a list of demands ranging from an undocumented students resource center to simplifying the admissions process.

Flier posted to the official Facebook event

Protesters assembled around all entrances to Harris Hall on the Evanston campus. Blood stained banners reading No Human is Illegal and Stop Deportations were draped across the doors. As the crowd grew demonstrators scanned the area, prepared to stop ICE in any way necessary. ICE got in! an organizer yelled to her comrades. Frustrated, the crowd began a series of chants and speeches justifying their need to disrupt the university lecture. Unsatisfied with their failed wall, the activists marched into the building.

The coalition of activist organizations entered the foyer in front of the lecture hall. Once in place, two students with megaphones led the group in chants. ICE is a disruption, not a discussion and Fuck ICE, echoed through the building.

Assistant Vice President and Dean of Students Todd Adams arrived to plead with protesters to take their demonstration outside. Unmoved, the chanting continued. Dean Adams explained to protesters that professors are allowed a degree of academic freedom, and that the university is not in a position to prohibit speakers from campus. ICE is not good! responded an eloquent demonstrator.

Thirty minutes into the standoff, professor Redbird allowed the protesters to enter the lecture. Immediately upon entering a screaming match ensued between the demonstrators and professor Redbird. Several students fled the hall, some in tears. Professor Redbird grabbed a microphone, Enough! Class is dismissed. she yelled over the activists. You are not required to stay in this uncomfortable environment if you dont want to. I will stay and answer questions!

With the protesters unwilling or unable to posit a question, I raised my hand. Are there speakers on any subject you would feel uncomfortable presenting to your lecture?

Well, I have a problem with a class that censors before she could continue the activists screeched in disgust. The pattern of interrupting professor Redbird continued throughout the Q and A.

The protesters statements revealed a troubling belief system. This bubble where everything is going to be objective, that is erasure. That is violent. Demonstrators felt no distinction between physical and emotional harm. We are trying to make the case that its harmful either way. Its not worth putting a symbolic danger on campus for the purpose of understanding it.

Professor Redbird, a progressive and advocate for undocumented immigrants, found this assault on academic freedom troubling. My husband is an immigration lawyer and when the travel ban came down he rushed to the airport to help. He could help because he knew the law. Without that knowledge he cannot help anyone. I want you to speak up, but I want you to understand the power. Without that knowledge you will always be outsiders. It is easy to be outside when you are loved. You need that knowledge to survive. Before she could continue angered protesters interrupted.

She went on to explain that the outside world, their home, and places of recreation should be safe. However, the classroom is a place that should make you uncomfortable. Understanding the way society works is uncomfortable. There is no way to learn how it works without being uncomfortable. Frustrated, the students urged the need to censor violent opinions in the classroom.

It became clear the protesters held no regard for freedom of speech or freedom of thought. The activist community makes no distinction between physical violence and emotional violence. The ICE representatives held no arresting power. They are not allowed, by law, to carry out violent behavior. And yet, according to Daniel, a sophomore participating in the protest, We must confront the idea that all opinions are valid. Even that should have a limitation under free speech. To him the pursuit of education is not worth putting students in ideological danger.

Students in Redbirds course disagreed with the activists assault on their class. Rick, a freshman in economics, disapproved of the protests blatant disregard for our opportunity to learn and make change towards what the group was advocating for. He felt that the protest hijacked their class in order to make a statement against ICE.

It is clear that academic freedom is under siege on college campuses. Actions such as this have landed Northwestern on FIREs list of worst colleges for free speech. Students and professors on both sides of the political spectrum must continue to pursue knowledge, no matter how uncomfortable it may make students. The censorship of violent opinions presents a direct threat to freedom of speech. Campus activists and their crusade to censor professors is anti-intellectual and their willful ignorance of ideas must be confronted. The activist community remains dedicated to silencing educators by any means necessary. I recommend they build the next censorship wall ten feet taller.

Asian Pacific American CoalitionBeth RedbirdBlack Lives MatterCensorshipcollegefree speechICEImmigrant Justice ProjectimmigrationImmigration and Customs EnforcementMEChAnorthwestern universityNU QTIPOCNU Rainbow AllianceSJWsocial justiceTodd Adamsuniversity

See more here:
Northwestern Activists Build Censorship Wall, Storm Lecture Hall ... - The Libertarian Republic

Climate Home

Trump administration sued over climate change 'censorship' Climate Home The Trump administration's refusal to release public information about its climate censorship continues a dangerous and illegal pattern of anti-science denial, said Taylor McKinnon from the CBD. Just as censorship won't change climate science, ...

Continued here:
Trump administration sued over climate change 'censorship' - Climate Home

Facebook's guidelines about whena post must be removed show that images captioned by commentary or criticism can remain on the site but support, praise or threats mean they must be removed.

Apicture of a person being shot at close range can stay online, the documents show,if the caption is "More deaths" or "How sad". It must be removed if there is noaccompanying text or if itsays something like"A great day".

Images of leaders of terrorist organisations must be deleted if they are posted without a comment or a supporting one, but can remain if the comment is neutral or condemning.

Posts celebrating terrorist attacks, groups and members are must be removed.

The leak contains a 44-page guide for moderators that includes the pictures and names of 646 terrorist leaders and their groups, the Guardian said. Most of the groups are recognised internationally as terrorist organisations. But some, including the Free Syrian Army and First Division Coastal Group, are supported as legitimate organisations by the US and UK.

Read more:
Terrorists can easily bypass Facebook censorship, leaked documents show - Telegraph.co.uk