Mediaboss Marketing

Not content with a 30-minute delay on broadcasts of foreign television channels, communist Vietnam has introduced a brazen new law which observers say could force media outlets such as the BBC and CNN to pay for their own censorship.

The law, known as Decision 20, requires channels to apply for an editing license with a government-approved local partner who will "prepare" -- subtitle and edit -- their content for a local audience, for an undisclosed fee.

The authoritarian nation already bans private media and all newspapers and television channels are state-run.

It has also long-censored foreign television channels, which are broadcast with a delay of up to 30 minutes to allow sensitive content to be cut.

But critics say the new law goes further by making the channels pay for -- in collusion with the government -- their own censorship.

Decision 20, which came into force last week, briefly saw dozens of foreign channels taken off air, as confusion over licensing requirements left local broadcasters fearing they would be penalised for breaking the law.

As subscribers grumbled at the loss of favourite shows, experts pondered whether the move signalled a new campaign to control information in the authoritarian country or if it was some kind of commercial ploy.

One bemused Hanoi-based diplomat from a country with an affected national broadcaster, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Vietnam's motives were as "clear as mud".

Although the government has previously said news content does not have to be subtitled, foreign channels fear they are the target of the new law.

"The channels are concerned that (the law) appears to force them to contract somebody to censor their content," John Medeiros, Chief Policy Officer at pay-tv industry body CASBAA told AFP.

Excerpt from:
TV channels balk at 'paying for censorship' in Vietnam

MEDIA RELEASE 27 May 2013

New PJR challenges Pacific censorship, political shackles

AUCKLAND: Fijis brand of post-coup media censorship and other Pacific political curbs have been challenged in the latest Pacific Journalism Review published today.

Even if the Fiji media are shackled, conferences in 2010 and 2012 provided opportunity and space to engage in some open dialogue, including criticism of the regime authorities, the AUT-published international journal says.

The proceedings were not confined to the Suva conference venue, or within Fijis borders this is the digital age after all.

Many of the papers by Pacific journalists and media analysts were presented at a Media and Democracy in the South Pacific conference hosted at the University of the South Pacific last September.

Other articles, in the edition, co-edited by USPs Shailendra Singh and AUTs Pacific Media Centre director Professor David Robie, feature New Caledonia, West Papua and climate change reporting in the region.

Canadian communications professor and author Robert A. Hackett warns of significant democratic shortcomings in the medias watchdog, public sphere, community-building and communication equity roles.

He advocates critical selectivity over wholesale adoption of Western media models in the South Pacific to avoid some entrenched shortcomings.

Such shortcomings have been highlighted in Shazia Usmans study on the Fiji print medias coverage of female candidates in the countrys 2006 elections.

Excerpt from:
New PJR challenges Pacific censorship, political ‘shackles’

Fijis brand of post-coup media censorship and other Pacific political curbs have been challenged in the latest Pacific Journalism Review published today.

"Even if the Fiji media are shackled, conferences in 2010 and 2012 provided opportunity and space to engage in some open dialogue, including criticism of the regime authorities," the AUT-published international journal says.

"The proceedings were not confined to the Suva conference venue, or within Fijis borders - this is the digital age after all."

Many of the papers by Pacific journalists and media analysts were presented at a Media and Democracy in the South Pacific conference hosted at the University of the South Pacific last September.

Other articles, in the edition, co-edited by USPs Shailendra Singh and AUTs Pacific Media Centre director Professor David Robie, feature New Caledonia, West Papua and climate change reporting in the region.

Canadian communications professor and author Robert A. Hackett warns of significant democratic shortcomings in the medias watchdog, public sphere, community-building and communication equity roles.

He advocates "critical selectivity" over "wholesale adoption" of Western media models in the South Pacific to avoid some "entrenched shortcomings".

Such shortcomings have been highlighted in Shazia Usmans study on the Fiji print medias coverage of female candidates in the countrys 2006 elections.

Reflecting international trends, the Fiji daily newspapers "lavished attention" on male candidates while "cold-shouldering" female candidates.

The Fiji Times quoted female candidates 20 times and male candidates 218 times, while the Fiji Sun quoted females 29 times, and males 292 times.

Continue reading here:
New PJR challenges Pacific censorship

Censorship! Video Removed In Less Than 24 Hours!
Wow I made this clip on family guy and it got taken down within hours! It is not surprising, but still makes me mad. Oh well they censoring YT soon anyway so you better learn what you can now!

By: JC Ishtruth

The rest is here:
Censorship! Video Removed In Less Than 24 Hours! - Video

Two international photographers have withdrawn their works from an exhibition in Sydney in protest over what one has described as censorship.

The photographers' works are being displayed on a screen near the Museum of Contemporary Art as part of the annual Vivid festival.

But several photographers say they have been asked to restrict the use of some images.

They have told the ABC that Vivid organisers said several photos were considered inappropriate and should not be displayed.

Photographer Jodi Beiber is one of them.

Ms Beiber is known for her photo of an Afghan woman with her nose cut off, which featured on the cover of Time magazine.

She says one of her photos of a bare-breasted woman was removed from the exhibition and she has decided to withdraw her feature in protest.

"If I look at all the photographs that are not allowed to be shown, I feel that there's a huge censorship," she said.

"I come from South Africa which is a country that's not perfect.

"But when you have such protection of a society, how are your children going to be when they go out into the real world, if they're not allowed to experience or see or make up their own mind about what happens in the world?"

Read the original:
Photographers withdraw from Vivid over censorship claims