Mediaboss Marketing

China wants its young people to have more babies, but for some of the country's millennials, procreation couldn't be further from their minds.

This week's announcement of the three-child policy, aimed at encouraging couples in China's urban areas to have three children, has been met with ridicule.

Many social media users notedthey couldn't begin to afford a second child, let alone a third, in a country where a strict one-child policy has dramatically shaped the society.

On Weibo, user Sivan said: "I dare not have even one child, what's the point of talking about three?"

In fact, even before the family planning news broke, young people were opting in to anew social trend that is all about checking out from society and its pressures "tang ping", or "lying flat".

Lying flatrefers to a defeatist lifestyle, where peoplestop working, desiring material acquisition, and tap out ofany social life sometimes for good.

A declining birth rate and a rapidly ageing population loomas China's most pressing crises for the years to come.

The phrase has been coined by the young generationin response to increasing social anxiety and pressure, andaround the push to have more children, as well as the increasingly unaffordable associated costs.

Critics believe by lying flat, young people are participating in a kind of non-cooperationmovement,rather than surrendering themselves to China's oppressive work culture where they see little hope of social mobility.

For more than 35 years from 1980, couples in China's urban areas were prohibited from having more than one child, and faced large fines, or even forced abortion and sterilisation if caught.

The country eased that and moved to a two-child policy in 2015.

Now, China wants families to have three children, as it looksto boost its population after it was recently revealed the country's population growthhad dipped to its slowest pacesince the 1960s.

Immediately before the release of the three-child policy, several state media outlets in China published articles criticisinglying flatand called the trend shameful.

Shenzhen, widely regarded as China's Silicon Valley, is notorious for its 996 working culture, but a new policy that enforces paid leave and overtime payments for special industries could help reduce burnout.

Related social media groups havealso been censored.

On May 30, social media platform Doubanremoved a popular lying flatgroup, and many posts containingthe phrase were deleted.

Comments on China's social media platform Weibo following state media Xinhua's post on the three-child policy were quickly removed.

Another online votewas deleted after over 90 per cent of people ticked a box saying they would not consider a third child at all.

However, that has not shut down discussion another lying flatgroup on social media platform Baidu Tiebanow has over 180,000 members.

Reuters: Aly Song

Lucy Yu, 32, lives in Beijing and is expectingtwins in September.

In Lucy's eyes, lying flatis a fantasy.

Sheuses the phrase all the time but can never practiseit in reality.

"I use the word to mock myself, like others do too, but then just continue with what I've been doing," she said.

"It's a way young people come up with self-mockery. When we are too tired or feel a great deal of pressure, we want to 'lie flat'for a moment and leave the hard work behind.

"It's just a saying. How could you really lie flat?"

This is how Chinese women defied one-child policy to give birth in secret.

Ms Yu chatted with colleagues who are older than her they were born in the 1970safter the new policy was announced.

"They actually wanted a second child, but the two-child policy came too late," she said.

"That generation had siblings and they were relatively more affluent, but they didn't havethe chance."

But for younger people, it's a different story.

"Ordinary city, working-class people are struggling to make ends meet, so when the three-child policy comes out, they tend to feel that it's none of their business," she said.

"It's too tiresome and only creates unnecessary burdens for ourselves.

"I haven't counted how much money it will cost to have two children, but I'll raise them in a rich way if I have money, and raise them in a poor way if I don't have money. They'll grow up anyway."

Supplied

Anabel Ye is a 20-year-old university college student majoring in finance management, who identifies herself as one of the lying-down youth.

"I am a bit lying down already. There are too many amazing people everywhere," she said.

"Often, I found my efforts were not rewarded. Again and again, my passions were grounded."

Ms Ye believes the new policycould lead to a better future for China, but worries about the concerns it causes for the younger generation.

"I think the mortality rate of young people is also getting higher, many people died young because of physical and psychological issues associated with high pressure," she said.

She might have children in the future, but only one or two, and that willdepend on her circumstances.

"To give a child a good family and educational environment is not easy today, apart from that I also have to work. I don't think I'll have time and energy [to have more]," she said.

"Two children is ideal, but I also fear I might not want to get married or have children because of the increasing pressure."

Reuters:Guang Niu/GN/CP

Guo Fei, a professor of managementat Macquarie University's Centre for Workforce Futures, thinks the increased child limit is a good idea, but is uncertain if it will have the desired outcome.

"China's low fertility started, actually, [at]the same timewhen China started to experience rapid economic growth, and rapid urbanisation and modernisation," she said.

"The low fertility rate was not only the result of the one-child policy."

ProfessorGuo said the underlying reasons for China's low fertility wereactually socioeconomic.

Cost of living pressures are making things likeeducationbecomeunaffordable for many, and that has been deterring many from becoming parents.

Professor Guo thinks improving parental leave arrangements could help.

"If it's the company's burden, then couples or mothers who will have children will be discriminated against, they will be disadvantaged, because enterprise will be paying for their leave," she said.

"It's a norm and cultural attitude problem. In addition to the economic incentive, they also need to change attitudes towards childbearing women and older childbearingcouples."

If China doesn't do more to encourage people to have children, it could end up like South Korea, which has a negative fertility rate.

Butthose with the financialmeans will likely embrace the chance to have larger families, Professor Guo said.

"From the data we have from looking at the second child [policy], we have started to see women who have resources and higher education the well-off women tend to have higher intention to have a second child."

Reuters: Tingshu Wang

Wang Yaqiu, a China researcher fromHuman Rights Watch, has recently investigated China's previous two-child policy and gender discrimination in the workplace.

MsWang found the three-child policy might lead to companiesbecomingeven less willing to hire women.

Gender discrimination in the workplace worsened when the one-child policy was replacedwith the two-child policy.

"For 35 years, most professional women were only expected to take one period of maternity leave and had one child to take care of at home. That's what employers expect," Ms Wang said.

"When you hire a woman, if she already has a child, you know that she's not going to take another maternity leave.

"Companies started to worry. That makes companies even less willing to hire women."

China's government announcesit is scrapping a policy limiting couples to two children and will now allow them to have three.

Like Professor Guo, Ms Wang thinks a parental leave scheme andanti-discrimination laws need to be implemented along with the three-child policy.

"There is an issue with pregnancy-based firing at jobs," she said.

"It could be worse because now employers could potentially expect three maternity leaves."

Because there is no mandatory paternity leave,organisations don't face the same outlay forfathers who arehaving a child, so it's seen more costly to hire women than men in China.

To fix this, China needs to make equitable parental leaves for both men and women, Ms Wang said.

She believes the backlash against the three-child policy from the lying flat followers isfor two reasons.

"There are a lot of concerns with access to education, access to housing, access to health care, are those practical reasons that people don't want to have children."

The other reason, according to Ms Wang, is that the trauma left by the one-child policy still haunts many families today.

"To a lot of familiesit was the policy enforced in such a brutal way, through forced abortion, forced sterilisation. Now, the government found that the policy resulted in an aging population and we want more children," she said.

"Of course, people are going to become cynical'You controlled my body for so long, now you want me to go the other direction?'"

Go here to see the original:
China's three-child policy is designed to bring on a baby boom, but its young adults are 'lying flat' - ABC News

86% Overall Response Rate (ORR) and 43% Complete Response Rate in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Nave Advanced Melanoma Patients in IOV-COM-202 Clinical Study

Initial 7 Patients Show 3 Complete Responses, 3 Partial Responses and 1 Best Response of Stable Disease

ASCO Update Conference Call and Webcast on Sunday, June 6 at 12 p.m. ET

SAN CARLOS, Calif., June 04, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: IOVA), a late-stage biotechnology company developing novel T cell-based cancer immunotherapies, today announced clinical data for lifileucel in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma. The data are now available in an ePoster at the ASCO 2021 Annual Meeting.

Antonio Jimeno M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Medicine/Oncology and Otolaryngology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine stated, Anti-PD-1 therapy has become standard of care in frontline melanoma, yet we are still looking for ways to help more patients respond and to improve upon the depth and durability of responses. The 86% Overall Response Rate (ORR) for lifileucel in combination with pembrolizumab is remarkable and suggests a potential additive effect for early-line treatment of patients with melanoma. I look forward to investigating this treatment approach in additional patients with melanoma as well as in other tumor types such as head and neck squamous cancer.

Friedrich Graf Finckenstein, M.D., Chief Medical Officer of Iovance, stated, We are very pleased with the initial efficacy and safety results for lifileucel in combination with pembrolizumab in patients who are nave to anti-PD-1 therapy. We are particularly impressed by the complete response observations and noted conversion of several partial to complete responses over time. These data in melanoma also build upon our initial data for TIL in combination with pembrolizumab in head and neck cancer, supporting the broader potential for TIL in earlier anti-PD-1 nave treatment settings across indications.

Early data suggest the response rate of lifileucel plus pembrolizumab may be additive and confirm the potential feasibility and activity of this combination in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-nave advanced melanoma. Cohort 1A in the IOV-COM-202 study is evaluating lifileucel in combination with pembrolizumab in patients who are nave to ICI, or anti-PD-1, therapy. Initial patients (n=7) enrolled in Cohort 1A had high tumor burden at baseline, and 71.4% had not received any prior systemic therapy.

Six of the seven patients had a confirmed objective response, representing an 86% ORR (2 complete responses (CR), 1 unconfirmed CR (uCR) who had not yet reached the confirmatory CR assessment, and 3 partial responses (PR)), with one best response of stable disease. Responses deepened over time and the CR/uCR rate was 43%. Poster data extraction was in April 2021 and the median follow up was 8.2 months. ORR was investigator-assessed per RECIST 1.1. In a subsequent data cut in May 2021, all ongoing responses continued.

The Cohort 1A results also demonstrated that lifileucel can be safely combined with pembrolizumab. The treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) profile was consistent with the underlying disease and known adverse event (AE) profiles of pembrolizumab, non-myeloablative lymphodepletion (NMA-LD) and IL-2. The median number of doses of IL-2 and pembrolizumab were six and 10, respectively.

Webcast and Conference CallIovance will host a webcast and conference call on Sunday, June 6, at 12:00 p.m. ET to discuss ASCO clinical data updates for lifileucel alone and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma. Iovance senior leadership, together with Dr. Omid Hamid of The Angeles Clinic, will present a summary of the ASCO data from Cohort 1A in the IOV-COM-202 study as well as the upcoming oral presentation of updated Cohort 2 data from the C-144-01 clinical study.

The conference call dial-in numbers are 1-844-646-4465 (domestic) or 1-615-247-0257 (international) and the access code is 4858337. The live webcast can be accessed in the Investors section of the companys website at http://www.iovance.com. The archived webcast will be available for a year in the Investors section at http://www.iovance.com.

AboutIovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.Iovance aims to improve patient care by making T cell-based immunotherapies broadly accessible for the treatment of patients with solid tumors and blood cancers. Tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy uses a patients own immune cells to attack cancer. TIL cells are extracted from a patients own tumor tissue, expanded through a proprietary process, and infused back into the patient. Upon infusion, TIL reach tumor tissue, where they attack cancer cells. The company has completed dosing in pivotal programs in patients with metastatic melanoma and cervical cancer. In addition, the companys TIL therapy is being investigated in a registration-supporting study for the treatment of patients with locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Clinical studies are also underway to evaluate TIL in earlier stage cancers in combination with currently approved treatments, and to investigate Iovance peripheral blood lymphocyte (PBL) T cell therapy for blood cancers. For more information, please visit http://www.iovance.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain matters discussed in this press release are forward-looking statements of Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the Company, we, us, or our) within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the PSLRA). All such written or oral statements made in this press release, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for forward-looking statements provided by the PSLRA. Without limiting the foregoing, we may, in some cases, use terms such as predicts, believes, potential, continue, estimates, anticipates, expects, plans, intends, forecast, guidance, outlook, may, could, might, will, should or other words that convey uncertainty of future events or outcomes and are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and assessments made in light of managements experience and perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors believed to be appropriate. Forward-looking statements in this press release are made as of the date of this press release, and we undertake no duty to update or revise any such statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside of our control, that may cause actual results, levels of activity, performance, achievements and developments to be materially different from those expressed in or implied by these forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause actual results, developments and business decisions to differ materially from forward-looking statements are described in the sections titled "Risk Factors" in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and include, but are not limited to, the following substantial known and unknown risks and uncertainties inherent in our business: the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic; risks related to the timing of and our ability to successfully develop, submit, obtain and maintain U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other regulatory authority approval of, or other action with respect to, our product candidates, and our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates for which we obtain FDA approval; preliminary and interim clinical results, which may include efficacy and safety results, from ongoing clinical trials may not be reflected in the final analyses of our ongoing clinical trials or subgroups within these trials; the risk that enrollment may need to be adjusted for our trials and cohorts within those trials based on FDA and other regulatory agency input; the new version of the protocol which further defines the patient population to include more advanced patients in our cervical cancer trial may have an adverse effect on the results reported to date; the risk that we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials or modify ongoing or future clinical trials based on feedback from the FDA or other regulatory authorities; the risk that our interpretation of the results of our clinical trials or communications with the FDA may differ from the interpretation of such results or communications by the FDA; the acceptance by the market of our product candidates and their potential reimbursement by payors, if approved; our ability or inability to manufacture our therapies using third party manufacturers or our own facility may adversely affect our potential commercial launch; the results of clinical trials with collaborators using different manufacturing processes may not be reflected in our sponsored trials; the risk that unanticipated expenses may decrease our estimated cash balances and increase our estimated capital requirements; and other factors, including general economic conditions and regulatory developments, not within our control.

CONTACTS

Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc:Sara Pellegrino, IRCVice President, Investor Relations & Public Relations650-260-7120 ext. 264Sara.Pellegrino@iovance.com

Solebury Trout:Zara Lockshin646.378.2960zlockshin@soleburytrout.com

Read more:
Iovance Biotherapeutics Announces Clinical Data for Lifileucel in Combination with Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma at ASCO - GlobeNewswire

All season long, the Toronto Maple Leafs young stars Auston Matthews (23-years-old) and Mitch Marner (24-years-old) led their team in scoring. They also placed well across the entire NHL. Matthews was the Rocket Richard Trophy winner with 41 goals scored and tied for fifth in NHL scoring. Marner was fourth in NHL scoring. Recently, Matthews was nominated for the Ted Lindsay Award as the NHLs best player.

In headline should read something like Matthews and Marner Have Magnificant Seasons. And that would have been the narrative had the team put together any kind of playoff success. But, the Maple Leafs as a team went down yet again, falling out of Stanley Cup contention by being dumped during the first round by the Montreal Canadiens.

It also didnt help that neither Matthews nor Marner were able to keep up their regular-season prowess. Both first-line partners scored a little basically one or two games, but they couldnt sustain the pace they had built during the regular season.

Related: Maple Leafs News: Grading Playoff Production, Whose Play Didnt Cut It?

The way their first line is built, Matthews and Marner are a partnership. They feed off each other. They have great chemistry. When one doesnt score its also likely the others offense also dries up. In contrast, when one line-mate flourishes the other usually does as well.

This time it worked the other way. Marner kept feeding Matthews pucks, and Carey Price kept shutting the door. The fact that Marner doesnt have the best shot didnt help. By the end of Game 7, Marner hadnt scored in 18th consecutive playoff games.

On June 2, Matthews was interviewed about a number of topics including his own and Marners lack of playoff production. I cant imagine that these are kind of interviews that any NHL player engages happily. Youve just failed to win; in fact, you blew a 3-1 game series lead. What youve worked for all season is now toast. You feel bad anyway, now you have to in and get to speak about it on a video that everyone can see.

The context of those interviews hurts if youre a player. You just got dumped; and, now you have to suffer public scolding from people who personally feel that youve let them down. Cant be fun for these players. I know Id dread that and it makes me glad I was a professor.

During that interview, Matthews answered appropriately and said appropriate things. He never once fell into returning fire. He kept his calm well, mostly. During the short video clip of the interview, you can see his responses.

Matthews was asked to comment about the redundant suggestions some people are making that the big four on offence may need to be split up. Then the media questioner named Matthews first-line partner Marner in two potential ways. First, might Marner be involved in a possible trade? Second, should he be moved away from Matthews so that the teams top six might achieve a better balance based on what happened again this year?

Related: Darryl Sittler Toronto Maple Leafs Legend

Matthews answer was revealing.

First, he quickly dismissed the validity of the entire idea by suggesting, I dont make much of that to be honest.

Second, he used the opportunity to stick up for his first-line partner by saying Mitch is an unbelievable player and an unbelievable teammate.

Third, he clearly demarcated who the questioner was and who he was talking with. In doing so, Matthews constructed the narrative of an in and an out. That is, he positioned the questioner (and others) as outside. And, he positioned Matthews, Marner, his teammates, and the organization as inside.

Matthews did it all thoughtfully, carefully, graciously, and without any sense of obvious irritability. But to me, his answer was immediately revealing. In it, Matthews shared a great deal of information about how the team was proceeding to delineate where they (re)sided in response to whats by reputation known to be a difficult and critical fanbase and media.

Matthews said, Thats just you know something I dont think anybody really thinks about here or focuses on. (my highlight of here)

Related: Maple Leafs Should Look to Address Killer Instinct in Free Agency

Matthews then added, I know in this room you know everybody loves Mitch and everybody loves everybody in this room. He went on to add that We really have a tight bond. (again, my highlight of in this room)

Then, Matthews put the writer in his place and I dont mean in any way rudely, but also matter-of-factly. Matthews added, So, I think all the stuff on the outside noise coming from the outside its you guys. (again, my highlights of noise, which is defined as sound that makes no recognizable sense, and outside and you guys.)

Finally, and perhaps the most telling was Matthews last response to the questioner Have fun with that. Could it be that Matthews and his teammates believe that outsiders are actually having fun as a result of his teams disappointment? He clearly said that these are men he loves. Thats tough stuff!

To me, this short video at least suggests theres a present and perhaps growing narrative among the Maple Leafs players that they are not supported by the fans or the media. In fact, are they alone?

Might there also a narrative being constructed that this 2020-21 disappointment has become a situation where the players feel that those on the outside might actually be enjoying as Matthews said having fun with the players disappointment and lack of success? Are outsiders abusing the people they love (love is Matthews word, not mine)?

To me, a discourse analysis of this one short video suggests that Matthews the Maple Leafs brightest young star is feeling theres an inside/outside split between the team (inside) and the media and the fans (outside). If thats true, where do the players, the team, the media, and the fans go from here?

Related:Maple Leafs Jack Campbell Is a Teammate You Want on the Roster

Furthermore, thinking well down the road, if this narrative takes hold and grows a life of its own, how might these little encounters and the narrative created by them impact the players desire to remain in Toronto?

But this is temporary right? Theyll get over it right? Well, if youve ever had relationships with other people, as Matthews says Have fun with that.

The Old Prof (Jim Parsons, Sr.) taught for more than 40 years in the Faculty of Education at the University of Alberta. Hes a Canadian boy, who has two degrees from the University of Kentucky and a doctorate from the University of Texas. He is now retired on Vancouver Island, where he lives with his family. His hobbies include playing with his hockey cards and simply being a sports fan hockey, the Toronto Raptors, and CFL football (thinks Ricky Ray personifies how a professional athlete should act).

If you wonder why he doesnt use his real name, its because his son whos also Jim Parsons wrote for The Hockey Writers first and asked Jim Sr. to use another name so readers wouldnt confuse their work.

Because Jim Sr. had worked in China, he adopted the Mandarin word for teacher (). The first character lo () means old, and the second character sh () means teacher. The literal translation of losh is old teacher. That became his pen name. Today, other than writing for The Hockey Writers, he teaches graduate students research design at several Canadian universities.

He looks forward to sharing his insights about the Toronto Maple Leafs and about how sports engages life more fully. His Twitter address is https://twitter.com/TheOldProf

Read the original:
Maple Leafs and the Media: Trying to Control the Narrative - The Hockey Writers

Not a great week for journalism at the ABC, News Corps Sharri Markson tweeted on Monday, when the week was barely a day old.

It is hard to remember the last time a News Corp columnist declared it was a great week for journalism at the ABC. Marksons tweet linked to a story in The Australian that quoted former Attorney-General Christian Porter saying his dropping of his defamation claim against the ABC was a humiliating backdown by the ABC.

Apart from reporting the settlement, the main basis for the article was that the ABC had warned its staff not to claim victory following Porters withdrawal, and to be careful in the way they talked about it.

At such a legally sensitive moment, one might have thought the ABC warning to staff was mere prudence, but it also points to more recurring issues about how media organisations view their journalists statements on social media. These issues are likely to become more common, not less.

Read more: View from The Hill: Porter decides it's time to 'fold em' in ABC defamation case

Last weekend, the Sydney Morning Herald published a story quoting Liberal Senator and former ABC journalist Sarah Henderson saying the national broadcasters social media policy was woefully inadequate.

There are genuine dilemmas here. Journalists as professionals and employees are subject to certain disciplines. What they tweet can and will affect the way others perceive their work.

Conversely, as citizens, they also have the right to free expression.

In April, The Australians economics editor, Adam Creighton, sent this tweet:

Does such a cri de coeur affect how readers regard his judgement and capacity to report? Or should he have the right to say how he feels?

The ABC is the Australian media organisation that has most earnestly sought to resolve these dilemmas. It has four eminently sensible guidelines:

do not mix the professional and the personal in ways likely to bring the ABC into disrepute

do not undermine your effectiveness at work

do not imply ABC endorsement of your personal views

do not disclose confidential information obtained through work.

Henderson pointed to two breaches of these guidelines. One was from an ABC lawyer who called the Coalition government fascist and Prime Minister Scott Morrison an awful human being on Twitter, and then resigned. Henderson said he should not have been allowed to resign, but should have been fired.

Her other example involved what she called Laura Tingles trolling of a prime minister last year. This is an inaccurate use of the word trolling, but increasingly politicians (and journalists) seem to equate any criticism of themselves on social media as trolling.

Tingles single offending tweet concluded we grieve the loss of so many of our fine colleagues to government ideological bastardry. Hope you are feeling smug Scott Morrison. The tweet was posted late at night after a farewell function for her friend and colleague Philippa McDonald, and it was deleted the next morning.

Read more: Latest $84 million cuts rip the heart out of the ABC, and our democracy

It is asking a lot of ABC journalists to feel detached and impartial about government cutbacks to their own organisation that adversely affect the careers of their colleagues. Nevertheless, the ABC has a large investment in Tingles public credibility, and the tweet was immediately addressed internally.

ABC Managing Director David Anderson injected an unusual note of common sense when he was asked whether Tingle was reprimanded during a Senate estimates hearing. He called Tingles tweet an error of judgement and said theres a proportionality that needs to be applied.

The larger danger is that journalists, especially those at the ABC, will get caught up in public controversies surrounding their own work. While at one level they clearly should have the right to defend themselves, the problem is the temptation to succumb to the cheap point-scoring in which critics often engage, to be dragged down from the professional standards of the original program.

Though recent public controversies have focused on apparent breaches on social media not being sufficiently punished, there are also dangers and potential injustices in an unduly restrictive approach.

The most obvious victim of a journalist being punished for social media activity was SBS football commentator Scott McIntyre, who posted a series of tweets on ANZAC Day in 2015 about the cultification of an imperialist invasion.

Read more: Conspiracy theories on the right, cancel culture on the left: how political legitimacy came under threat in 2020

Then-Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull thought they were despicable remarks which deserve to be condemned, and contacted the head of SBS, Michael Ebeid. Ebeid fired McIntyre the same day.

Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson was then quoted as saying McIntyres freedom of speech was not being curtailed, and that his historical claims will be judged very harshly.

Whatever the merits of his ANZAC tweets, they had no relationship to his role as a football commentator. Is his reporting on soccer compromised by his views on the ANZAC tradition?

This episode illustrates that political correctness and cancel culture are found across the political spectrum and media organisations will continue to grapple with these issues as the social media profiles of their journalists continue to grow.

Follow this link:
Journalists are not going to stop tweeting. But should media outlets exert more control over their posts? - The Conversation AU

Yet another attempt to bring all mediums of speech in Pakistan under state control has come to the fore, as the countrys Federal Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has issued a draft ordinance titled the Pakistan Media Development Authority. It is important to analyse the ordinance based on its content, as well as the intent of the state based on recent attempts to control speech and press in the country.

The proposed body is to regulate print, television, electronic and digital media, altogether by merging all different regulators into one, supposedly to save money and streamline authority, is essentially a euphemism for easing the burden of unconstitutional censorship that the state has taken upon itself. The proposal itself states that media in democracy ideally should be self-regulatory [sic], but proposes government regulation through a sweeping statement that demerits outweigh the merits for a self-regulation mechanism for all forms of media in Pakistan.

The draft from Pakistans information ministry openly admits that controlling government advertisement expenditure as an incentive structure exists for the countrys government to solicit favourable coverage from media houses and punish critical coverage, as has been seen in the past few years.

This needs to change if Pakistan is to be a rights-respecting democracy. Government advertisements in the media should only worry about reaching citizens through print, broadcast and digital media rather than acting like a private empire that aligns expenditure on the basis of favourable words when the job of the media is to hold the government accountable.

A major concern with the Pakistan Media Development Authority is the attempt to lump social media together with other forms of media without realising the fundamentally different nature of the internet.

Whereas the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016, has been consistently abused to silence activists and journalists, the Pakistan Media Development Authority proposal claims that in the age of mega data and social media regulatory functions are only limited to criminal acts of cybercrimes and Federal Investigation Agency holds the mandate to investigate and prosecute cybercrimes.

This completely ignores the abuse of Section 37 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act by the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority to censor entire platforms like TikTok twice in the past year, apart from the record-breaking number of requests sent to social media companies for the content takedown and user data, a large portion of which were complied with by companies.

But the Pakistan Media Development Authority seems to want to further expand censorship powers over social media, a proposal which is neither permissible under the Constitution, nor practically possible, as the Pakistan Media Development Authority proposal itself states that the regulatory access of government is increasingly getting marginalised due to rapidly advancing internet-based technologies.

The chief justice of the Islamabad High Court has termed the Removal and Blocking of Unlawful Online Content Rules, 2020, under Section 37 of Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act prima facie ultra vires to Article 19 of the Pakistan Constitution and the government is currently reviewing them for the second time. Clearly, the attempts to regulate social media in the status quo are already excessive.

Pakistan seems to have dropped any pretence of adhering to democratic and constitutional norms and procedures. The proposal termed as an attempt to impose media martial law by the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, Pakistan Bar Association and Human Rights Commission of Pakistan is being introduced as an ordinance bypassing democratic processes of being tabled in parliament and debated upon on the floor of the house as well as in standing committees.

It is also telling that this draft sprung up all of a sudden in the public domain with the intent of passing it, whereas the Journalist Protection Bill was passed by the cabinet after two years of struggle by Pakistans human rights ministry and is being introduced in the countrys parliament. Clearly, attempts to control the press triumph over attempts to protect the press in Pakistan.

This comes in the background of journalist Asad Toor being brazenly attacked inside his home in the capital with the attackers least concerned about being caught on CCTV, Fareed Khan, a photographer being illegally detained by police for photographing the lockdown in Karachi and a private television team similarly manhandled while filming violation of Covid-19-related standard operating procedures. Not to forget the armed attack on journalist Absar Alam in Islamabad a month prior to these attacks.

It is also noteworthy to recall proposals similar to the Pakistan Media Development Authoritys by this government in the past. In 2018, the same information minister had floated the idea of a Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority that would merge the electronic, print and digital media regulators. Similarly, in early 2020, a proposal was floated to extend web-based channels and streaming platforms under the purview of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority.

Both proposals faced the same criticism as the Pakistan Media Development Authority: they have no place in the countrys democracy where Article 19 and 19-A of the Constitution exist which guarantee press freedom and right to information and were shelved as this one should be, too.

As the onslaught on civil society organisations nears completion through stringent registration requirements and surveillance, the press seems to be the next target for the red-tape induced fatigue to be imposed through yearly no-objection certificates, revocable licences, fines through tribunals, and cutting appeals by only allowing appeals to the Pakistan Supreme Court.

To form an authority to regulate films, electronic, print and digital media in Pakistan private and public altogether seems like one grand plan to make all media like the Pakistan Television, which Prime Minister Imran Khan had promised would be independent but is anything but.

It is essential for Pakistans democracy that media and internet regulators be independent instead of being subjected to the whims of government officials and hidden pressures. Regulators must be separate as the proposal only seeks to make separate wings of them and stop yearning for a hybrid regulatory framework that is nothing but an ill-informed big brother style censor with powers of imposing fines, revoking licenses and holding journalists livelihood hostage to state censorship.

This article first appeared in Dawn.

View post:
In Pakistan, attempts to control media are triumphing over efforts to protect the free press - Scroll.in