Mediaboss Marketing

Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed,who announced the suspension in a statement in Abuja, alleged persistent use of the platform for activities capable of undermining Nigerias corporate existence.

Mohammed also disclosed that the Federal Government had directed the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to immediately commence theprocess of licensing all Over-The-Top (OTT) media services in the country.

The current move was triggered by Twitters deletion of President Muhammadu Buharis tweet in which he threatened to treat Nigerians misbehaving in the language they understand on Wednesday, June 2, 2021.

Buhari had in the said tweet cited Nigerias civil war experience between 1967 and 1970 and noted that most of those misbehaving by burning electoral offices and police stations were too young to understand the gravity of war.

In the tweet, he also threatened to deal with the arsonists, saying: Those of us in the fields for 30 months, who went through the war, will treat them in the language they understand.

The tweet elicited millions of comments and widespread condemnation, with many Nigerians criticising the President, especially for making reference to the civil war in which millions of Nigerians, mostly of Igbo extraction, were killed.

Some Nigerians had called on Twitter to suspend President Buharis account, claiming that his tweet expresses intentions of self-harm or suicide, as stated on Twitters usage policy. The following day, June 3, Twitter deleted the message, alleging that the post violated its rules. On Thursday, June 4, it took one step further by also deleting the video of the tweet.

Like Twitter, Facebook, another social networking service, also deleted President Buharis post.

In line with our global policies, weve removed a post from President Buharis Facebook page for violating our Community Standards against inciting violence.

We remove any content, from individuals or organisations that violates our policies on Facebook, said a Facebooks spokesperson.

Since the government suspended Twitter from operating in Nigeria, it has adduced reasons upon reasons the social media space should be regulated even as it has, without hesitation, deployed relevant organs and agencies of government to realise the goal.

For instance, on June 10, the NBC asked all social media platforms and online broadcasting service providers operating in Nigeria to apply for broadcast licence. Director-General of the commission, Armstrong Idachaba, gave the directive in a newspaper advertorial wherein he noted that the NBC establishment code empowers the commission to ask the companies to be licensed.

The advertorial read: The National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) hereby directs every Online Broadcast Service provider and Social Media Platforms operating within the Nigerian State to apply and obtain broadcast licence for their service(s).

Note that any online broadcast service provider that fails to obtain a licence will be considered an illegal entity.Ironically, a bill seeking to amend the NBC Act 2004 is still under consideration at the National Assembly, likewise the bill to amend the Nigeria Press Council (NPC) Act. The sponsor of the bills, Odebunmi Olusegun, had argued that they were aimed at moderating alleged recklessness of the media.

Speaking at a public hearing on the NBC amendment bill organised by the House on Wednesday, June 16, Mohammed asked the lawmakers to amend the NBC Act to empower the agency to regulate social and online media.

Section two (b) of theNBCAct states: (1) The Commission shall have (the) responsibility of: Receiving, processing and considering applications for the establishment, ownership or operation of radio and television stations including (i) cable television services, direct satellite broadcast and any other medium of broadcasting.

The Federal Government wants the commission to also be able to regulate the online media in addition to other channels of broadcasting.

I want to add here specifically that Internet broadcasting and all online media should be included in this because we have a responsibility to monitor contents, including Twitter, the minister stressed.

Also speaking last Tuesday at an investigating hearing organised by the House of Representatives committees on communication, justice, information and culture, and national security and intelligenceon the suspension of Twitter in Nigeria, Mohammed justified the Federal Governments action, citing the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020.

His words: As regards operation of foreign companies in Nigeria, the law provides that a foreign company, which fails to take necessary steps to obtain incorporation as a separate entity in Nigeria for that purpose, but until so incorporated, the foreign company shall not carry on business in Nigeria or exercise any powers of a registered company.

Hence, flowing from this background, a foreign company as Twitter cannot be clothed with the legitimate rights to operate as a company registered in Nigeria, as they are not licensed, accordingly.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is also observed that the operations of Twitter in the Nigerian social space is not legally permissible when it is used in airing of information that endangers the life and security of the majority of citizens of Nigeria.

Mohammed claimed that Twitters suspension is backed by international laws, including articles 24, 25 and 26 of the African Union on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (CCPR).

According to him, the government would not hesitate to suspend other social platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Google hangout, if they are found to be promoting posts or statements capable of destroying the country.

The government has been talking tough. But would it succeed, having failed in this very cause before? It could be recalled that efforts by the current administration to regulate the social media began in November 2015 when the then Deputy Senate Leader, Ibn NaAllah, sponsored the Frivolous Petitions Bill, 2015 (SB. 143) in the Senate. The bill, otherwise known as anti-social media bill, was read for the first time on Thursday, November 24, 2015. On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, the Senate debated on the general principles of the bill and after extensive deliberations, read it for the second time and referred it to the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, which was asked to report back with its recommendations.

On May 17, 2016, the committee recommended that the bill be withdrawn, stressing that if passed into law, it would affect the anti-corruption war of the Federal Government and do more harm than good to President Buharis administration.

The recommendation read: The Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters to which was referred a Bill for an Act to Prohibit Frivolous Petitions and other Matters Connected therewith, having considered the same, reports negatively thereon and accordingly recommends that the Senate withdraws the bill.

The Chairman of the committee, David Umaru, had also argued that the passage of the bill would conflict with some provisions of extant Acts Penal Code, Criminal Code and the Cyber Crime Act, which, according to him, have sufficient provisions to address the issues that the Bill sought to tackle.

The Senate, in line with the recommendation of the committee, withdrew the bill from further legislative consideration to the relief of many Nigerians who saw it as a ploy to deprive them of their right to freedom of speech and expression and decried it from day one.

But undeterred, in March 2018, the then Deputy Chief Whip of the Senate, Abdullahi Aliu Sabi, introduced a bill seeking prohibition of hate speech in the country, otherwise known as Hate Speech Bill. The overwhelming public outrage against the bill forced the lawmakers to withdraw it. Nevertheless, in a show of perseverance, the Senate reintroduced the bill in November 2019.

According to the sponsor, the bill was aimed at eliminating all forms of hate speech in the country. The bill defined hate speech as a comment that insults people for their religion, ethnic and linguistic affiliation, among others, and prescribes death penalty for certain offenders.

Any person who commits an offence under this section shall be liable to life imprisonment and where the act causes any loss of life, the person shall be punished with death by hanging, the bill stipulates.

It also proposed jail term of not less than five years or a fine of not less than N10 million or both for offences like harassment on the basis of ethnicity and racial contempt.

It further proposed establishment of a national commission for the prohibition of hate speech that would be saddled with the responsibility of discouraging persons, institutions, political parties and associations from advocating or promoting discrimination or discriminatory practices through the use of hate speeches; promoting tolerance, understanding and acceptance of diversity in all aspects of national life and encouraging full participation by all ethnic communities in social, economic, cultural and political life of other communities.

Also in November 2019, a bill titled Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations Bill 2019 (SB.132) was introduced in the Senate. The sponsor of the bill, Mohammed Musa, had argued that it would help to curb fake news on the Internet.

It is a legislation that will guide how we can tolerate our activities on the social media. False information has been disseminated so many times and they have caused so many chaos in different parts of the world, he argued.

In March 2020, the Senate held its public hearing on both the Hate Speech Bill and Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations Bill, where many Nigerians kicked against them, insisting that one of the most important tenets of democracy is citizens right to freedom of expression.

This is the same argument Nigerians are putting forward amid the current attempt by the government to check the excesses of the social media in the country. However, some Nigerians believe the government is in the right direction this time around, as the following report will show. But only time will answer the question of whether the government would succeed or fail in this fresh drive.

View original post here:
Social media regulation: Between failed attempts and Buhari's current move - Guardian

The hashtag #NizarBanat swept social media sites in Palestine, with many denouncing Banat's arrest.

Banat was a human rights activist who was assassinated by the Palestinian security services (PA), at dawn on Thursday, after his house was stormed.

Many activists called him the "Khashoggi of Palestine."

The governor said in a press statement that the Palestinian security forces arrested Banat after the Public Prosecution ordered his arrest. According to the governor, Banat's health deteriorated and was transferred to the Hebron Governmental Hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

According to one of Banat's relatives however, "a security force raided his house at 3:30 am, and he was severely beaten by about 20 soldiers." He added that Banat was alive and shouting when he got arrested.

Banat's cousin Ammar Banat said that the Palestinian security forces hid Nizar's body from the family. He added that the family searched for his body in all hospitals in Hebron but could not find it.

In turn, International bodies and UN institutions condemned the assassination by the PA.

Sadness pervaded social networking sites, amid widespread and great condemnation of what they described as a heinous and disgusting crime, during which Banat was brutally murdered in front of his family and children at the moment of his arrest at his home in the city of Hebron, southern occupied West Bank.

Activists likened his death to the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside his country's embassy in Istanbul.

An Activist, identified as Yahya Nafeh asked, "How can an authority in an occupied country demand that the world stop the crimes of the occupation while it practices the same behavior towards its people... Freedom is indivisible. #Nizar'sassassination."

The city of Ramallah witnessed demonstrations, with hundreds participating to condemn the assassination of Banat. The participants chanted for the departure of the PA and its trial for the crime.

Another activist, identified as Ahmed Nazzal wrote, "Silence about this crime is no less than the despicable act itself."

Another activist wrote, "Today's event reminds us of the slain cartoonist Naji Al-Ali. He had an intellectual disagreement with the authority some time before his assassination, and he expressed his disagreement with a pen and paper.... It is the same tragedy!"

Activist Ahmed Salem commented, "The assassination of the martyr Nizar Banat must not go unnoticed, and every official must be punished, and this is a crime that every free person denounces."

Read the original post:
#NizarBanat trends on social media sites in rejection of Banat's assassination - Roya News English

Welcome to the Randolph Rundown, our series that informs our readers on new developments right here in Randolph County.

Fourth of July fireworks will be going off all over Randolph County, so join the celebration.

Food on site:S&P Lemonade,Dorsett Funnel Cakes and More,Roadway Dogs,Preacher Steen Icees,The Chill Shak,Kyles Concessions,4 Fosters Slushies,Sunset Slush of HP

Thank you for subscribing to The Courier-Tribune. Be sure to download our mobile app for the latest local news.

Financing with Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI's) is a webinar course part of a series offered by Randolph County Community College onBusiness Recovery and Resiliency following the COVID-19 crisis.

While most small businesses are familiar with lending options with traditional banks, CDFI's provide unique opportunities that no small business should overlook. The seminar will teach small businesses about CDFI's, what they offer, and how to secure funding through them.The speaker will be Dr, Jonathan Thill of VentureAsheboro.

It will take place onWednesday, June 30th, from10:00am to 11:00am. Register here

The North CarolinaZoois asking the public to vote for names for six American red wolf pups born in April.

For the first time in two decades, this red wolf litter was born on the wolves public habitat, givingZooguests a rare chance to view the pups for a limited time. Most litters are born in the red wolf breeding area, which is an area of theZooclosed to the public.

Members of the public cancast their votefor their favorite name among the six chosen by theZoo's red wolf keepers. The names are based on rivers in the Southeastern U.S. where critically endangered red wolves used to range.

The names to choose from are: Catawba, Edisto, Haw, Harper, Warrior, Eno, Fisher, Pearl, Waccamaw, and Swannanoa

Voting closes Monday, June 28th at 4pm.

The public can access theonline pollthrough theZoo's website atnczoo.orgor through theZoo's social media channels onFacebook,TwitterandInstagram.There is no charge to select names. The winning names will be announced on Wednesday, June 30.

The pups were born as part of theZoos red wolf breeding program. There were three litters totaling 12 pups born during three days from April 28 to April 30(the other two litters pups names will be announced soon). This brings the number of red wolves currently in theZoo's breeding program to 35, making it the second-largest pack in the U.S. after Point DefianceZooand Aquarium in Tacoma, Washington.

Only 15-20 red wolves remain in the wild, and they're all in eastern North Carolina. Red wolves are considered the most endangered canid in the world.

Once common throughout the southeastern United States, the wolves were driven to near extinction during the late 1960s, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began an aggressive conservation effort the American Red Wolf Recovery Program that led to new ways to track and protect the species. Those efforts led to increasing numbers of wild red wolves in eastern North Carolina, but changes in how the recovery program was managed have resulted in the wild population again plummeting in recent years.

TheZoohas been part of the American Red Wolf Recovery Program since 1994 and led the successful efforts to have the American red wolf become part of the Association ofZooand Aquariums SAFE (Saving Species From Extinction) program.

Michelle Shen is an Economic and Data Reporter for The Courier Tribune. Feel free to reach out to her with story tips on Twitter (michelle_shen10), Instagram (pretty_photos_by_michelle OR michelle_shen10), or email (mshen@gannett.com).

See the original post here:
Randolph Rundown: What's happening in Randolph County? Fourth of July deals, business classes, and red wolf puppies - Asheboro Courier Tribune

The internet generation (iGen) is the first cohort to have lived their entire adolescence in the age of the smart phone (those born between 1995-2012).

This generation is experiencing ever higher rates of loneliness, depression, anxiety and mental health issues in general (even before Covid), leading to questions about the potential contributory impact of smart phone and social media use.

The first version of Facebook (FaceMash) was started by Mark Zuckerberg in 2004 at Harvard University. Today there are 2.8 billion FB users worldwide, over 1.8 billion daily users.

According to the Pew Research Center, more than 70% of Americans use social media (SM) (up from 5% in 2005 and 50% in 2011). Most are daily users. Adolescents and young adults are the highest users.

SM plays a substantial role in the social and emotional lives and development of adolescents and young adults, with unknown implications. While there is an explosion of interest and research in this area, the data are, as yet, unclear. Conclusions are often contradictory. And influences on mental health outcomes are numerous, making it difficult to separate out aspects of SM use from other factors.

Science does tell us that social connection is one of the strongest contributors to overall health, including physical health, emotional health and longevity. This association seems to by mediated by a number of interconnected factors, such as hormone release (oxytocin and others), effects on inflammation and the immune system, and the buffering of stress. Chronic stress, involving stress hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline, can be toxic for the brain and body. According to the buffering hypothesis, social support can reduce the negative effects of stress on health and wellbeing. Having fewer human connections is associated with higher risk of heart attack, stroke, sleep disturbance, altered immune system, higher inflammation and stress hormones, and even cancer. Studies also show that perceived social support protects against stress-induced depression and anxiety.

In-person human-to-human social contact, eye contact and touch have many beneficial physiologic effects. Touch can reduce the experience of physical pain, lower stress hormone levels, and boost the immune system. In one study, people who received hugs tended to develop fewer illness symptoms when exposed to the common cold virus.

We dont know if there is a difference in the magnitude or quality of health benefits depending upon whether the social connection is virtual vs. in-person.

Here are some examples of the conflicting research results regarding SM use and adolescent mental health (pre-Covid). We do know that exposure to the blue light of screens before bedtime can interfere with sleep. One 8-year study of adolescents (from age 13 to age 20) showed no relationship between time spent on SM and anxiety or depression. Multiple other studies of teens, however, have shown a relationship between exposure to media and low self-esteem, substance use, depression, loneliness, eating disorders, self-harm, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Directionality is unclear; maybe people who are anxious or depressed are more likely to use SM (for avoidance, to escape pressures, to connect to others, as a diversion, etc.).

There are many possible benefits of SM, depending on how it is used, how often, and what it might be replacing. In general, active use of SM (engaging with others) tends to be healthier than passive use (just scrolling through other peoples feeds). Some studies point to the benefits that can be derived from playing video games with others, including problem-solving and social connection. Online social networking and accessing communities of support (such as for LGBTQ youth) can play vital roles in gaining sense of belonging, learning information, connecting to resources, alleviating loneliness, and exploring identities.

Some of the negative aspects of extensive SM use (and overall time spent on-line) are well-described. Even before Covid, adolescent in-person communication has declined, while online communication has increased. Young people, in general, are more likely to experience discomfort making eye contact, making a phone call, maintaining an in-person conversation, and approaching an adult such as a teacher or advisor.

Adolescents may find themselves targets of harassing or abusive on-line behavior, including stalking, being overly monitored by a significant other, or being pressured to send sexual photos. Cyberbullying (both as victim and perpetrator) may be more psychologically damaging than in-person bullying, and can be a risk factor for suicidality. These days, bullying extends beyond the school day and into ones home and bedroom; there is no escape or downtime on social media. Studies suggest that the more time spent online, the higher the risk of becoming a victim and/or perpetrator of cyberbullying.

Other SM risks include exposure to content that is harmful or inappropriate to age. This can include porn, pro-anorexia (pro-ana) sites, seeing disturbing content, and violence. Copy behaviors can follow, including anorexia, bulimia, and other forms of self-harm, such as cutting. Repeated exposure to graphic depictions of disturbing news events, such as videos of police violence or natural disasters, can be traumatizing.

Social media sites are platforms for carefully curated (and photoshopped and filtered) images. Even though people, on one level, are aware that these are not realistic (FakeBook), time spent on SM has been linked to low self-esteem and feelings of insecurity, as well as the development of disordered eating. Physical attractiveness (and thinness) is overvalued. FaceMash, the first version of Facebook, was a hot-or-not rating site of Harvard female students. If self-worth is highly linked to appearance, self-esteem and mood can be unstable and externally mediated, changing quickly based on the number of likes or positive comments one receives from photos posted to SM. Adolescents are especially sensitive to peer influences and are therefore more susceptible to these negative feelings.

The FOMO (fear of missing out) phenomenon is amplified by SM, as people post photos of all the fabulous parties they are attending, the people they are with, and vacation spots. Social media envy leads to feelings of sadness, self-doubt and anxiety as people compare their lives with what they are seeing on SM (Facebook depression).

Addiction (used colloquially here) to SM is another area of increasing concern. Addiction can be generally described as a repetitive behavior that some people may have difficulty controlling or stopping. It involves a compulsive quality, unsuccessful attempts to cut back, and ongoing use despite negative consequences. SM use can, in some cases, reach this level. It may replace other important activities, such as sleep or schoolwork. Smart phones and SM platforms are designed to be addictive, with frequent notifications and the speed of interactions, instilling fear of missing something if not checked frequently. A like or positive comment can trigger a dopamine release, and a craving for more of the same. The rewards of SM are unpredictable, as one is never sure which post will receive positive feedback; such variable reward systems (gambling is a good example) are especially likely to result in compulsive repetitive behavior. (Internet Gaming Disorder was added as a condition for further study to the most recent edition of the psychiatric diagnostic manual (DSM-5) in 2013.)

The displacement hypothesis describes another concern. Time spent on SM is time not spent doing other things, such as being physically active, sleeping a full night, being outdoors, socializing in-person, engaging in hobbies, and daydreaming. For optimal brain development, children and adolescents need to engage in a full range of activities (including substantial off-line time).

SM is a significant platform for disinformation, where one cant tell real from fake (inaccurate statements, as well as doctored photos and videos). Inflammatory and false information often gets amplified because our brains are wired to react more strongly (and therefore read, share and like) to posts eliciting powerful emotions (such as anger) as opposed to measured and nuanced information. Because we are highly responsive to favorable social responses, such as likes, this becomes a positive feedback cycle, further distorting reality, intensifying negative emotions and increasing societal divisions. The basic human drive for belonging to an in-group of like-minded people is especially strong in adolescents; when certain opinions are shared repeatedly by ones online community, its harder to maintain objective judgment.

For parents, you can engage your children in ongoing discussions about some of the benefits and pitfalls of their SM use. Familiarize yourself with what sites they are visiting and platforms they are using. Here are some signs to look out for, suggesting that their SM use might be of concern:

We are in the midst of a SM wave that we do not fully understand. And the stakes are high for the health of our younger generations. It is reassuring to know that research on this topic is ongoing. In the meantime, while there is much we still do not fully understand about SM and mental health, the following recommendations are based on strong evidence:

The rest is here:
iGen, Social Media and Mental Health - The Crozet Gazette

Bigger is always better. Many of us think this is true when it comes to building our online networks of social media friends, connections and followers. But new research suggests the opposite may be closer to the truth: curating small networks of trusted connections may be smarter in the long run. While this may seem counterintuitive, it also comes with a caveat.

We often feel compelled, and are even encouraged by social media platforms, to grow our networks. Consider all the prompts about someone else you might know and who to follow. We all want the sociometrics (that number of friends or followers posted in the corner of your profile) to look good.

Offline and online social networks

Both offline and online, our social networks can function as either prisms or pipes. As prisms, they broadcast to others our likes, dislikes, opinions, interests, activities and more. They signal who we are, or want to be, to our network of social connections.

As pipes, they act as conduits through which help and resources can flow. Using our networks as pipes is an important part of how we build relationships. We give and receive advice, advocacy, endorsement, emotional support and tangible things (like entrepreneurs do, for example).

Studies of face-to-face networks have generally shown that, whether we use our networks as prisms or pipes, bigger is better.

But what about online?

We flock to social media networks like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Instagram because its easy to view, share and store our connections, allowing us to communicate with them whenever we want. Thats what makes connecting online and offline so different. We cant search and find a comment we made six days ago to a friend over coffee. We can, however, find and reshare a conversation we had with our Facebook friends three years ago. It turns out thats a really important distinction.

Its when we use our online networks as pipes, not prisms, that small matters and seems to be valuable. In a recent study of Canadian entrepreneurs, our team of researchers uncovered this counterintuitive point and shed light on the reasons why. We think it suggests some broader insights.

Using our online networks

For people to actually use their online networks as pipes for resources and support, three things need to come together. First, we need to believe we have the ability to ask for or give a resource or support (termed exchange). Second, we need to have a way to actually make the exchange happen. And finally, we need to want to conduct the exchange.

All those digital viewing, scanning, sharing, searching and storing capabilities of our social media networks make it really easy for us to believe we have the ability and arrangements to use our networks as pipes. I can quickly and easily ask my online network for something I need and get a quick response. But our research suggests that we dont always have the willingness to ask.

Through interviews with entrepreneurs, we uncovered that the reason is likely that people are really worried about what others will think. This perceived social judgment risk can get in the way of entrepreneurs getting helpful resources from their online networks. We suspect its not just entrepreneurs who are worried about this. Thats because perceived social judgment risk is a product of audience collapse, which reduces our willingness to reach out online.

Audience collapse happens when we add people to our online networks from all aspects of our lives. These might be people we know well and people we barely know; personal connections, work acquaintances, volunteer connections, hometown connections and those with shared interests and hobbies.

By building these varied and oversized networks, and inviting so many different people to join, our willingness to ask for help goes down. With all that searching, viewing and sharing, who knows where our request might land?

Our research reveals that many of us likely perceive a lot of social judgment risk in asking for anything but information from our online networks. We are worried that others will judge our asks as weak, needy, unsure, confused, too personal or otherwise inappropriate, making us less willing to seek help. This dark side implication of bigger is better social media networking is rarely discussed.

If this resonates, what can you do?

To make our social media networks useful as pipes, we suggest creating trust networks. These are purpose-built to stay small yes, small. Only add people who will support, not negatively judge, any ask for help you might make these are the people you trust.

A trust network is likely to be very high in reciprocity, or the giving and getting of help, because all members feel it is a safe place to ask for and give help. It becomes a really useful pipe network where small, not big, is valuable.

So, if you want to use your online networks as a prism to signal things to the world stay big. But if you want to give and get help, then create a purpose-built, small trust network on social media. We think youll be glad you did.

Follow this link:
When it comes to social networks, bigger isn't always better. Here's why - Hindustan Times