Home » Posts tagged 'reclaim the net' (Page 3)

Tag Archives: reclaim the net

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

EU Officials Dodge Their Own Surveillance Law

Leaked documents suggest EU officials seek immunity from their own controversial online surveillance laws, raising accusations of hypocrisy.

Do as I say – not as I do. That’s the essence of a leak that claims to expose high-ranked EU officials as more than simply politicking hypocrites when it comes to implementing the extremely controversial legislation affecting online privacy and encryption.

Namely, interior ministers from EU member countries reportedly want to exempt themselves – but not only – from the looming Child Sexual Abuse (CSAM) Regulation (aka, “chat control“), expected to be adopted as early as in June.

Pushed by supporters as being exactly what it says on the tin – the proposed new rules are at the same time criticized as a vehicle for indiscriminate mass surveillance of everyone’s online communications, and a way to weaken true encryption deployed by platforms – a vital component of internet security, once again, affecting everyone who goes online, children included.

German member of European Parliament (MEP), Pirate Party member, and lawyer Patrick Breyer, who has been investing a lot of time and energy in drawing EU public’s attention to the dangers that come with the regulation, is now quoting leaked documents published by the French site Contexte, which may or may not prove the context of the already troubled proposed rules, just got even worse.

That’s because, according to Contexte, “EU interior ministers want to exempt professional accounts of staff of intelligence agencies, police and military from the envisaged scanning of chats and messages.”

In addition to ministers, police, and spies, anything that’s labeled as “professional secret” is also supposed to be exempt from this highly invasive (when it comes to everybody else in the EU) type of content scanning.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Social Media Fact Checkers Claim Their Work Isn’t Censorship. Here’s Why It Is.

“Fact-checking” isn’t just labeling. It tanks the visibility of posts.

There’s good news, and bad: first, the fact that “fact-checkers” masquerading as unbiased and accurate moderators of content – while actually unreliable and bias-prone tools of censorship – are now recognized widely enough as just that, to trigger a reaction from some prominent actors.

But then – these “fact-checkers” are reacting in order to double down on their role as something positive, and justified.

Because there are no facts to support this attitude, one of the key “fact-checkers” is hiding behind an opinion piece. But the claim is there: “Fact-checking is not censorship,” a post on Poynter wants you to believe.

This, despite the organization, which acts to “certify fact-checkers” via the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), having a project that has resulted in mass suppression of posts on Facebook.

According to Facebook (Meta) CEO Mark Zuckerberg, posts that get fact-checked experience a 95% drop in clicks. In other words, even if this content is not outright removed, it is made virtually invisible. That’s censorship by any other name.

So how in the world can Poynter claim that activities of those it certifies actually result in “adding to the public debate” rather than suppressing it?

It can, and does. Meanwhile, a report recently published by Meta paints a different picture: the EU that was no doubt happy to share that “fact-checking” reduces users’ attempts to share posts by 47 and 38 percent on Facebook and Instagram, respectively.

Of course, neither Meta nor the EU are offering this data as proof of negative and nefarious efforts resulting in censorship; instead they are treated simply as proof that Meta complies with EU’s “codes” and other rules, also in the end producing more censorship.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Scotland Implements Controversial Hate Legislation That Damages Free Speech

A major attack on free speech was introduced on April 1st.
Scotland’s contentious “hate crime” legislation, widely criticized as an affront to free speech, is now in effect. Critics have voiced concerns that these new measures, while designed to address the alleged harm inflicted by hatred and bias, may inadvertently act as a tool to suppress freedom of speech and be abused.

Implemented on 1 April under the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act, the laws aim to bolster protections for individuals and communities vulnerable to hate crimes.

These laws offer a unifying structure that both consolidates current legislation and introduces new offenses. Now, any threatening or abusive conduct intended to inflame hate, rooted in prejudice towards various characteristics like age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, and transgender identity, constitutes wrongdoing.

The law, applicable even within the boundaries of private family homes, penalizes behavior devised to incite hatred, a provision previously only applicable to racial matters in Scotland.

Humza Yousaf, Scotland’s First Minister, stated emphatically that a “zero-tolerance approach” is needed to combat hate. He expressed his confidence in the police’s ability to handle investigations related to alleged hate.

The majority of the Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) approved the legislation in 2021. High-profile figures like J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk have publicly expressed their disapproval of the act, highlighting its threat to free speech.

A recent letter to Holyrood’s criminal justice committee from the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents (ASPS) raised concerns that an activist fringe might “weaponize” the law.Police Scotland has pledged to examine every hate crime reported.

The First Minister reaffirmed his “absolute faith” in the abilities of the police force to filter out frivolous complaints at the First Minister’s Questions session.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Irish Government Wants Pre-Election Pact With Tech Giants To Counter Online “Disinformation”

A move that raises accusations of manipulating Big Tech’s power.

Many governments around the world are no longer at least pretending they don’t see Big Tech as a major political asset, or that they will not try to use that asset to their advantage. Instead, this behavior is slowly being normalized – albeit always qualified as a democracy-preserving, rather than undermining policy.

In other words, something driven by the need to combat “disinformation” and not what critics suspect it is – the need to harness and control the massive reach, influence, and power of major social platforms.

Judging by reports out of Ireland, it is among those countries, with big words like “supercharged disinformation threats to democracy” flying around as the government looks to use what some might call “supercharged fearmongering” to secure no less than a “pre-election pact with tech giants.”

Some of this is yet to be enacted through the Electoral Reform Act, so in the meanwhile Big Tech representatives have been summoned to a meeting, via lobbyists representing them, Technology Ireland, to discuss the said “threats.”

The Electoral Reform Act is supposed to formalize new rules for both platforms and those buying ads, while during the meeting, set to take place in late April, tech companies will be expected to sign “the Irish Election Integrity Accord.”

A letter signed by Minister for Housing Darragh O’Brien and Minister of State Malcolm Noonan explained that the Accord will be new, but based on the Electoral Reform Act from 2022, and always focusing on “disinformation,” and advertising. What the giants are expected to sign up to is “a set of principles for the sector and the state to work by to safeguard our democracy over these crucial next few months.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

More Details Have Come to Light About Feds’ Surveillance of Everyone That Watched Certain YouTube Videos

Recently, it came to light that US courts are issuing orders to YouTube (Google) to hand over user information – a previously unreported form of dragnet investigation. And now additional details about the practice are emerging.

Forbes broke the story last month after seeing documents that showed a court order covering all YouTube users who watched certain videos over a period of time. Personal data required by law enforcement in these cases was very detailed.

Regarding Google users – that’s information from their Google accounts (name, address, phone number and records, online payments history, IP address, etc…), while everybody else visiting URLs listed in the order had their IP addresses surrendered.

A one-year gag order made sure Google could not make any of this publicly known, and now we’re hearing about it because that time period has expired.

However, the actual documents that the original article was based on were not published at that time; now, reports say they have been made available on the Bluesky platform.

The order covers the first 8 days of 2023, and three apparently obscure and in and of themselves harmless YouTube videos (the target of the investigation was a person suspected of illegal activity, while the video’s URLs were “exchanged” during communication between undercover investigators and their target).

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Civil Liberties Supporters Sue Trudeau’s Government for Freezing Bank Accounts

Tired of censorship and surveillance?

Defend free speech and individual liberty online. Push back against Big Tech and media gatekeepers. Subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Twenty plaintiffs heavily embroiled in the 2022 Freedom Convoy, have initiated a legal battle against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other high-ranking members of his cabinet, at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

The lawsuit results from the government’s decision to freeze their financial assets under the measures of the Emergencies Act—an act which they feel breached their Charter rights.

The list of defendants includes not only Trudeau, but names such as Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, former ministers Marco Mendicino and David Lametti, ex-RCMP commissioner Brenda Lucki, acting Ottawa Police commissioner Steve Bell, and numerous banks across Canada. The lawsuit, lodged by the Calgary-based Loberg Ector LLP, calls for a total of $2.2 million in compensation for each plaintiff.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

The defendants are accused of malicious and high-handed misconduct, breaching contractual agreements, and committing an “assault and battery” on the plaintiffs by unlawfully seizing their bank accounts. These actions, the plaintiffs argue, violate section 2(b) and section 8 Charter rights, which protect their freedom of expression and safeguard against unauthorized search and seizure.

Text exchanges between Ben Chin and Tyler Meredith, senior advisers to the Prime Minister, reveal that the seizure of Freedom Convoy assets was planned as early as early February of 2022 when the Prime Minister’s Office started applying pressure on banks to do so.

Even given the political context, concerted efforts of banks and insurers to resist making moves against their clients were recorded. These exchanges were admitted into the Public Order Emergency Commission as evidence since the commission evaluates the appropriateness of invoking the Emergencies Act in situations like convoy protests.

…click on the above link to read the rest…

The Time The US Banned Criticism of War

https://youtu.be/Y6oSn1Pqc6E

 

Brazil Censorship Regime: Popular Podcaster Monark Criminally Investigated and Fined $75,000 For Online Speech

One of Brazil’s most popular podcasters, Monark (real name Bruno Monteiro Aiub), is under criminal investigation and has received a fine equivalent to $75,000 for his online conduct.

Critics of the authority’s behavior here – like Brazil-based investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald – see this as a way to completely science the online personality known as the country’s version of Joe Rogan.

And do this without any due process, as well.

Reports in the Brazilian press say that the decision to fine Monark, whom they refer to as a digital influencer, came from Federal Supreme Court’s Minister Alexandre de Moraes.

Moraes is no stranger to taking an active part in controversial policies and decisions slammed for suppressing free speech on the internet.

In fact, he now has a fairly long history of involvement in this, dating back to the campaign to oust Brazil’s previous president.

In line with this reputation, Moraes’ decision was explained as the podcaster’s failure to comply with a court order, and in addition to the fine, includes blocking his bank account, suspending any new social media accounts, and demonetizing his channels.

In other words, a pretty thorough deplatforming and canceling, and Monark said he also lost his Rumble contract over the incident. And the reason: Moraes says he’s fighting “disinformation” allegedly spread by Monark, as well as his tactic of trying to get his voice heard by creating a new account, once an old one gets banned.

Monark’s defenders, including his lawyer, say that the “crime” he committed is that of having an opinion that is not liked by the government, and that accusations of “instigation of anti-democratic acts” are not true.

…click on the above link to read the rest…

Investigating The Pro-Censorship UK Group Expanding Across The US

Freedom of information requests to hit government agencies for its association with pro-censorship group.
America First Legal (AFL) have announced its investigation into a UK-based group known as the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

AFL, a non-profit often described as “an alternative to ACLU,” is starting the probe into CCDH – which it refers to as a pro-censorship group that is a party to anti-free speech collusion with the government – by filing several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

We obtained an example of one of the FOIAs for you here.

They are addressed to the US Department of Health and Human Services, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of State, and the goal is to obtain any communications they may have had with CCDH, headed by Imran Ahmed.

The basis for looking into the group’s activities in the US is that although based in the UK, it has expanded its “censorship encouraging,” as AFL put it, work to the US as a 501(c) non-profit.

As far as CCDH is concerned, the group is a non-profit and an NGO (non-governmental organization) with nothing but noble intentions – fighting online hate and disinformation.

Ahmed’s professional profile gives a good idea of what exactly CCDH means by that. As per the organization itself, Ahmed is an “authority on social and psychological malignancies on social media, such as identity-based hate, extremism, disinformation, and conspiracy theories.”

As is often the case with those that like to add a layer of opaqueness to their work, “the organization of the organization” here is rather complicated: there are ties with top Labour Party officials, the Black Lives Matter movement, there has been a “merger” with another online disinformation crusader called Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN).

…click on the above link to read the rest…

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress