Tag: Free Expression

U.S. Press Starts To Figure Out College TikTok Bans Are A Dumb Performance

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

U.S. Press Starts To Figure Out College TikTok Bans Are A Dumb Performance

One, the bans are generally designed to agitate a xenophobic base and give the impression the GOP is “doing something about China.” But the party that couldn’t care less about rampant corruption or privacy violations isn’t doing much of anything meaningful to thwart China. In fact, letting adtech, telecom, and app companies run rampant with little oversight runs contrary to any such goal.

Two, the bans distract the public and press from our ongoing failure on consumer privacy and security issues. Banning TikTok, but doing nothing about the accountability optional free for all that is the adtech and data-hoovering space, doesn’t actually fix anything. China can just obtain the same data from a universe of other international companies facing little real oversight on data collection.

Three, the ban is really just about money. Trump gave the game away with his proposal that TikTok be chopped up and sold to Oracle and Walmart. That cronyistic deal fell through, but it’s pretty clear that this moral panic is designed to either help TikTok’s competitors (Facebook lobbyists are very active on this front), or force the sale of the most popular app in modern history to GOP-allies. At which point they’ll engage in all the surveillance and influence efforts they pretend to be mad about.

Related:

Read More »

Finally! An Interesting Twitter Files That Appears To Reveal Sketchy Government Behavior +

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Finally! An Interesting Twitter Files That Appears To Reveal Sketchy Government Behavior

So when the Intercept’s Lee Fang kicked off the 8th installment of the Twitter files, I was not expecting much at all. After all, Fang was one of the authors of the very recent garbage Intercept story that totally misunderstood the role of CISA in the government and (falsely) argued that the government demanded Twitter censor the Hunter Biden laptop story. The fact that the evidence from the Twitter files totally disproved his earlier story should at least result in Fang questioning his understanding of these things.

…

LibsOfTikTok was ‘whitelisted’.

Thus, it’s not at all surprising that Twitter clearly has a similar whitelist feature. This was actually somewhat revealed in an earlier Twitter File when Bari Weiss, thinking she was revealing unfair treatment of the @LibsOfTikTok account, actually revealed it was on a similar Xcheck style whitelist that clearly showed a flag on the account saying DO NOT TAKE ACTION ON USER WITHOUT CONSULTING an executive team.

Related:

The Twitter Files Are a Missed Opportunity

Twitter’s most recent transparency report, published in July, shows that it took action on 4.3 million accounts in the second half of 2021 and removed 5.1 million pieces of content. You could cherry-pick a few of those decisions to fit almost any ideological narrative. Right-wing commentators aren’t the only people complaining about platforms’ actions. Some Black and LGBTQ social-media users have also objected that they’re being unfairly moderated, as automated tools take down posts containing words and phrases deemed offensive. Distrust of Big Tech’s power is universal.

Twitter Aided Pentagon in Covert Propaganda Campaign

Pentagon Opens Review Of Its Clandestine Psychological Operations

The Onion Files Hilarious Amicus Brief In An Important Case, And Actually Makes A Key Point In The Best Way Possible

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

from the put-the-onion’s-editorial-board-on-the-supreme-court dept

Tue, Oct 4th 2022 10:45am – Mike Masnick

In most cases, it does not do you any good to try to be funny in legal filings. In most cases, judges will not be that amused (even if those same judges sometimes try to make jokey rulings). In the world of the courts, the judges can be funny, but no one else should try. But every so often it works. The ACLU’s Eat Shit, Bob filing, for example, was pretty good.

The Onion Files Hilarious Amicus Brief In An Important Case, And Actually Makes A Key Point In The Best Way Possible

H/T: Steve Lehto

Related:

The man who wrote the Onion’s Supreme Court brief takes parody very seriously

Ohio Man Arrested and Prosecuted for Facebook Joke Appeals to Supreme Court

That video of Mount Rushmore for your YouTube channel could now land you in jail — shocking court decision transforms First Amendment rights

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

WASHINGTON, D.C., Aug. 26, 2022 — Visiting D.C.? Planning to take video at the Lincoln Memorial for your YouTube channel? Not so fast. Thanks to the National Park Service and the D.C. Circuit Court, that video on your iPhone could land you in jail if your YouTube viewership generates any revenue.

That video of Mount Rushmore for your YouTube channel could now land you in jail — shocking court decision transforms First Amendment rights

Canada: Fast-moving proposal creates filtering, blocking and reporting rules – and speech police to enforce them

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

BY CORYNNE MCSHERRY AND KATITZA RODRIGUEZ | EFF | AUGUST 10, 2021

Policymakers around the world are contemplating a wide variety of proposals to address “harmful” online expression. Many of these proposals are dangerously misguided and will inevitably result in the censorship of all kinds of lawful and valuable expression. And one of the most dangerous proposals may be adopted in Canada. How bad is it? As Stanford’s Daphne Keller observes, “It’s like a list of the worst ideas around the world.” She’s right.

Canada: Fast-moving proposal creates filtering, blocking and reporting rules – and speech police to enforce them

Canada wants to fine people up to $50,000 for “online hate speech”

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Canada’s proposals would make it one of the most oppressive nations when it comes to free expression By Dan Frieth | Reclaim the Net | June 29, 2021

The “Liberal” Canadian government plans to pass a law that criminalizes so-called online “hate speech,” with the punishment being fines ranging from $20,000 to $50,000. The law only punishes social media users, it does not punish the platforms hosting the alleged hate speech and will introduce a new definition of “hate” that is yet to be revealed.

Canada wants to fine people up to $50,000 for “online hate speech”