"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of freedom of speech."
Suella Braverman’s letter to the police on the harassment of Jewish people in the UK following Hamas' attack on Israel raises issues for freedom of expression.
We're concerned about the consequences of such a letter when the Online Safety Bill becomes law:
Age verification leaves only a few options for platforms with UK users. All of them lead to a less open, less functional and less free Internet.
The Online Safety Bill risks a disproportionate interference with children’s and adult’s right to access information, and their freedom of expression rights.
ORG's Exec Director @jim explains the risks to privacy and freedom of expression of age verification requirements.
Age verification is coming with the Online Safety Bill. It’ll force the choice of blocking content to ensure platforms are suitable for children or make all users verify their age.
This is “a huge boon to age verification companies, for little practical benefit for child safety, and much harm to people’s privacy.”
ORG’s investigation into the Prevent duty has uncovered shocking widespread data sharing due to finding a poorly redacted FOI, as revealed in The Observer today.
#JonathanAyling gives a fairly nuanced perspective on the free speech implications of calls to censure Prof Joanna Kidman, for her comments about the NatACTs' dopey Boot Camps.
In #Uganda , people have long been savvy on social media, but now they’re mobilising in online “exhibitions”. First it was the state of the #roads now it’s #health . When physical protests are banned, and other things are difficult, it’s impressive. And the government now seems to be scrambling to stop it #eastAfrica#Africa#citizens#freedomofexpression#protests
Freedom of expression and media freedom are firmly anchored in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. It's considered important for democratic societies to be able to tolerate a variety of opinions, even if they offend religious sensibilities.
However, provocations against religious communities repeatedly spark debate about the limits of this freedom.
The newly passed Online Safety Bill poses "a huge threat to freedom of expression with tech companies expected to decide what is and isn't legal, and then censor content before it's even been published".
This grab bag of half-baked fantasy solutions to misunderstood (or misrepresented) problems has received Royal Assent, including powers to break #encryption in messaging apps and censor content before it's even posted.
Scrutiny over how Ofcom implements the law and how the government exercises its powers is critical now that the threats to #privacy and #freedomofexpression have become law.
Watching the most recent music video of #ToomajSalehi who has been sentenced to death by the government of Iran basically for protesting them and rapping.
Meta's algorithm labelling people as terrorists highlights how even seemingly straightforward automated systems can make mistakes, that invariably exacerbate racism and discrimination.
This is going to be an even bigger problem when the Online Safety Bill is implemented and tech companies are obliged to identify illegal content and prevent it from being posted.
Over-moderation will seriously harm freedom of expression.
Vancouver Island University, my employer, is now threatening to remove the encampment and have people arrested. I'm absolutely sick.
I had corresponded with our President on May 1. I sent this to our Chancellor, Chair and President today.
Dear Chancellor Sayers, Chair Anderson, and President Saucier,
I am extremely concerned by the escalatory words and actions of VIU today given the encampment’s peaceful and respectful nature and disposition to date. The President has stated to me in her response quoted below on May 1 "that VIU’s approach to the encampment is based on respect and peace for protest and freedom of expression.”
The locking of all campus buildings today and the very clear threat by VIU Security (see attached noticed link) to have peace officers remove tents and equipment under the Trespass Act under threat of arrest is completely contradictory to the President’s statement and is exactly the approach that I flagged to the President as being extremely dangerous and likely to result in harm to the protesters and deep embarrassment to the University itself. There are peaceful ways to do this.
As an institution that is supposed to be fully immersed in the spirit and action of Truth and Reconciliation, I find these statements and actions to be horrendously contradictory, misguided, colonial, and dangerous.
As an individual employee, VIUFA faculty member, and member of this community on Snuneymuxw, Coast Salish and Nuuchanulth lands I am embarrassed, and I beg the University to reconsider and reverse its actions.