True or False? - Freedom of Press

TWITTER

LOL ... Been thinking I might need my head checked because I'm suspicious of everything I see in the media and cynical about every organisation I come across, surfing news and politics. 

But irrespective of who owns the medium or the quality of the mainstream message, I think there is no alternative to defending the freedom of the press.

Preserving freedom of press hopefully also means preserving freedom of information, freedom of speech and allowing everybody to have a voice, should they wish to use it.

Australian politicians & law enforcement - Make headway towards controlling social media

Financial Review Twitter move to Australia "imminent": Julie Bishop PUBLISHED: 11 Jan 2013 11:35:00 | UPDATED: 15 Jan 2013 08:45:28 Negar Salek, James Hutchinson and AAP Social networking giant Twitter is being tipped to open its first Australian corporate office “imminently” as part of plans to help combat cyber bullying and deepen ties with the federal and state governments. Federal politicians have for months been lobbying the company to launch a full-time presence in Australia and make it easier for police officers to engage with the company. Speaking after a visit to Twitter’s US headquarters on Friday, deputy opposition leader Julie Bishop said she understood the move was “imminent”.  [Now Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party government - here.] “That’s what they told us today - they’d be opening an office in Sydney,” she said. “Facebook has a presence in Australia and it’s clear Twitter is about to establish one.” Ms Bishop said it was “essential” for social networking companies to deepen ties with Australian governments and authorities. Earlier, Ms Bishop tweeted that she was at Twitter headquarters in in San Francisco as part of the Australian American Leadership Dialogue.”There are 400 million tweets/day with most tweets posted in Jakarta!”. [AALD - NGO-charity] Twitter did not immediately confirm the move. Cooperation Twitter has seven international offices with the latest being in Paris. A new Australian corporate presence is likely to have a strong commercial motive, with Australians keenly embracing Twitter over the past six years and currently sending about 1.4 million tweets per day. But it is also likely to ease cooperation on issues such as cyber bullying and online abuse as well as enhancing relationships with all levels of government. It comes after a series of high-profile cases of cyber bullying, including rugby league star Robbie Farah being abused by a troll on Twitter. [SMH - September 10, 2012 - here.] Communications Minister Stephen Conroy branded the company “arrogant” in September after he unsuccessfully tried to contact the company to discuss the Farah case and ways to combat cyber bullying. “They just believe they don’t have to take any notice of the Australian public, any notice of the Australian laws, and they think they can behave this arrogantly,” he told Nine Network last year. Facebook, too, has come under pressure to extend its relationship with Australian authorities. Victoria police chief Ken Lay this week met with a Facebook executive to discuss his concerns about hate pages, and Facebook’s threat to high profile prosecutions. A spokesman for Senator Conroy told AAP on Friday that he would welcome a permanent Twitter presence in Australia. [Conroy - Labor Party - here.] But Prime Minister Julia Gillard said an Australian office may not speed up negotiations over taking down offensive material. [Former PM] “It hasn’t been so much a question of location of the organisation, as opposed to the will to address the issue,” she told reporters in Sydney on Friday. “We will be urging the bodies that have some control over content to have policies, not to stop people from having a genuine conversation or anything like that, but some of the extremes that have caused real harm to try and deal with that conduct.” Twitter has had no full-time offices in Australia since launching in 2006 despite launching an official Twitter handle, @TwitterAU, last October. Senior Twitter executives visited Australia in late 2012 as part of a scoping study. SOURCE - Financial Review - here.

Replace keyboards with handcuffs: Police Minister NSW Police Minister Michael Gallacher said at a press conference in Sydney this morning that Twitter trolls should have their keyboards replaced with handcuffs. "Honestly, these clowns who hide behind their keyboards in their mothers' basements thinking that they can send offensive messages ... we've got to empower police with the ability to replace their keyboards with handcuffs, grab them by the ears from mummy's basement and take them down to the local police station and make them understand the offensive matters that they continue to raise on the internet [bear] a terrible price." Mr Gallacher said NSW Police did have some powers to take action against online abusers, but there needed to be some support from the federal government in making the legislation tougher. Source - SMH - September 10, 2012 - here.

--------------------------------------
COMMENT

So if I have this straight, there are some people in the community who are offended by tweets (or content of facebook pages) and the Australian politicians and law enforcement were (and presumably still are) lobbying to find means to curtail freedom of expression on these internet mediums.

Of course, it's all in the name of defending from cyber 'bullying'.

Politicians on both sides of the fence are, of course, happy to do what they can to bring about controls.

Julie Bishop's remark is disturbing:

Ms Bishop said it was “essential” for social networking companies to deepen ties with Australian governments and authorities.

On the contrary, I believe it's essential for social networking companies -- and the internet -- to be independent of interference from the government and all its branches.

As for 'hate' sites, one man's hate site is another man's truth.  Who is to determine what is, or is not, acceptable content?  Once that door is ajar, it's wide open to government censorship of content.  So good luck preserving freedom of expression and freedom of information.

Now the nanny state wants to step in and guard against online social media users being 'offended' by remarks, and this is all in aid of defending the thin skinned from cyber bullying and 'hate'?

No way.

Ultimately, this is about politicians and government seeking control of a communication medium and control of freedom of expression and freedom of information.

Twitter didn't take long to come around to the politicians' lobbying. 

Nine months later Twitter Australia headquarters was born:

Twitter opens local headquarters     The Australian     September 02, 2013 12:00AM TWITTER has appointed a country manager for Australia and will officially open its local headquarters in Sydney this week, as the US social media giant pushes to build its advertising business in more markets ahead of a rumoured public offering. Recently, Twitter started offering its so-called "promoted products" in Australia, with businesses paying to have promoted tweets pushed into users' timelines, promoted accounts included in "who to follow" recommendations and "promoted trends" appearing on the popular topics list. Twitter won't divulge how many Australian advertisers it has signed, although it said National Australia Bank and Qantas were among the brands that have used the platform for marketing. ... However, the platform has at times proved problematic for brands. Qantas saw one promotional campaign became a PR fail when users hijacked its hashtag "#QantasLuxury" to make fun at the airline's expense. "You always have episodes of bad behaviour, especially on open platforms," Mr Rao said. "(One benefit) from having people on the ground ... is our teams can actively work with organisations in Australia to understand best practices so we can manage accounts on the platform in the best way possible." ...extracts only...full @... SOURCE - The Australian - here.

The Australian's article is all about the business/advertising side of things, save for revealing that the #QantasLuxury hashtag wound up being the butt of Twitter jokes. 

Was Qantas offended?  Was this a form of online bullying?  Was it a form of cyber hate?  And did the NSW police minister ensure all those responsible were held accountable?  Did all those Twitter basement-dwellers bear a terrible price?  And has the police minister replaced their keyboards with handcuffs? 

US - INTERNET REGULATION - ISP RECLASSIFICATION

The Hill Internet rules stir passionate debate By Kate Tummarello - 07/20/14 06:00 AM EDT While reclassifying Internet providers to treat them like phone companies would be an uphill political battle, companies, lawmakers and members of the public are pressing the agency to do it anyway. The FCC has received more than 1 million comments about its proposed rewrite of net neutrality rules. Amid profanity-filled diatribes and threats against FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, many of the comments ask the agency to change the way it regulates Internet providers. Under the agency’s old net neutrality rules, Internet providers were regulated as “Title I” or “information” services. Phone companies, in contrast, are classified as “Title II” or “telecommunications” services, meaning they are regulated more like utility companies. ... In filings to the FCC, the major Internet providers — including Comcast, Verizon and ATandT — warned that reclassification would hurt the Internet. “Reclassification would mire the industry in years of uncertainty and litigation, and it would abruptly stall the virtuous circle of investment and innovation that has propelled the United States to the forefront of the broadband revolution,” ATandT told the FCC. Comcast warned the agency that reclassifying Internet providers “is not only entirely unnecessary but would be unwise and likely unlawful.” Jon Banks, senior vice president for law and policy at USTelecom, said the FCC should focus on the growth of Internet access under its current classification. “Under Title I, we’ve had massive investment and innovation from broadband providers” and websites, he said. “Why would you want to change that?”  ..extract only...full @... SOURCE:  The Hill - here. Federal Communications Commission (FFC)

----------------------------------
COMMENT

One million isn't a large number in the US when you consider the size of their population.

So what kind of weirdos write in asking for internet provider reclassification?
Come on, what are the odds of that?

Well, folks, here's another way to fuck up the internet; and if they're doing it in the US, you can bet they'll be doing it near you eventually.

UK Nanny-State - Internet Porn Filters & Censorship

Daily Mail Article

PM's policy adviser 'had 59 child porn images on an iPad': Cameron confidant assigned welfare officer by Downing Street as he appears at court

By Chris Greenwood

Published: 09:29 AEST, 4 July 2014 | Updated: 09:29 AEST, 4 July 2014

A former adviser to David Cameron accused of possessing indecent images of children is still being supported by Downing Street, a court heard yesterday.

Patrick Rock, 63, was assigned a welfare officer by No 10 when his arrest led to his resignation from a role at the heart of Government four months ago.

He appeared at Westminster magistrates’ court in London even though no evidence against him was found on British soil.

He was held at his sister’s home in the US state of North Carolina. 

The court was told he had 59 indecent images of children on an iPad. District Judge John Zani ordered Rock, from Fulham, West London, to stand trial at Southwark Crown Court later this month.

He was released on bail with a number of conditions, including that he maintain contact with the Downing Street-appointed welfare officer. 

He was also told to surrender his passport.

Rock was arrested in February by the National Crime Agency, but the investigation was made public only when it was revealed by this newspaper. 

The secrecy remains unexplained.

Rock, ex-deputy director of the Downing Street policy unit and a protege of Margaret Thatcher, was one of Mr Cameron’s closest confidants. 

He worked for Michael Howard when he was Home Secretary in the 1990s and was involved in drawing up government policy on filters designed to block images of child abuse.

The crimes are alleged to have taken place between July 31 and August 31 last year.

Mr Rock, deputy director of the Downing Street policy unit and a protege of Margaret Thatcher, was one of Mr Cameron’s closest confidantes.

...

... story continued...

SOURCE - Daily Mail - here.

-------------------------------------------

COMMENT

The above article relates to an appearance in court back in February of this year.

The particulars aren't that interesting to me, apart from the NCA involvement and alleged secrecy.

What is of interest to me is this:

... Rock was an adviser ... on internet porn filters, introduced last year to curb children’s ability to access adult content online.

According to the Open Rights Group, the government-backed ISP filters have been overzealous in blocking completely innocuous websites, raising concerns over web censorship. The percentage of sites hosting legal pornographic material online is thought to be close to 4 percent.  [rt.com]

How a democratic government even managed to push through restrictive censorship of the internet in the first place is a mystery.

Surely the onus of responsibility should fall entirely on parents, when it comes to blocking access to pornography, and the government should keep their noses right out of it.

On a quick check of Open Rights Group, it looks as though they're not averse to laws -- they want regulation.  So if this is an example of a protector of digital freedoms, maybe this is where it has gone pear shaped in the first place.

Why support regulation at all?  

The internet shouldn't be a regulated medium -- why kill the beauty of the internet.