11 Jul 2013 | Events
Free speech, Mass Surveillance and Modern Media: how free are we and who decides?
Updating a status, tweeting a celebrity, Instagramming our breakfast- we all do it, but how much do you think about who is seeing what you put online? Social media is constantly hitting the headlines as people are arrested for posting a picture or sending a tweet without thinking of the real-life consequences. But should what happens online stay online? And can our governments ever be justified in reading our private messages in order to keep us safe?
If you want to discuss, argue or learn a bit more about these issues then join Index on Censorship and the Lewisham Youth Parliament and Young Mayor for, “Mass surveillance and modern media: who’s in control?”, to debate how our freedom of expression is being challenged by these developments in modern communication.
The event will be part debate and part workshop starting with a panel and Q&A session between Index on Censorship’s CEO, Kirsty Hughes and Philip Cowell, Head of Programmes at English PEN. It will be chaired by Index’s Head of Advocacy, Mike Harris. You will get to the chance to challenge our speakers on the key issues before breaking into workshop groups to discuss, and attempt to answer, some of the most problematic issues facing free speech online:
If we voluntarily put all our information online do we still deserve the right to privacy?
Where would you draw the line on offensive speech made on social media?
Do you mind our government reading your emails in the name of national security?
The event will be hosted at the Albany Theatre in Deptford Monday 22nd July from 5-7pm for young people between 14-20 years old. There is limited space so if you would like to take part in this exciting debate please email Fiona Bradley
[email protected] to reserve you place.
11 Jul 2013 | Americas, Religion and Culture
Journalist José Cristian Góes says case brought against him is a “direct attack on free speech. Rafael Spuldar reports
(more…)
11 Jul 2013 | Asia and Pacific
In an interview with the UK’s Press Gazette this month, Lal Wickrematunge, brother of murdered Sri Lankan newspaper editor Lasantha Wickrematunge, lamented the self-censorship of his country’s press, and warned that UK hacks should fight for their own freedom of speech as an example to others, saying “Those who are in safer climates must keep the drum beating because these are the standards that other journalists in troubled areas look to.” Padraig Reidy writes
The Sri Lankan regime is not noted for its commitment to media freedom, with Reporters Without Borders declaring the president and his brother, the defence minister “predators of the press” in May 2013.
Wickrematunge’s comments echoed the response of the The Editors’ Guild of Sri Lanka to Lord Justice Leveson’s proposals for press regulation. In a statement in response to Lord Justice Leveson’s recommendations, the island’s editors said:
“The almost draconian legislature contemplated in the United Kingdom would serve oppressive governments around the world, and especially in the Commonwealth with a convenient example to maintain tight controls over an independent media.
“In the future, any statements from the British Government on the freedom of the press would sound hollow in the face of such legislation.”
They were not wrong. The government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa wasted little time in drafting a code of media ethics designed to stifle country’s already under siege press. Draft guidelines were released in June.
In very best Leveson language, the authorities stressed that the restrictions aimed “to ensure that the Electronic and Print media and Websites in Sri Lanka are free and responsible and sensitive to the needs and expectations of the receivers of the message it sends out whilst maintaining the highest standards of journalism, and to uphold the best traditions of investigative journalism in the public interest, unfettered by distorting commercialism or by improper pressure or by narrow self-interests which are against the bare norms of media freedom.”
The code then went on to ban everything, from information that could damage the foreign relations, to stories containing “details of a person’s family life, financial information, race, caste, religion, sexual orientation, physical or mental illness or disability and one’s home or family and individuals in hospitals unless it has a direct relevance to the public interest.”
There is some confusion about the status of this new code. Sri Lanka’s media minister Keheliya Rambukwella, has said that the code is not about to made a law, but in the same breath suggested that it was to be introduced because of the absence of a criminal defamation law. President Rajapaksa meanwhile, suggested that editors write their own code, adapted from the government’s.
Despite this, it’s clear that the government is firing warning shots at the newpapers’ bows to remind them of their limits.
Sri Lankan journalists are looking ahead to the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Colombo in November. While British Channel 4 News and Australian ABC journalists will be wondering if they will even allowed into the country, after the president took umbrage at their coverage of his brutal final push in the civil war with the Tamil Tigers, Sri Lankans will be wondering if, post-Leveson, David Cameron will be able to look the likes of Rajapakse in the eye and talk about press freedom.
11 Jul 2013 | In the News
INDEX EVENTS
18 July New World (Dis)Order: What do Turkey, Russia and Brazil tell us about freedom and rights?
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, is holding a timely debate on the shifting world order and its impact on rights and freedoms. The event will also launch the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine, including a special report on the multipolar world.
(More information)
CHINA
Censoring the News Before It Happens
Every day in China, hundreds of messages are sent from government offices to website editors around the country that say things like, “Report on the new provincial budget tomorrow, but do not feature it on the front page, make no comparisons to earlier budgets, list no links, and say nothing that might raise questions”; “Downplay stories on Kim Jung-un’s facelift”; and “Allow stories on Deputy Mayor Zhang’s embezzlement but omit the comment boxes.” Why, one might ask, do censors not play it safe and immediately block anything that comes anywhere near offending Beijing? Why the modulation and the fine-tuning?
(New York Review of Books)
EGYPT
Egypt, the military and the media: Worse yet to come?
After the fall of Egypt’s Islamist president this month, security officials shut down media linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. With a history of biased media and an increasingly divided nation, the future Egypt looks grim. Shahira Amin reports
(Index on Censorship)
GLOBAL
Fine words on open government don’t match actions
From America to Azerbaijan, leaders have pledged themselves to a new era of openness and transparency. So why are whistleblowers and journalists still punished, asks Mike Harris
(Index on Censorship)
GHANA
Freedom of Speech and the Supreme Court of Ghana
Not long ago a great Katakyie by the name of Ken Kuranchie was incarcerated for standing for what he believes in i.e. Freedom of Speech! He was summarily convicted by the Supreme Court for daring to question some of the judgments of the Justices and going on to criticize the basis upon which some of the decisions in the august court were made.
(Ghana Web)
INDIA
Is India about to gets its own PRISM?
Two surveillance entities are being set up to monitor Indian citizens’ communications, Mahima Kaul writes
(Index on Censorship)
TUNISIA
Gobvernment should create jobs, not regulate religious behavior
The number of believers in Tunisia seems to increase dramatically during the month of Ramadan and decrease suddenly afterwards. It is as if praying is limited to this particular part of the year, when even those who are normally heavy smokers or drinkers become outraged when they see their fellow sinners engaging in such activities. Official policies seek to reinforce this yearly change in behavior, but the government must realize that instilling religious morals must not take priority over ensuring the welfare of its people.
(Tunisia Live
UNITED KINGDOM
Freedom of speech is not freedom to spin
Free speech does not imply the freedom to mislead. We want our media to be free, but also honest and reliable.
(The Conversation)
UNITED STATES
Arch Insurance Group launches libel insurance for bloggers
Arch Insurance Group is launching a new insurance program that will protect bloggers against libel and copyright infringement lawsuits.
(New York Business Journal)
University of Alabama at center of free speech debate
A pro-abortion rights student organization at the University of Alabama and a civil liberties group have asked the university to re-evaluate its grounds-use policy, arguing that it is contradictory and unconstitutional.
(Tuscaloosa News)
SEC Finally Permits Free Speech for Hedge Funds, VCs, and Entrepreneurs
Today is finally the day that the Securities and Exchange Commission — one year and three months after it was instructed to do so by the bipartisan Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act signed by President Obama — lifted the ban on advertising and communication to and from hedge funds and the private equity and venture capital community. Lifting these archaic rules is a victory for entrepreneurs, all types of investors, and, most importantly, the First Amendment.
(Open Market)
FROM INDEX ON CENSORSHIP MAGAZINE
Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)
Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)
The multipolar challenge to free expression
As emerging markets command influence on the international stage, Saul Estrin and Kirsty Hughes look at the impact on economics, politics and human rights.
(Index on Censorship)
News in monochrome: Journalism in India
The media’s infatuation with a single narrative is drowning out the country’s diversity, giving way to sensationalist reporting and “paid for” news. But, says Bharat Bhushan, moves towards regulation could have a chilling effect too
(Index on Censorship)
Censorship: The problem child of Burma’s dictatorship
Writer and artist Htoo Lyin Myo gives his personal account of working under government censorship in Burma
(Index on Censorship)
Previous Free Expression in the News posts
July 10 | July 9 | July 8 | July 5 | July 4 | July 3 | July 2 | July 1 | June 28 | June 27
