Mediaboss Marketing

26 Jul 2012

The censorship and control-freakery imposed by Locog makes a mockery of the idea that the London Olympics are open and inclusive, says Kirsty Hughes This letter appeared in the Financial Times on 25 July

Sir,

You argue that Locog has in many ways done a commendable job in pulling together the Olympic Games, while suggesting the lack of transparency and oversight of Locog and its failure to control the security fiasco are a serious blot on its copybook (Games and guards, editorial, July 19).

Perhaps if Locog had paid rather more attention to controlling its Olympic security requirements and rather less to constraining our freedom of expression in order to defend Olympic sponsors and brands the mood music as we head toward the games opening would be rather more positive.

For better or worse, big international sporting events rely on sponsorship. But none demands the level of censorship and control-freakery that Locog has imposed and which rather makes a mockery of the idea of the games as an open, inclusive event. Locog has drawn up two lists of everyday words that cannot be used in combination and threatened legal action against businesses. The words games, 2012 or for that matter Twenty twelve must not be combined with the words gold, silver, medals, sponsor or summer among others.

Meanwhile, the Olympics Act passed in 2006 means that our usual right to peaceful protest is also under threat. In one particularly egregious case, police handed out an Asbo to an acknowledgedly peaceful protester in east London for protesting against construction work at Leyton Marsh.

We all contribute to the games, whether as taxpayers, as citizens of the host city and country or as participants and workers. We should be proud to be hosting them as a democracy not taking on trappings more appropriate to an authoritarian state.

Kirsty Hughes is Chief Executive of Index on Censorship

Read more from the original source:
Censorship subverts Olympic ideals

If a website you're trying to reach is blocked for legal reasons, do you have a right to know about it?

Developer advocate Tim Bray thinks so, and he's got a perfect error code for it: 451, a tribute to the late Ray Bradbury's landmark novel about censorship, Fahrenheit 451.

Bray, a self-described "general-purpose Web geek" who helped develop several key Internet standards, wrote a formal specification for his proposal and submitted it to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the body that develops and promotes Internet standards. The group is slated to take up Bray's proposal at next week's annual meeting, which begins Sunday in Vancouver, Canada.

"I've been told by the chair of the IETF HTTP Working Group that he'll give the proposal some agenda time at the next IETF meeting," Bray told CNNMoney by email. "It's not a big proposal; shouldn't take long."

Most internet users are familiar with "404 Not Found" errors, the HTTP status messages that come up when you click on a broken or dead link. Another common error, "403 Forbidden," is displayed when you try to reach a site whose server won't grant you access to it.

That's the error code U.K. blogger Terence Eden hit when he tried to reach The Pirate Bay, a notorious hub for pirated content that is frequently targeted in lawsuits. Eden's Internet provider had been ordered to block out the site, but Eden wasn't happy with the 403 error response it generated.

"As far as I am concerned, this response is factually incorrect," Eden wrote on his blog.

He points out that it wasn't Pirate Bay's server that refused to allow him access. "The server did not even see the request. It was intercepted by my ISP and rejected by them on legal grounds," he wrote.

Eden called for a new "HTTP code for censorship" -- a call Bray answered with literary flair.

The idea quickly caught on, sparking discussions on nerd-news gathering spots like Slashdot and Hacker News. Commenters kicked it around in Spanish on meneame, in Russian on habrahabr and in German on NetzPolitik. One Slashdotter commenter called the idea "so painfully obvious."

Read the original:
Error 451: A proposed Internet status code for censorship

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Librarians are often the unsung free-speech heroes or heroines in our supposedly free society. They protect the rights of the public to read and obtain material that offends others. These gatekeepers often face censorship challenges.

An angry parent might complain about a school library book featuring sexual themes, racially charged language, witchcraft or other material offensive to the parent. A public library patron may complain about a certain book or display. There may be community or school pressure to remove a particular book.

A new book, True Stories of Censorship Battles in Americas Libraries, offers first-person insights of numerous librarians embroiled in censorship battles. Edited by Valerie Nye and Kathy Barco and published by the American Library Association, the book is an excellent read.

Many of the stories are fascinating. One librarian had to deal with library employees who would hide or destroy books. Another had to defend the librarys right to carry Kurt Vonneguts classic novel, Slaughterhouse Five. Another had to ward off censorship efforts by people opposed to a display of books on gay and lesbian themes.

One particularly poignant story features a librarian who initially decided against acquiring the book The Rainbow Boys for the library collection, in part because of the gay characters in the book. Later, the librarian feeling guilty about her initial decision changed her mind and ordered the book.

In the introduction, editors Nye and Barco write: We hope that this book provides insights into how librarians protect the First Amendment in their communities.

The editors have succeeded, as readers of this book will understand that many librarians have learned that defending the First Amendment can be stressful and difficult though ultimately rewarding.

Tags: banned books, book censorship, library, library censorship

More articles related to Speech Commentary | banned books, book censorship, library, library censorship. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

More here:
Book about librarians vs. censorship a worthy read

GWINNETT COUNTY, Ga.

A Gwinnett County artist said he is the victim of censorship after a library took down his exhibit featuring eight prominent televangelists.

The exhibit includes famous pastors Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer and Joel Osteen.

Lawrenceville artist Ralph Beach told Channel 2's Kerry Kavanaugh his work is an expression of his faith.

He said when the Grayson Public Library offered to display his pencil-sketched portraits, he jumped at the chance. Beach said the library was fully aware of what he would be hanging.

"I had emailed them several of the pictures," Beach said.

He said he hung the sketches on Saturday, July 7. Beach said they were to remain on display through Aug. 11, but in a matter of days he got a call telling him they needed to come down.

"You can do anything you want but you just can't say 'Jesus.' And in the Bible belt, that's ridiculous," he said.

Beach said the library told him a patron complained that they were offensive and non-inclusive. He said the collection had already been taken down when he went to retrieve them Saturday.

"Where does it stop? Where does censorship stop?" Beach said.

See the original post:
Nixed televangelist exhibit upsets Gwinnett County artist

The upper house of the Russian Parliament passed a bill on Wednesday that the Russian IT industry believes has high potential to lead to Internet censorship.

The bill, including amendments to several laws, was adopted by the upper house of the Russian Parliament, the Federation Council of Russia. The adoption of the bill makes it easier to block sites that host child pornography, promote drugs and provide instructions about how to commit suicide, as well as other information that affects health and development, the Council said. In particular, the law includes the creation of mechanisms for the rapid removal of web pages that contain materials prohibited from circulation within Russia, the Council said.

IT companies in Russia however, have been warning that the law can have negative effects and lead to censorship because there is a risk that legal content can be blocked more easily too, mainly because it amends the law "On information, information technologies and information protection" to allow the blocking of websites through IP and DNS blockades.

It also looks as though Roskomnadzor, the Russian Federal Service for Supervision in the Sphere of Telecom, Information Technologies and Mass Communications, will gain the power to blacklist websites without a court's consent as of Nov. 1, Vladimir Medeyko, director of Wikimedia Russia, the organization that runs the local version of Wikipedia, said via instant message.

One of the amended laws leaves the opportunity to blacklist whole domains when only part of the hosted content is illegal. For instance 1.3 million blogs hosted on Blogger are blocked in Russia as a result of a court ruling that ordered the blocking of access to extremist blog posts, Google Russia said earlier this month. And in another lawsuit in 2010, a court ordered a local Internet provider to block the entire YouTube domain because the court deemed one of the hosted movies illegal, according to Google. The company said the new law is a threat for the Internet.

Presenting the bill to the Council, Senator Lyudmila Narusova said that the Internet community has certain worries, particularly regarding the risk of unjustified blacklisting of websites, and that it is necessary to constantly monitor enforcement of the amended law. However, she also pointed out that many European countries, including Germany and the U.K., and also the U.S. have certain mechanisms in place to block websites, adding that the fight against illegal information on Internet is strong in the world, a Council statement said.

Amendments to the law "On information, information technologies and information protection" should not have been made so hastily, said Vladimir Isaev, Manager of International Media Relations at Russian search engine Yandex, via email.

"Yandex is ready to accept official invitations to discuss the Bill or to commit our vision and opinion to government authorities," he said. The effects on the Russian online industry are hard to gauge at the moment, he said adding: "All of us are waiting for subordinate regulatory acts and regulation instructions."

The bill moved through the lower and upper house within a period of two weeks, giving the industry little time to protest the legislation. After Wikipedia became aware of the bill and its potential it decided to block access to its site for 24 hours. The English version of Wikipedia, along with websites including Reddit and Craigslist, conducted a similar protest against the U.S. Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) by blocking access to their sites last January. Other Russian online businesses including Yandex, social network VK.com and the Russian version of Live Journal posted banners or blog posts to protest the bill.

These protests were followed by changes to the proposed amendments to legislation. Among the changes the Russian security service FSB (successor to the KGB) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs were excluded from the list of government bodies that would be allowed to blacklist sites, before the lower house of Parliament, the State Duma, approved the bill, Medeyko said last week. Wikimedia Russia was also allowed to partake in a working group overseeing the bill and its implementations.

Continue reading here:
Russian Parliament's Upper House Approves Internet 'censorship' Bill