Mediaboss Marketing

Internet shutdowns, blocked platforms, malicious apps and a government set on stifling dissent this is the current state of protest in Iran.

Since the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in police custody last fall, Iranians have marched in the thousands against repressive hijab laws and to show displeasure with the regime of Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Having once taken over the streets of Tehran, the protests have now become more disparate, individualistic.

Building a snowman to depict a famous political prisoner. Publicly disavowing hijab rules. Dancing, hair down, in public.

Mani Mostofi has worked with some of those protestors. As director of the Miaan Group, a human rights organization focused on Iran, he and his team have been in touch with Iranians on the ground documenting arrests; distributing VPNs, or virtual private networks; and working with protestors to secure social media accounts. In an interview with the Click Here podcast, Mostofi discusses the current state of Irans internet censorship, malicious VPNs, and how a combination of online and in-person repression has created a climate of fear.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Click Here: When we spoke with a source in Iran this past fall, we had some pretty severe connection issues, in part because the government was slowing down the internet. What obstacles have you faced while working with protestors on the ground?

Mani Mostofi: We were doing a lot of network monitoring, so we were looking at connectivity during the protests. And what we were seeing was a range of ways of disrupting access to the internet. So there were internet shutdowns often targeting mobile data, and what an internet shutdown looks like in Iran is that you could use Iranian messaging apps, but you couldn't use WhatsApp or Telegram or internationally based Western apps. So we were in communication as much as possible under those circumstances with activists on the ground.

CH: And are you seeing differences between the fall and now in terms of digital connectivity or the way authorities are focused on what we think of as smaller protests?

MM: Yes, so Iran has been involved in different forms of censorship for a really long time. [The regime] can censor specific websites. It can censor specific applications. And then they do things which we could put under the category of internet shutdowns and disruptions. So these are ways of trying to fundamentally limit access either in targeted ways or nationwide. What that means is nobody can access the internet of the world, but they could access the National Information Network, which is the main project of the Iranian government to facilitate all its controls.

The National Information Network is an internet that's inside the country, and it's designed around an infrastructure with entry points to the international internet that the government controls. And then it has all the services and conveniences the people expect from the internet mirrored domestically. So you could have your version of domestic Uber or Wikipedia or Google. Digital services are mirrored to some extent as part of this national information.

CH: So its a little bit like the great firewall of China

MM: It's not a little bit it's modeled on it. They see China as their role model when it comes to internet controls. And the major disruption periods like shutdowns or other sorts of disruptions are also partly calibrated to get people to give up on the international apps and move to the new ones.

CH: So the protests have died down and we're seeing these sort of individual protests happening, right? These small acts of civil disobedience that are going viral. Are you seeing a change in the tactics that are being used against the protestors?

MM: Yes. Iran is constantly evolving its tactics. Every time since 2019 when there's been a sizable protest movement, we've seen some sort of internet shutdown or disruption. What we saw with the most recent protests is much more diversification of the tools that they're using. So for example, they're doing internet shutdowns, but they're doing it on a curfew basis so only during certain hours. They're also very focused on mobile data, and the reason for that focus and the curfew focus is they're trying to minimize disruption to the economy.

In 2019, the disruption was in the billions of dollars, and it was probably the same under the recent protests, even though we don't have solid projections yet. But businesses don't run as much on mobile data. The banks work on fixed internet [desktop computers on WiFi, not mobile phones]. So by being more surgical, which is really what we've seen, they're able to minimize disruption.

CH: What about VPNs? We often see people in countries like Iran use VPNs to access sites like WhatsApp or Telegram, which are blocked. How is the government dealing with that?

MM: The Iranian government has always disrupted VPNs, but now what we see is like a daily aggressive effort on their part to do it. Basically, they can find where a VPN is located and they can cut off that IP address. And we were seeing some major VPNs, like Googles Outline, that were only functional for about two hours and then they would go down. And then someone would have to create a new IP address with Outline, and about two hours later that would be down.

The number one thing we heard from people inside of Iran was: "Do you have a VPN that works? None of my VPNs work." [Some] VPNs are working, but what's happening is that a user has to basically try four, five, six VPNs, so they find the one that allows them to use some application like WhatsApp or Signal or Telegram. Our fear is that they start using the domestic, government-approved VPNs, which are slowly being rolled out, because the chances of surveillance on those are pretty high.

CH: Surveillance within VPNs? Tell me a bit more about that.

MM: Yeah, I mean definitely. State-sponsored hackers have used the desire for people to get online against users and activists. So when Elon Musk announced that StarLink was going to be available inside Iran, circulating on social media sites were files that were being advertised as, "if you download this file onto your phone or your computer, you can get onto Starlink." And those files contained malware, and they were able to steal data off the user's device.

Then we saw a couple months later, the attack of a very popular VPN called Argo VPN, which was doing better than other VPNs and getting people online during all of this crisis. And all of a sudden fake versions of our Argo VPN were circulating, and those fake versions were forms of spyware. So that type of state-sponsored hacking and surveillance has definitely ramped up in this era, and it very strategically uses people's own desperation to get online against them to make the internet less secure for them.

CH: I guess what I'm wondering is how people in Iran are responding to this. Have they gotten creative in terms of VPNs?

MM: What I can say is there are VPNs being made inside and outside of Iran. And all these VPNs had to become more creative in how they deliver their services, how they structure their architecture. So for example, the internet privacy organization Tor they're famous for their Tor Onion, which is a multi-layered, encryption-based search engine they also have their own VPN. And what their VPN has that makes it relatively successful inside of Iran is the sheer number of IP addresses. Its massive.

They have essentially a software that anyone me or you can just download and put on our computer. And the Tor VPN network can connect to our personal computers. So there's personal computers or small servers in the thousands and thousands and thousands that are on this Tor network it's called the Snowflake Network and because of that, it's just harder for the Iranian government to catch up.

CH: Would it be possible for the Iranian government to shut down those IP addresses, even if they do number in the thousands?

MM: Generally speaking, it's a cost-benefit analysis for them. They could eventually block that VPN. It's just, like, how much energy do they need to put into doing it successfully? And at a certain point, what the VPN providers or the security providers are trying to do is just outpace the Iranian government's resources.

What I would say is more important is the actual confiscation of devices. [The regime] arrested tens of thousands of people during these protests, and the first thing they did was confiscate their device. And then the second thing they would try to do was to get inside all of their social media channels WhatsApp, Twitter, Instagram. Now we're hearing [that] a vast majority of arrests of protestors was at their home, which means they were identifying people who participated and then waited to get them later. But when they got to your home, they would essentially come and download your memory from your phone or your laptop almost immediately. So they wouldn't wait till they got to the interrogation location.

CH: I just wonder if, in a sense, when these protests are right in front of you, its easier [as the government] to just focus on the people on the street. But Im wondering if the civil disobedience has them more on edge because you never know when it's going to pop up.

MM: Generally speaking, their attacks on the internet have slowed a little as mass protests have dissipated. That said, the overall repressive nature of the internet is notably and measurably worse than it was before these protests started. They're very good at creating a climate of fear.

Will Jarvis is a podcast producer for the Click Here podcast. Before joining Recorded Future News, he produced podcasts and worked on national news magazines at National Public Radio, including Weekend Edition, All Things Considered, The National Conversation and Pop Culture Happy Hour. His work has also been published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Ad Age and ESPN.

Excerpt from:
Q&A: Amid growing censorship and malicious VPNs, protestors ... - The Record by Recorded Future

EXCLUSIVE: Members of a House select committee on China met with Walt Disney Co. CEO Bob Iger and later with a group of Hollywood filmmakers and executives on Wednesday, amid concerns over industry business practices in engaging with Beijing.

The committees chairman, Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI), was joined by nine other members, including its ranking member, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL).

According to a source close to the committee, the hourlong meeting was constructive and it was candid.

Gallagher expressed concerns around censorship, and Iger spoke about the relationship with the Chinese Communist party and how it has changed, among other topics, the source said.

Iger was joined by other Disney executives, and they spoke about how their goal is not to change the stories, the source said, adding that the executives conveyed how they tried to walk the line between cultural and political requests from Chinese censors. They admitted it was a value judgment and dont always get it right, the source said, with the point made that sometimes the studio complies and sometimes it does not.

The private meeting was set up with Iger as lawmakers of both parties focus on Chinas influence over American business and culture. Hollywood has been a target of members on Capitol Hill in recent years over some high-profile examples in which movies were edited, or their storylines changed, to appease Chinese censors.

In 2020, Gallagher was among the lawmakers who previously sent a letter to then-Disney CEO Bob Chapek over Mulan and concerns over Disneys work with authorities in the Xinjiang, the region where Uyghur Muslims have held in detention camps. The U.S. has said the Chinese government has committed genocide against the ethnic population.

Gallagher raised the issue again at the meeting, the source said, and Iger talked of how measures have been put in place to make sure such a situation doesnt happen again. Also discussed were the kinds of requests that the studio gets from Chinese film authorities.

Gallagher has said that he wanted Iger to testify on Capitol Hill at some point, but it is unclear whether that is still a possibility.

Disneys global policy in countries where it operates is that we seek to share our stories in their original form as we and the artists involved have created them. If we make edits because of legal or other considerations, they will be as narrow as possible. We will not make an edit where we believe it would impact the storytelling. In that circumstance, we will not distribute the content in that market.

Disney has a large footprint in China beyond movie releases, including Shanghai Disneyland, which opened in 2016. The park is majority owned by Shanghai Shendi Group, with Disney having a 43% stake, according to corporate documents.

Other members at the meeting included Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-FL), Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA), Rep. John Moolenaar (R-MI), Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) and Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA).

Later on Wednesday, five members of the House committee and 17 industry representatives met at Cecconis in West Hollywood for an off-the-record session in which Hollywood figures shared experiences of doing business in China. The group included filmmakers, executives and producers, as well as representatives from academia and industry associations, but the names of the attendees were not disclosed to allow for a more frank discussion.

Producer Chris Fenton, who has been serving as an unpaid adviser to the committee, said that the meeting touched on Chinas film quotas, revenue sharing, tech swaps forced edits, pre-meditated censorship and things that go beyond the China border.

Fenton said that the goal was to make sure it was as wide a perspective on the situation as possible, and to make sure that the members got as full an education and an idea of the nuances and the pressures on everybody with respect to China.

He added, Overall, the idea was, How do we unite on pushing back on things that have gotten out of control?

In a recent op ed, Fenton wrote that the industry, at the center of culture and commerce, should work with lawmakers so our community can help keep those two vital bars of connection while helping to design policies and regulations we can live with as an industry.

Without a healthy collaboration with Washington, I fear Hollywood will attempt to continue the status quo as China continues to impose its massive market leverage, forcing widespread industry compliance even as its domestic movie industry continues to rise, displacing American movies in theaters and smartphones, he wrote.

The House group also was planning meetings with Silicon Valley executives on Thursday, and was scheduled to meet with Apple CEO Tim Cook on Friday.

The committee named the Select Committee On the Chinese Communist Party held its first meeting in February, and was unusual for the bipartisan focus on concerns over Chinas influence.

In an appearance on Face the Nation in February, Gallagher told 60 Minutes, I think we can have a productive conversation with companies that have substantial business interests inChina, and we want to make sure that the power of the Chinese economy is not seducing certain companies into betraying American values.

Lawmakers have criticized studios for self-censorship in the way that movies are edited as a way to gain entry into China. One incident that created an uproar was when the trailerforTop Gun: Maverickshowed Tom Cruises character wearing a bomber jacket with two of the flag patches, for Taiwan and Japan, replaced with other symbols. The flags were restored when the film was finally released last year, albeit not in China. When he was attorney general, William Barr cited reports that in the case of Marvel StudiosDoctor Strange, filmmakers changed the nationality of a major character from a Tibetan monk to Celtic.

Continued here:
Lawmakers Meet With Bob Iger, Hollywood Creatives To Express Concerns Over Censorship And Beijings Influence - Deadline

Security agencies are on high alert as Takht Damdama Sahib in Talwandi Sabo gears up for a first-of-its-kind gathering of journalists called by Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Harpreet Singh on Friday to discuss what he calls media censorship and fake news in Punjab.

You have exhausted your monthly limit of free stories.

To continue reading,simply register or sign in

Continue reading with an Indian Express Premium membership starting Rs 133 per month.

This premium article is free for now.

Register to continue reading this story.

This content is exclusive for our subscribers.

Subscribe to get unlimited access to The Indian Express exclusive and premium stories.

This content is exclusive for our subscribers.

Subscribe now to get unlimited access to The Indian Express exclusive and premium stories.

This comes after the recent crackdown on the organisation Waris Punjab De on March 18, which has resulted in allegations of censorship on some media outlets and journalists in the state.

The Jathedar had called the gathering shortly after Waris Punjab De chief Amritpal Singh, who is on the run since March 18, urged him in a video message to call a Sarbat Khalsa on the occasion of Baisakhi on April 14.

Sukhdev Singh Phagwara of the Alliance of Sikh Organisations (ASO), which is closely assisting Akal Takht Jathedar in hosting this gathering, said many journalists have reported raids on their houses and confiscation of their electronic devices. Freelance journalists have been particularly affected by the crackdown, he claimed.

The gathering will also address the issue of fake news and hate speech in the region. The SGPC has alleged that many Sikh practices have been misrepresented in the national media, leading to misunderstandings and tensions between communities. The journalists gathering is expected to provide a platform to discuss how to tackle these issues and ensure responsible reporting in future.

Although police officials are tightlipped, sources said that Amritpal can use any historic gurudwara, especially one of the three Takhts in Punjab, to surrender.

Punjab Police recently arrested Punjabi Radio host Sukhnaib Sidhu under serious non-bailable Sections for posting a video that was critical of a man who allegedly gave a call to protest against Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwnat Manns family. Sukhnaib was released the next day; no charges were pressed against him.

Sukhdev Singh said: Censorship of the media was not limited to the Waris Punjab De crackdown. It was widespread, and many journalists had submitted a memorandum to Akal Takht Sahib after their houses were raided by police, and their pages, channels, and social media accounts were blocked. Freelance journalists were the most affected. This is why Akal Takht Jathedar decided to convene a gathering of journalists and discuss this extraordinary situation not only to address the current challenges but also to develop a plan on how to react to such attacks on the media in future.

He said, Although most journalists who have faced restrictions and police heat come from the Sikh community, I also know a Hindu journalist called to a police station over a news item. So this gathering is not limited to Sikh journalists. It is an open invitation to all journalists who want to protect Punjab from false propaganda of respective governments. We are hoping for a constructive outcome out of this gathering for healthy journalism in Punjab.

Recently, the Editors Guild of India had released a statement and expressed deep concern about arbitrary suspension of social media accounts of several journalists and media organisations in Punjab.

The Indian Express (P) Ltd

First published on: 07-04-2023 at 01:52 IST

The rest is here:
Akal Takht Jathedar to host gathering on media censorship today, agencies on alert - The Indian Express

The New York Times recently reportedabout a horrific situation at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention when COVID-19 first appeared. No, it wasnt about whether a bat or a pangolin or an experiment gone wrong had set off an epidemic. It was far worse.

In the midst of an extremely dangerous worldwide pandemic, young scientists were being censored, threatened and bullied by the CDCs leadership and others holding high political office in the Trump administration, the paper reported. They were told to stop sharing their frank opinions on social media about what was going on as a lethal coronavirus began to spread around the world.

Incredibly, instead of indignation at the censorship of our scientists, this nation is consumed by an irresolvable, politically driven dispute over the origins of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 lab leak or zoonotic spillover? That debate is all but pointless. The requisite evidence is not available, and the answer to the question is more or less irrelevant. Both origin scenarios are plausible and thus require worldwide policy attention.

What should be commanding this nations attention, eliciting congressional hearings, independent investigations by high-level commissions and sustained outrage on the part of every American is the utter failure of the CDC to respond rapidly, truthfully and transparently to a global infectious-disease outbreak that ultimately killed nearly 7 million people worldwide, including over a million in the U.S. No one can argue we are in any way prepared for future outbreaks without fully understanding what happened early on during COVID when politics crushed the voice of the CDC. We need to know to ensure it cannot happen again.

Key Words (February 2020): The coronavirus disease from Wuhan, China, now has a name: COVID-19

The Times reporting focuses on the agonizing experience of a group of young scientists who worked for the CDCs Epidemic Intelligence Services. The scientists were heartbroken, the Times reports, to realize that the CDC had effectively acknowledged to its own staff that it had evidence that the new coronavirus was being spread by people without symptoms. But it had not told the public. At one point, the scientists basically snuck away from their desks under fear of reprisals to discuss what was going on. All of us knew tens of thousands were going to die, and we were helpless to stop it, said Daniel Wozniczka, one of the scientists, according to the Times.

Why couldnt those scientists warn the public? The CDC was under intense pressure from the countrys political leaders not to tell the truth. Trump administration officials were not allowing the worlds leading public health authority to say what it believed.

The details of what happened behind the scenes at the Epidemic Intelligence Service are new, but the political throttling of the CDC played out in plain sight at the time. In February 2020, Nancy Messonnier, a senior CDC official, warned that the virus was likely to spread and to severely disrupt daily life. The stock market plunged, and she abruptly disappeared from public view. Vice President Mike Pence was placed in charge of the governments response to the pandemic declared on March 11 of that year.

From the archives (February 2020): CDC: How Americans should prepare for school and workplace closures due to coronavirus outbreak

Also see (February 2020): Heres why the U.S. governments effort to contain the coronavirus outbreak was never going to be successful

Isnt this demonstrable decision to politicize, censor and ultimately conceal the dangers of COVID as unacceptable as anything the Chinese government may have done to obscure its origins and silence whistleblowers?

Dont we need legislation to immunize the CDC and other health agencies against political interference? Should whistle-blower protections be strengthened so concerned younger and vulnerable experts can speak freely? Doesnt the media need to recommit to give stronger voice to dissenters and the censored when they try to sound an alarm during a plague? And shouldnt professional societies and journals find safe forums to help those who feel the weight of political meddling get their voices heard even if anonymously?

Many in Congress prefer to bemoan censorship in China. But we continue to let our politicians call the shots and set the boundaries of fact about public health crises. No meaningful reforms have been instituted to protect against future infectious-disease tragedies in which Americans unnecessarily die in droves. The focus in Congress in many state legislatures and many scientific forums is solely on what China knew and when did that country know it.

The primary focus of American inquiries ought to be when did American scientists believe they knew important information about COVID, who prevented them from sharing their opinions and how do we ensure that form of censorship never happens again?It hardly matters what the origins of the novel coronavirus were and how it spread if our own scientists and public health officials were not permitted by our government to talk freely.

Arthur L. Caplanis the Drs. William F. and Virginia Connolly Mitty professor of bioethics and the founding head of New York University School of Medicines Division of Medical Ethics.

Read on (December 2020): WHO says coronavirus pandemic is not the big one the world needs to brace for

See the rest here:
Americans angry at China over the lab leak theory should be furious at the CDC. - MarketWatch

Photography by Chiara Negrello. Image courtesy ofThe New York Times.

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simonis statue of David has come to represent theideal of Renaissance artthe sculpted figure stands confident and poised for action. Centuries after thestatue's completion in 1504, historians and students still study the artists steady hand and vivid work, imbuing a new generation with an admiration for the bygone master. That is unless you live in Florida, where presenting an image of thenudebody in a classroom is grounds for forced resignation and a nation-widescandal.

Principal Hope Carrasquilla was ousted from the charter Tallahassee Classical School last month after a photo ofDavidwas shown during a sixth-grade art history lesson without sufficient notice to parents, some of whom found the statue to be pornographic.Accordingto school board chair Barney Bishop, these families enrolled their kids in the charter school because of its ability to counteract woke indoctrination.

News spread quickly across the Internet. Carrasquilla received a personal invite to visit the sculpture at Florences Galleria dellAccademia, and David himself made an appearance on SNL to defend his nudity. On the shows recurring Weekend Update segment, cast member Michael Longfellow appeared in makeup and not much else to declare, Im proud of my tiny, shiny penis and my stone pubes. I got nothing to hide.

Parents determination to prevent wokeness from entering their childrens schools may be a contemporaryphenomenon, but outrage over Davids exposed genitalia is not. Attempts at forcing him to cover up date back to his inception.

When David first debuted in 1504 outside the Palazzo Vecchio, the town hall of Florence, Italy, he was given a gilded loin covering comprised of well-placed fig leaves. Leonardo Da Vinci suggested the alteration, likely as a dig at his rival, Michelangelo, after the artists' relationship wasreduced to bitter spats in the streets. The attachmentwaslater removed, only to be replaced with a single leaf in the mid-16th century when the Vatican cracked down on nudity and launched the fig leaf campaign, an effort to cover up prominent artworks, and later castrate others.

Similarly, in 1857, a replica of David was delivered to the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, commissioned by the Grand Duke as a gift to the queen. Upon first sight, she was allegedly so shocked by his nudity that a fig leaf covering was immediately put together to mend the situation. The leaf was kept at the museum in anticipation of any royal visits, when it would be hung from hooks to allow David some modesty. A version of the leaf remains in the V&A collection today, just in case.

The Simpsons, in a characteristically prescient manner, offered its own take on Davids bare form in 1990 with the episode Itchy & Scratchy & Marge. Concerned about her childrens viewing habits, Marge forms a protest group to rally against a violent television show, only to unwittingly create an angry mob that turns against David, who is visiting Springfield as part of a traveling exhibition. Marge stands up to defend Michelangelos marble man, and learns a touching lessonabout picking and choosing what art deserves to be seen.

David made his way back onto TV screens in 2012 when China Central Television began promoting a new exhibition at the National Museum of China, Renaissance in Florence: Masterpieces and the Protagonists. The statue was broadcast with the crotch pixelated, causing immediate chaos on social media. Users poked fun at the seemingly arbitrary blurring, declaring that the real David has a penis. Later broadcasts bared all.

Just recently, Davidwas reproduced using 3D printers atDubai's Expo 2020 and was widely advertised as a major attraction. However, when visitors arrived, they found the giant manstuck in an octagonal shaft with only his head and shoulders visible to passersby. A reporter at La Repubblica compared the encasing to a beheading, and guests felt justifiably ripped off. To catch a glimpse of his body, some craning over the gilded ledge would be required.

Over 500 years after his creation, the question remains: why is Davids small package such a big deal?

Sign Up for the Cultured Newsletter

Sure, we can be close friends. Unfiltered access awaits.

Follow this link:
Michelangelo's 'David' Has a Long History of Censorship - Cultured Magazine