Mediaboss Marketing

The European Parliament is introducing a new rule set to curb hate speech, cutting live debate feeds and removing video/audio traces of offensive remarks. A fierce backlash from press and MEPs has critics accusing the EU Parliament of censorship.

The new rule would let the chair of a debate cut a live feed from the parliament in the case of defamatory, racist or xenophobic language or behavior by a member, also imposing a $9,500 fine on the offender. Remarks deemed offensive could also be erased from the audiovisual record of proceedings.

The step apparently aims to tackle racist remarks by far-right members of the EU parliament. For instance last year, Eleftherios Synadinos, an MEP for Greece's far-right Golden Dawn party, was expelled from the parliament after calling Turks dirty and polluted and comparing them to wild dogs.

Read more

Some MEPs agree that far-right rhetoric can go over the top at the parliament.

There have been a growing number of cases of politicians saying things that are beyond the pale of normal parliamentary discussion and debate, said Richard Corbett, a UK MEP who backed the new rule, according to AP.

What if this became not isolated incidents, but specific, where people could say: Hey, this is a fantastic platform. It's broad, it's live-streamed. It can be recorded and repeated. Let's use it for something more vociferous, more spectacular, he added.

The latest step wasnt made public and triggered a massive backlash by the press representatives and MEPs, with many of them questioning if the latest measure could amount to censorship.

This undermines the reliability of the Parliament's archives at a moment where the suspicion of fake news and manipulation threatens the credibility of the media and the politicians, Tom Weingaertner, president of the Brussels-based International Press Association, told AP.

Many journalists and MEPs took to Twitter to vent over the latest development.

It should be noted that the issue was on the table as early as last December. Back then Gerolf Annemans, an MEP from Vlaams Belang, Belgium's Flemish independence party, voiced his concern that the measure could be abused by those who have hysterical reactions to things that they qualify as racist, xenophobic, when people are just expressing politically incorrect views, as cited by AP.

Some of the MEPs voiced more balanced views, with German deputy Helmut Scholz saying that EU lawmakers are chosen to speak out on the state of Europe, adding that one can't limit or deny this right. At the same time, he said a tool was needed to tackle Nazi shouts and racists remarks.

We need an instrument against that, to take it out of the record, to stop distribution of such slogans, such ideas, Scholz argued.

Original post:
Critics accuse European Parliament of censorship over 'kill switch' to cut racist remarks - RT

The EuropeanParliamentis often the stage for political and sometimes nationalist theater.

Beyond routine shouting matches, members occasionally wear T-shirts splashed with slogans or unfurl banners. Flags adorn some lawmakers' desks.

But some MEPs say nationalist rhetoric has recently crossed the line of what is acceptable.

"There have been a growing number of cases of politicians saying things that are beyond the pale of normal parliamentary discussion and debate," said Richard Corbett, a British MEP who backedthe new rule.

"What if this became not isolated incidents, but specific, where people could say: 'Hey, this is a fantastic platform. It's broad, it's live-streamed. It can be recorded and repeated. Let's use it for something more vociferous, more spectacular,'" he told The Associated Press.

Rule 165 of the parliament's rules of procedure allows the chair of debates to halt the live broadcast "in the case of defamatory, racist or xenophobic language or behavior by a member." The maximum fine for offenders would be around 9,000 euros ($9,500).

The new rule, which was not made public by the assemble until it was reported by Spain's La Vanguardia newspaper, offending material could be "deleted from the audiovisual record of proceedings," meaning citizens would never know it happened unless reporters were in the room.

Mr Weingaertner said the IPA was never consulted on that.

A technical note seen by the AP outlines a procedure for manually cutting off the video feed, stopping transmission on in-house TV monitors and breaking the satellite link to halt broadcast to the outside world.

A videotape in four languages would be kept running to serve as a legal record during the blackout. A more effective and permanent system was being sought.

It is also technically possible to introduce a safe-guard time delay so broadcasts appear a few seconds later. This means they could be interrupted before offending material is aired.

Critics say the system would be unwieldy and possibly ineffective.

Read this article:
Censorship concerns as European Parliament introduces 'kill switch' to cut racist speeches - Telegraph.co.uk

On CNNs Reliable Sources this morning, Bret Stephens, the deputy editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal, suggested that the media should boycott the Trump White House in retaliation for Trumps censoring of the media.

Stephens also added that what Trump was doing was worse than Nixon.

Stephens comments came during a discussion of Trumps decision to ban the NYT, CNN, Los Angeles Times, BuzzFeed and Politico from a press gaggle, or informalbriefing, at the White House on Friday.

It is thought that Trumps censorship of these outlets was in response totheir reports a day earlier on the White Houses growing efforts to obstruct the Russia investigation.

It was particularly surprising to hear the notion of a boycott come from the editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal, a conservative publication. Heres Stephens:

I would call it Nixonian, except I think that would be unfair to the memory of President Nixon. This is an attempt to bully the press by using access as a weapon to manipulate coverage. The Wall Street Journal put out a statement that I thought was very clear, if we had known what was happening we wouldnt have participated in that meeting with Mr. Spicer. And I think thats the right attitude for the rest of the press to take. That if the administration is going to boycott certain news outlets, then perhaps we should as news organizations return the favor to this administration.

Add your name to the thousands who aredemandingthe Justice Department appointa special counselto investigate Trumps ties to Russia.

With the election of Donald Trump, AMERICAblogs independent journalism and activism is more needed than ever.

Please support our work with a generous donation.(If you prefer PayPal, use this link.) We dont make much on advertising,we need your support to continue our work. Thanks. Also, check out our Trump Swag store, where you can get your Illegitimate t-shirts and more. Allthe proceeds go to supporting our independent journalismat AMERICAblog.

John Aravosis Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in New York City, and is the cofounder of TimeToResign.com. Bio, article archive.

View post:
Wall Street Journal editor endorses boycott of Trump White House over media censorship - AMERICAblog (blog)

Once again our elected state representatives are attempting to nail a lid on the constitutional right to protest, assemble, and express contrasting ideas. The recent bill passed by the state Senate to ostensibly protect businesses from property damage perpetrated by so-called professional anarchists is a thinly veiled attempt to intimidate and punish citizens who get off the couch and activate their right to protest.

Laws that punish violence and mob rule are already on the books and have been so for generations. I suggest that these elected officials see themselves as police rather than representatives of the people. Controls and censorship seem to be the prevailing philosophies driving many folks in the Arizona government and feeding on peoples fear of the what ifs is their tactic to nail down the commonweal to a prescribed set of behaviors they deem acceptable.

No responsible citizen supports violence or mob rule, but this bill assumes that there is a demon lurking in every shadow and every living room and so will punish citizens for even discussing the possibility of expressing their right to protest. What are they afraid of a broken window or an open society?

Read the original:
Rioting bill about censorship - Arizona Daily Sun

Raymond Ahner, Loudwire

When bands perform in China, it is no secret that they must submit their song lyrics to the government, who then return to the band with a list of songs they can and cant play as well as allowing certain songs as long as the lyrics are altered to something permissible. Metallicas recent trek to the country was no different, though James Hetfield seemed nonplussed by being forbidden from playing classics like Master of Puppets.

In an interview with South Morning China Post, the frontman was more than understanding about the censorship, stating,Why shouldnt you respect their culture when youre there as a guest and youve been invited to play? We want to be respectful and just because we do things differently, it doesnt mean it should be forced upon [others].

Hetfield is optimistic about returning to China and having the ability to play not just Master of Puppets, but other exclusions like One (in Shanghai) and Hardwired. But hopefully well keep coming back and theyll realize were not a threat politically and we have no agenda except to cross boundaries with music and let people enjoy the songs, he continued. Were not trying to bring a secret message to anybody.

During Iron Maidens performances in China last year, Bruce Dickinson toed the line with the censors, mouthing curse words and instructing the crowd to take a picture despite cameras not being allowed at the concert.

Metallica will embark on a North American stadium tour this summer, bringing along Avenged Sevenfold, Volbeat and Gojira on select dates. For more info and a list of all stops, check our 2017 Guide to Rock + Metal Tours.

Where Do Metallica Ranks Among the Top 50 Hard Rock + Metal Live Acts of All Time?

10 Bands That Were Banned From Countries

Subscribe to Loudwire on

10 Unforgettable James Hetfield Moments

Read the rest here:
James Hetfield Talks Metallica Concert Censorship in China - Loudwire