Mediaboss Marketing

From Wired How-To Wiki

When Twitter announced a change to their censorship policy in January, Twitter users and pundits rose dutifully to the defense of free speech. Critics said the company sought to silence voices of dissent in compliance with requests from autocratic governments and anti-transparency bureaucracies.

The uproar, however, may have been in haste. Twitter has always had an obligation to remove illegal content; their new policy simply ensures prohibited tweets disappear only within the borders of the offended country. Offense alone also provides no grounds for removal. On its website, Twitter says it deletes tweets only after receiving a valid and scoped request from an authorized entity."

While this change in policy won't affect you if Twitter is your go-to for funny pictures or Foursquare check-ins, activists or rebels may be worried that government intervention will cause this vessel of communication to be lost to them forever. For those trying to avoid inciting the wrath of those who wish to censor you, we've compiled these tips that will help you escape prying authoritative eyes.

This article was written by John Flanagan, a Vermont-based writer, film fan, and intermittent bon vivant.

Twitter will notify you directly if youre being censored, unless theyre legally prohibited from doing so. You can check for yourself by viewing your own tweets. Censored tweets from others appear in your timeline with a message reading, Tweet Withheld: This tweet from (@Username) has been withheld in: (your country). If a particular Twitter user whom you follow has been blocked, a similar message will appear: (@Username) Withheld: This account has been withheld in: (Your country).

Fret not, however, because there are a few simple tricks to get around these blocks.

Twitter wields the hushcloth according to your accounts Country setting. The company guesses where you live based upon the IP address of your computer, phone, iPad, etc., and changing this location is a cinch. Heres how:

Eschew censorship by referencing sensitive material indirectly in your tweets. For instance, instead of referring to a controversial despot by name, tweet about the fourth president of Egypt or the successor of Hafez al-Assad. While this approach may evade detection, the cleverly-worded content continues to violate laws.

l33tspeak (leet or elite speak) doesn't just belong to hackers it has its benefit for dissidents as well. Certain censors filter certain words, so where revolt might not fly, r3v0lt sneaks through undetected. In English, substituting ASCII characters for letters of the Roman alphabet, or using intentional misspellings, helps evade trackers. Many languages have their own version of l33tspeak, such as Russians Padonkaffsky Jargon and Japaneses Kusachu. Like clever wording, however, this approach is still illegal, and thus grounds for removal.

Visit link:
Avoid Twitter Censorship

This post originally appeared on the American Express OPEN Forum, where Mashable regularly contributes articles about leveraging social media and technology in small business.

As social media usage continues to rise, its only natural that statistic correlations will be made about the individuals who use the medium. This isnt a bad thing; its common to deep-dive into demographic information and behavioral data. While there will always be exceptions to the "correlations" that emerge from such data, universal truths about social networking usage and user behavior can be valuable.

[More from Mashable: Encyclopedia Britannica vs. Wikipedia [INFOGRAPHIC]]

The Ethics Resource Center (ERC) is the oldest non-profit organization in the U.S. dedicated to independent research and advancement of high ethical standards and practices in both public and private institutions. Since 1994, the ERC has produced the National Business Ethics Survey (NBES), available for free to the public, to gather information about employees perspectives of ethics in the workplace.Dr. Patricia J. Harned, president of the ERC, says the NBES is the only longitudinal study that represents the views of the U.S. workforce in business.

The ERCs latest report is one of the first to explore the possible connection between ethics and social media. Social networking has become very important in our culture, and we wondered if the technology is influencing employees views about ethics at work," Harned explains. "Additionally, over the past few years, we have seen companies establish policies concerning social networking in the workplace, so this year it seemed fitting to add questions on the topic.

[More from Mashable: 8 Reasons People Arent Following You Back on Twitter]

One of the most fascinating conclusions in the report is that "active social networkers show a higher tolerance for activities that could be considered unethical." But Harned says the findings are not an indictment about the character of social networkers: It appears that they are more willing to consider things that are gray areas -- issues that are not always clear in company policies as wrong; and thats an area for further study.

The report also points out that active social networkers are at higher risk for observing misconduct. Harned stresses that it's observing wrongdoing, not necessarily participating in it.You could also look at another set of our responses -- particularly the high number of active social networkers who reported misconduct -- and say that social networkers behaved appropriately, she explains.

In order to understand any potential connection between ethics and social networks, it only makes sense to step back and discuss what ethical behavior means. Jay Shepherd, author of the book Firing at Will: A Managers Guide, sums up unethical behavior with a sentence.

Its like pornography: You know it when you see it. Its as simple as knowing the right thing to do, then doing the wrong thing.

See original here:
Ethics and Social Media: Where Should You Draw The Line?

Saturday, March 17, 2012

DOGS are known as mans best friend, yet the fangs that hide behind the happy face can be deadly, a rabid dog can kill.

There are a lot of stray dogs and cats around the streets of Davao city that may be carrying the rabies virus and are a threat to the people around especially children. Thats why Davao City has an Animal Bite Center (ABC) office that became operational in 1998. It provides treatment to all dogs, cats, monkeys and rat bite patients of the city and from other provinces of Region XI. They offer free Post Exposure Treatment (PET) to 100% of high-risk animal bite patients.

Their goal is to reduce the incident of human rabies by year 2004 and eliminate human rabies and declare a rabies free Davao City by year 2020.

Are they anywhere near their target?

Marl Bohol, an entrepreneur and a victim, was bitten by a cat and so he went to ABC for treatment. When he got there, a lot of patients were waiting in line for treatment. But it was not the main problem, there were no medicines available. The registration area was full of patients lining up for their medical prescription.

The patients were advised to buy the anti-rabies vaccine with the box consisting of four vials worth P1,900, and their own syringe for 10 pesos each. Most of the patients could not afford to buy the whole box so they resort to group themselves into four so that each of them would only pay about 500 pesos each.

But the problem is each patient has to have three shots of anti-rabies within a period of time, so the scenario in the ABC office goes on every day, with one rabies patient returning for his next shot looking for three other patients to divide the cost of a box of vials with.

In Marls case, he said, that he waited for more than an hour, but still no medicine was available. He asked the lady in the registration area and the woman said that he could come back the next day for available medicine.

Marl was not willing to wait much longer and pestered the woman further. The woman told him to wait as she texted somebody. A few minutes later, a woman arrived offering to share her box.

The rest is here:
Killer bite

15-03-2012 13:15 Are you in? my.barackobama.com Remember how far we've come. From Academy Award®-winning director Davis Guggenheim: "The Road We've Traveled". This film gives an inside look at some of the tough calls President Obama made to get our country back on track. Featuring interviews from President Bill Clinton, Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Elizabeth Warren, David Axelrod, Austan Goolsbee, and more. It's a film everyone should see.

Read the original:
The Road We've Traveled - Video

The bids are now in, but whoever wants a piece of what is almost certainly a juicy contract is keeping quiet--and for good reason.

It's the bid that dares not (publicly) speak its name.

Friday was the deadline for companies to file their applications to win a piece of a Pakistani project that has stoked controversy stretching from to South Asia to Silicon Valley.

In late February, Pakistan's National ICT R&D Fund, which represents the government, began inviting bids to help create a "national-level URL filtering and blocking system." The system was described as a way to protect the public from "undesirable content."

But critics dismiss that claim as a smokescreen for the government to tighten its control over the Internet and choke off dissent. What's really going on, they say, is a Pakistani attempt to duplicate China's sophisticated content-filtering Internet--often referred to as the "Great Firewall."

"This is essentially about government agencies wanting more and more control over public spheres," said Sana Saleem, a Pakistani journalist and blogger who also runs a Karachi-based Internet free speech organization called Bolo Bhi.

The construction of the envisioned system would empower the authorities with a switch they could use to "turn off anything and everything that they deem 'objectionable'--especially in the absence of a legislation or proper definition of the term 'objectionable' or even 'national security," according to Saleem. She said that the project's opponents have heard that Pakistan's National University of Science and Technology may be involved in building and maintaining the system. "Interesting to note that it is a military run institution & beyond ironic that it teaches science and technology," she said.

In the run-up to Friday's deadline, activists published the names of some of the companies believed to be competing for the bid. However, it's difficult to verify the list's accuracy. For instance, it was reported that Cisco had dropped out of the running. But the company maintains that wasn't true. "We don't have the products they're looking for so we didn't bid," a spokesman said. Another company, Blue Coat Systems, whose Internet blocking gear has turned up in Syria also denied its participation or interest in bidding. "Blue Coat did not bid on this opportunity," according to a representative.

So who is emailing in their bids?

"Good luck trying to find out," said an executive at a technology company which sells products to many developing nations including Pakistan. "Nobody here is going to talk about that--nobody. Forget even getting something on background. And don't you dare use our company name."

Read more from the original source:
Pakistan's Internet filter has the Valley buzzing over who's bidding