Tag: censorship

EU’s Weakened “Chat Control” Bill Still Poses Major Privacy and Surveillance Risks, Academics Warn

On November 19, the European Union stands poised to vote on one of the most consequential surveillance proposals in its digital history.

The legislation, framed as a measure to protect children online, has drawn fierce criticism from a bloc of senior European academics who argue that the proposal, even in its revised form, walks a perilous line. It invites mass surveillance under a veil of voluntarism and does so with little evidence that it will improve safety.

This latest draft of the so-called “Chat Control” law has already been softened from its original form. The Council of the European Union, facing mounting public backlash, stripped out provisions for mandatory on-device scanning of encrypted communications.

But for researchers closely following the legislation, the revised proposal is anything but a retreat.

“The proposal reinstates the option to analyze content beyond images and URLs – including text and video – and to detect newly generated CSAM,” reads the open letter, signed by 18 prominent academics from institutions such as ETH Zurich, KU Leuven, and the Max Planck Institute.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The argument, in essence, is that the Council’s latest version doesn’t eliminate the risk. It only rebrands it.

Keep reading

US House Committee Summons Australian Censor Julie Inman Grant Over Global Takedown Demands

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, is now facing transnational political clash after the US House Judiciary Committee demanded she appear before Congress to explain her office’s global content takedown efforts.

The committee, chaired by Republican Jim Jordan, argues that Australia’s Online Safety Act (OSA) has evolved into what he called a “foreign censorship regime” with implications for American speech.

In a letter sent Tuesday, Jordan described Inman Grant as a “zealot” and accused her of pushing an “expansive interpretation” of the OSA that “directly threatens American speech.”

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

He warned that her efforts to enforce content removals beyond Australia’s borders amount to an assertion of jurisdiction over foreign citizens and platforms.

Keep reading

Italian Court Orders Google to Restore Banned Catholic Blog

Google has been compelled by the Tribunale di Imperia to restore Messainlatino.it, a major Italian Catholic website that, as you may remember, the company had abruptly taken down from its Blogger platform in July.

The ruling, issued against Google Ireland Limited, the firm’s European branch, also requires payment of approximately €7,000 (about $8,100) in court costs.

The blog’s editor, Luigi Casalini, filed legal action after Google deleted the site without warning, claiming a violation of its “hate speech” rules.

The company’s notification consisted of a short, generic email and provided no explanation or chance to appeal.

For Casalini, whose publication had accumulated over 22,000 articles since 2008 and reached around one million monthly readers, the removal appeared to be less a matter of policy enforcement and more an attempt to silence dissenting religious opinion.

Messainlatino.it was well known for covering issues surrounding traditional Catholic liturgy and had been cited by major outlets.

Following Google’s action, questions were raised in both the European Parliament and Italy’s Chamber of Deputies.

Legislators noted that the deletion “raises serious questions about the respect for freedom of expression, speech and religion” as guaranteed by Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

They also pointed to the Digital Services Act (DSA), which, despite being a censorship law, obliges platforms to apply their moderation policies with “due regard” for fundamental rights.

Casalini’s legal case focused on that provision. He argued that Google’s decision breached Article 14 of the DSA, which calls for a balance between policy enforcement and the user’s right to free expression.

As Casalini stated to LifeSiteNews, “Google acted in this way in violation of the Digital Services Act.”

Google responded through five lawyers based in Milan. The company claimed that an interview with Bishop Joseph Strickland, who opposed the ordination of women as deacons, violated its hate speech policy.

When the defense team countered that the post merely reported the bishop’s words and contained no discriminatory content, Google’s attorneys maintained in court documents that “it does not matter the source, more or less authoritative (bishop, Pontiff) of the post, if it violates the Policy.”

Keep reading

UN makes “landmark” deal on information integrity to shut up annoying denialists

Look out. Climate Denialism is a “security threat” now

As the Net Zero fantasy crumbles and the political tide shifts, the Blob has up’d the ante and pressed the red hot “security threat” button. Climate deniers are now such a mortal threat (to the sinecures of the Blobcrats) they must be contained.

As David Archibald says “When they have lost the argument, they change the rules.”

Countries seal landmark declaration at COP30—marking first time information integrity is prioritized at UN Climate Conference

Drafted in collaboration with civil society members of the Global Initiative Advisory Group, the Declaration has been endorsed by ten countries so far – Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden and Uruguay. 

“Climate change is no longer a threat of the future; it is a tragedy of the present,” said President of Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Belém. “We live in an era in which obscurantists reject scientific evidence and attack institutions. It is time to deliver yet another defeat to denialism.”

Oh, the horrible obscurantists! Humanity will be saved, but only if governments can rule without having to answer difficult questions.

The UN must be feeling fragile because the term “denialism” is decidedly unscientific — it is the language of political and religious struggle, not of atmospheric physics.

Perhaps they’re afraid the world might recognize that the UN is a superfluous, bloodsucking freeloader?  To make themselves useful, the UN are providing an excuse for sympathetic (socialist) governments to launch information integrity commissions, or to fund “research” into misinformation online.

Keep reading

Britain’s Speech Gulag Exposed: 10,000 Arrested Last Year For Social Media Posts

A damning study complete with an interactive map has revealed that UK police arrested nearly 10,000 people in 2024 for “grossly offensive” social media posts—equivalent to 30 arrests every single day—while knife crime, burglary, and sexual offences go unsolved.

This Orwellian crackdown, driven by vague “communications” laws, has turned Britain into an international embarrassment, with forces devoting more manpower to policing opinions than protecting citizens.

Compiled from Freedom of Information requests to 39 police forces, the data shows 9,700 arrests in 2024 alone under the Communications Act 2003 and Malicious Communications Act 1988.

Keep reading

Korean President Vows Harsh Penalties for “Hate Speech” and “Misinformation”

Korean President Lee Jae Myung has pledged to impose strict punishments for spreading what he calls “misinformation” and for engaging in discriminatory speech, warning that such behavior divides society and threatens democracy.

“We can no longer overlook hate or disinformation disguised as opinion,” he said. “Acts that distort facts or violate human dignity are crimes that must be punished as such.”

Yet the president’s vow, made during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, has also deepened unease among free expression advocates who fear that broad definitions of “false information” could open the door to government overreach.

“Truly anachronistic discrimination and hatred based on race, origin, and nationality are rampant in some parts of society,” Lee said at the Yongsan presidential office in Seoul.

“As our society becomes increasingly polarized, these extreme expressions continue to exacerbate social unrest.”

The remarks come as groups hold anti-China protests in downtown Seoul, and after reports that the head of the Korean Red Cross made racist comments toward foreign diplomats.

Lee described such actions as “crimes” that threaten daily life and must be “eliminated.” He added that hate speech and falsehoods were “spreading indiscriminately” online and declared, “We can no longer tolerate this.”

He urged political leaders to help “eradicate these hate crimes and fabricated information.”

But that phrase, “fabricated information,” has caused worry that the government could classify dissenting political views or unpopular opinions as punishable offenses.

In recent months, activists, including supporters of impeached former President Yoon Suk Yeol, have staged demonstrations in areas like Myeong-dong and Daerim-dong, waving banners that read “China Out” and tearing down images of President Xi Jinping.

Their rallies have intensified following the restoration of visa-free entry for Chinese tour groups and Xi’s visit to the APEC summit in Gyeongju.

The animosity toward Beijing also reflects domestic political divides that widened after Yoon’s short-lived martial law order. His supporters accuse China of meddling in South Korean elections and claim the current government’s engagement with North Korea risks Communist influence.

Keep reading

UK Tech Secretary Urges Ofcom to Fast-Track Censorship Law Enforcement

UK Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is pressing Ofcom to accelerate the rollout of the controversial censorship law, the Online Safety Act, warning that delays could weaken protections for vulnerable users. In a letter to the communications regulator, she said:

“I remain deeply concerned that delays in implementing duties, such as user empowerment, could hinder our work to protect women and girls from harmful content and protect users from antisemitism.”

Kendall is determined to enforce the controversial law quickly, even as more people have finally realized that the Online Safety Act grants excessive power to regulators over what citizens can say or share online.

Ofcom has confirmed that it expects to publish by July next year a register identifying which companies will face the strictest obligations, including mandatory age verification.

That schedule is roughly a year later than initially promised. The regulator said the delay was due to “factors beyond its control,” citing a legal challenge that raised “complex issues.”

One challenge involves 4chan and Kiwi Farms, platforms often targeted by politicians seeking tighter online speech regulation.

Reclaim The Net recently reported that 4chan’s legal team had rejected Ofcom’s attempt to impose fines under the Act, arguing that the regulator’s enforcement powers overreach.

The law has also drawn criticism abroad.

The US State Department condemned the UK’s online censorship laws, including the Online Safety Act, warning that the powers granted to Ofcom could restrict the open exchange of ideas.

We also covered the growing concern among technology companies that the Act’s broad language and compliance costs could force them to reconsider their presence in the UK.

Keep reading

‘Free to express opinions’: Oregon district pays $650,000 to settle with educators who objected to trans lessons

Schools ‘can’t retaliate against speech simply because they disagree with what’s said.’

An Oregon school district has agreed to pay $650,000 to settle with two educators who were punished, then fired, for speaking out against the injurious transgender agenda the district was adopting.

The trans ideology as promoted by Joe Biden and his administration for years includes giving chemicals to children to delay puberty, then doing mutilating body surgeries on the child.

Grants Pass, Ore., educators Katie Medart and Rachel Sager had launched a grassroots movement called “I Resolve” to speak out on a school gender identity education policy, and to offer alternatives that would allow teachers to continue teaching without submitting their religious beliefs to the social agenda.

And one that would respect the rights of parents to know what their children were being given in school.

They posted a video on their own website promoting their beliefs and efforts.

Subsequently, Grants Pass School District 7 officials suspended them, then fired them.

“Educators are free to express opinions on fundamental issues of public concern—like gender identity education policy—that implicate the freedoms of teachers, parents, and students,” said Mathew Hoffman, of the ADF, which represented the teachers along with the Pacific Justice Institute.

“The Grants Pass School District is taking the right step by acknowledging that teachers don’t give up their First Amendment rights when they set foot on school property. Public schools can’t retaliate against speech simply because they disagree with what’s said.”

Sager and Medart have worked in the education field for many years, including at North Middle School in Grants Pass. Sager served as assistant principal, and Medart taught science there, the legal teams explained.

Their legal action charging the school violated their free speech, religious freedom and equal protection rights was settled with the district agreeing to pay $650,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees.

Keep reading

At COP30, Countries Sign First-ever Declaration to Control Info on Climate

Germany, France, Canada, and Belgium are among 12 nations that signed on to the “Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change,” documenting the so-called “threats” that free speech and the free press pose to what U.S. President Donald Trump refers to as the climate “con job.”

Signed at the United Nations’ COP30, the UN’s annual climate confab, the declaration marks the first time that “information integrity” has been on the docket for COP’s Action Agenda.

The rise of independent media, social media, and the internet has created a source of non-establishment news that has elevated legitimate criticism of the so-called man-made climate-change agenda.

Rather than addressing concerns about the UN’s horrible track record of climate predictions, the failure of “green” energy, and the astounding hypocrisy of climate evangelists’ jet-setting across the globe in private jets emitting mass amounts of carbon, the UN has instead turned to censorship and narrative control.

Defeating the “Obscurantists”

In the opening address at COP30, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva targeted anyone who dares to question the man-made climate-agenda.

“In the era of disinformation, obscurantists reject not only scientific evidence but also the progress of multilateralism. They control algorithms, sow hatred, and spread fear. They attack institutions, science, and universities. It is time to once again defeat the denialists,” he said.

Arguing that “obscurantists” control algorithms beggars belief. In fact, it is the UN that has openly admitted to rigging algorithms with Google to prioritize UN narratives regarding climate change.

“We partnered with Google,” said Melissa Fleming, the UN’s under-secretary-general for global communications. “For example, if you Google ‘climate change,’ you will, at the top of your search, you will get all kinds of UN resources.”

Fleming revealed that the collaboration started when UN officials were “shocked to see that when we Googled ‘climate change,’ we were getting incredibly distorted information right at the top.”

Pushing Propaganda

But how will the UN “defeat the denialists” who are allegedly controlling the narrative? First, the declaration acknowledges the necessity of narrative control to continue the UN’s climate doomsaying:

[We are] concerned by the growing impact of disinformation, misinformation, denialism, deliberate attacks on environmental journalists, defenders, scientists, researchers and other public voices and other tactics used to undermine the integrity of information on climate change, which diminish public understanding, delay urgent action, and threaten the global climate response and societal stability.

The signatory nations also refer to the Global Digital Compact, adopted by UN members at the Summit of the Future in 2024, which sets forth a global framework for digital cooperation for artificial intelligence, controlling algorithms, and digital control.

Encouraging policies that will bolster climate propaganda at both the international and local level is crucial, the declaration states.

Through promoting and supporting the “sustainability of a diverse and resilient media ecosystem,” the signatory nations affirm that the man-made climate-change narrative cannot survive scrutiny without “equitable access to accurate, consistent, evidence-based, and understandable information on climate change for all stakeholders.”

Keep reading

Brussels Aims at WhatsApp in the Next Round of Speech Control

Meta’s WhatsApp platform is set to come under tighter European oversight as regulators prepare to bring its “channels” feature under the European Union’s far-reaching censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA), the same framework that already pressures Facebook and Instagram.

According to Bloomberg, people familiar with the matter say the European Commission has informed Meta that WhatsApp’s channels are being prepared for designation as a “Very Large Online Platform.”

That classification carries extensive responsibilities for content censorship. Although no public date has been announced, the Commission’s notice indicates that WhatsApp will soon face some of the most demanding digital rules in the world.

Channels, which allow public updates from news outlets, public figures, and organizations, function more like social media feeds than private chats.

WhatsApp reported earlier this year that these channels reached around 46.8 million users in Europe by late 2024, slightly above the DSA’s 45 million-user threshold for stricter oversight.

Once a service crosses that line, it must perform regular assessments of how illegal or “harmful” content circulates and develop strategies to limit its spread. Platforms are also required to publish user figures twice a year and risk fines of up to 6 percent of global revenue for failing to comply.

The DSA does not apply to private, encrypted communication, so WhatsApp’s core messaging service will remain unaffected.

Still, the EU’s decision to expand its regulatory reach into new areas of online conversation has caused concern that these rules could burden companies and discourage open dialogue in the name of safety.

The European Commission has remained cautious about providing details, saying only that it “cannot confirm the timeline for a potential future designation.”

For Meta, the move adds another chapter to its ongoing disputes with European regulators.

Keep reading