A year since Pakistan’s May 9 riots: A timeline of political upheaval | Imran Khan News

Nationwide riots on this ‘dark day’ last year triggered a months-long political crisis that saw ex-PM Imran Khan jailed, and a crackdown on his party.

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party has scheduled rallies all across the country on Thursday to mark a year since the arrest of its leader and former Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Cricketer-turned-politician Khan was arrested on this day last year, triggering a political crisis that lasted for months, which saw the PTI chief imprisoned again in August on several serious charges and a government crackdown on his party.

Khan, 71, remains embroiled in a slew of cases in which he has been convicted, and is currently lodged in Rawalpindi town’s Adiala jail.

Here’s a recap of the lead-up to Khan’s May 9, 2023 arrest, and the key events that transpired since:

2022

April 10: Khan loses a no-confidence vote in parliament, forcing his removal from power. He alleges a United States-backed conspiracy to sack him. Rival Shehbaz Sharif of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN) party becomes the prime minister. The US has denied any role in Khan’s removal from power.

October 21: The Election Commission of Pakistan disqualifies Khan as a member of parliament after finding him guilty of “corrupt practices”, two months after he is charged in the state gifts case, which relates to him allegedly selling gifts he received from foreign countries when he was in power.

November 3: An assassination attempt is made on Khan while he is leading a protest in Wazirabad city in Punjab province to demand snap elections.

2023
May 9: 
Khan is arrested in a corruption case while making a court appearance in capital Islamabad, triggering nationwide protests by his supporters who blame the military for orchestrating the arrest. The military has consistently denied any role in Khan’s legal or political troubles.

 

PTI supporters protest Khan’s arrest in Karachi on May 9, 2023 [Sabir Mazhar/Anadolu]

May 11: Amid deadly protests led by PTI, Pakistan’s Supreme Court says Khan’s arrest is illegal, ordering his immediate release.

May 17: Authorities allege that Khan is hiding May 9 rioters in his residence in Lahore. Pakistan’s National Security Committee approves the military’s decision to try the arrested protesters in military courts.

August 5: Police arrest Khan in Lahore after an Islamabad court sentences him to three years in prison for illegally selling state gifts.

August 6: Pakistan’s election panel bars Khan from politics for five years following his conviction in the state gifts case.

August 9: President Arif Alvi dissolves the country’s National Assembly, the lower house of parliament, paving way for elections.

August 14: A caretaker government takes office under Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar.

August 20: Khan’s close aide and former Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is arrested in the state secrets or cypher case – which refers to the leaking of a secret diplomatic cable Khan alleges proves his charge that the US was involved in his removal from power.

October 21: Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Shehbaz Sharif’s elder brother, returns to Pakistan from self-exile in the United Kingdom. A few days after his arrival, the Islamabad High Court grants him bail in several corruption cases.

October 24: A five-member Supreme Court bench declares the military trial of civilians in May 9 cases unconstitutional.

November 21: Islamabad High Court declares Khan’s in-jail trial illegal, striking down his indictment in the cypher case.

December 14: A six-member bench of the Supreme Court upholds an appeal by the government against its October 24 ruling. This allows the military trial of the May 9 accused to continue.

2024

January 13: Khan’s PTI is banned from using the iconic cricket bat symbol for not holding intra-party elections. PTI-backed candidates are forced to contest the elections as independents.

January 30: Khan is sentenced to 10 years in jail in the cypher case.

January 31: A court in Rawalpindi sentences Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, to 14 years in the state gifts case.

February 3: Another court in Rawalpindi sentences Khan and Bibi to seven years, ruling that their marriage violated Islamic law.

February 8: Pakistan holds parliamentary and provincial elections. PTI alleges widespread vote rigging — accusations that the government denies.

February 13: PMLN and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), along with other allies, form the government despite PTI-backed MPs emerging as the single largest bloc in parliament.

March 11: Police arrest more than 100 PTI supporters protesting against alleged rigging in the election.

April 1: Islamabad High Court suspends jail sentences of Khan and Bibi in state gifts case.

May 8: Bibi, who was under house arrest at Khan’s Bani Gala residence in Islamabad, is moved to Adiala jail.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Media feel pressure to tell ‘positive’ China story as party tightens grip | Freedom of the Press News

The first time 27-year-old Ong Mei Ching* came across the Chinese online magazine, Sixth Tone, it immediately caught her attention.

For years, Ong had been interested in Chinese current affairs and had stayed updated about news from China, but she found that much of the coverage revolved around similar topics.

Sixth Tone, which is published in English, was different.

“I found it refreshing because it was not about Chinese business or economics or politics – it was about people,” Ong told Al Jazeera.

She was captivated by the way the publication’s journalists ventured beyond the usual spaces into lesser-known cities and provinces to report about social dilemmas such as the country’s ageing population or its marginalised groups like single parents and children left with their grandparents by parents who had left for work in faraway cities.

“I felt they were doing something quite meaningful, that they were changing the narrative of how an international audience saw China,” she said.

Ong wanted to be a part of it. So, when she got the opportunity to work at Sixth Tone in 2019, she jumped at the chance and moved her life to Shanghai where the magazine has its headquarters.

She became a part of an editorial team that she described as upholding high journalistic standards and whose members were passionate about their work.

Journalists covering last month’s National People’s Congress in Beijing. The traditional end-of-congress news conference was cancelled [File: Tatan Syuflana/AP Photo]

However, the work could often lead to clashes with Chinese censors who objected to certain topic choices and story angles, which sometimes resulted in pieces getting killed before they were ever published or taken down just a few hours after they went online.

“We were testing the waters with many stories to see whether they would pop the censors,” she said.

Regardless of the scrutiny, Ong found that Sixth Tone, which was geared towards a Western and internationally-minded audience, often had more leeway than media for more local audiences.

But its room for manoeuvre now appears to have shrunk.

Former and current employees at Sixth Tone have recently given accounts of how articles have been removed and phrases censored on a massive scale across the outlet’s archives. Editors have also been required to check in with censors every few hours and certain terminology has been changed to align with the preferred narrative of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) including referring to Tibet as “Xizang”.

Al Jazeera reached out to Sixth Tone for comment but did not receive a reply.

Ong is not surprised that the grip appears to be tightening around Sixth Tone.

“As Sixth Tone has grown, it has attracted a bigger audience making the government want to increase its control over the content this audience is getting,” she said.

“At the same time, there is a lot of pressure on Chinese media today to portray China in a solely positive manner.”

A controlled experiment

Under President Xi Jinping, the Chinese government has called for “telling China’s story well” and spreading “positive energy”.

Such mantras have not always been reflected in Sixth Tone’s many articles about the socioeconomic issues facing common people in China.

The irony is that while Sixth Tone’s reporting has drawn the attention of Chinese censors, the outlet is also considered state media because it is part of the state-controlled Shanghai United Media Group.

According to Shaoyu Yuan, a scholar of Chinese studies at Rutger’s University in the US, state media in China serve as a mouthpiece of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) with less emphasis on editorial independence and more focus on aligning content with party ideology and government policies.

“This means that state media operate under the auspices of the CCP and contribute to the promotion of government objectives, enhancing national unity and supporting China’s image domestically and internationally,” he told Al Jazeera.

But although Sixth Tone had to balance credible reporting for an international audience with CCP ideology, Yuan is not convinced the magazine was doomed to lose its edge.

Instead, he argues that allowing Sixth Tone to pursue its own journalistic style was akin to a controlled experiment by the CCP.

“Chinese citizens interested in such reporting most likely already knew how to bypass censorship and access foreign news outlets that already cover some of the same issues,” he said.

“The Chinese government’s support for Sixth Tone allowed for a subtle control over the tone and framing of such issues.”

Additionally, when Sixth Tone was founded in 2016, China was still transitioning from the less assertive governing style of Hu Jintao, who was China’s president from 2003 until 2013.

“Compared to eight years ago, it would be more unusual to see a media like Sixth Tone be founded today,” Yuan said.

Shrinking space

Since Xi came to power in 2013, the media environment has tightened. Internet freedom has also declined.

In Freedom House’s 2023 report on internet freedom around the world, China was rated “not free: with a score of only nine points out of 100, one point less than the year before.

In RSF’s World Press Freedom Index, meanwhile, China fell four spots compared with 2022, ranking second to bottom and just above North Korea. More journalists are currently in jail in China than anywhere else in the world.

“There has been a very clear development towards greater state control over the media in China in recent years leaving very little space for media,” Alfred Wu, a scholar of public governance in China at the National University of Singapore, told Al Jazeera.

This development has also affected state media, according to Yuan at Rutger’s University.

“Under the rule of President Xi Jinping, state media in China have been consolidated and aligned closer with the ideology of the CCP,” he said.

“This involves regular ideological education and training, aiming to make sure that reporting reinforces Xi Jinping Thought [Xi’s ideology] and the objectives of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and this is why we are witnessing foreign staff members resigning from media outlets like Sixth Tone.”

One of those staff members is former editor Bibek Bhandari who allegedly landed himself and several other employees at Sixth Tone in “hot water” last year after publishing a media project that criticised Beijing’s zero-COVID policy.

On X, Bhandari wrote a long thread explaining how the list of prohibited topics was growing and had come to include migrant relocation, the Shanghai lockdown, LGBTQ-related stories, women’s issues and the zero-COVID protests.

Bhandari attended the biggest of the zero-COVID protests in November 2023 along with other members of the editorial team.

By May 2023, none of them were left at Sixth Tone, he wrote in a series of posts.

“I resigned. Demand for ‘positive stories’ was growing. Censorship getting worse. And the place has been utterly mismanaged. Space for stories that we previously published without any hiccups is shrinking. It’s not the same place I joined.”

Walking a tightrope

But it is not only journalists in more outspoken media such as Sixth Tone who have come under pressure.

When a reporting team from Chinese state television CCTV began a live interview close to the scene of a gas leak explosion that had claimed the lives of 27 people in a city outside Beijing in the middle of March, members of the local authorities reportedly blocked the camera while others engaged in pushing and shoving to physically remove the journalists.

Even this year’s annual news conference at the end of the annual political gathering of the Two Sessions was cancelled.

Yuan warns that the incident near the gas leak explosion, the cancelled press event and the tightening controls over media outlets like Sixth Tone suggest more difficulties ahead for journalists in China.

“These developments underscore the precarious nature of media freedoms and the tightrope that journalists must walk within the regulatory and political landscape of the country,” he said.

Despite recent crackdowns and restrictions, former staffer Ong believes that Sixth Tone still has a role to play in China’s media landscape.

“I don’t think they will be shut down completely because I think they are still useful as a tool to promote China to a Western audience,” she explained.

“And even if it is not the same as before, a lot of it is still real stories, real people and real issues.”

Yuan noted that the future of outlets like Sixth Tone is not set in stone.

“I consider Sixth Tone’s journey to be reflective of the evolving strategies within China’s media ecosystem,” he said.

“Should there be a shift towards a more open governance approach, there’s the possibility that Sixth Tone could once again rise to prominence.”

*The source’s name was altered to respect a wish for anonymity given the sensitivity of the topic.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Meta’s oversight board urges Facebook, Instagram to lift ban on ‘shaheed’ | Censorship News

The oversight board of Meta, the social media giant which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has ruled that a ban on the use of the word “shaheed” – “martyr” in Arabic – should be lifted. Meta has acknowledged that the term “shaheed” accounts for more content removals under the company’s content moderation policy than any other single word or phrase on its platforms.

In a policy advisory note, the company’s oversight board stated: “The Board has found that Meta’s current approach disproportionately restricts free expression, is unnecessary, and that the company should end this blanket ban.”

Meta’s oversight board was established in 2020. It is funded by Meta but operates independently of the company. When Facebook and Instagram make decisions to remove certain content from their platforms, Meta can ask the board to review those decisions, particularly when they cause controversy. The board effectively acts as an ombudsman which makes recommendations and issues rulings either endorsing or overruling such decisions made by Meta.

Here is what we know about the recommendation made by the oversight board and how it came to its decision.

Why does Meta remove content containing the word ‘shaheed’?

Meta’s current content moderation policy considers that the term “shaheed” is used as “praise” when it is mentioned in relation to organisations which have been included on its Dangerous Organizations and Individuals (DOI) list.

The top tier of this list includes what it terms “hate organisations; criminal organisations, including those designated by the United States government”. According to Meta, these are individuals and organisations which are deemed to be engaging in “serious offline harm”.

The policy advisory from the oversight board comes after repeated criticism levelled against Meta over its approach towards content posted by Palestinian and Arabic speakers.

Most recently for example, in December last year, Human Rights Watch issued a report which concluded that Meta’s content moderation policies amounted to censorship of content relating to the continuing Israel-Palestine conflict.

In a 51-page report, the human rights group said that Meta had misused its DOI policy to “restrict legitimate speech around hostilities between Israel and Palestinian armed groups”.

Meta began its own internal dialogue in 2020 over its approach to the use of the term “shaheed” on its platforms but failed to reach a consensus.

An independent investigation launched by the group in 2021 found the company’s content moderation policies “appear to have had an adverse human rights impact on the rights of Palestinian users”, and were adversely affecting “the ability of Palestinians to share information and insights about their experiences as they occurred”.

In February last year, therefore, Meta asked the oversight board to provide a policy advisory about whether it should continue to remove content using the Arabic term in reference to individuals or groups designated under its DOI policy.

Palestinian activists and journalists protest against what they consider censorship of Palestinian content by Facebook, in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron, on November 24, 2021 [Hazem Bader/AFP]

How did the oversight board go about considering this issue?

Nighat Dad, a member of the oversight board, told Al Jazeera that Meta suggested multiple options for the board to consider, including maintaining the status quo, but the board was not bound by those options and also explored other avenues after “extensive, more than a yearlong deliberation”.

She added that the group’s discussion on the usage of “shaheed” involved testing out the recommendations in real-life situations after the war started in October last year.

“We wanted to see how people will use Meta platforms and did our research to see people’s usage. We found out that our recommendations held up even under the conditions of the current conflict,” she said.

What did the oversight board recommend?

In its report, which was issued on March 26, the oversight board said Meta’s current approach to the term “shaheed” is “over-broad, and substantially and disproportionately restricts free expression”.

The report further added that Meta had failed to comprehend the term’s “linguistic complexity”, saying its content moderation policies only treated it as the equivalent of the English word “martyr”.

The board observed that Meta operated on a presumption that reference to any individual or organisation on the designated list “always constitutes praise” under the company’s DOI policy, leading to a blanket ban.

“Doing so substantially affects freedom of expression and media freedoms, unduly restricts civic discourse and has serious negative implications for equality and non-discrimination,” it added.

Dad said discussions within the board were extensive as the group explored the use of the term in different contexts and “paid extremely close attention to potential for real-world harm with any policy change”.

“We, as board, ultimately decided that Meta’s approach to tackle the word was counterproductive, which often affected journalists from reporting on armed groups as well as limited people’s ability to debate and condemn violence,” she said.

Are recommendations from the oversight board binding?

Meta said it would review the board’s recommendations and respond within 60 days. However, the board’s recommendations in this matter are not binding.

“Our decisions on any matter related to Meta are binding, but when it comes to policy advisory which is sought by Meta itself, they are not,” Dad explained.

However, she added, the board has a “robust mechanism” through which it can follow up and ensure that implementation of the recommendation is considered.

“We have an implementation committee, and we regularly reach out to Meta to follow up on what they have done with our advisory opinion,” she said.

 

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Hate crime tracker Hindutva Watch blocked in India ahead of national vote | Censorship News

New Delhi, India – The website of Hindutva Watch, a United States-based independent research project that documents hate crimes against religious minorities in India, is no longer accessible in India, days after government officials warned its founder that they might block it.

The website of India Hate Lab, another initiative dedicated to exclusively tracking hate speech in the country, can also no longer be accessed in India even though both platforms are available outside the country.

“We received communication from MEITY (Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology) under the IT Act last week regarding the potential blocking of India Hate Lab and Hindutva Watch,” Raqib Hameed Naik, the founder of both projects, told Al Jazeera, referring to India’s Information Technology (IT) Act.

On January 29, Naik was informed by users in India that both websites had become inaccessible on multiple servers, he said. “Currently, I am exploring legal options,” Naik added.

The government issued notices for blocking the websites under section 69A of the controversial IT Act, which empowers authorities to prevent the public from accessing information citing the “interest of sovereignty, integrity, and security” of India. The Supreme Court of India in 2022 had struck down another section of the IT Act that allowed the government to prosecute people for sending “offensive” messages online – multiple governments, across political parties, had used that section to arrest everyday civilian critics, from a cartoonist to a chemistry teacher.

Al Jazeera reached out to India’s IT ministry for comments but has not yet received a response.

Naik, a Kashmiri journalist living in the US since 2020, launched the Hindutva Watch website in April 2021. He is joined by 12 volunteers, spread across five countries, who work through different time zones to keep up with the documentation of rising hate crimes in India.

Since its launch, Hindutva Watch has grown into a rare database that documents hate speech and violence against India’s religious minorities, which have escalated everywhere from major cities to smaller towns, yet often receive little mainstream press coverage in the country or outside it. The project has been documenting two to four hate events daily, nearly double the number of reported incidents from a year ago.

Its critics, however, accuse Hindutva Watch, Naik and their coverage of being driven by a bias against Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its political ideology, called Hindutva.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, right, meets Elon Musk, chief of X, in New York, Tuesday, June 20, 2023 [Narendra Modi Youtube Channel via AP]

Censorship fears

The blocking of the websites comes two weeks after X – formerly known as Twitter – withheld the account of Hindutva Watch in India on January 16, following the government’s order under the IT Act. The X account of India Hate Lab was still accessible in India as of Wednesday morning.

“While shocking, it’s not surprising, considering Prime Minister Modi regime’s history of suppressing free press & critical voices,” Naik wrote on X on January 16, reacting to the ban. “The suppression of our account in India only fuels our determination to continue our work undeterred.”

Critics of the government have pointed to a growing climate of censorship involving X accounts in India since the platform was taken over by billionaire Elon Musk in November 2022. Last year, the company also withheld the accounts of US-based human rights groups – the Indian American Muslim Council and Hindus for Human Rights in India – in response to legal demands by the Modi government.

“Not only is the Indian state rewriting history, the government does not want information, or any kind of documentation, of violence against minority groups,” said Suchitra Vijayan, an author and founder of The Polis Project, a New York-based research and media organisation.

Describing Hindutva Watch as an “institution”, Vijayan said the group of volunteers had effectively used social media to highlight rights abuses against minorities in India. “The Indian government is literally going after anybody still thinking, writing and documenting,” she noted.

The blocking of Hindutva Watch’s website in India is a part of a larger pattern, including “the absolute destruction of media in Kashmir,” she said, referring to a crackdown on independent news outlets and journalists in the region, which is claimed by both India and Pakistan and that both partly control. “A story of David versus Goliath,” she added.

India’s ranking in the 2023 World Press Freedom Index slipped to 161 out of 180 countries, from 150 in 2022, as per the annual report by global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF). In 2014, when Modi came to power, India stood at 140.

“In any democracy, this kind of violence against minorities should be 24/7 news. But it has been completely wiped out [in India],” Vijayan said. “Even an act of documenting [it] is seen as a threat.”

Supporters of India’s ruling BJP light firecrackers as they celebrate winning elections in three states in Srinagar, Indian-controlled Kashmir, Monday, December 4, 2023 [Mukhtar Khan/AP]

Run-up to election

In a September 2023 report, Hindutva Watch analysed more than 255 documented incidents of hate speech aimed at Muslims and noted that 80 percent of the events took place in states governed by Modi’s BJP.

About 70 percent of the incidents took place in states scheduled to hold elections in 2023 and 2024, the report added. The majority of the hate speech events mentioned conspiracy theories as well as calls for violence and socioeconomic boycotts against Muslims.

India is headed towards a national election, likely to be held in April-May 2024. “There is a huge concern in the way that hate speeches will be used to incite people in the run-up to the elections,” said Geeta Seshu, an editor at Free Speech Collective, a media watchdog. Rather than obstructing the work of such projects, she added, the government should “see them as allies and not adversaries”.

“Is the government trying to shield people that are committing illegal acts against the Constitution?” asked Seshu. “This is a classic ‘shoot the messenger’. By criminalising Hindutva Watch, they are clamping down on reality; censoring the reality.”

In the past, two databases attempted to monitor hate crimes, initiated by the Hindustan Times newspaper and IndiaSpend. Both stopped operating, in 2017 and 2019 respectively, after coming under heavy criticism from Hindu nationalists.

Recent posts by Hindutva Watch on X and their website document hate speech by a BJP leader calling for violence against Muslims in Maharashtra as well as an attack on a Christian couple by a Hindutva mob in the southern state of Karnataka — reports that are now inaccessible in India.

“It is not easy for these groups to secure any kind of action against these hate speeches but Hindutva Watch has a very strong network [of sources to report],” said Seshu. “It is an autocratic regime that silences any kind of independent point of view. The dangers to the larger democratic functioning of India are something we all need to wake up to.”



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Nicole Jenes and Rathbone: Social media influencers a new lens on Gaza war | Social Media

Exploring how Instagram and TikTok influencers shape narratives in Israel’s war on Gaza.

Social media has revolutionised our understanding and perception of wars and conflicts.

Platforms like Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, with their real-time, unfiltered content, offer a new perspective that’s immediate and often raw.

These platforms enable users worldwide to witness conflicts like the war on Gaza as they unfold, offering a variety of viewpoints that traditional media may not cover.

This shift has led to a more multifaceted and grassroots-level narrative, one which we will explore as influencers Nicole Jenes and Rathbone talk to Al Jazeera.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Texas school district cancels visit from bestselling author Emma Straub for foul language

A Texas school district canceled a scheduled visit from New York Times bestselling author Emma Straub after learning she “regularly used” foul language on social media.

The novelist was going to read her first children’s picture book, “Very Good Hats,” to kindergarteners and first graders at two elementary schools in the Katy Independent School District outside of Houston on Jan. 13, however, the district decided to rescind their invite a day before Straub’s visit, the Houston Chronicle reported.

“It has been brought to our attention that this author has regularly used inappropriate and foul language on her social media platforms — specifically repeated use of the ‘F’ word,” administrators wrote to parents and staff from both schools in an email on Jan. 12.”This type of language, as you know, does not align with our school and community’s values.”

“We apologize for any misunderstandings or inconvenience regarding this decision,” the district continued. “Though, ensuring we are consistently modeling appropriate behaviors and expectations for our students, both in the classroom and via other campus opportunities, is of high priority.”

“Very Good Hats” is Straub’s first picture book and was published this year.
Rocky Pond Books

One Katy ISD parent, Anne Russey, tweeted out a screenshot of a complaint she found from a fellow parent in which the parent posted an expletive-laced tweet from Straub and demanded the district “do better” vetting guest speakers.

“F-ck guns, f-ck people who care more about controlling women’s bodies than protecting all of us from people with guns, f-ck!” Straub tweeted on May 24, 2022. “It’s too much. So heartbroken.”

May 24, 2022 was the date of the massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas , in which 19 students and two teachers were mercilessly gunned down.

Crosses set up to honor those who lost their lives during the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Texas are shown.
AFP /AFP via Getty Images

“Once again @katyisd caves to the unrelenting demands of parents who insist on restricting access and experiences for ALL students and not just their own,” Russey said in response to the cancellation.

Straub, who’s penned six novels including NYT’s bestsellers “This Time Tomorrow” and “Modern Lovers,” responded to Russey and said she was “sorry not to be able to read my silly book about hats and imagination to those kids.”

“The only F words in the presentation: funny, feline, feelings,” she said.

According to Chron, Katy ISD similarly canceled a scheduled event from award-winning author and cartoonist Jerry Craft in October.

The school removed the author’s books from its libraries after parents claimed the books professed “Critical Race Theory.” The district later rescheduled Craft’s visit and returned the books to the library, according to Chron.

In 2021, the school began removing books from its library it found “pervasively vulgar,” and opened an online portal for parents to suggest books that should be reviewed for their appropriateness for children.



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

The left throws a tantrum as Elon Musk reverses censorship on Twitter

News that Elon Musk brought his 2-year-old son — one of 10 children — into key meetings at Twitter headquarters, after taking over the social media company in the fall, might make it less of a mystery to lefties why his “Priority #1” has been to banish child sexual exploitation material. 

Not that you need to be a parent to abhor child pornography, but for some reason the vile content effectively was given a free pass at Twitter before Musk arrived, so clearly not everyone in the company respected society’s last taboo. 

But, instead of applauding Twitter’s dedication to child safety and attack on degeneracy, leftist media has been decrying Musk’s attempts to restore free speech protections as if they are a threat to civilization. 

They are hopping mad that Musk is demolishing the left-wing censorship regime that saw a sitting president de-platformed, satirical site The Babylon Bee banned and the oldest newspaper in the country locked out of its account for two weeks before the 2020 election. 

Censorship hypocrisy 

Lamenting the explosion of free speech under Musk, Yoel Roth, the former head of “Trust and Safety” who was responsible for censoring The Post, delivered an implied threat to his former employer in an op-ed piece in The New York Times. 

Keep the censorship regime in place or Twitter will be thrown off Google and Apple’s app marketplace, he wrote, “making it more difficult for potential billions of users to obtain Twitter services. This gives Apple and Google enormous power to shape the decisions Twitter makes.” 

Roth claims he just wants to prevent “hate speech,” but why was it that everyone banned by Twitter was conservative? 

Former Twitter executive Yoel Roth claimed Twitter will be removed from Apple and Google’s app stores without censorship.

“Correct,” Musk replied to a tweet observing: “We don’t hear much about Democrats and leftists being let back on Twitter [because] they were never kicked off in the first place . . . Censorship has been deployed as a one-way operation against conservatives.” 

Musk already has reinstated Trump, The Babylon Bee, Project Veritas, psychologist Jordan Peterson, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and the Libs of TikTok account that merely reposts absurd leftist clips from the video-sharing app TikTok. 

In response you would think Musk had launched the apocalypse. 

Dozens of top Twitter advertisers boycotted the platform in protest, reportedly including Merck, Pfizer, Kellogg, Verizon, General Mills, Musk’s Tesla competitor Volkswagen, General Motors and, ironically, Balenciaga. 

No sooner had the multinational fashion brand signaled its virtue, than Balenciaga had to delete its Twitter account after being bombarded with irate messages over its depraved advertising campaign featuring small children holding teddy bears in bondage gear

Other not-so-subtle pedophilia messages were embedded in the images, such as a sheaf of papers on a table which, on closer inspection, were court documents about child pornography. 

How do you explain that? You launch a $25 million lawsuit against the production company and pretend no Balenciaga executive signed off on the images. 

No wonder Balenciaga protested against a child-porn-free Twitter. 

Which raises the question a a lot of people on Twitter have been asking of Roth, the former head of “Trust and Safety”, after he, too, quit the company in protest. 

Why was child porn permitted on Roth’s watch for years and all but eliminated by Musk in a few days? It’s an important question, but the rest of the media is more interested in amplifying his threats against Twitter. 

The Associated Press tweeted a story claiming “online safety experts predict [Musk reinstating conservatives] will spur a rise in harassment, hate speech and misinformation”, yet did not quote a single expert and did not carry a byline. 

You would think AP might have been more careful about spreading unfounded nonsense after nearly starting World War III the previous week with a false report that Russian missiles had hit Poland. 

The Washington Post’s infamous “technology” reporter Taylor Lorenz penned a piece last week claiming that Musk was “opening the gates of hell . . . to the alarm of activists and online trust and safety experts.” 

At least she quoted some humans, even though they were far left hysterics and trans activist Alejandra Caraballo, who tweets obsessively as @esqueer to get conservatives kicked off Twitter and demand that the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe should “never know peace again.” 

Musk said his goal is to make Twitter a “forum for the peaceful exchange of views.”
Baron Capital via AP

Right on cue, Antifa accounts which previously were free to dox conservatives and organize violent riots, called for arson attacks on Tesla locations in response to being banned from Twitter. 

All the anti-Twitter “experts” agreed that the ultimate control of Musk will be for Apple and Apple and Google to remove Twitter’s app. 

Musk’s response was to declare he will just “make an alternative phone.” 

He is no right-winger. A libertarian who says he voted for Joe Biden at the last election, he responded to criticism by tweeting: “As a reminder, I was a significant supporter of the Obama-Biden presidency and (reluctantly) voted for Biden over Trump. 

“But freedom of speech is the bedrock of a strong democracy and must take precedence. 

“My preference for the 2024 presidency is someone sensible and centrist. I had hoped that would the case for the Biden administration but have been disappointed so far.” 

His goal is “a trusted digital town square, where a wide range of views are tolerated, provided people don’t break the law or spam. For example, any incitement to violence will result in account suspension . . . 

“Twitter will be a forum for the peaceful exchange of views.” 

In fact, since Musk took over and fired half the workforce, including most of the censorship — err, “moderation” — team, he has published stats indicating there are more users and less hate speech. 

‘Mistake’ to delete Don 

Musk also said banning Trump was a “grave mistake” since there had been “no violation of the law or terms of service. Deplatforming a sitting President undermined public trust in Twitter for half of America.” 

He gets it, but is now bracing for the mother of all attacks, because he is removing the censorship that has been a source of the left’s newfound power in recent years. 

“They won’t give up controlling the narrative easily,” he tweeted over the weekend. 

President Biden hinted at a future investigation into Elon Musk and his “cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries.”
Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

Remember Biden’s triumphal first press conference after the midterms? He issued a pointed warning to Musk that his administration would be investigating him. 

“I think that Elon Musk’s cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at whether or not he is doing anything inappropriate,” Biden said when asked by a useful reporter if the new Twitter owner is a national security threat. 

Putting aside the fact that the comment rather lacked self-awareness from someone about to be investigated by Congress over the inappropriateness of millions of dollars given to his son and brother by China and “other countries” which “paid to play” when he was vice president, it was an odd priority for the president’s first pronouncement after losing the House. 

Musk in return has promised he will make public all the details around The Post’s censorship by Twitter over the Hunter Biden laptop story. 

“This is necessary to restore public trust,” he tweeted last week

Amen and Godspeed.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version