Read more on Ofwatch

Following on from demands made by the Information Commissioner last year Ofcom have finally published censored versions of the minutes for the first 21 content board meetings. Unsurprisingly not a lot has been revealed , however one or two snippets are noteworthy and some of the censored sections make amusing reading. It would seem that paper CB 65(04) looked at safe guards and how security might be regulated if Ofcom decided to allow the transmission of R18 material. The content board also requested to see some R18 content for themselves (yet were not so keen on allowing others the right to view it on subscription television). Some members of the content board also asked about the availability of such content on the web and (presumably) were informed that access was very easy indeed.

The prize for the most censored minutes must go to the ninth meeting held in Riverside house on the 20th January. The agenda merely states that the purpose of the meeting was "The hearing and determination of a complaint", whilst the "minutes" are shown below, in their entirety, as published by Ofcom - a true masterpiece of censorship that will strike a cord with those of you who are familiar with the way in which our transparent regulatory friends deal with adult service issues. Strangely the announcement of the £25,000 fine imposed on Playboy for showing R18 rated content was made in early February, but whether the two are connected remains a secret. Why does the regulation of adult service cause such regulatory paranoia?

Present

In Attendance

[Withheld from published minutes]

By Invitation

Appearing on behalf of The Number

[Withheld from published minutes]

Appearing on behalf of [Withheld from published minutes]

[Withheld from published minutes]

Observers from Ofcom

[Withheld from published minutes]

Preliminary points

1. [Withheld from published minutes].

2. [Withheld from published minutes].

The Hearing

3. [Withheld from published minutes]

4. [Withheld from published minutes]

From MediawatchWatch

Magazinet, an obscure Norwegian Christian magazine, has incurred the wrath of the Supreme Islamic Council for re-publishing the Mohammed cartoons originally printed by Jyllands-Posten in Denmark.

According to Islam Online, the head of the Supreme Islamic Council, Mohammed Hamdan, has condemned the magazine “in the strongest possible terms”. When informed that Magazinet printed the cartoons in the name of free expression, Hamdan revealingly replied: What on earth does freedom of expression mean?

He hopes that the government of Norway will condemn the publication, unlike the Danish government who steadfastly refused to take action: Editors should not take free speech as an excuse to insult a certain religion; otherwise they risk an extremist response from the offended, which carries grave consequences.

In other words, shut up or we’ll kill you.
 

When UK Muslim dignatories were challenged for the homophobic opinions (see Gay Cartoon Hypocrisy) then they said: All Britons, whether they are in favour of homosexuality or not, should be allowed to freely express their views in an atmosphere free of intimidation or bullying. We cannot claim to be a truly free and open society while we are trying to silence dissenting views.

From MediawatchWatch

According to the Brussels Journal, the Norwegian newspaper which published the Mohammed cartoons in support of Jylands-Posten has withdrawn them from its website in the face of death threats.

Vebjørn Selbekk, the editor of Magazinet, received threatening anonymous emails, including one containing a picture of a burnt body. The e-mail with the pictures of the burnt body is the most frightening. But I am not afraid. This is of course unpleasant, especially for a family man. But I cannot go around being afraid said Selbekk.

Another Norwegian newspaper, Dagbladet, has also published the cartoons as a gesture of support.

From The Guardian

Saudi Arabia said yesterday it had recalled its ambassador to Denmark, saying the government had not taken enough action over newspaper cartoons seen as mocking Islam and the prophet Muhammad. The Saudi government recalled its ambassador ... in light of the Danish government's lack of attention to insulting the prophet Muhammad by its newspapers, a Saudi official said.

Denmark's biggest newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, ran 12 cartoons last September including one in which Muhammad seemed to be carrying a bomb in his turban.

Denmark's main industry organization, fearing a loss of business in the Muslim world, sought to distance itself Friday from a newspaper that published contentious drawings of Islam's Prophet Muhammad.

The Confederation of Danish Industries urged Jyllands-Posten to explain its decision to publish the cartoons on Sept. 30 last year: Time has come for Jyllands-Posten to use its freedom of speech to explain how it views the fact that the paper's Muhammad drawings have offended large groups of people, the group's head, Hans Skov Christensen, wrote in a letter to the daily.

The caricatures have sparked a wave of denunciations across the Islamic world and from Muslim leaders in Denmark. Islamic tradition bars any depiction of the prophet, even respectful ones, out of concern that such images could lead to idolatry.

In Iraq on Friday, thousands of people condemned the caricatures during weekly prayer services and demanded legal action be taken against the newspaper.

Skov Christensen said Danish companies faced repercussions this week from customers in the Middle East, including product boycotts, dropped orders, and cancelled business meetings. The confederation claims the Middle East accounts for annual sales of at least $816 million for Danish companies.

Danish-based Arla Foods, Europe's largest dairy group, said it had noted sales dropping in Saudi Arabia because of protests over the drawings.
 

From MediawatchWatch

Shiite and Sunni clerics in Iraq have joined the chorus of condemnation against the Mohammed cartoons published first by Jyllands-Posten in Denmark, and then by a couple of magazines in Norway.

Ranting in his mosque in a Shiite district in Baghdad, Sheikh Hazem al-Aaraji said: They want to disfigure Islam and this we cannot accept. These cartoons directly attack the personality of the messenger of God. We say to them: they cannot attack Mohammed, nor any of the prophets. Mohammed is the symbol of humanity. He is not dead, he lives always among us through his teachings and through the sacred book

After the sermon, a crowd of about 100 charged through the neighourhood chanting: there is no god but God, and Mohammed is his prophet.

Meanwhile, an email memo to Norwegian embassies has been leaked which reveals that Norway’s government is trying to make amends by “apologising”: I am sorry that the publication of a few cartoons in the Norwegian paper Magazinet has caused unrest among Muslims. I fully understand that these drawings are seen to give offence by Muslims worldwide.

The cartoons in the Christian paper Magazinet are not constructive in building the
bridges which are necessary between people with different religious and ethnic backgrounds. Instead they contribute to suspicion and unnecessary conflict.

Let it be clear that the Norwegian government condemns every expression or act which expresses contempt for people on the basis of their religion or ethnic origin. Norway has always supported the fight of the UN against religious intolerance and racism, and believes that this fight is important in order to avoid suspicion and conflict. Tolerance, mutual respect and dialogue are the basis values of Norwegian society and of our foreign policy.

Freedom of expression is one of the pillars of Norwegian society. This includes tolerance for opinions that not everyone shares. At the same time our laws and our international obligations enforce restrictions for incitement to hatred or hateful expressions.

From The Times

Denmark faced the full fury of the Muslim world yesterday as a long-simmering row over newspaper cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad finally erupted.

There were street demonstrations and flag-burnings in the Middle East. Libya joined Saudi Arabia in withdrawing its ambassador from Copenhagen. Islamic governments and organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain, issued denunciations and a boycott of Danish goods took hold across the Muslim world.

The Danish Government warned its citizens about travelling to Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Syria, and withdrew aid workers from the Gaza Strip.

Last night EU foreign ministers issued a statement in support of Denmark, and the European Commission threatened to report any government backing the boycott to the World Trade Organisation.

A spokesman for Peter Mandelson, the EU Trade Commissioner, said that if the Saudi Government had encouraged the boycott of Danish goods, Mandelson would take the matter to the WTO.

By yesterday governments across the Arab world were responding to public outrage. Libya closed its embassy in Denmark and the Egyptian parliament demanded that its Government follow suit. The Kuwaiti and Jordanian governments called for explanations from their Danish ambassadors. President Lahoud of Lebanon condemned the cartoons, saying his country “cannot accept any insult to any religion”. The Justice Minister of the United Arab Emirates said: “This is cultural terrorism, not freedom of expression.” In Gaza, gunmen briefly occupied the EU office in Gaza and warned Danes and Norwegians to stay away. Palestinians in the West Bank burnt Danish flags. The Islamic groups Hamas and Hezbollah and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood demanded an apology.

Supermarkets in Algeria, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Qatar, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen all removed Danish produce from their shelves. Arla Foods, a Danish company with annual sales of about $430 million in the Middle East, said that the boycott was almost total and suspended production in Saudi Arabia.

The Muslim Council of Britain, whose leaders are to meet the Danish ambassador tomorrow, deplored the newspapers’ refusal to apologise for printing “sacrilegious cartoons vilifying the Prophet Muhammad”.

Per Stig Moeller, Denmark’s Foreign Minister, insisted in Brussels last night: We condemn blasphemy. We want respect for religions. But we cannot intervene. We have sent explanations but, as we have said before, freedom of expression is a matter for the courts, not for the Government

From al jazeerah

The publication of the Danish illustrations of the Prophet and their republication in Norway offers not one but two separate offenses to the Muslim world. The most obvious is that not only was the Prophet depicted in ten of the twelve cartoons, but also that one of the illustrations portrayed him as a terrorist. The second offense is that people in Denmark and Norway and no doubt in most of Europe and North America seem blissfully unaware of precisely how outrageous these images are to Islamic sensibilities.

What is so deeply disappointing is that the Danish and indeed Norwegian authorities have failed to adequately condemn the publication of the image or to directly apologize for the hurt it has caused to everyone in the Muslim world. Instead, we have heard the usual responses about freedom of speech and governments having no control over the press and media.

No one is talking about censorship... BUT... what Muslims are saying that with every freedom comes a responsibility. Something deeply painful to the entire Muslim world was published in a Danish newspaper. That in itself was an irresponsible use of the freedom of the press, which in no country anywhere is an unlimited freedom allowing journalists to vilify, libel or lie.
 

From The Independent

A Danish newspaper suffered bomb scares a day after apologising for cartoons of the Prophet Mohamed which prompted protests from Muslims and a boycott of Danish products in a dozen nations. The offices of Jyllands-Posten in Copenhagen and Arhus were evacuated for a short tim

Stunned by the scale of the reaction, the newspaper - which received 9,000 e-mails on the subject in one day - moved to defuse the row with an appeal published on its website. Carsten Juste, editor-in-chief, said in the open letter, which was also published in Arabic: In our opinion, the 12 drawings were sober. They were not intended to be offensive, nor were they at variance with Danish law, but they have indisputably offended many Muslims for which we apologise.

Under the headline "Honourable Citizens of the Muslim World", the editor defended the publication, arguing: The initiative was taken as part of an ongoing public debate on freedom of expression, a freedom much cherished in Denmark. The apology, which has prompted a fierce debate over freedom of expression, was welcomed by the Danish premier, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. He said: I'm extremely happy that Jyllands-Posten has decided to take this very difficult step. I would now like to appeal to Muslim groups in Denmark to speak out and defuse the situation after Jyllands-Posten's apology.

From FortWayne.com

A Danish Muslim group accepted an apology from a newspaper that published offensive cartoons of the prophet Muhammad but said later that it had decided the statement was ambiguous.

The group did not elaborate, and it was unclear whether there would be any effect on protests and boycotts of Danish goods in Muslim countries.

From The Telegraph

Channel 4 is facing investigation by Ofcom, the television regulator, over a stunt in which a man was hung from a gallows on live television.

Jonathan Goodwin, an escapologist, was supposed to free himself from a noose within 30 seconds but the stunt was said to have failed and a friend had to step in to cut him down.

More than a dozen viewers complained about the programme, Death Wish Live! Channel 4 received six complaints from viewers and Ofcom received seven.

Ofcom is now investigating whether the programme has breached broadcasting guidelines.

A Channel 4 spokesman said: As a result of a pre-arranged safety measure, when Jonathan did not manage to escape within 30 seconds, his friend cut the noose. At no point was Jonathan's life in danger. Jonathan was immediately seen by paramedics on site who have confirmed that he is well and his only injuries are minor rope burns."

Goodwin said: I was told it was dangerous and stupid and it turns out that the advice was right. But despite a sore neck, I am fine and hope to be buried alive on Friday.

From The Observer

Comedian Rowan Atkinson today makes a last-ditch call for MPs to reject a controversial bill that would make it illegal to insult religions.

Atkinson, an outspoken critic of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill, which goes before the Commons on Tuesday, says the move would stifle freedom of speech. The Mr Bean star is part of a vociferous alliance of thespians, atheists and Christians who are lobbying against the bill, which is also being opposed by the Conservatives and the Lib Dems.

Others opponents include Nicholas Hytner, director of the National Theatre; Ian McEwan, a Booker prize-winning author; best-selling children's writer Philip Pullman; and the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey.

The Lords voted by a majority of 149 to narrow the government's proposed new offence of inciting religious hatred to that involving the use of threatening words or behaviour. But Labour now plans to make it an offence to incite religious hatred through the use of insulting or abusive words.

I am deeply concerned for all performers and entertainers, because the climate in which we work will be very different if the government gets its way, Atkinson said. If the wording of the revised bill is read carefully, it can be seen that the new freedoms the government provides with one hand it deftly removes with the other.

Last night Christian groups expressed dismay that the government had opted to reject the Lords' amendments. Our previous relative relief that the Lords had delivered a workable and less extreme bill ... has now turned to alarm, said Dr Don Horrocks, head of public affairs at the Evangelical Alliance.

The practical effect will be to inhibit free speech and writing in such a way that people will worry about saying anything critical of religion.

Keith Porteous-Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, which was instrumental in co-ordinating opposition to the bill, said the legislation would be welcomed only by lawyers. There are an awful lot of litigious people around. Extremists are going to cow people into silence.

It is estimated between 20 and 30 backbench Labour MPs may rebel against the government, suggesting the vote will be very close.

Tuesday's vote will be the last and best chance for parliament to protect freedom of speech, said Lib Dem spokesman Evan Harris. Unless these safeguards are kept in place, the chilling effect of this new offence would be to stifle free expression and set community against community - each seeking to prosecute others for perceived insults.

From The Telegraph

An unlikely alliance of humanists, secularists, Muslims and evangelical Christians issued an eleventh-hour plea to MPs to reject the Government's proposed religious hatred legislation.

The appeal will increase the pressure on ministers to make significant concessions when the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill returns to the House of Commons for a critical vote today.

The group say in a letter to The Daily Telegraph today that the Bill, as it currently stands, will undermine free speech in a society where it is vital to allow debate: As people with strong views on religion, we know how easy it is to offend those with whom you disagree and how easy it is to resent what others say, and see insult in it, the letter says.

But we also recognise that a free society must have the scope to debate, criticise, proselytise, insult and even to ridicule belief and religious practices in order to ensure that there is full scope - short of violence or inciting violence or other criminal offences - to tackle these issues.

The signatories to the letter call on MPs to ensure that amendments to the Bill made by the House of Lords are not reversed in the Commons. Under the Lords amendments the new offence of inciting religious hatred would be restricted to threatening words and behaviour rather than a wider definition including insults and abuse.

The amendments would also require the offence to be intentional and specify that proselytising, discussion, criticism, insult, abuse and ridicule of religion, belief or religious practice would not be an offence.

The signatories to the letter include two Muslims, Dr Ghyasuddin Siddiqui, leader of the Muslim Parliament, and Manzoor Moghal, of the Muslim Forum.

But the Government has indicated that it plans to reverse most of the changes made by the Lords.
 

The victory has rather been eclipsed by the embarrassment of Blair and speculation about his political future. It seems a bit of pity that we cannot celebrate the defeat of the most extreme parts of this bollox law in its own right.

From The Guardian

The government last night suffered a chaotic defeat over its bill to combat religious hatred when a lethal mixture of Labour rebels, abstentions and absentees from Westminster delivered an unexpected triumph to the combined Opposition in both Lords and Commons.

Though the racial and religious hatred bill came from Charles Clarke's Home Office team, and some MPs predicted that chief whip, Hilary Armstrong will today offer her resignation, Tony Blair contributed personally to the defeat by missing the night's second key vote - which was lost by just one vote, his own.

As the Home Secretary immediately confirmed to gleeful MPs in the Commons the two defeats - the first by 288 to 278 votes - mean that the bill will now go for royal assent in the version amended substantially by the Lords last autumn.

Ministers had made concessions to reassure religious critics - Christian and Muslim, as well as atheists and civil libertarians, who claimed the bill was unnecessary and would threaten basic freedom of speech. Several hundred demonstrators had protested outside parliament for much of the day.

During last night's debate on the disputed Lords amendments, it fell to junior minister Paul Goggins to assure MPs he had embraced the need to make changes which will clarify the law and protect the free speech of polemicists and comedians alike. Rowan Atkinson had been a vocal opponent.

Changes made in the Lords now mean that someone charged with an offence would have to be shown to have used "threatening" language - rather than "threatening, insulting and abusive" the test in race cases. It will also mean that the prosecution will have to show "intention" to foment such hatred by the accused rather than intention or "recklessness" as Goggins's compromise had proposed.

As Goggins struggled to make his case he admitted that the cartoons critical of Muhammad which have triggered boycotts and a political crisis in Denmark after being published there could attract prosecution under the bill.

The straight answer is [yes] if there was an intention to stir up hatred or if the person was behaving in a reckless way about the impact of his behaviour, the minister told Labour backbencher Gordon Prentice when MPs on both sides pressed him for specific examples of a likely offence. The disputed cartoons included one showing Muhammad, the founder of Islam, wearing a bomb-shaped turban, and another of him telling suicide bombers he had run out of virgins to award them. MPs offered other examples - such as the punishment of death for seeking to convert Muslims - as possible problem areas.

Based on an article from Manager Online

The Thai Information and Communication Technology Ministry (ICT) is taking another crack at banishing pornography from the country, this time by using hundreds of cyber snitches and closed-circuit television (CCTV) in post offices.

Just a few months after Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra said that the government would begin to shift its focus to an agenda aimed at curing social ills, including pornography, ICT Minister Sora-at Klinpratoom said earlier this week that today will see the start of an initiative that will be executed by hundreds of employees and backed by tougher regulations, with the aim of ensuring that the country’s decency laws are observed.

The ICT has been blocking illegal websites for years, but, according to a spokesman, it has been nearly impossible to stop people from surfing illegal sites, due to the open nature of internet communication technology and the proliferation of websites with obscene content. The ministry estimates that there are more than one million websites with content that violates the law, and these pornographic websites get about one million hits from inside Thailand every day, Sora-at said yesterday.

So far, the ICT has gathered a list of fewer than 2,000 websites with content that is deemed illegal, and has requested that internet service providers (ISPs), such as CAT Telecom (CAT), True and CS Loxinfo, block their users from accessing the sites.

Most internet users access the web through a handful of licensed service providers, all of whom can filter out material from banned websites, said a spokesman at CAT. Every [ISP] has a proxy server and all data go through that server before they appear on subscribers’ computers, he said. So, it is easy for ISPs to filter content. Users usually don’t even know about the filtration process, as banned sites will often come up with normal error messages or “request denied” pages, he said.

The ministry spokesman said that, although they are difficult to breach, filters can stop access to specified websites only, and the ICT has not yet been able to identify every website which violates Thai law.

To get around the problem, the ministry has employed hundreds of so-called “cyber inspectors,” who scour the internet to identify websites with nudity or other obscene material. The ICT has its own website, where citizens can report potentially illegal web content, and it recently began giving away parental control software.

Starting today, the ministry is sponsoring a radio show which parents can call to report illegal websites and receive advice on how to monitor their children’s internet usage. It has installed a telephone hotline and is monitoring post office boxes to catch people who send printed pornography through the mail.

People can rent post office boxes, but they don’t have to register their names, [and] so, they can use them to send [pornographic] DVDs, books [and] CDs. Starting [today], everyone has to register to have a post office box number, and we will soon have CCTV in some post offices, the ministry spokesman said.

The ministry does not have an estimate of the number of people it suspects of viewing online pornography, but if internet porn is as widespread as estimated by Sora-at, the government’s efforts to block websites will have little impact, said telecommunications analysts, who expressed doubt over the government’s ability to stop people from accessing online pornography sites, even with the new policies and the cooperation of ISPs.

From The Telegraph

Google, the giant internet search company, is to lead industry opposition to new proposals from the European Commission to regulate online content.

The company, which last week said it would self-censor its Chinese search engine to appease the country's government, objects to the commission's proposals to extend regulations in the Television Without Frontiers directive (TWFD) to cover video content shown on the internet.

James Purnell, the minister for creative industries, has backed Google's stance. He said: There is no benefit to the consumer that justifies this move. This increased scope could mean significant regulation of the internet and stifle the growth of new media services. That would raise prices for consumers and deprive them of potential new services.

Existing national laws that regulate TV broadcasting - for example, the British ban on tobacco advertising and child porn - were sufficient, he added.

If the proposals became part of European law, Purnell said: in 10 years our successors will bemoan the handicaps we gave to European industry and the restraints we put on free speech. For example, the proposals suggest that member states should ensure that media service providers. . . do not offer material which contains incitement to hatred on grounds of, for example, disability or age. I'm the last person to say that issues like this are not important and of course we have been discussing race and religious hatred in our own Parliament only recently.

But what that debate showed was that these are wide-ranging issues on which there are different, strongly and legitimately held opinions and where intervention must have the strongest justification. Some member states - and I don't just mean the UK - will have serious difficulties with such an approach on grounds of freedom of speech.

The plan to extend the scope of the TWFD is set to go before the European Parliament later this year. The new proposals, if implemented, will govern material shown on the internet which originates in EU member states. The internet industry fears that some content providers will move outside the trading bloc rather than submit to regulation.

The TV and internet industries are moving closer together as new technologies and faster download speeds make it easier to broadcast video on the web.

The Witch Who Came in from the Sea has been passed 18 uncut by the BBFC in 2006.

Amazon Review:

Here is an odd little gem of a film that fortunately ( at least for fans of offbeat cinema) has resurfaced on DVD, boasting a pristine film transfer. Descriptions of the film, the title of the film, and even the DVD cover itself do little to relate, or even hint at what is, as it turns out, an altogether strange, unsettling, humorous, and entertaining cinematic treat. The off kilter acting styles, unnatural tone, and dark humor of the film shares a kinship to the works of David Lynch ( who is too often misused as a comparative description) and is sure to surprise and delight viewers who have an affinity for the outré. Highly recommended.

From KTRE

The Los Angeles city attorney is alleging the makers of the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas video game hid pornography inside it. The lawsuit also accuses Rockstar Games and parent company Take-Two Interactive of making misleading statements and engaging in unfair competition.

The video game includes a secret "mini game" in which characters can engage in explicit sex. City attorney Rocky Delgadillo says the industry board that rates video games gave it a mature rating but would have given it an adults-only rating if it knew of the explicit content. The game's rating was later changed and some big retailers pulled it from shelves.

The game makers haven't commented yet on the lawsuit

Updated 28th January

From The Sun

A violent new British movie about “happy slapping” was facing calls to be banned last night. Nutters fear Kidulthood which features two scenes where yobs film attacks glamorises teenage violence. The movie came under fire days after a teenager was jailed for filming pals kicking a man to death. Lucy Cope, who founded Mothers Against Guns after her son was shot dead in 2002, last night led calls for the film to be banned. The movie set in west London has been compared by some critics to youth classics like Trainspotting and Quadrophenia.

A teenager said to be obsessed with a killer video game was yesterday found guilty of murdering his sister by torching his home in a twisted bid to slaughter his entire family.  The 16-year-old – who modelled himself on a half-human/half-demon PlayStation 2 character – also hit his brother with an axe leaving him brain damaged.  The lad always wore black Goth clothes and called himself Dante after the killer character in the 15-rated game Devil May Cry, the Old Bailey heard. 

Last night the pressure group mediawatch-uk accused the games industry of “living in denial” of the consequences of their products.

Based on an article from Christian Today

This week the nutter bait stage show, Jerry Springer – The Opera, begins with theatres across the country now bracing themselves for protests during the nationwide tour.

Local organisation Action Group has already planned a protest outside the Plymouth Theatre Royal and up to 50 nutters are expected to turn out to voice their concerns.

The 20-city, five-month tour will begin in Plymouth, Devon on Friday after a turbulent period where it was questionable whether the tour would go ahead.

A spokesperson for the Plymouth theatre said there is planned to be extra security on the opening night of the tour. The BBC reported her as saying, We are aware that there are people out there who aren't particularly happy with the fact that we have Jerry Springer. We have got more people who will be present front-of-house to ensure that there are no problems with people who want to come in and see the production and make sure they can gain access.

Previously, one third of the venues had backed down on plans to show the musical after receiving threats of protests by religious pressure group Christian Voice, according to Manchester Online.

The Independent newspaper reported that Stephen Green, the national director of Christian Voice, has announced the organisation's intention to prosecute any venue that shows the Jerry Springer show.

But theatres have joined forces and a deal was agreed upon with the producers, Avalon despite threats of protests. The Independent newspaper has reported that Stuart Griffiths, the chief executive of the Birmingham Hippodrome, said that the tour venues were "absolutely keen" it should go ahead.

But the Bishop of Manchester, the Right Rev Nigel McCulloch, who described the TV broadcast of the musical as “gratuitously offensive” said he has no problem with the show coming to the city.

He said there was a “big difference” of issues because people could choose whether to buy a ticket, according to Manchester Online. "This production has been on stage before and there is a big difference between something on the television and the stage.

Bishop McCulloch said people had a right to “peaceful protest” but warned that violence or threats of violence are not acceptable: I want to distance myself completely from the kind of thing that happened after the televised performance when the lives of people were threatened. That is reprehensible and has nothing to do with any Christian concern.

From the Southport Visitor

Southport nutters have joined in the call against Jerry Springer: The Opera. Around 600 members of Southport churches have signed a petition calling on the Liverpool Empire and the Manchester Opera House to drop performances of the production.

Dave Allen of Elim Pentecostal Church organised the petition.

Spotted by  Mediawatch-UK

Tony Blair, responding to a question about violent computer games from nutter MP Keith Vaz said, in the House of Commons yesterday: My honourable friend has campaigned on that issue for a long time, and I pay tribute to his work. It was partly as result of his representations that we announced last year that we had commissioned our own research to establish whether there was any substance to the allegations of a link between playing violent computer games and violent behaviour in real life. The Department of Culture Media and Sport intends to publish the results of that research shortly. We are also aware of the Missouri-Columbia research to the same effect. We will look carefully at the research and study its impact. We will then have a debate on how we take it forward.

From The Independent

Google has become the latest technology company to founder against the Great Firewall of China with the news that it will censor its search engine to give it greater access to China's fast-growing market.

Google.cn, the company's site aimed at boosting its market share in China, was launched yesterday but will censor itself of politically sensitive material.

The new version could restrict access to thousands of sensitive terms and web sites and make searching for information on topics such as Tibet, Taiwanese independence and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre even harder.

There are 111 million internet users in China and the number is rising swiftly. A growing market of that size is too big to ignore. A survey during the summer showed Google was losing market share to companies such as the Beijing-based Baidu, in which it has a small stake. Domestic giants including Sohu.com Inc. and Baidu.com Inc., along with China sites operated by Yahoo Inc and Microsoft, all routinely block searches on politically sensitive terms.

Google said that it planned to notify users when access had been restricted and argued that it could play a more useful role in China by participating than by boycotting it.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders described the launch as a black day for freedom of expression in China. It said that US firms were bending to the same censorship rules as Chinese competitors.

The Free Tibet Campaign described the move as an endorsement of censorship and repression. With this move, Google's motto 'do no evil' is in smithereens, said the campaign's spokeswoman Alison Reynolds. This also further contradicts those political leaders who attempt to convince us that foreign business can change China for the better.

The Free Tibet Campaign has already protested to Google about its service "Google Earth", in which the word Tibet is not recognised.

Updated 26th Janury

From The Observer

A late-night porn show, which has survived for more than 300 episodes, will probably disappear this month from Seattle's public-access television channel.

Tonight, the Seattle Community Access Network's board is scheduled to approve a definition of obscenity, months in the making, that targets the program's showcasing of porn-video clips. The new definition forbids showing sex acts that lack "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

Station management has tried to remove or tone down the show, Mike Hunt TV, but decided not to revoke producer Mike Aivaz's access to airtime until clear rules could be written. Ann Suter, the station's executive director, says she didn't want to risk a free-speech lawsuit that would take up money and time.

Suter says the station has researched obscenity rules in other cities and believes the new definition can withstand legal challenges. Also, she said, the board's new rule is part of a broader rewriting of policy covering copyright protection, fair distribution of time slots, and content: Our contract with the city says you can't broadcast obscene material.

Aivaz said he should be allowed to show sex acts for a number of reasons: The program is unlikely to be seen by children in its 1 a.m. Thursday time slot; the same footage is sold at video stores, so he believes it doesn't violate community standards; and it is less offensive than violent acts the commercial networks show routinely.

Anthony Riddle, executive director of the national Alliance for Community Media, said many communities argue over obscenity, but Seattle is the only city he's aware of where genital contact routinely appears on a community-access channel.
 

The Seattle Post reported that the Seattle Community Access Network's board voted Wednesday night to enact stricter standards for obscenity in an effort to shut down a late-night sex show that appears on Seattle's public-access cable television station.

The report claimed that in a raucous meeting at the SCAN headquarters, the show's creator and about 30 of his fans said the board's action was censorship.

If you want freedom of speech to look like the Bible Belt, move to the Bible Belt, Mike Aivaz, creator of the show Mike Hunt TV, told board members shortly before they voted 7-1 to approve the new policies. After the vote, the report said that he and his supporters chanted "shame."

Shows can be taken off the air if they are deemed obscene by the network's content review board. Wednesday's vote specified several things that will be considered violations of that standard, including depictions of intercourse and masturbation.

The story claimed that Suter said she will begin enforcing the new rules immediately and said that Aivaz's program will be pulled off the air if he violates the revised policy.

Aivaz's attorney, Gilbert Levy, called the new standard too restrictive, noting that the community accepts sex scenes on cable movies and in adult videos.

The report concluded with Aivaz saying that he likely will challenge the policies in court.

From The Stage

Peers have voted to remove those sections of the Government’s controversial Terrorism Bill that the theatre industry had feared would threaten freedom of artistic expression.

Members of the House of Lords have agreed to take out parts of the bill referring to “glorification” of terrorist acts, which many in the industry believed would have led to artists being prosecuted for work dealing with controversial subjects. The recent Out of Joint production of Talking to Terrorists was one play that opponents to the legislation thought could have been affected. Campaigners will now lobby MPs to ensure the bill is accepted in its amended form in the Commons.

Speaking during the parliamentary debate, Lord Goodhart said: The whole question of glorification is simply going to confuse and trouble the courts. The definition is amazingly wide… If one is looking at past acts of terrorism within the very wide definition of terrorism in the [Terrorism Act 2000], the War of American Independence is a terrorist act. When one then looks at glorification, it includes celebration, so that act of terrorism is celebrated every July 4 on Independence Day.

The National Campaign for the Arts, one of the groups which lobbied for the change, said the wording of the bill was now clearer.

Director Victoria Todd added: When the bill started out it was hopelessly vague. Now it should be very hard to prosecute someone who, for example, puts on a play about terrorism. There had been a lack of clarity about what was prosecutable and what wasn’t, which meant theatre directors might say: ‘I don’t want to get involved in this’.

The NCA had also campaigned for the concept of “recklessness” to be removed from the bill. While that has not happened, the government has provided assurances that the test will be whether or not someone knew that they were being reckless in producing material that could encourage terrorism.

Updated 25th January

From the China Post

Films from India's prolific Bollywood movie industry, officially banned for decades in Pakistan but still watched by millions there, have become legal.

Pakistan outlawed public screenings of Indian films in 1965, the year the nuclear-armed neighbor countries fought the second of their three wars. But now, both countries are working hard on a sweeping peace process.

The Times of India newspaper quoted Saeed Rizvi, president of the Pakistan Film Producers Association, as saying the Indian film ban has been lifted:The censor board on Friday deleted the words 'Indian artiste' and 'Indian director' from the guidelines, which had earlier prevented release of films of Indian actors and directors in Pakistan.

India's Hindi language film industry, dubbed Bollywood, is the world's largest by viewership and the number of films it churns out each year. Millions around the world watch the exuberant song-and-dance features, even in countries where Hindi isn't understood.

Even during the ban, Indian films are hugely popular in Pakistan. Illicit copies are easy to find. Pakistani cultural products are legal in India, and Pakistan's poetry, songs and television dramas are widely popular there. Several Pakistani poets and singers are superstars in India.

The first Indian film to be shown in Pakistan with formal permission will be the 1984 romance Sohni Mahiwal a joint venture between a Russian and an Indian company.

From Hindustan Times

Pakistan on Monday said it would permit public screening of the 1984 Indian movie Sohni Mahiwal, a love story set in Punjab, but it denied having lifted a 40-year-old ban on viewing of Indian movies.

The government has allowed the exhibition of only one Indian movie Sohni Mahiwal on the basis of a court decision, Censor Board chairman Ziauddin said.

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said he was unaware of any decision on the lifting of a ban on Indian films: I have no knowledge of any such decision, Ahmed said reacting to comments by office bearers of the Film Producers Association (FPA) and the Cinema Owners Association (CAO) that the Pakistan government has approved a request to delete the words "Indian artiste" and "Indian director" from censorship guidelines that prevented the release of films featuring Indian actors and directors.

An appeal was made to President Pervez Musharraf and the president has omitted this clause, Pakistan Film Producers Association President Sayed Rizvi had been quoted as saying. Rizvi claimed the changes were approved by Musharraf.

Updated 25th January

From the BBC

There is an air of confusion in Cambodia at the moment. Since New Year's Eve, three prominent human rights activists have been arrested and jailed pending trial for defaming the government.

Several activists and government critics have left the country rather than risk arrest. The leader of the main opposition party is in self-imposed exile - and has recently been sentenced to 18 months in prison for defaming the leaders of the governing coalition.

Human rights groups and diplomats alike say they are increasingly worried about the situation. The United Nations Special Representative to Cambodia on Human Rights, Yash Ghai, believes it is time for the world to worry about the direction Cambodia is taking: The people of Cambodia are deeply committed to human rights precisely because they have suffered so much from the denial of those rights.

The government has had an adversarial relationship with Kem Sokha since he founded the Cambodian Centre for Human Rights three years ago. But the events of New Year's Eve marked a serious escalation of that conflict. The rights worker was arrested and charged with defaming the government because of a banner displayed at a rally to mark International Human Rights Day in December. One of the rally's organisers received similar treatment, and a few days later one of Kem Sokha's colleagues was also arrested and charged.

It was the second round of arrests of government critics in recent months. In October, the government brought charges of defamation and incitement against seven people who also criticised the proposed border treaty. Five of them left the country before they could be arrested, and other critics of the government also fled as rumours swirled around Phnom Penh.

Defamation is a criminal offence in Cambodia, a legacy of the United Nations transitional regime in the early 1990s. Critics say it was a law for exceptional circumstances that should have been replaced by now.

The United States ambassador, Joseph Mussomeli, warned that the debate on the border issue was a real test of Cambodia's commitment to democracy, and it seems they are failing. But Cambodia's politicians are well aware that Western countries are reluctant to add conditions to the hundreds of millions of dollars in aid they provide every year.

The human rights campaigners who have so far escaped jail or arrest warrants are exasperated. They have heard both the government and donors argue that Cambodia needs time to establish a truly democratic system with freedom of speech.

From the BBC

Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen has dropped defamation charges against at least four activists who criticised him, after pressure at home and abroad.

The four - a journalist, union leader, and two human rights activists - were arrested after they accused Hun Sen of ceding Cambodian land to Vietnam.

Hun Sen said he was dropping the charges because he had received letters of apology from the accused. The four were freed on bail last week after a visit by a US diplomat. They were journalist Mom Sonando, union leader Rong Chhun, and activists Kem Sokha and Pa Nguon Tieng.

A fifth man, Yeng Virak, another activist, was freed on bail the week before. It was not immediately clear if Hun Sen was dropping charges against him too.

Hun Sen told reporters he had decided to tell his lawyers to withdraw the lawsuits and "put a smooth end to this affair through compromise".

Several other critics left the country last year before they could be arrested, raising fears about the strength of Cambodia's democracy. Hun Sen said he was prepared to forgive these people too if they also wrote him letters of apology.

But there is no sign of leniency towards exiled opposition leader Sam Rainsy, who was sentenced in absentia last month to 18 months in prison for remarks he made about the governing coalition

From Brand Republic

GCap has apologised for causing offence over a talkback session on Capital Gold in which the presenter described a young, single mother as a "dirty slapper".

Two listeners complained about the programme, which was broadcast at 10.30pm on October 19. They were offended by remarks made by the presenter, Alex Belfield, as well as by language used by two callers in response to his remarks.

The topic under discussion was teenage pregnancies and Belfield referred to a report on a 16-year-old girl who had given birth to triplets.

During the discussion, he condemned the girl in the article and expressed his condemnation of young, single mothers in general, including expressions such as "dirty little tart" and "dirty little slapper". It was in response to these views that two callers to the programme then referred to him as a "cunt".

GCap Media, owner of Capital Gold, has apologised for any offence to listeners and fully acknowledged that the presenter's comments had been inappropriate and unacceptable.

Ofcom said that had taken the issue very seriously, and that the phone-in element was suspended for the rest of the programme that evening and internal measures had since been put in place to address the issues raised by the broadcast: However, the presenter's handling of the discussion was seriously ill-judged and the broadcaster should have taken appropriate steps to prevent callers from using such language live on air. ruling.

It found the station in breach of the rule on general standards.

From The Guardian

The Turkish authorities have dropped charges against the celebrated novelist Orhan Pamuk, thus avoiding the international opprobrium which would have mounted if he had been convicted of a crime for expressing his opinion.

The justice minister, Cemil Cicek, yesterday disavowed responsibility for the case and a municipal court in Istanbul dropped the charges, according to CNN Turk television last night.The EU had said the case raised concerns over freedom of speech in Turkey as it seeks to win EU membership by demonstrating its commitment to European values.

Pamuk was put in the dock last month in Istanbul amid ugly scenes, charged with a criminal offence and facing a potential three years in jail for saying to a Swiss magazine that 30,000 people had died in the conflict between Kurdish nationalists and Turkish security forces, and that a million Armenians had died in Turkey during the first world war - "and nobody but me dares to talk about it".

If the writer's observations may seem commonplace outside Turkey, they were met with protests in the country, which is sensitive to any charge of genocide, which it rejects, in relation to Armenia, and has struggled with armed Kurdish separatism. The decision to try Pamuk, author of the acclaimed novels Snow and My Name Is Red, shocked Istanbul liberals, outraged rights activists and the European Union, and embarrassed the reformist wing of the Turkish government.

A game of pass the parcel followed when the judge in the case adjourned the trial in December and ruled that the justice ministry had to decide on whether it should proceed. Cicek yesterday passed the problem back to the court which promptly said there was no case to answer.

While Pamuk supporters were pleased his ordeal was over, anti-censorship lobbyists noted that scores of others - writers, publishers, and academics - still face trial for "denigrating Turkishness" or for publishing books deemed to be offensive to Turkey's official self-image. The writer was charged under a catch-all article in the penal code which criminalises any belittling of "Turkishness" and also outlaws "insulting" all of the major offices of state as well as the military and parliament.

Updated 22nd January

From the Times of India

The information & broadcasting ministry is in the process of framing guidelines for TV that will make it difficult for private channels to circumvent loopholes.

Inspired by Ofcom guidelines framed by the UK in July 2005, the I&B ministry will introduce 'watershed' timings.

The guidelines will offer a window period after 10 or 11 pm for adult programmes. Anything before the watershed time (that is 9 pm for UK) should be appropriate for children.

At present, there is a general broadcast code in existence that allows only programming with 'universal' or U certificate to be aired but unsurprisingly it is regularly flouted.

A committee under the I&B secretary is likely to finalise the guidelines by February. The other issues that will be looked into while framing the guidelines include the manner in which women are depicted or whether a programme reinforces superstition.

The guidelines are also likely to be stringent on nudity, glamorising use of drugs, smoking, solvent abuse and misuse of alcohol. The current code has only 1 or 2 sections on the parts that will be seen as objectionable. We are looking at detailing each segment so there is less ambiguity, an official said.

From DNA India

The government’s draft programming code says women cannot be depicted in a manner that emphasises passive, submissive qualities and encourages them to play a subordinate, secondary role in the family and society.

The draft guidelines, which have been prepared by a committee including members of the media and consumer groups, are still to be studied by the government.

The code lays down a separate time band, from 11pm to 6am, for programmes meant for adults only. It also says the broadcaster must edit movies “to fit the genre of adult movies for India”.

There should be no explicit sex, no full frontal or rear nudity, no overt sexual situations, and no pornography.

TV channels that get high TRPs by telecasting programmes on the occult also need to watch out.

Serial-makers are divided on these clauses. Producer Manoj Raghuvanshi said a character must evolve in a serial. I don’t mind showing a passive woman who metamorphoses into a confident person. On adult programming, he said, It’s a matter of interpretation in the absence of a clear definition of explicit sexuality.

From The Independent

Memoirs of a Geisha, the hit film based on a best-selling book, has run into trouble in China, home to its leading actresses. Prompted by fears that it will further inflame already rampant anti-Japanese feeling, Chinese film censors have cancelled the planned release of the movie next month.

China's two most famous actresses, Zhang Ziyi and Gong Li, play the leading roles in the film, which was initially approved by the censors. But the state-run Film Bureau has changed its mind. Mao Yu, director of the bureau's propaganda and publishing section, believes Memoirs poses "complex" problems and is "too sensitive". There were complaints in Japan about Chinese actresses portraying Japanese women, but there is outrage in China, where many regard geishas as prostitutes. The 26-year-old Zhang, who shot to fame in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and has since become Asia's most famous actress, has attracted venomous criticism from her compatriots.

With Sino-Japanese relations at their lowest point in decades, the authorities are worried the film will revive lingering resentment over the Japanese treatment of Chinese women before and during the Second World War. Tens of thousands of women were raped by Japanese troops during the infamous Nanjing Massacre in 1937. Thousands more were among the estimated 200,000 Asians forced to work as "comfort women" in Japanese military brothels during the war.

Beijing authorities, who are struggling to maintain their traditionally tight control over creative matters. President Hu Jintao hosted a gala event last month for 700 luminaries of the Chinese film world at the Great Hall Of the People in Beijing. Mr Hu praised them for their part in the modernisation of China, but urged the filmmakers to "stick to the correct political direction all the time".

From Web India 123

Setting aside the Censor Board order directing the deletion of certain scenes and dialogues from the Hindi film Wounded, the Bombay High Court has cleared the film for public viewing.

The film is based on the life story of dacoit Seema Parihar, in which she had herself played a leading role.

A division bench comprising Justice Ranjana Desai and Justice Abhay Oak, who delivered the order on January 18, allowed the screening of the movie with an ''A'' certificate and passed a directive to delete certain scenes.

The film has received various international awards including the jury award in the Leicester International Film Festival, England.

Aggrieved with the Central Board Film Certification (CBFC) order, producer-director Krishna Mishra moved the HC arguing that the Censor Board had directed to delete those scenes which were an integral part of the movie and hence could not be deleted.

Adv Ranjit More, cousel for the filmmaker, argued that Seema Parihar had acted naturally in the movie. He cited the example of another Hindi movie Bandit Queen, which had also contained similar scenes and dialogues and it was allowed to be screened.

Adv R V Desai, appearing for CBFC, contended that the dialogues and scenes in the petitioner's movie were more abusive as compared to Bandit Queen

From The Times

Tessa Jowell, the Culture Secretary, said yesterday that a European Union plan to introduce Internet regulation was unwelcome, arguing that new media were best left to themselves. If we want further regulation, then I believe the best approach is to rely as far as possible on self-regulation. She said that existing EU proposals in a draft directive were “as a whole … still unacceptable.”

The European Union is trying to overhaul the 1989 Television Without Frontiers directive, which sets out a baseline for broadcast regulation across Europe. Although Brussels insists it is producing a light-touch approach, it still wants to introduce new rules on the protection of children and the incitement to hatred. It is the first time that the Culture Secretary has taken a position on the subject, although her stance is in line with a speech made by Lord Currie of Marylebone, the chairman of Ofcom, in Liverpool last autumn. He argued that ordinary criminal law was a sufficient way to regulate the Internet.

From Aftenposten

Despite a Supreme Court ruling that Norway's practice of covering graphic sexual activity in porn films and magazines with black bars needed modernizing, Norway's Media Authority ruled that movies would remain censored.

The Supreme Court ruling was on still photographs. Our assessment concerns moving pictures, said MA director Tom Thoresen.

In December adult magazine editor Stein-Erik Mattsson was finally cleared of violating pornography laws after he provoked a legal crisis by distributing for free a special magazine edition entitled Frie Aktuelle Rapport, which contained images generally hidden behind a censorship bar.

While the MA is not ready to clear the way for uncensored pornographic films, they also made it clear that the depiction of sexual acts did not qualify as an automatic transgression of existing laws, and said that each case must be assessed on its own merits.

We interpret the Supreme Court ruling such that there is no basis in changing the practice we have had in the past few years. Films with an artistic form that show explicit sexual acts have been approved at times in the past. Mass-produced pornography will not be approved, Thoresen said.

Mattsson used a sampling of approved films to convince the Supreme Court that the standard for 'non-offensive' sexuality in films had changed dramatically since the existing law was formed.

From The Guardian

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport yesterday confirmed that Lord Currie would remain as chairman of media regulator Ofcom for a further two years beyond the end of his contract in 2007.

There had been speculation that Lord Currie would step down when his original five-year contract runs out in July next year.

From CNET News

US senators on Thursday blasted what they called an "explosion" in Internet pornography and threatened to enact new laws aimed at targeting sexually explicit Web sites.

At an afternoon hearing convened here by the Senate Commerce Committee, Chairman Ted Stevens, an Alaska Republican, lashed out at an adult entertainment industry representative, saying that the industry needs to take swift moves to devise a rating system and to clearly mark all its material as "adult only.": My advice is you tell your clients they better do it soon, because we'll mandate it if they don't, Stevens said.

Though it wasn't mentioned at the hearing, Web browsers have long supported the Internet standard called PICS, or Platform for Internet Content Selection. Internet Explorer, for instance, permits parents to disable access to Web sites rated as violent or sexually explicit.

In addition, mandatory rating systems have frequently been struck down by courts as an affront to the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of expression. Judges have ruled it unconstitutional for governments to enforce the Motion Picture Association of America's movie-rating system. The Supreme Court has said that the right to speak freely encompasses the right not to speak--including the right not to be forced to self-label.

Sen. Blanche Lincoln, an Arkansas Democrat, talked up her bill that she and a handful of Democrats announced last year. It proposes a 25 percent excise tax on revenue from most adult-oriented sites and a requirement that all such sites use an age-verification system: Too few adult Web sites are taking the extra step to create another obstacle, another barrier, that can keep youngsters from accessing or stumbling on pornography.

From CNET News

Federal prosecutors preparing to defend a controversial Internet pornography law in court have asked Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and America Online to hand over millions of search records--a request that Google is adamantly denying.

In court documents filed Wednesday, the Bush administration asked a federal judge in San Jose, Calif., to force Google to comply with a subpoena for the information, which would reveal the search terms of a broad swath of the search engine's visitors.

Prosecutors are requesting a "random sampling" of 1 million Internet addresses accessible through Google's popular search engine, and a random sampling of 1 million search queries submitted to Google over a one-week period.

Google said in a statement sent to CNET News.com on Thursday that it will resist the request "vigorously."

The Bush administration's request, first reported by The San Jose Mercury News, is part of its attempts to defend the 1998 Child Online Protection Act, which is being challenged in court in Philadelphia by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU says Web sites cannot realistically comply with COPA and that the law violates the right to freedom of speech mandated by the First Amendment.

An attorney for the ACLU said Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL received identical subpoenas and chose to comply with them rather than fight the request in court.

Yahoo acknowledged on Thursday that it complied with the Justice Department's request but said no personally identifiable information was handed over. We are vigorous defenders of our users' privacy, said Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako. We did not provide any personal information in response to the Justice Department's subpoena. In our opinion this is not a privacy issue.

Osako declined to provide details, but court documents in the Google case show that the government has been demanding "the text of each search string entered" by users over a time period of between one week and two months, plus a listing of Web sites taken from the search engine's index.

Our understanding is that MSN and AOL have complied with the government's request, that Yahoo has provided some information in response, but that information wasn't completely satisfactory (according to) the government, ACLU staff attorney Aden Fine said.

AOL spokesman Andrew Weinstein confirmed that the company received a subpoena from the DOJ but said the information from the ACLU was not accurate. We did not and would not comply with such a subpoena. We gave (the DOJ) a generic list of aggregate and anonymous search terms, and not results, from a roughly one day period. There were absolutely no privacy implications, Weinstein said. There was no way to tie those search terms to individuals or to search results. He declined to elaborate.

In a statement, Microsoft said it was, in fact, contacted by the DOJ. We did comply with their request for data in regards to helping protect children, in a way that ensured we also protected the privacy of our customers, the company said. We were able to share aggregated query data (not search results) that did not include any personally identifiable information, at their request.

Court documents reveal that the Justice Department has been pressuring Google for excerpts from its search logs for half a year. Prosecutors hope to use the excerpts to show that filtering software can't protect children online.

In a motion filed Wednesday, prosecutors say that compliance is necessary to prove that the 1998 law is more effective than filtering software in protecting minors from exposure to harmful materials on the Internet. Records from search logs would help to understand the behavior of Web users and estimate how frequently they encounter pornography, the motion says. For instance, Internet addresses obtained from the search engines could be tested against filtering programs to evaluate their effectiveness.

A subpoena dated August 2005 requests a complete list of all Internet addresses that can "be located" through Google's popular search engine, and "all queries that have been entered" over a two-month period beginning on June 1, 2005. Later, prosecutors offered to narrow the request to random samples of indexed sites and search strings. It's unclear what version of the request AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo complied with.

To analyze the logs, the Justice Department has hired Philip Stark, a professor of statistics at the University of California, Berkeley. Stark said in a statement that analyzing information from Google would let him "estimate the prevalence of harmful-to-minors" and the "effectiveness of content filters" in blocking it.

From The Observer

British artist Sam Taylor-Wood has made a porn film. It's quite rude. A man is walking in a desert. After a while, he stops. First, he takes off his T-shirt. Then he puts his hand inside his pants. Basically, he masturbates for eight minutes.

When Taylor-Wood was asked to take part in this project (other directors in the Destricted series include Larry Clark of Kids fame and the American performance artist Matthew Barney), her instinct was to turn it down but she rose to the challenge.

If people watch my film wanting to get excited, I think they'll be disappointed, says Taylor-Wood. I want you to feel the loneliness of it, this vast, empty landscape. What's going on in this man's head that has made him stop in the desert?  Does she think her film is erotic? Not at all.

The film is one of a series of new arty porn shorts that will open the Sundance film festival on Thursday

From AVN

Explicit sex scenes in Mexican filmmaker Carlos Reygadas' latest film, Battle in Heaven, proved too hot for Sundance Film Festival officials last week after they abruptly pulled its Jan. 20 screening.

The film, which features a cast of amateur actors will be rescheduled.

Battle in Heaven received some acclaim, but was also widely criticized for its graphic sex and nudity at last year’s Cannes film festival. The film takes place in Mexico City and follows the life of a middle-aged chauffeur who takes up with the prostitute daughter of a Mexican general. It’s scheduled for release nationally in March through Tartan Films.

Note that the old format website is still running (and being updated) at Mediawatch-UK

Thanks to Dan

Mediawatch-uk have generated a new website in a new format:

www.mediawatch-uk.org.uk/portal

But their campaign hasn't changed. Seeking to hold broadcasters to account? More like seeking to stop
anyone viewing anything they disapprove of.