Censor Watch

In March this year, the Belgian parliament passed the Anti-Sexism Act ( Antiseksismewet ), which bans sexist speech from public life, be it in books, magazines or on the internet.

The new law is bound to raise countless problems, and not just in Belgium. For as long as there is someone in Belgium who is exposed to speech they deem sexist , under the terms of the new law it will be possible for that individual to instigate criminal proceedings. This means that any speech or form of expression that merely reaches Belgium could be subject to prosecution.

Inevitably the text is drafted so vaguely and broadly as to render its application limitless. Sexism is defined as any gesture or action intended to express contempt towards someone because of their sex, or to regard a person as inferior , or to reduce someone to his or her sexual dimension . Additionally, a violation of someone's dignity is required.

...Read the full article

Filmmakers and importers will soon have to dip deeper into their pockets to have their film certified by the Malaysian Film Censorship Board.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said the censorship fee would be reviewed after 30 years. He said the current rate was based on the Film Censorship Regulations 1984 that had not been amended since it came into force. He said:

The number of local and imported films have been on the rise, thus increasing the burden on the board. Industry players must accept the reality that changes require a high cost and the costs borne by the Government is no longer fair. We have to charge a reasonable fee to those who produce and import films,

He also urged industry players to understand the board's responsibility in ensuring that creative works by filmmakers were censored to the satisfaction of the Board moralists:

Don't just look to making a profit by producing films based on superstitions, toyol and ghost stories as we must balance art with social responsibility.

Film Rating Advisors Inc (FRA) is a consulting company backed by former MPAA raters, that has just launched this month to work with filmmakers to get the MPAA ratings they desire.

FRA co-founders Howard Fridkin and Barry Freeman offer their combined 23 years of MPAA experience, which includes the rating of more than 15,000 films. By viewing a film prior to its MPAA screening, FRA is able to assess any potential ratings issues in detail, then work closely with the filmmaker to trim the scenes to prevent more substantial edits that might occur from an unexpected rating. Fridkin said:

Often, filmmakers are completely surprised by the MPAA and their opinion on what constitutes suitable material for a particular age group. The need to reshoot can be cost prohibitive, while these suggested edits can detract from the director's vision. However, Barry and I, having been longtime raters, are able to catch these 'issues' early on. We can prevent the need for heavy-handed editing as a result of what the filmmaker perceives as a mis-rated film.

Thailand's Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT) officials called for greater support in their efforts to censor supposedly inappropriate online content.

Piyakhun Nopphakhun, of the Crime Suppression Division of MICT claimed that:

Even though the military has taken over, they have not commanded us about what to do.

This rather begs the question as to why then is the group looking to ratchet up internet censorship.

Since the coup began, the Royal Thai Army has ordered ISPs to monitor online content that might lead to unrest, asked social media companies to prevent the spread of provocative messages and barred media from presenting news critical of the junta.

Piyakhun then ludicrously claimed that he believed that recent efforts by the Ministry to curb online content were not political in nature. But then he acknowledged that efforts to curb online content could be seen to violate rights.

This is not because of the coup, it is very normal practice. But I agree that the coup will have some effect. They (the Royal Thai Army) will put more people into helping fight the websites. Some people may ask about freedom of expression. I have to say that it will actually affect (this).

Piyakhun is keen to speed up the censorship process. He explained:

It takes about a week to block a website. One or two days to gather evidence. One or two days to get permission from MICT. One or two days to go to court. One or two days to distribute court orders to ISPs. One week is too slow.

At the moment everything is on paper. You have to print it out, present the evidence to the Ministers and the courts, and you have to present papers to the ISPs. If documents are not signed, we have to wait even longer. Computer officials have to physically travel to the courts to receive court orders.

At the moment we are in the process of getting approval to distribute court orders to the ISPs electronically. We are going to appoint one representative ISP to distribute these court orders to the other ISPs, because that representative would know which ISPs are active.

Technically, it is going to be very easy. But legally, is the only question. Are there any laws, regulations that allow us to do this legally? Do we really need to be present in court to present evidence?

Update: Attempted block of Facebook

16th June 2014. See article from bangkokpost.com

The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) has condemned the Norway-based mobile operator Total Access Communication (DTAC) and asked it to clarify a company statement regarding an order by the internet censor to block Facebook.

Telenor of Norway, which owns DTAC, this week claimed online that Telenor Group confirmed that on May 28, DTAC received notification from the NBTC at 3pm that it must temporarily restrict access to Facebook. The restriction, which was implemented at 3.35pm, affected DTAC's 10 million Facebook-using customers. Telenor said it believed in open communication and regretted any consequences this might have had for the people of Thailand. Access to Facebook was restored at about 4.30pm, according to Telenor's statement.

But the Thai authorities weakly claimed the Facebook blackout was due to technical glitches and not purposely blocked. Colonel Settapong Malisuwan, chairman of the NBTC's telecom committee flannelled:

DTAC's statement has caused extensive damage to the regulator's image. We want the company to take responsibility by clarifying exactly who ordered Facebook to be blocked.

A Turkish court handed a 15-month jail term to a teacher over Twitter posts deemed religiously offensive, local media reported.

The court in the city of Mus ruled that the man, identified as Ertan P., supposedly insulted Islamic values with his Twitter handle @allah, and a series of tweets he posted. Pretending to tweet as God, he wrote:

In my present state of mind, I would not have created the little finger of human beings.

Here (heaven) is very safe because there is no police.

Index on Censorship and Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso are joining forces to map the state of media freedom in Europe. With your participation, we are mapping the violations, threats and limitations that European media professionals, bloggers and citizen journalists face everyday. We are also collecting feedback on what would support journalists in such situations.

Help protect media freedom and democracy by contributing to this crowd-sourcing effort!