Tag: Infowars

It’s not about Alex Jones: National Coalition Against Censorship Weighs In

Simultaneous removals of the alt-right media personality from online platforms raise questions about content regulation, censorship and who chooses what we can see.
This week, Facebook, YouTube, Apple and Spotify removed posts, videos and podcasts from Alex Jones and his platform, Infowars. Many, across the political spectrum, breathed sighs of relief.

The removals shine a harsh light on the challenges tech companies face in applying their own content regulations.

Online platforms have been grappling for years with how to manage speech they–and many of their users–dislike. The New York Timeshas a good primer on how various platforms have approached regulating users’ content.

As private companies, these firms are free to take down whatever they want. They also serve as the largest global forums for the exchange of ideas–and presumably want to stay that way. But their guidelines surrounding offensive content remain vague, subjective and confusing. What happens when the gatekeepers dislike speech you agree with? Who decides what is offensive enough to ban? Who draws the line? Do you really trust them to do it well?

As Nadine Strossen writes, “Entrusting these powerful private-sector companies to decide what we can see, hear and discuss online is, simply put, a very bad idea.”

Where do we go from here?
Before we enthusiastically outsource control of the online public sphere to Big Tech, we need to consider the implications. There are other ways to confront the toxic conspiracy theories Infowars peddles in. We stand with our allies working in internet freedom, journalism and government transparency to defend free expression. As we deal with toxic online speech, we must remain true to our commitment to First Amendment principles.

Our democracy demands that we protect free expression. 

 

What do you think?

We need your stories of internet censorship, thoughts on current methods of content regulation and what solutions you’d like to see.
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!

No, a man was not convicted in Sweden for ‘eating bacon’

Today Infowars linked to the following story, now widely shared on various social media sites. Before you start sharing away, The Local Se, a website dedicated to providing Sweden’s news in English, gives a more accurate accounting of the case.

Sweden: Man sentenced for eating bacon in front of Muslims

https://www.thelocal.se/20170901/no-a-man-was-not-convicted-in-sweden-for-eating-bacon

A story making headlines in some media outlets claims that a man was convicted in Sweden for ‘eating bacon’ in front of women wearing veils. But the reality is that the man was charged after insulting them on the grounds of their ethnicity and religion.

The incident, which happened on a commuter train to Stockholm suburb Märsta in 2015, saw a 52-year-old man walk up to a group of three women who were wearing veils, then hold bacon in front of their face and demand that they should eat it.

When the three women changed to different seats, the man followed them. He also said he “hates muslims”. Attunda District Court judged that the man’s intention was to insult the three passengers on the grounds of their ethnic origin and creed.

According to the court’s judgement, which The Local has seen, the man “held bacon up to their faces, demanded that they eat it, then ate it in front of them. From CCTV evidence from the train it is clear that there was ample seating space in other parts of the train. Despite that, he followed the plaintiffs when they changed place in order to avoid him, and facing them, which is made clear by the CCTV film, continued to eat bacon in front of them”.

“At this stage, he stated to the plaintiffs that he ‘hates Muslims’. The district court considers his actions make it clear that the purpose was to insult the plaintiffs because of their ethnic origin and creed,” the document continues.

Evidence from CCTV footage, witness statements and accounts provided by the three women was used in the case. The man was ordered to pay damages of 5,000 kronor to each of the women, as well as 60 “day-fines” – a type of fine based on the offender’s income.

The 52-year-old also stood accused of racial agitation over an incident a year later at a subway station in Stockholm where it was claimed that he said “I hate muslims” and “bloody Arab” (“jävla arab”). The man was acquitted in that case however as it was judged that there was not sufficient proof for a conviction.