An impressive dystopian short by Chris Cousins which explores the inherent threat of censorship in a world where art, culture and data are stored and controlled digitally.
Barrow Street, Grand Canal Dock, Dublin 2
A protest will be held over “the gardai’s inaction” toward what organisers allege as “the ongoing open incitement to hatred taking place on the streets of Dublin”.
Daily protests led by Anti Corruption Ireland founder Gemma O’Doherty, who was de-platformed by Google-owned YouTube, have taken place outside the tech giant’s Dublin HQ.
These protests are now entering their fifth week.
Dublin Says No To Hate regard Anti-Corruption Ireland as ‘anti-immigrant’ (a charge ACI strenuously deny).
They have urged social media companies to censor and de-platform others they consider to be ‘far right’.
The video was removed by YouTube and she was served with a seven-day suspension, which prevented her from uploading new content on her channel, which has more than 26,000 subscribers.
However, [Ms O’Doherty] appeared to circumvent the ban by posting a series of new videos under a second account bearing her name with 14,000 subscribers, which is a violation of YouTube’s rules.
A spokeswoman for Google – which owns YouTube – confirmed that both Ms O’Doherty’s accounts have been removed for “repeat” breaches of its rules.
The Best Banned in the Land – A Forum on Artistic Freedom of Expression.
On Tuesday, April 30, from 11am until 4pm.
At the Projects Arts Centre in Temple Bar, East Sussex Street, Dublin 2.
The ordered removal of Maser’s Repeal the 8th mural has brought censorship to the fore once again. Is freedom of artistic expression being limited in Ireland? Are issues such as funding, promotion, social media restrictions and discrimination creating conditions for self-censorship?
Join a host of artists and activists as we remember and examine the role of censorship. Guests include Be Aware Theatre Company, Lian Bell, Donal Fallon, Declan Long, Una Mullally, and more to be announced.
A light lunch will be provided.
Glamour Pam (right) as she was shown on the BBC Africa documentary Fake Me: Living For Likes
But the BBC Africa documentary, which looked at how people portray themselves differently on social media, was edited because of concerns about adverse reaction in some of the more conservative African countries where it was shown, prompting a debate at the BBC about whether the corporation should be censoring women’s bodies.
“The decision to deal with Pam’s cleavage was made at senior editorial level at BBC Africa,” said one internal email discussing the incident and justifying the decision.
Biddy Bitcoin writes:
This is surreal. Shambolic censorship of a woman’s body. Why?
On Thursday, September 28.
In St Mary’s Cathedral, Limerick.
Kevin Myers will moderate a talk, entitled ‘How censorship stifles debate and undermines the tenets of free and democratic societies’.
Anne Sheridan, in the Limerick Leader, reports:
The talk will be given by Jodie Ginsberg, of the Index on Censorship, which publishes the work by censored writers and artists and campaigns for free expression worldwide…
David O’Brien, chief executive of Limerick Civic Trust, which has organised the series of talks, said he has not read Myers’ widely criticised article, entitled ‘Sorry, ladies – equal pay has to be earned’, but stressed their talks are about “encouraging debate and having opposing views”.
But Prof O’Connor [Prof Emeritus Pat O’Connor, of sociology and social policy, at University of Limerick] said her concern is that “with this platform, they are framing Kevin Myers as the defender of free speech by putting him in that position.
“I suspect that it is simply an attempt to drum up an audience by being controversial. In these sort of situations, the best thing one can do is to ignore.
“It’s not an acceptable position to say everyone is entitled to free speech if it stirs up hatred against any one group. It’s not an uncontested right,” said Prof O’Connor.
“I have no time for political correctness. I think if the heart is right, the lip can be forgiven. But it seems to be giving a platform to Kevin Myers, and legitimising opinions that many people found offensive.”
Prof O’Connor, a visiting Fellow at University College Dublin’s Geary Institute, said she won’t be attending the talk, as there were “too many crazy assumptions in his column”.
…“I have no time for political correctness. I think if the heart is right, the lip can be forgiven. But it seems to be giving a platform to Kevin Myers, and legitimising opinions that many people found offensive.”
…“He said men are more charismatic, and that is one of the reasons why they get ahead, but I’m afraid we all know an awful lot of boring men. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much. When there are as many mediocre women as mediocre men in the top jobs, we’ll have equality,” she said.
Previously: Listening To Kevin
Further to Labour Senator Lorraine Higgins’ controversial proposed bill to combat
Former Labour communications minister Pat Rabbitte has published his own bill , The Public Electronic Communications Networks (Improper Use) Act 2015, which proposes:
“On convicting a person for an offence [sending ‘grossly offensive’ messages], the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed for the offence, order any apparatus, equipment or other thing used in the course of committing the offence to be forfeited to the State.”
That’s your tablet that is.
Mark Malone writes:
… imagine you send a tweet sugggesting Pat Rabbitte was a bit of a hypocrite condemning political organisations with links to paramilitaries who murdered people, given his own political history. Granted that might be hard to fit into 140 characters, but imagine it was possible for the sake of an example.
And say Pat Rabbitte was a litigious sort of character who didn’t want to be publicly associated with any of the murders, bank robberies or lots of stuff the Official IRA was involved in when he was member of the Workers Party, the political wing of the OIRA.
I guess you’d be into a couple of tweets now, something that might be construed by Rabbitte and his expensive legal team and barristers as “persistent and without legitimate cause”.
It probably might not matter that you feel it important to public discourse that many younger people ought know that that a former minister – responsible for promoting austerity and a gagging law – was once a member of a politico-paramilitary organisation that murdered people.
You might even infer that the Stalinist tendencies embodied in WP/OIRA back in the day could be found in a bill that seeks to quash public online political dissent today by actually making it illegal to be a political nuisance.
So you are taken to court and found guilty. Say your day job was a graphic designer, or architect or any other job that requires a laptop and/or mobile phone and access to the net. Your ability to earn a wage (or get donations) relies on these things. Rabbitte’s bill allows for a judge to remove that wage earning ability by seizing the tools of your trade….
Previously: What Are They Playing At
(Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland)
Labour Senator John Whelan
Labour Senator John Whelan was a contributor on RTÉ’s Late Debate, presented by Cormac O’hEadhra, on November 5.
During the interview, there was this exchange:
John Whelan: “I believe the contract should have been awarded, the record will show, to Bord na Móna. I believe that Bord Gáis, and this is why the Government has gone in, Alan Kelly has gone in and stripped it back, the board has to be reconfigured, reconstituted and…interrupted.”
Cormac O’hEadhra: “Wait now, this is very serious John. What you’re saying this evening, surely, does that not render the validity of the Bill, the Act all null and void?”
Whelan: “No, what I’m saying is this. Bord Gáis through the process of New Era and the line minister at the time made a pitch to establish Irish Water and I believe they did so under false pretences and they haven’t delivered.”
On November 14, Anthony Sheridan, of the blog Public Inquiry, noted that Senator Whelan’s relevant remarks were removed from RTÉ’s radio playback service.
Yesterday, the Irish Times reported on RTÉ’s decision to remove the remarks, quoting an RTÉ spokeswoman saying: “The comment on The Late Debate was removed from playback following an internal editorial decision. This can happen on occasion with a live programme.”
It also reported Senator Whelan, a journalist, saying: “I said what I said in the knowledge of the full import of what I was saying and I did not need the privilege of the House to do so… There was no libel and no slander. It was fair comment on a matter in the public interest.”
However, this morning, Mr Sheridan writes:
“I see the Irish Times took up my story surrounding the dramatic revelation by Labour Senator John Wilson that Bord Gais had made their pitch to establish Irish Water under false pretences.”
“Bizarrely, however, the Irish Times took the same line as RTE and, effectively, censored the principal allegation made by Senator Whelan.”
“Here’s the exact charge made by the Senator against Bord Gáis:”
“No, what I’m saying is this. Bord Gáis through the process of New Era and the line minister at the time made a pitch to establish Irish Water and I believe they did so under false pretences and they haven’t delivered.”
“Here’s how the Irish Times reported his allegations:”
“No, what I’m saying is this: Bord Gáis through the process of New Era and the line minister at the time made a pitch to establish Irish Water . . . and they haven’t delivered.”
“Leaving out the words; ‘under false pretences’ strips the report of any relevance, it effectively kills the story.”
“So much for the ‘paper of record’.”