A stinging attack by John Hartigan, the CEO of Rupert Murdoch’s News Limited, labels bloggers and alternative media outlets as “political extremists”. Hartigan implies that bloggers should be jailed as they are in oppressive police states like China and Burma.
In a speech to the National Press Club, Hartigan savagely dismissed blogs as, “Something of such little intellectual value as to be barely discernible from massive ignorance.”
“Bloggers don’t go to jail for their work. They simply aren’t held accountable like real reporters….It could be said the blogosphere is all eyeballs and no insights,” barked Hartigan.
“In the blogosphere, of course, the mainstream media is always found wanting. It really is time this myth was blown apart.”
“Blogs, and a large number of comment sites, specialise in political extremism and personal vilification. Radical sweeping statements without evidence are common.”
Hartigan doesn’t seem to grasp the fact that the mainstream media is always found wanting because they habitually lie about news events and spin stories to suit the demands of their corporate owners. This is the very reason why blogs and alternative media outlets have become so popular and have eaten into the mainstream media’s audience share, because people are sick of being treated like idiots, sick of being lied to, and are desperately in search of the truth.
Indeed, Hartigan’s boss Rupert Murdoch confessed to the fact that his media empire tried to shape public opinion to support the war in Iraq In other words, Murdoch’s many prominent news outlets wantonly put out propaganda supporting the manufactured case for invasion. Murdoch admitted to this while lamenting the corporate media’s “loss of power” to alternative media and Internet blogs, seemingly unaware of the fact that the two are directly connected.
Read full article »»
A newly designed Internet Protocol, restricting communication source autonomy, is being quietly drafted with detailed technical standards that “define methods of tracing the original source of Internet communications and potentially curbing the ability of users to remain anonymous” by a United Nations agency. The “IP Traceback” drafting group, which has declined to release key documents or allow their meetings to be open to the public, includes, among others, the United States National Security Agency. While the traceback proposal is not scheduled to be released or finished until 2009, concerns are already being raised by privacy advocates that should the US adopt this or a similar proposal, the right to Internet anonymity would disappear, a right they claim is guaranteed by the Constitution. There is also concern that IP traceback would be abused, under the guise of public protection in light of current suspected terrorist activities, and become yet another method for the government to become Big Brother.
In 1995, the Supreme Court decided McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, ruling that the Constitution does not permit the punishing of an author of political handbills who failed to include her identity on those publications. Specifically, the majority states:
“The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But… our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuses.”
This case is routinely used by privacy advocates to support the concept that a right to anonymity exists and that it is protected under the First Amendment’s right to free speech and expression. Further evidence is claimed from U.S. legal history, which has a long tradition of protecting anonymous speech, beginning with the Federalist papers written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison under a pseudonym. However, the Supreme Court has never completely addressed or resolved the scope of protection the First Amendment affords to the disclosure of one’s identity. So, the question remains, would the IP traceback proposal, which essentially eliminates Internet anonymity, be a violation of the First Amendment?
Mais uma vez, obrigado Táxi Pluvioso!
The European Commission is once again calling for the United States to let go of ICANN and place it under international supervision.
Echoing an earlier appeal from EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media, Viviane Reding, the Commission said in a statement today that future internet governance “should reflect the key role that global network has come to play for all countries.”
ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is a California-based non-profit group that oversees the internet’s address system. It currently operates under a Joint Project Agreement with the US government, which expires at the end of September 2009.
“It is an appropriate time therefore for the EU to review the progress of ICANN to date, and to identify what changes if any may be desirable,” the Commission said.
Read full article »»
Vote in the European Parliament on May 5, 2009
Do not let the European Parliament close the Internet … It will not come back!
Access to the Internet is not unconditional
All those who have a website, a blog as well as those who use Google or Skype, all those who like to express their views freely, investigating in a way understood to be for personal issues, professional or academic, all that shopping online, making online friends, listening to music or watching videos …
Million of Europeans depend on the Internet either directly or indirectly as part of their lifestyle. To take it away, to limit it, to restrict it or to condition it will have a direct impact on what we do. And if a small business depends on the Internet to survive, making it inaccessible in a period of crisis in which we can survive cannot be good.
Therefore we know the Internet is threatened with extinction by the new laws that the European Union wants to propose at the end of April. Secondly, under these laws, service providers, that is companies that provide us with the Internet, PT, Zon, Clix and many others, will be able to legally limit the number of websites we visit, besides being able to limit the use or subscription for any services that we want from any site.
People will have the kind of internet packages similar to those on the current television. It will be advertised with many “new services,” but they will be exclusively controlled by the Internet provider, with access options for sites highly restricted.
This means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and post content will be severely restricted. It will create packages of accessibility on the Internet that are not adapted to the actual use that we give to the Internet today.
The reason is simple…
Today the Internet allows exchanges between persons who are not controlled or promoted by an intermediary (the state or a large enterprise), and this situation in fact improves people’s lives, but it forces the large corporations to lose power, control and profits. And it is for this that these enterprises force the “friendly” politicians to act before this situation.
The excuse is the piracy of movies and music, but the real victims will be all of us, democracy and cultural independence and information for the citizen.
SPY chiefs are pressing ahead with secret plans to monitor all internet use and telephone calls in Britain despite an announcement by Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, of a ministerial climbdown over public surveillance.
GCHQ, the government’s eavesdropping centre, is developing classified technology to intercept and monitor all e-mails, website visits and social networking sessions in Britain. The agency will also be able to track telephone calls made over the internet, as well as all phone calls to land lines and mobiles.
The £1 billion snooping project — called Mastering the Internet (MTI) — will rely on thousands of “black box” probes being covertly inserted across online infrastructure.
The top-secret programme began to be implemented last year, but its existence has been inadvertently disclosed through a GCHQ job advertisement carried in the computer trade press.
Read full article »»
Millions of Europeans now depend on the Internet, directly or indirectly, for their livelihood. Taking it away, chopping it up, ‘restricting it’, ‘limiting it’ and placing conditions on our use of it, will have a direct impact on people’s earnings. And in the current financial climate, that can’t be good.
The internet as we know it is at risk because of proposed new EU rules going through end of April. Under the proposed new rules, broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look
at, and to tell you whether or not you are allowed to use particular services. It will be dressed up as ‘new consumer options’ which people can choose from. People will be offered TV-like packages – with a limited
number of options for you to access.
It means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and to put up content could be severely restricted. It will create boxes of Internet accessibility, which don’t fit with the way we use it today. This is because internet is now permitting exchanges between persons which cannot be controlled or “facilitated” by any middlemen (the state or a corporation) and this possibility improves the citizen’s life but force the industry to lose power and control. that’s why they are pushing governments to act those changes.
UK Security Minister Lord West confirms officials considering on-demand wiretapping of all communications over the Internet…Posted: April 22, 2009
The security minister has confirmed officials are considering installing technology that could enable on-demand wiretapping of all communications passing over the internet by the intelligence services and law enforcement.
Lord West told Parliament on Monday that civil servants working on the Interception Modernisation Programme (IMP) were considering how Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) equipment “might support the lawful interception of communications and separately the lawful acquisition of communications data”.
It’s the first time the government has publicly acknowledged its interest in DPI equipment. A delayed Home Office consultation on IMP is due to be launched “shortly”, West said.
Read full article »»
Britain’s failure to protect its citizens from secret surveillance on the internet is to be investigated by the European Commission.
The move will fuel claims that Britain is sliding towards a Big Brother state and could end with the Government being forced to defend its policy on internet privacy in front of judges in Europe.
The legal action is being brought over the use of controversial behavioural advertising services which were tested on BT’s internet customers without their consent.
Yesterday, the EU said it wanted “clear consent” from internet users that their private data was being used to gather commercial information about their web shopping habits.
Under the programme, the UK-listed company Phorm has developed technology that allows internet service providers (ISPs) to track what their users are doing online. ISPs can then sell that information to media companies and advertisers, who can use it to place more relevant advertisements on websites the user subsequently visits. The EU has accused Britain of turning a blind eye to the growth in this kind of internet marketing.
Read full article »»
A recently proposed but little-noticed Senate bill would allow the federal government to shut down the Internet in times of declared emergency, and enables unprecedented federal oversight of private network administration.
The bill’s draft states that “the president may order a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic” and would give the government ongoing access to “all relevant data concerning (critical infrastructure) networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.”
Authored by Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 seeks to create a Cybersecurity Czar to centralize power now held by the Pentagon, National Security Agency, Department of Commerce and the Department of Homeland Security.
Read full article »»
The European Union started legal action against Britain on Tuesday for not applying EU data privacy rules that would restrict an Internet advertising tracker, called Phorm, from watching how users surf the web.
The EU regulators also warned that they could force social networking sites like Facebook or MySpace to hide minors’ profiles from search engines.
The European Commission said Britain should outlaw Internet traffic interception and monitoring unless users give explicit consent that their behavior can be tracked and analyzed.
It said it had received numerous complaints about BT Group PLC, which tested Phorm in 2006 and 2007 without informing customers involved in the trial. Phorm analyzes Internet users’ behavior so it can target them with advertising that might appeal to them.
Read full article »»
Privacy campaigners expressed alarm today over government plans to monitor all conversations on social networking sites in an attempt to crackdown on terror.
A Home Office spokesman said that the internet eavesdropping plan, which would be set out in the next few weeks, would cover any social network that allows people to chat to one another, including Facebook, MySpace, Bebo and Twitter as well as internet calls on Skype.
He said the proposal would update existing plans to store information about every telephone call, email, and internet visit made by anyone in the UK on a central database.
Read full article >>
According to the great-grandson John D. Rockefeller, nephew of banker David Rockefeller, and former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller the internet represents a serious threat to national security. Rockefeller is not alone in this assessment. His belief that the internet is the “number one national hazard” to national security is shared by the former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Obama’s current director Admiral Dennis C. Blair.
Read full article >>