text:
Why do Venezuelans see their country reflected in George Orwell’s “1984”? · Global Voices
Laura Vidal

“Big Brother Is Watching You” Montage elaborated by César Courbenas, used with permission.
For many within Venezuela and abroad, Big Brother is tightening his grip on the nation. References online comparing George Orwell's popular novel with the situation in Venezuela have not been few, isolated or only recently mentioned.
Winston Smith, the novel's main character, wants to rebel and collaborate with the overthrowing of the government that controls its citizens and brutally punishes those who commit crimes — or even think about doing so.
Orwell's novel succeeds in portraying a totalitarian government that controls and manages the public and private lives of its citizens. And beyond the book and its story, Orwell also creates a universe of symbols and metaphors in which language and history are important pieces of a solid strategy for social control.
Orwell's totalitarian portrayal has also reached a universality that few novels have achieved. Venezuelans haven't been the first to compare 1984 to the regimes that have ruled their countries.
However, the profound crises that Venezuela actually faces in many areas, not to mention the economic and social collapse, have permeated the daily life of its citizens. Many compare characteristics of Orwell's Oceania to the political system established by Hugo Chávez and continued by his successor, Nicolás Maduro.
Caracas, March 5, 2014. Commemoration of the death of President Hugo Chávez Frías. Photo: Xavier Granja Cedeño. Shared under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.
For many netizens, there are numerous examples of 1984 in today’s Venezuela. For example, in 2017,1984 was staged in a theatrical adaptation. On Twitter, tags for Venezuela and 1984 appear regularly, and there has been comparisons between Ingsoc, the fictional political party of the novel, and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela:
Escuchaba en audiolibro unos fragmentos de 1984, la novela de Orwell, era como escuchar una descripción de la Venezuela actual. Carteles con ojos que te siguen, apagones, celebraciones patrias, propaganda política sobre los grandes logros del régimen.
— J.C Méndez Guédez (@mendezguedez) June 5, 2018
I listened to some sections of the audio book of 1984, Orwell's novel. It was like listening to a description of Venezuela today. Posters with eyes that follow you, blackouts, patriotic celebrations, political propaganda about the regime's great achievements.
#GegeTuit Recordando la Novela 1984 de #Orwell, mezclada con Rebelión en la Granja, creo el escritor jamás imaginó que #Venezuela sería la mejor puesta en escena de sus obras, el que las ha leído me entenderá!
El Cerdo Mayor con Bigotes, que comanda el Ingsoc Bolivariano! pic.twitter.com/X6znY35jKL
— GéGé (@GegeRpz) May 17, 2018
#GegeTuit Remembering #Orwell's novel 1984 of together with Animal Farm. I think the author never imagined that #Venezuela would be the best stage for his novels. The one who's read these novels will understand!
The Main Mustached Pig commands the Bolivarian Ingsoc! pic.twitter.com/X6znY35jKL
Now, not only those opposed to the government see reflections of Oceania in Venezuela. Food and medicine shortages, as well as the series of protests that have turned violent have evoked similar opinions from some who support Nicolás Maduro's government. From their perspective, however, the repression comes from foreign influence and governmental opposition. Guillermo Moreno expresses it this way on the online collective (generally in support of the government) Aporrea:
…recordé las largas colas para un pote de leche, para un pañal, para una medicina Y no pude dejar de asociar ese sufrimiento y esa tortura como una forma mas de manipulación que ejerce un estado para lograr sus objetivos […] Y es que el antiguo estado capitalista en Venezuela aun mantiene intacto todo su poder. Ese que tiene para dejarnos sin la leche para nuestros hijos, sin sus pañales, sin las medicinas y que nos manipula a través de los medios de comunicación tratando de convencernos de que el enemigo es el estado socialista y popular
…I thought of the long lines for a bottle of milk, for a diaper, for medicine. I couldn't help but think of the suffering and the torture as another form of manipulation exercised by a state to reach its goals […] The thing is, the former capitalist regime in Venezuela still has all its power. The power to leave us without milk for our children, without their diapers, without medicine. It manipulates us through the media trying to convince us that the enemy is the people's socialist state.
Pedro Patiño, from the same site, shares a similar vision:
El partido único de gobierno, la hegemonía comunicacional del estado político, la propaganda de guerra por parte de sectores nacionales y extranjeros opositores, el uso de tecnologías para avanzar en la disociación psicótica de los ciudadanos, todo esto nos lleva a decir que esta magnífica novela que está enmarcada en la “Distopía” es decir en la “anti utopía” nos cae como anillo al dedo.
The single government party, the political state's hegemony of communication, the war propaganda run by groups inside the country together with and foreign opponents, the use of technology inducing further all this psychotic disassociation in the citizens… All this leads us to say that this magnificent novel, framed in a “dystopia”, an “anti-utopia” fits us like a glove.
Photo of a billboard with the eyes of Chávez taken in Guarenas, in the north central part of the country. Image shared by the user The Photographer, published under Creative Commons license CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
In 1984, Big Brother is the supreme leader of Oceania. His voice and face dominate not only the media, but are omnipresent in daily life. Whether he lives or not is not the point, he is the face of the State. Most of those who comment online about the use of Hugo Chávez's image, especially his eyes, in posters, billboards, graffiti and even on logos of governmental entities in several Venezuelan cities, agree that this is comparable to the omnipresence of Orwell's Big Brother. This how Pedro Villa sees it on the Contenido Web website:
Los ojos de Chávez se despliegan por toda Venezuela, en todas las instituciones, en vallas, en instalaciones militares y más. Todo con la misma intención que en la novela, decirnos: “Somos el poder y te estamos vigilando”. Lo más tétrico es que en la realidad venezolana el “Gran hermano” vigilante son los ojos de un muerto.
Chávez's eyes are displayed throughout Venezuela, in all the institutions, on billboards, in military areas and more. All with the same intention of [Oceania's government] in the novel, to tell us: “We are the power and we are watching you”. And the gloomiest thing of all is that in Venezuela, the [image] of “Big Brother” are the eyes of a dead person.
The diverse strategies to control information have also been one of the elements that has strongly inspired this comparison to the Venezuelan government. This article from Caraota Digital contains an analysis about the bill to “regulate hate” online. Previous to its discussion the bill was not available to the citizens, and it was supported and later approved by the representatives of the Constituent National Assembly (ANC in Spanish) amidst protests that were questioning, among other things, the legitimacy of the Assembly itself. The ANC was created in 2017 to dissolve the National Assembly, whose members had been voted in elections back in 2015 and were from the opposition in its majority:
La Ley del Odio, recién aprobada por la ANC, cuenta con estructuras que permitirían acabar con los “traidores de la Revolución” […] De igual manera [se prohibe a] los usuarios de redes emitir mensajes que, de acuerdo con la interpretación de la ley, promuevan el odio o la intolerancia hacia un determinado grupo político.
The Hate Law, recently approved by the Constituent National Assembly, provides the means that would permit the government to put an end to the “traitors of the Revolution” […] It also [prohibits] Internet users from sending messages that, according to the interpretation of the law, promote hate or intolerance against a specific political group.
Other similarities not only appear in the interpretation of bills, in speeches or from those in power. The creation of the Vice Ministry for the People's Utmost Social Happiness in 2013 drew a lot of criticism online and sounded familiar to many of Orwell's readers. Changes made to school textbooks, especially in Venezuelan history, are another reason for concern. These changes form part of several efforts that seem to have new interpretions on Venezuela's Independence, as well as new visions of the life and work of Simón Bolívar, the country's most important national hero. Some of these initiatives have been seen in new investigations about the death of Bolívar and in featured films that recreate his biography.
About this, Veda Everdum from newspaper El Nacional comments:
Los que nacieron de 1980 a 1995 y vivieron en Venezuela saben perfectamente quién fue, qué hizo, y todo lo que «en realidad» pasó de 1998 al 2012 con el gobierno del ex-presidente […] el gobierno oficialista ha empezado, desde que murió el Presidente Chávez, a cambiar la historia, a cambiar el pasado; a pintarnos algo que en realidad sabemos que no fue así.
Those born from 1980 to 1995 and living around those years in Venezuela know perfectly well who [Hugo Chavez] was, what was done and what really happened from 1998 until 2012 under the government of the ex-president […] Since President Chávez's death, the government started to change the history, to change the past, to present us something that in reality, we know to be untrue.
The use of language and the adjectives used by one political group to describe the other also have a place in these conversations. Online authors such as Andoni Abedul, in her Medium space, say:
Esto se puede ver claramente cuando llaman a los opositores [“golpistas”], pero el gobierno celebra el 4 de Febrero, una fecha en la que el ex-presidente [Hugo Chávez] hizo su primer intento de golpe de estado contra el presidente de aquel entonces.
This can be clearly seen when the opposition are accused of plotting a coup d'Etat [used in Spanish as an ever present adjective: “golpistas”], but the government celebrates February 4th, when ex-president [Hugo Chávez] made his first intent to stage a coup against the president at that time [Carlos Andrés Pérez].
Finally, some visions from years ago, pose fundamental questions about labels used by the government. With years of symbols and speeches linked to rebellions and anti-power movements coming from those in power, who are the rebels and who is the power? This how Adam Pervez poses it:
One thing I wondered, though, was at what point does this propaganda stick and just become part of common knowledge, or when does it become ridiculous and embarrassing. Here, a lot of things are labeled “revolution” or “revolutionary”. […] Doesn’t the revolution become the powers that be at some point?

author: Laura Vidal


text:
Barbados’ LGBT+ community is here, queer and making history with the country’s first public Pride Parade · Global Voices
William Abbott

Marchers in July 22nd's historic Pride parade in Bridgetown, Barbados. (PHOTO: Khalil Goodman for B-GLAD. Used with permission).
Sunday, July 22, 2018, marked the first major, public LGBTQ Pride march in Barbados. This has been a long time coming. There have been Pride events in the past: June and July usually see a few parties, and 2017 saw both a small-scale demonstration for inclusivity outside Parliament and an equally small counter-protest to a religious rally with underlying homo-antagonistic messages.
This year, however, the Barbados Pride Committee, which comprises representatives of several local LGBTQ organisations and groups, divvied up the responsibility for a series of pride events during June and July. Ro-Ann Mohammed, co-director of Barbados Gays & Lesbians Against Discrimination (B-GLAD), was tasked with organising the march and managed to rally a modest yet powerfully visible group comprising an estimated 120–150 members of the Barbadian LGBTQ community and allies. This is no small feat.
Ro-Ann Mohammed, co-director of Barbados Gays & Lesbians Against Discrimination (B-GLAD). Mohammed was the target of much criticism and vitriol in the lead-up to the July 22 parade. (PHOTO: Mandy Cummings. Used with permission.)
In the weeks leading up to the march, Mohammed received an impressive amount of bigoted social media vitriol, along with credible threats to her safety and that of march participants, posted both on her personal Facebook page and the B-GLAD page. It was as if she had become the de facto lightning rod for hatred against the community. She also received criticism from members of the LGBTQ community itself, some of whom did not believe that Barbadian society was ready for such a public display. Additionally, religious leaders publicly condemned the march, using typical anti-LGBTQ buzzwords like “gay agenda,” and quoting scripture. Barbados still maintains anti-sodomy laws, and the public/media conversation around the rights of LGBTQ people is still dominated by conservative Christian sentiment. It is against this backdrop of probable threat, potential lack of support, and general societal antagonism that the march took place.
A participant in the July 22 Pride parch in Barbados repurposes a phrase popularised by Jamaican reggae artists in homophobic song lyrics. (PHOTO by the author. Used with permission).
As the march prepared to head out, organisers cautioned that we were liable to encounter vocal opposition along the route—something of which most of the marchers were fully aware, having witnessed the threats and bigotry of the preceding days and weeks. We were also given one ground rule: do not engage. So this sense of caution, along with a vague feeling of apprehension, accompanied us on the march. However, this slowly faded into the background as we walked and danced through the streets and it became clear that we were meeting no open protest or hatred.
I asked Mohammed to describe her gut feelings during the march. She said she experienced “overwhelming relief” that there was no violence or open conflict and was “pleasantly surprised” by the whole experience. She had expected that “something bad was going to happen,” and when it didn’t—when all she saw was positivity—the experience became “sort of surreal.”
My partner and I shared this surreal sentiment. We had dithered about whether or not to attend the march. Although we are relatively open about our sexuality, the thought of national visibility is always daunting. Our planned compromise was to meet the marchers en route to the end-point, stand on the sidelines, and cheer. The march did not leave its starting point on time because both organisers and marchers were being interviewed by the media. We decided, instead, to spend some time at the start point and leave as the march got underway. Two and half hours later, we found ourselves at the march’s end point, caught up in an environment that was inclusive, empowering, celebratory and filled with love. We had been almost unconsciously swept along. Somewhere along the way, we forgot our concerns about visibility and revelled instead in the joy and exuberance of the experience. Other marchers felt similarly.
In describing her experience, Mandy Cummins—a professional make-up artist and musician— said:
I have always seen myself as an ally to equality causes, but as someone who quite recently came to identify as pansexual, Pride became that much more special. I’m lucky to have lots of support from my close circle but I know many people don’t have that, and it warmed my heart and made me a little emotional to experience the sheer joy on the street. Everyone was dancing and singing and hugging each other and laughing, without any worries or fear, at least for those few hours, about rejection or judgment. It was empowering and beautiful.
Christopher Reynolds, another marcher, described something even more visceral:
We were right outside Scotiabank and ‘I’m Coming Out’ played – and down a side street comes Didi [Winston, a popular Barbadian LGBTQ activist and performer] wearing a pride dress and hoisting an enormous pride flag. And she’s running hard in heels. The entire crowd explodes. It was our party. It was our moment. I couldn’t even hear what slurs people were yelling at us, buoyed up by love. Who could step to a rainbow woman? Who could step to any of us when we stand together?
Khalil Goodman, a photographer and advertising executive, had a more measured response:
… the Pride parade was beautiful, and more significant than can be articulated. Those who oppose the Barbadian LGBT… community say “we allow you to exist as long as you are invisible, don’t speak up for yourself. Isn’t that enough?”
The Pride parade was Barbadian LGBT folk choosing to say “we are here, we are not invisible and we are not settling for existing. We are happy, we are here and we will not just exist; we will LIVE just as fully as everyone else.”
Marchers in July 22nd's historic Pride parade in Bridgetown, Barbados. (PHOTO: Khalil Goodman for B-GLAD. Used with permission).
For the marchers on the day, however, Pride became an intensely personal, yet almost paradoxically public experience. Beyond the obvious social statement being made, there was a celebration of our collective humanity, an assertion of our individual selfhood, and a display of the solidarity that we enjoy despite our differences. What this means for the larger Barbadian society remains to be seen, but for the LGBTQ community, whether or not they participated in the march, this was an affirmation and, perhaps, a significant step towards both owning and showing our beautiful, diverse normalcy.
A participant in the historic July 22 Pride parade in Barbados. (PHOTO: Khalil Goodman for B-GLAD. Used with permission).

source: news-globalvoices

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: William Abbott


text:
A young Syrian widow from Eastern Ghouta on her forced displacement · Global Voices
Act For Ghouta

Safa and her children before leaving Jobar, Eastern Ghouta. Photo by Safa, used with permission.
My name is Safa. I was born 30 years ago. Today, I'm a mother of three children: the eldest is five years old and the youngest is less than a year. Three months ago, Assad's forces killed my husband during the constant shelling of our town, near Jobar in Eastern Ghouta. Now I am alone, sad and tired.
My story started one Thursday.  A Thursday that separates the years of siege, bombardment and death from the unknown future on the other side. The story started when the men said farewell to us and went to the front lines. We stayed, women and children, in the back lines of the Jobar front. We did not have any choice but to wait, consumed by continuous brutal, horrific shelling, and by continuously having to move to escape certain death.
The men came back on Friday morning, preceded by disappointment, as the factions’ leaders had announced surrender. This meant handing the rebel areas over to the Assad regime and being forced out of our homes. We had lost all hope. Of being able to defend ourselves. Of being able to live and die near the soil that had embraced us since we were born and witnessed our childhoods. We would be forced to leave the town that had offered us its schools, whose fruit we had eaten, in whose neighborhoods we had played, whose residents we'd befriended, in whose buildings we had worked. It was the time of farewell and departure.
This is how the time of our departure arrived—without our having a say in determining our destiny, without our being asked about what we wanted. Maybe some of us wanted to leave, but others wanted to stay in their houses and accept life under the control of the regime that killed, displaced, tortured and besieged us. But no one asked us what we wanted, as if that was not our destiny.
So, we will be forcibly displaced, in order to maintain our principles, dignity and freedom. But this injustice is painful, and it burns my memory, or what remained of it.
Assad's forces got closer to our house on Friday afternoon. That morning, we buried our 14-year-old cousin Mostafa. We gathered our few belongings, preparing to leave. When Assad's forces arrived, the rebels withdrew, the town notables disappeared and we were left alone, facing the unknown.
Outside the house, people were carrying their bags and did not know where to go, moving chaotically in different directions. Everyone was asking everyone: where are we going? Where are the buses heading?
We headed to Jobar, my ancestors’ land, the land that Assad destroyed with what his force and equipment, the land that had resisted and intimidated those forces, militias and allies for a long time. That gracious land embraced us in our last days in Eastern Ghouta.
The torturous search for the buses assigned to the forcibly displaced and for ways to leave the town started in Jobar. We knew that the green buses were in Arbin city and those who wanted to leave should go there and wait in the streets for their turn to come. Everything was shrouded in ambiguity. No clear information about arrangements or destinations was available.
In Jobar city, we stayed for three days near our dear martyrs: my husband, brother and cousin. We spent our last days there next to their graves, talking to them, crying for our loss and saying farewell. We met our relatives and others dear to us there, also saying farewell to their loved ones under the ground.
We went to Arbin via Zamalka. The scenes we witnessed were heart-breaking. People were sleeping in the streets awaiting their destiny, powerless.
Getting on the buses happened through nepotism. Even in such a situation, corruption controlled us. We registered our names with more than one faction, fearing that we might lose the chance for salvation.
A convoy of buses arrived in Arbin, at a location controlled by one of the fighting factions in Eastern Ghouta. I ran towards them carrying two of my children while the third ran alongside me holding on to my clothes. The place was unlike anything I've ever seen: countless people, fear and horror everywhere. I still hear my children's cries every time I remember that scene.
Those responsible for organizing the boarding of the buses wanted their relatives and friends to get on first. They called their names, and the relatives and friends pushed past the crowds of other women and children, stepping on those who fell on the ground. No one had any idea what was happening. Saving oneself was the aim.
After suffering in front of the bus door for more than an hour, being pushed to and fro in that crowd, we got on the bus that would carry us into the unknown. That bus on which we used to travel to summer resorts and beaches, to enjoy the beauty of a country that now rejects us, that same bus carried us sad, defeated and filled with pain to an unknown destination. “Who will host us? Where will we live? How will we sleep?” Many questions were revolving in my mind that day.
The bus moved off. It was the last time we saw the destruction and the rubble we'd lived under and which had buried many of our dear ones, the last time we inhaled that air saturated with death.
The bus arrived at the first gathering point. The occupiers appeared in front of us: those people whom I had refused to be smuggled out of Ghouta to continue my education in order to avoid seeing. Now we were meeting face to face. I maintained a steely determination, keeping my gaze free, refusing their tyranny and saying to them in my mind: “I am triumphant. I am undefeated, despite all your weapons, you criminals.”
At the checkpoint, a Russian officer boarded the bus and welcomed us, smiling as though that would make us forget his occupation of our houses. Then Syrian name-takers and investigators, male and female, got on the bus. Their eyes were filled with fear, while our gazes were strong and defiant. Yes, we had lost our land, but we had not lost our dignity, identity and respect for ourselves.
The buses moved on and we passed through the checkpoint to the gathering point. There, we waited until the rest of the convoy arrived to start the journey by night.
Our convoy arrived in Damascus, my dear Damascus. Finally, I saw it, but it was not free as I would have liked; it was handcuffed by the manacles of the accursed jailer. It is my Damascus, mine and my ancestors’ land. Beloved Damascus with its roads, streets, pavements and jasmine. How cruel this farewell scene was! I told myself that I would come back one day, swearing it by the blood of my martyrs, I will. Oh… my heart was crying and my eyes were filled with tears.
The buses passed through the Damascus streets, where the crowds of people stared at us. Some eyes expressed sadness at our forcible displacement; other faces expressed happiness and laughter, and others frowned. Some people waved to us but others seemed afraid and tentative. I waved back, saying goodbye, I will return, this is a promise I made to myself and to those I left under the virtuous ground there.
The convoy was on its way. To where we did not know. Along the way, people cursed us and threw stones. From cars belonging to Assad militias driving next to us, people threw dirt, took photos and mocked us. They did not know that our souls were satisfied and our dignity intact.
The convoy, as slow as a turtle, arrived in Qalat al Madiq, our bones and bodies wracked with pain from to the long hours in those narrow seats. Children were crying and adults were exhausted with nausea, dizziness and fear. That was the worst trip ever for most of us, a long, arduous trip through the beautiful landscapes of our beloved Syria.
The plan was to drive us through areas that supported the Regime. People were standing on both sides of the road throwing hard stones, trying to break the windows above our heads and shouting poisoned words that showed their ugliness. On the bus we remained calm but confused, enveloped by sadness and grief.
In al Madiq town, people welcomed us cheerfully and generously, a welcome that assuaged some of the pain we carried. They helped us carry our luggage to another bus whose destination we didn't know, but which they said was heading to some kind of accommodation center. What a neverending trip!
The roads here were different. The sun was shining, sending its rays everywhere, a beautiful scene. We did not close our eyes, though we were so tired. After 24 hours on the road we had arrived in our final destination, a mosque in Idlib city called al Rahman Mosque.
Remember my story. My name is Safa. I was born thirty years ago. I was forcibly displaced from my home with my three children. I'm now alone, sad and tired.

author: Act For Ghouta


text:
What were Global Voices’ readers up to last week? · Global Voices
Georgia Popplewell

PHOTO: Georgia Popplewell.
At Global Voices, our community researches, writes, edits, and translates stories with a mission to support human rights and build bridges of understanding across countries, cultures, and languages.
We don't publish just to grab clicks or follow a news trend. We do, however, like to keep track of the ways in which our hard work has impact around the world.
To that end, one useful metric is how readers respond to our stories and translations. So let's take a look at who our readers were and what caught their attention during the week of July 23-29, 2018.
Last week, our stories and translations attracted readers from 186 countries! The top 20 countries represented across all of Global Voices’ sites were:
1. United States
2. India
3. Philippines
4. United Kingdom
5. Canada
6. France
7. Germany
8. Australia
9. Pakistan
10. Japan
11. Nigeria
12. South Africa
13. Italy
14. Peru
15. Brazil
16. Russia
17. Singapore
18. Malaysia
19. Netherlands
20. Bangladesh
But that's only a small slice of the diversity of our readership. Let's use the True Random Number Generator from Random.org and take a look at a few other countries on the list:
92. Cyprus
108. Albania
143. Solomon Islands
164. Nauru
41. Saudi Arabia
The English-language site is where the majority of original content is first published at Global Voices. The top five most-read stories of last week were:
1. #ThemToo: Syrian Women Tell Stories of Rape in Regime Prisons
2. Will a World Cup Joke force France to have a necessary conversation about Africa?
3. Why Bamyan province brings out the best of Afghanistan
4. Why Syrian refugees in Lebanon fear going back to an Assad-controlled Syria
5. A guide to Pakistan's 2018 general elections
Lingua is a project that translates Global Voices stories into languages other than English. There are about 30 active Lingua sites. Below is last week's most-read story or translation on each active language site.

author: Georgia Popplewell


text:
Russian journalists killed in Central African Republic · Global Voices
RuNet Echo

Orkhan Dzhemal, 51, a veteran war reporter from Russia, killed on July 31, 2018, in Central African Republic // Screenshot from Echo of Moscow, YouTube
Three Russian journalists were killed on the night of July 30 in Central African Republic, at a checkpoint outside the country’s capital Bangui.
Veteran reporter Orkhan Dzhemal, award-winning filmmaker Aleksandr Rastorguev and cameraman Kirill Radchenko were shot and killed by unidentified assailants who emerged from the bushes at roadside when they arrived.
The attack took place amid an on-going conflict between the country’s government and various rebel groups.
Their deaths were confirmed by the Investigations Control Center (TsUR, Tsentr Upravleniya Rassledovaniyami), an investigative reporting outlet funded by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a former oil magnate currently living in exile in London.
According The Moscow Times, Russia has supplied arms and deployed training teams to aid CAR government security forces.
According to TsUR, on whose assignment Dzhemal, Rastorguev and Radchenko went to CAR, the journalists were pursuing a news tip about a group of armed Russian mercenaries sighted in the African country.
This armed group's existence has never been officially acknowledged, although numerous journalistic investigations pinpointed the so-called ‘Wagner Group’ in hotspots such as Syria and Eastern Ukraine. Although he is consistently denying the allegations, the ‘Wagner Group’ is widely believed to be funded by Evgeny Prigozhin, a powerful businessman with strong ties to Vladimir Putin, sanctioned by the U.S. for his alleged — and, again, never acknowledged — involvement in the 2016 presidential elections.
Dzhemal, Rastorguev and Radchenko were highly respected media professionals, recognized by the industry. Orkhan Dzhemal was a renowned war reporter, his career stretching back to the early years of Russia’s independent press. Alexander Rastorguev was praised for his vivid chronicle of Russia’s failed anti-Putin opposition surge in his 2013 documentary “The Term” (Srok.) Kirill Radchenko worked as a TV reporter in war zones such as Syria.

author: RuNet Echo


text:
Death of a 12-year-old boy lays bare the plight of Iran’s Ahwazi minority · Global Voices
Rahim Hamid

Ahwazi children walk alongside a canal. A 12-year-old boy has been the latest casualty of Ahwaz's continued state of poverty and struggle. Image: Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA 3.0
A 12-year-old Ahwazi boy was reported dead by suicide on the evening of July 24, 2018, in the Republic of Iran, sparking outrage over the discrimination and hardship faced by the country's minority Ahawzi population.
Suicide rates and cases of self-immolation continue to rise among the Ahwazi, an Arab community who live in Iran's oil and gas-rich southern provinces and constitute 10 percent of the country's population. Viewed as inferior because of their ethnicity, most Ahwazis exist below the poverty line, with limited or no access to employment, education, healthcare, or basic utilities.
The mother of the young boy, who was identified only as Meysam, returned to the family home in Abadan, in the province of Khuzestan, on Tuesday evening to find that her 12-year-old son had hanged himself. The boy was the eldest of two children, the other a five-year-old girl.
The mother, the sole wage-earner of the household, worked as a housekeeper and cleaner and struggled to provide for herself and her children. According to activists, shortly before her son's death, the woman had sold some of the family's meager possessions, including her son’s mobile phone and bicycle, in order to pay outstanding rent.
Meysam's suicide is the latest to afflict the Ahwazi Arab community. In the past couple of years, a high number of Ahwazi Arab young men have protested through acts of suicidal self-immolation, often in front of the oil and gas companies’ headquarters and government offices.
In an interview with Ahwaz monitor in April 2017, the Ahwazi activist Karim Khalaf Dohimi pondered the reasons behind those events:
There is a surge of high incidence of suicide across Al-Ahwaz due to poverty and the high rate of unemployment as well as the closure of the Ahwazi Arab free market that led to Ahwazi youth and especially those who are married to commit suicide. The suicide attempts also increased in rural areas in Ahwaz since 90 percent of Ahwazi Arab people in rural areas are suffering from poverty and very low income. They are overwhelmingly dependent on agriculture and fishing for their food but these people have been left with no alternative source of income after their entire arable lands on the banks of the Karoon River were forcibly confiscated by regime officials with very low compensation.
There is, however, an economic crisis occurring across Iran, and there is a general upswing of suicide rates across the country. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), and various studies led inside of Iran reported by Iranian news agencies such as the Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA), suicide rates in Iran are on the rise. In 2014, the WHO reported that 5,3 out of 100,000 Iranians committed suicide.
On social media, in reaction to the harsh news, one Iranian remarked on the sad state of the country reflected in both Meysam's suicide, alongside similar deaths amongst another Ahwazi boy of 17 years old alongside another 15 year old girl from an Arab dominated city of Iran.
حکومت جمهوری اسلامی تو یک هفته؛
۱. خودکشی پسر ۱۲ ساله آبادانی
۲. خودسوزی پسر ۱۷ ساله اهوازی
۳. دختر ۱۵ ساله‌ی شهرک الغدیر
+ هر سه به دلایل معیشتی خودکشی کردن. چه شعارهایی قبل از ۵۷ دادند، حالا بعد از چهل سال همون مردم دارن برای بقا مبارزه میکنند.#متحد_شویم
— vania? (@bigvania88) July 28, 2018
The Islamic Republic of Iran in one week
+ all 3 killed themselves because of the struggle for a livelihood. What slogans were there before 1979, and now after 40 years of it? #become_united
In Ahwaz, the region's natural wealth has been turned into a source of suffering for its people. On one hand, the Ahwazi bears the brunt of the environmental pollution caused by the oil and gas drilling operations; on the other, profits from operations in the region bolster the authorities’ security apparatus, who are employed to crush any resistance in the region.
The number one cause of suicide is untreated depression. Depression is treatable and suicide is preventable. You can get help from confidential support lines for the suicidal and those in emotional crisis. Visit Befrienders.org to find a suicide prevention helpline in your country.

author: Rahim Hamid


text:
Filipinos urged to #BoycottNutriAsia for attacking the strike of workers · Global Voices
Karlo Mongaya

Youth and students hold indignation rally in front of Meycauyan, Bulacan police station after striking NutriAsia workers and their supporters were violently dispersed and arrested on July 30, 2018. Photo by Anakbayan, used with permission
Filipino activist groups have launched a boycott campaign against popular Filipino condiment company NutriAsia for violently dispersing the strike of its workers.
On strike for the past two months, NutriAsia workers demand the regularization of contractual or temporary staff. On July 30, NutriAsia workers and their supporters had finished conducting an ecumenical mass in front of the Nutri Asia factory, where a picket line had been set up, when the combined forces of the police and company security began hitting the crowd with clubs, anti-riot shields, and stones.
In the Philippines, short-term employment practice, whereby the employee is terminated just before legally being eligible for regularized working status, is called “Endo contractualization“, the word “endo” referring to “end of contract”.
NutriAsia hires over 1,400 workers but only 100 are regular employees with the security of tenure, health insurance, and other work benefits. The majority of the workers face threats of illegal dismissal, underpaid overtime work amounting to 619 Philippine pesos (US$11.65) for 12 hours, salary deductions, repression of the right to organize unions, and substandard workplace conditions.
The Philippine Labor Ministry has ordered NutriAsia to regularize at least 900 of its workers. However, the company management says this is not possible because, according to them, these 900 workers are actually employees of a third-party agency and not in NutriAsia’s employ.
The strike comes in the wake of President Rodrigo Duterte’s (so-far) failed promise of abolishing contractualization practices in the country, which has led to an explosion of labor struggles seeking the regularization of workers in big companies such as telecommunications company PLDT and fast-food giant Jollibee.
Nutriasia is famous for condiment products like ketchup, vinegar, soy sauce, cooking oil, and fruit juices that have become a staple in Filipino households. Its founder Joselito D. Campos, Jr. is also the Chief Executive Officer of Del Monte Pacific Ltd which runs a global operation of pineapple plantations in the Philippines and a dozen factories in the USA, Mexico, and Venezuela.
Among those critically hurt on July 30 was Leticia Retiza, an urban poor leader, who was seen in a now-viral photo with blood from her mouth spilling on her blouse and scarf. At least 20 were hurt during the dispersal.
GRAPHIC VIDEO & PHOTO ALERT:
BREAKING: Isang matandang babae ang malalang nasugatan sa muka matapos magkagulo sa picket pagkatapos ng sinagawang ecumenical service. #BoycottNutriasia pic.twitter.com/oheOr2dTKr
— Anakbayan – UST (@AnakbayanUST) July 30, 2018
An old woman is badly wounded on the face when the picket was violently dispersed after an ecumenical mass.
Gaano karahas ang Meycauayan police at security guards ng NutriAsia? Panuorin ang video. #NutriAsiaWorkersStrike pic.twitter.com/NDwir8BWhd
— Altermidya (@Altermidya) July 31, 2018
How violent are the Meycauayan police and NutriAsia security guards. Watch the video.
LOOK: AlterMidya correspondents Eric Tandoc and Hiyasmin Saturay being arrested and mauled by police forces & NutriAsia security guards while covering the dispersal of the #NutriAsiaWorkersStrike. #FreeTheMessengers #VideoAsEvidence pic.twitter.com/1t2ermjLEY
— Altermidya (@Altermidya) July 30, 2018
The police arrested 19 strikers and supporters, including youth leaders and volunteers from the independent media outfit Altermidya. They were brought to the Meycauayan Police Station and charged with illegal assembly, alarm and scandal, and physical injuries. Meycauayan Town Police Chief Supt. Santos Mera, who ordered the dispersal of the NutriAsia workers’ picket, also claimed that they recovered guns and drugs from the arrested workers and their supporters.
Einstein Recedes, secretary general of @anakbayan_ph , raises his fist when staff members of @GabrielaWomenPL Rep. @emmidejesus visited the detained NutriAsia workers, supporters. (Photo by Roel Flores) pic.twitter.com/tO4UFqQ9RW
— Bulatlat (@bulatlat) July 30, 2018
Bulacan Provincial Police Chief Senior Supt. Chito Bersaluna took the cudgels for the police involved in the dispersal and filing of charges against the striking workers, saying it was the protesters who hurt the guards of NutriAsia.
Bersaluna was chief of the Caloocan City police force before he was sacked after public outrage over the summary killing of teenager Kian Delos Santos last year. Police reported Kian was a drug dealer who fought back in a shootout with police but CCTV recording showed him being dragged by police before he was found dead the next day.
NutriAsia asserts that it was the workers and their supporters who started the “violence” by firing a gunshot in the air and throwing stones at police and security forces. However, videos and photos posted by advocates that have been supporting the striking workers undermine the statements made by the company.
The arrested strikers, their supporters, and journalists were released on August 1. The legal battle, however, is not yet resolved and the fate of the temporary workers is still uncertain.
Before the July 30 incident, the striking NutriAsia workers’ picket line had also been violently attacked last June 14, resulting in the arrest of 23 workers and their supporters, including a high school student.
#BoycottNutriAsia campaign
In response, some Filipino shoppers and netizens turned to social media expressing support for NutriAsia workers and calling for the boycott of NutriAsia products:
Mga nanay at tatay na laging naggrogrocery, I’m asking your help to #BoycottNutriasia. Here are their brands: pic.twitter.com/htfW1iSoJj
— Ethel (@econcepcion) July 30, 2018
Mothers and fathers who are always doing grocery, I'm asking your help to #BoycottNutriasia. Here are their brands.
suka means “to vomit” but it also pertains to a condiment or vinegar. an example of a brand of suka is datu puti which means we should #BoycottNutriAsia and i think that’s beautiful
— kamylle (@rslnkmyll) July 30, 2018
The violent dispersal of at the picket of striking NutriAsia workers only shows how this government treats its human resource. Instead of protecting our workers, this government became a tool for repressing the workers rights to protest. #BoycottNutriAsia
— BIBOYism (@Biboyism101) July 30, 2018
I don't mind having my food tasteless as long as I support against your food company, NutriAsia, for being a disgusting, inhuman, and immoral. #BoycottNutriasia
— It's Redd (@PaulaRidingHood) July 31, 2018
Capitalism is not being able to afford paying 1k workers proper wages and benefits, but can afford paying the police to beat up even grandmas, plant drugs on arrested unionists, arrest journalists, and burn workers’ belongings #SupportNutriAsiaWorkers #BoycottNutriAsia
— Swill Smith ♋ ♑ ♏ (@anton_dulce) July 30, 2018
When you see it. Mula sa FB ni Jong. #BoycottNutriAsia pic.twitter.com/Dmfiz4Qad6
— Renato Reyes, Jr. (@natoreyes) July 31, 2018
When you see it. From the FB of jong.

author: Karlo Mongaya


text:
Juliana Mbengono Elá Avomo: Bringing arts and culture to the youth of Equatorial Guinea · Global Voices
Lucía Mbomío

Juliana Mbengono: “If there were no differences between women and men then no one would think of me as a feminist, but given the inequalities that we experience I feel obliged to reclaim my rights and I do it through my literature.“
Juliana Mbengono Elá Avomo is a journalism student, an assistant director of a daycare center, and a Literary Bud (in Spanish Capullos Literarios, meaning cocoon, flowerbud, and also jerk in colloquial Spanish). She says so herself. She founded a collective of poets in Equatorial Guinea together with two classmates in 2015, and they chose the name Capullos Literarios because they are novices and they “haven't yet been recognized as writers. They stay in the shadows but they love to write, they put everything they have into it and they put it to use every day.”
Buds are shy by nature, so it's hard for them to recognize themselves when they have started to blossom. That's why Juliana keeps herself humble, despite having won several literary competitions, having gotten two of the theatrical plays she wrote to be performed, and having become the coordinator of Crazy for Culture (Locos Por Cultura – LPC- , in Spanish) in the capital city of Malabo. The organization brings together artists who work with different modalities from around the country. According to Juliana, the goal of Crazy for Culture is to “promote the creation of spaces for young people to interact, with the aim to improve their artistic abilities and promote social leadership.”
Participants of Crazy for Culture (Locos Por Cultura, – LPC- in Spanish), a collective formed to “promote the creation of spaces for young people to interact, with the aim to improve their artistic abilities and promote social leadership.” Photograph courtesy of Locos Por Cultura collective, used with permission.
The organization doesn't have a set number of members or artistic communities. At the moment, they are composed of Literary Buds; theatre group Speaking and Biyemyema; visual arts collectives EG-Pencil and Hangart; photography group Photos With Lyrics; and many independent artists such as Eusebio, who does portraits, or Mariano Ebana Edu (also called Black Bey), Benjamín Ndong (Jamin Dogg) and Lil Jojo, who are singer-songwriters and rappers.
We conversed with Juliana about the activities of the Crazy for Culture collective, the struggles for equality between men and women, and the value of culture as a key component in the development and growth of young people and the society they live in.
GV: One activity that has really caught my attention are the street readings. How do people react when they see all of you?
JMEA: The project “Reading Afternoons” is an initiative organized by Literary Buds to promote reading and writing among citizens. Many people think that reading is an activity reserved for educated people and so some people feel embarrassed when reading in public or simply consider it a waste of time. In fact, people say “if you want to hide something from a Guinean put it in a book.” We believe reading can produce changes in society, not only through the ways it can nourish the vocabulary of those who read but also the effect is has in many other areas of their lives.
This project is one of our great achievements because over time, along with LCP, we have been able to create a tradition in Malabo and Bata, the most important cities of Equatorial Guinea. Many people are already familiar with these literary festivities, they show interest and they are encouraged to read. That's how a good portion of the youth that participate regularly have been able to overcome the fear and nerves they used to feel when reading in public.
The collective Crazy for Culture (Locos Por Cultura, in Spanish), led by Juliana, organizes many cultural events in public spaces. Photograph by Lucía Mbomío, used with permission.
GV: Two of the three spokespeople for LPC are women. Why is that?
JMEA: In Crazy for Culture (LPC), responsibilities are assigned based on the degree of interest and the commitment each one gives to the collective. Roles are not random nor are they based on gender.
GV: However, even though you deal with various themes in your texts, you write a lot about the situation of women. Do you consider yourself a feminist? How does that feel in Guinea?
JMEA: I wouldn't define myself as a feminist. I believe that everyone deserves to be respected and we wish to be treated the same as everyone else. If there were no differences between women and men then no one would think of me as a feminist, but given the inequalities that we experience I feel obliged to reclaim my rights and I do it through my literature.
To ask me whether or not I am a feminist is not a problem for me, but to identify myself as such in Guinea is another matter. Sometimes it bothers people who think feminism is the feminine equivalent to machismo. And lately I feel that labeling yourself a feminist has become a trend, particularly for those who think that being a feminist implies being intelligent, modern, and brave.
GV: What women role models do you have in the country?
JMEA: I look up to three or four women role models. The first one is Teodosia Mónica Angue Bivini, a stranger who became my mentor, boss, friend, and counselor. In Mónica, I find the example of a working woman who seems utopian, she is so entrepreneurial that she sees opportunities for employment and business where no one else imagines it. She is the founder and president of the non-profit organization IMGE (Women's Initiative for Education in Equatorial Guinea), and she is also the president of the association of Guinean members of YALI (Young African Leaders Initiative). She holds a degree in business administration with a specialization in human resources, and she works as the director of human resources in the Office of the Ombudsman, among many other things.
JMEA: Also, there is Trifonia Melibea Obono Ntutumu, writer, journalist, gender researcher, and founder of the organization “We're Part of the World” (Somos Parte del Mundo, in Spanish), dedicated to defending the rights of non-heterosexual people:
JMEA: Meli [Trifonia Melibea] is so convinced in her principles that the wave of insults, negative opinions, disrespect and threats that fall on her constantly don't ever make her give up. She writes so much that there have been times when she has published two novels in less than five months, and her writing always centers around the situation of women and of non-heterosexual people in Equatorial Guinea. My new favorite novel is her book “The albino girl of money” (La albina del dinero, in Spanish), our lives are reflected in those pages.
JMEA: The third one is my aunt Melania, who sets the example on patience and solidarity. She took care of me and my little brothers when she didn't have enough to take care of herself. Even today she is still the umbrella that covers our enormous family when the rain comes down.
The last one is my mother. Her life and way of understanding things have influenced me greatly. Her tolerance has helped me to accept that no one deserves to be judged if they are not harming anyone and that I should never criticize others for what they say or do.
GV: How close are you to your dreams, and how far away are you from reaching them?
JMEA: In the future I would love to be a journalist, create a magazine, and launch a school for literary writing.
For now I am working on some projects in collaboration with IMEGE (Women's Initiative for Education in Equatorial Guinea), one of which is “A Night Among Writers” that will consist of workshops to exchange writing ideas and techniques among writers. We will also include sessions to teach public speaking and how to launch. Another one is “Youth Date,” a radio program dedicated to young Equatorial Guineans and to entrepreneurs.
I trust that I will be able to reach many of my dreams, that's one of the things that makes life seem so wonderful to me.

author: Lucía Mbomío


text:
Montenegro disagrees with Trump that they are a threat to world peace · Global Voices
Marko Angelov

A typical street scene from Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, where citizens much rather spend time on socializing in cafes under glorious Mediterranean weather, than on plotting wars. Photo by Anton Nosik, via Wikipedia, CC-BY.
A recent quip by US President Donald Trump caused controversy about the Balkan state of Montenegro, after he said that their ‘aggressiveness’ could trigger a Third World War.
Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson on Fox News asked Trump about Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which obliges its members to come to the aid of other member states when they are under attack. He asked why America’s sons should go defend Montenegro, the newest NATO member. To that, Trump said that “Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people” who “may get aggressive, and congratulations, you’re in World War III.”
Trump says he's bothered by provisions of NATO that require the US to come to the defense of other member countries. pic.twitter.com/2xY1FjBTSn
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 18, 2018
The quip drew criticism by senior US diplomats and lawmakers as “a gift to Putin”.
Besides, according to an article on Business Insider, the exchange on Fox News misconstrued the way Article 5 works. A NATO member starting a war “could not invoke Article 5 and require US involvement because it would not be an attack on a NATO member but rather an attack from a NATO member.”
With a little over 642.000 inhabitants, Montenegro is the smallest Balkan state by population. It became independent in 2006. Its political scene, dominated by the same elite in the last 28 years, has been deeply polarized between pro-European Union (EU) and pro-NATO government and an opposition which includes parties accused of ties with radicals from neighboring Serbia and the Kremlin.
In 2016, Montenegrin authorities announced they prevented a Russia-supported attempt for coup d’etat which allegedly aimed at stopping the country from becoming a member of NATO.
Montenegro eventually joined NATO in June 2017 in spite of disapproval by the Russian Foreign Ministry, which issued an official threat of retaliatory measures.
Along the way, Montenegro had its first Trump-related scandal when the US President appeared to shove the Prime Minister of Montenegro Duško Mirković during a photo op of NATO leaders. While the PM commented that the move was “inoffensive,” the domestic opposition used it as a reason for anti-NATO protests.
The following video provides a concise 8-and-a-half minute explanation of these recent historical developments.
Again, the government of Montenegro reacted to Trump in a conciliatory manner, underpinning the dedication to friendship and alliance with the US. They noted that “In today's world, it does not matter how big or small you are, but to what extent you cherish the values of freedom, solidarity and democracy.”
Government of #Montenegro: we are proud of our history, our friendship and alliance with #USA is strong and permanent #USpartnerMNE #WeAreNATO https://t.co/WPn0PMrU0h pic.twitter.com/DOeRutynUm
— Govt. of Montenegro (@MeGovernment) July 19, 2018
On the other hand, Montenegrin opposition politician Marko Milačić expressed ‘support for Trump’ for “entering the zone of like-mindedness with the opponents of NATO membership who for years have asked a similar question: why should Montenegrin soldiers go fight wars around the world, defending peoples who they couldn’t find on a map a day before”? He also dismissed the World War III claim as “a joke.”
Milačić is a conservative who is against joining both NATO and the EU, and can be seen burning the NATO flag in the above video. His other priorities include family values and preventing same-sex marriage.
The last time Article 5 of NATO treaty was invoked was by the US after 11 September 2011, leading to the NATO operation in Afghanistan, which includes direct participation by Montenegro since 2010 before it even became a member.
The claim that Montenegro would start a war with a much bigger enemy nation seems to echo a number of jokes that used to be popular in former Yugoslavia.
In the Balkans, Montenegrin people have a reputation of chivalrous resistance to foreign invasions, from the Ottoman Empire to the anti-fascist struggle during World War II. They also have a reputation for being staunch allies when they make a pact of their own choosing.
For instance, the old Kingdom of Montenegro formally declared war on Japan in 1904 as a show of support to its then-ally Russian Empire during the Russo-Japanese War. There is even a legend that a lone Montenegrin officer traveled to the Far East to join the Russian troops as a volunteer and won a sword-fighting duel against a samurai.
As Montenegrin culture grew less militaristic in the decades after World War II, the contrast between its size and the stereotype of proud inflammable highlanders was exploited by a number of jokes, such as the popular example about a hypothetical war with the most populous nation on Earth:
Pričaju dva Crnogorca:
– Znaš li mrčo da smo zaratili sa Kinezima?
– Znam. A koliko ih ima?
– Milijardu i dvjesta miliona.
– Kuku nama! Đe ćemo sahranit’ tolike ljude?
After Montenegro and China declared war, two Montenegrins discuss the situation:
– Hey bro, do you know that we’re in war with the Chinese?
– So I’ve heard. How many are they?
– A billion and two hundred million.
– Oh my! How shall we find a cemetery big enough to bury so many people?
There’s no information on how Trump became familiar with the “strong Montenegrin” stereotype. One theory is that his wife Melania, who grew up in Yugoslavia, could have been exposed to this piece of popular culture, but there’s no public record evidence that Trump has gained such local knowledge about the Balkans from her.
Recent resistance to the coup attempt has also shown that Montenegrin resolve to stand up to hostile influences (this time, Russia) is no joke, and could’ve made an impression on Trump’s US advisors, or on Russian president Vladimir Putin, with whom he recently had a private talk.

author: Marko Angelov


text:
Officials blame WhatsApp for spike in mob killings, but Indians say vicious party politics are at fault · Global Voices
Vishal Yashoda Manve

Mobile phone kiosk in Bangalore, India. Photo by Victor Grigas, retouched by Wikimedia Foundation. CC BY-SA 3.0
After a spate of more than 20 mob lynchings driven by rumors spread on social media, the Indian government on July 20 threatened to punish WhatsApp for its inability to control fake news.
India's Ministry of Information and Technology issued an official statement describing WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook, as an “abettor” in these crimes.
Information and Technology Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad chided WhatsApp and told a news daily: “They cannot evade responsibly and accountability for the messages, particularly those which are leading to killings.”
This may be a first step towards the Indian government taking legal action against the Silicon Valley company. But would legal action against Facebook actually help put an end to the killings?
Many Indians say that party politics and political manipulation, when combined with a technology like WhatsApp, are the real source of the problem. Sufyan Sadiq summarized the dynamics on Facebook:
WhatsApp is a big black hole of fake news in India that's used by the mischief mongering right-wing groups more often associated with BJP that ends up in someone's killing carried out by a lynch mob. This app is still evolving as a principal KillerApp in India…
Thus far, WhatsApp has responded to criticism by purchasing full-page advertisements in Indian newspapers offering readers ways to spot fake news. The platform has also placed new limits on forwarding of messages and introduced a label for messages that are forwarded, in an apparent effort to signal to users that a message may not have been written by its sender.
Some Indians appreciated the forwarding measure, while others think WhatsApp could do much more. But many are asking why the government hasn't taken more responsibility for the lynchings, which represent a serious threat to public safety.
Lynch mobs formed on social media have claimed the lives of at least 34 people in India since 2014. Here are cases documented thus far in July 2018:
July 1: A spate of doctored videos spread on WhatsApp led to the mob lynching of five men in Maharashtra state, who were wrongly targeted for being kidnappers. The lynch mob subsequently threatened to set fire to police officers in an effort to confirm the victims’ deaths.
July 2: Four men were attacked in Maharashtra's Malegaon district as rumors spread about a child abducting nexus. A timely intervention from officials saved their lives.
July 8: Nilotpal Das and Abhijeet Nath were lynched by a mob in Northeast India's Assam on June 8, 2018, over viral rumors spread via Facebook, WhatsApp and eventually word-of-the-mouth.
July 13: A mob of 200 attacked five friends, wrongly believing they were child kidnappers, in the southern state of Karnataka. The mob killed Mohammad Azam, a UK-educated IT professional and seriously injured two others. The mob also attacked police officials who sought to intervene.
July 21: Rakbar Khan, who was wrongly suspected of illegally transporting cows, was killed by a mob in Rajasthan that beat him with sticks.
July 25: Four men were assaulted by a mob in India's most populous state, Uttar Pradesh for ferrying a bovine carcass. Police intervention spared their lives.
It is difficult to determine precisely how many people have been victims of mob violence. A Wikipedia chronicle of WhatsApp-related mob violence produces 56 results on this page. Independent data journalism website IndiaSpend claims that there have been 89 incidents of lynching since 2014, affecting 290 victims and killing 34. Minority Muslims, who account for 14 percent of India's population, have been the victims of 56 percent of these crimes.
The rise of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in India in 2014, which practices a unique brand of hard-line Hindu nationalism, has coincided with an increase in Islamophobia and a series of proposed (and some enacted) laws banning or limiting the consumption of beef, as the cow is a sacred animal in Hindu tradition.
Rajasthan and New Delhi have seen the murders of 50-year-old Mohammad Akhlaq who was killed for procuring beef, followed by Umar Mohammad, Rakbar Khan and dairy owner Pehlu Khan, all documented by Global Voices. Some of these incidents have been committed despite the victims possessing permits.
Like those mentioned earlier, these murders appear to have been sparked by online misinformation campaigns that often carry a strong Islamophobic bent. These appear to come from various sources, including state-sanctioned IT cells.
Dhruv Rathee, a vlogger from India, interviewed a former IT cell member for the right-wing BJP on how multiple pages on Facebook and numerous WhatsApp groups have spread fake news and misinformation campaigns to gain electoral leverage:
Writing for The Tribune of India, Aditi Tandon called mob lynching a “political tool” and said that law enforcement has become “part and parcel” of the attacks:
The violence we have seen over the past four years follows a trend. Mob lynching is a political tool being used to polarise society. Law enforcement has also become part and parcel of the attacks. Police officers who act fairly are transferred. The idea is to create a fear psychosis by unleashing the mobs on a certain community.
There are ongoing efforts to push back against these campaigns by de-bunking videos that have been falsely labeled or doctored. For years, fact-checking websites such as AltNews, SMHoaxSlayer, and BOOM have been verifying fake news to create awareness. BOOM found that one of the videos that triggered lynching of five men in Maharashtra's Dhule region was from Syria — a video of children who died of a nerve gas attack five years ago was being used to spread paranoia amongst the masses. While their efforts are critical, the scale of the problem well outweighs their capacity.
Many Indians say that the government and law enforcement agencies must take greater responsibility for the crisis, but this may be difficult to engineer, with the BJP in power.
In an opinion piece for Bloomberg, business writer Mihir Sharma points out that lynch mobs in India are not new — while WhatsApp has contributed to the problem, he says, it is not the source. He points instead to a lack of policing and political will:
It’s particularly odd that the government is demanding “accountability and responsibility” from a phone app when some ruling party politicians are busy spreading divisive fake news. How can the government ask WhatsApp to control mobs when those convicted of lynching Muslims have been greeted, garlanded and fed sweets by some of the most progressive and cosmopolitan members of Modi’s council of ministers?
One government branch that has spoken out on the issue is India's Supreme Court, which recently recommended the government enact new laws to prevent lynching and mob violence. The SC bench headed by justice Dipak Mishra asked the Indian parliament to deal with lynching as a special and separate offense and “a recurrent pattern of violence which cannot be allowed to become the new normal.” He said:
A special law in this field would instill a sense of fear of law amongst the people who involve themselves in such kinds of activities. There can be no trace of doubt that fear of law and veneration for the command of law constitute the foundation of a civilized society.
Following this, the Indian government on July 23 2018, has set up two panels to understand the need for a new law to prevent lynching.
The report will be submitted to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who leads the very government that has fostered this culture of intolerance.
While Mark Zuckerberg and other technology platform founders should experiment with new ways to curb fake news and rumor-mongering on their platforms, the Indian government needs to do much more to protect public safety for all Indians. Ensuring mob justice is punished and the rule of law is enforced will save the lives of many minority communities including Muslims, Dalits, and minority tribal groups.

author: Vishal Yashoda Manve


text:
Cricket Australia under fire for sacking female employee over abortion reform tweets · Global Voices
Kevin Rennie

Author’s mashup. Images: Wikimedia Commons and a screenshot from 9Honey video
Cricket Australia, the national governing body for cricket in Australia, is facing public controversy for sacking female employee Angela Williamson after she criticized local abortion policies on Twitter.
Representatives of Cricket Australia claim that Williamson's tweets damaged their relationship with the government.
Williamson, Cricket Australia's former manager of public policy and government relations, tweeted in June 2018 on her personal account that the Tasmanian parliament’s refusal to restore abortion services was “most irresponsible … gutless and reckless”. She was forced to go to mainland Australia from the island of Tasmania earlier this year for a pregnancy termination as the last clinic in the state closed in December 2017.
Angela Williamson is fighting for her job back through the industrial relations tribunal the Fair Work Commission. She also started an online petition calling for ‘affordable, accessible abortion in Australia':
I’m speaking publicly now, waiving my privacy, because nobody should have to go through what I went through to access a legal health procedure.
However, Williamson's tweets in question were apparently taken down and her account was made private. Meanwhile, Australian netizens were swift to respond and highly critical of Cricket Australia, sounding off that the decision was rooted in misogyny and sexism. Lifestyle reporter Rebecca Sullivan typified the reaction:
Men can lie, cheat, be involved in sex scandals, assault their partners and still keep their jobs. For women it's one abortion, a few tweets and you're done. WTF https://t.co/9SKYpYEOaq
— Rebecca Sullivan (@beck_sullivan) July 29, 2018
Zombie Mao threw some dark humor out there by referencing the iconic uniform from The Handmaid's Tale, a television series that imagines a world where women's rights are extremely compromised:
Cricket Australia announce new Women's One Day Uniform pic.twitter.com/lmLVTqNF1x
— Zombie Mao (@zombiemao) July 30, 2018
Writing for The Big Smoke, Gay Mackie did not see this as an isolated incident:
Surely it had to pass through many hands before it was rubber stamped.
Which is the issue, we’re not dealing with one person, we’re dealing with a culture. Clearly 1951 rolls on down the corridors of Cricket Australia, a halcyon place where a woman’s place is out the door.
It’s not Cricket. It’s institutional misogyny.
Indeed, the Tasmanian Liberal government may have played a role in Williamson's firing when in March 2018 a senior staffer named Martine Haley allegedly informed Cricket Australia about her pregnancy termination. Haley, a Liberal Party member, was forced to quit when it was discovered that she was using a fake social media account to troll Williamson and others. Women's Agenda reported:
Making matters worse, a senior staffer of the Liberal Party allegedly was the first to complain to Cricket Australia about Williamson’s tweets and breached privacy by notifying the organisation of Williamson’s pregnancy termination.
Local Tasmanian writer Melanie Tait believes the government has a lot to answer for:
“The real villain in this story is the Tasmanian government. It’s been eight months since a Tasmanian woman could have a surgical abortion in her home state.”
On Angela Williamson's sacking, me in @GuardianAus https://t.co/vHM5hVGsnm
— Melanie Tait (@MelanieTait) July 30, 2018
Netizen Roy Brown decided to get a straight answer from Cricket Australia but was disappointed with their reply:
I emailed cricket Australia in response to a ‘Cricket Family’ email yesterday making my view very clear that their position is unacceptable. Response: ‘it’s not about abortion, former employee disparaged a stakeholder, subject to legal proceedings.’ Shitest response. Ever.
— Roy Brown (@royfrancisbrown) August 1, 2018
The right to freedom of expression also emerged as a central issue in Williamson's situation, especially for those with different views:
Cricket Australia, in my opinion, has impeded some of Angela Williamson’s most basic human rights. But if we want to show outrage for Williamson, we must also show outrage for those fired whose opinions differ from our own.
— Kat George (@kat_george) August 1, 2018
Murray Campbell disagrees with abortion but also disagrees with Williamson's dismissal and weighed in on the matter through his self-titled blog whose ‘aim is to engage with Melbourne culture and churches through a Gospel lens:’
[…] not because I like what she said, but because in a civil society, citizens have a right to voice opinions about social and political issues.
Meanwhile, WORK180, an international jobs network, has suspended Cricket Australia as an “Endorsed Employer” while Williamson's case is pending:
In light of the Angela Williamson case, we've suspended Cricket Australia's status as an Endorsed Employer for Women. While this case is under investigation by Fair Work Australia, we encourage Cricket Australia to reconsider her dismissal. Full statement: https://t.co/vPKw92F7i4
— WORK180 (@WORK180_ANZ) August 2, 2018
However, Cricket Australia is unflinching, posting a job advertisement for a replacement for Angela Williamson that is currently active as of August 2:
LinkedIn recommended I apply for the job of Public Policy & Government Relations Manager at Cricket Australia based on, I guess, my close match to the 1,500 other outraged feminists in the policy space who clicked on the ad in horrified incredulity.
— NessCrosby (@alienspectacles) August 2, 2018
For the moment, the last word goes to Madeleine Northam. She is a public sector union representative in Tasmanian. Coincidentally, her Twitter profile states “All tweets are my own’.
Out the front of @BlundstoneArena letting Cricket Australia (@CAComms) know that sacking a woman for talking about abortion is #justnotcricket. #TerminationShouldNotMeanTermination #istandwithangela #politas #auspol #cricketaustralia pic.twitter.com/8qbOrity6K
— Madeline Northam (@MadelineNortham) August 2, 2018

author: Kevin Rennie


text:
If Google goes back to China, it will be on the government’s terms. What will that mean for human rights? · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

A Google music search product launch in Beijing, 2009. Photo by Keso via Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
A report by The Intercept published on August 1 says that tech giant Google may soon launch a censored version of its search engine in China.
Drawing on internal documents from Google and an interview with a source from the company who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the independent media outlet reported that the company is developing a customized version of its Android search application (app) for the Chinese market. Code-named “Dragonfly”, the app would automatically identify and censor websites like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Wikipedia, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Global Voices and many others that are currently blocked by China's so-called Great Firewall.
Google left the Chinese market in March 2010 following criticism for complying with government censorship orders. But in recent years, under the leadership of Sundar Pichai, who became Google's Chief Executive Officer in 2015, the tech giant has tried very hard to reconnect with the Chinese market despite considerable human rights implications.
When Google left the Chinese market, executives cited concerns over human rights, censorship, and blocks on access to information. And these conditions haven't changed — China enacted a cybersecurity law in 2016 that strengthened China's already-stringent online censorship and surveillance practices and made it obligatory for foreign companies operating in China to turn over user data, including the encryption keys, upon official request.
The Intercept source says the Dragonfly project accelerated after a December 2017 meeting between Pichai and the Chinese Communist Party’s top ideologue, Wang Huning. Google staff apparently have already performed a demonstration of the app for Chinese government officials. If released, the app will have to compete with Baidu, the native search engine that presently dominates China's market.
Google may be prepared to compromise human rights principles for the Chinese market. But it will still depend on the Chinese government to grant its entry.
Internal documents also indicate that the search app will be operated by a joint venture partnership between Google and a China-based company (yet to be identified). This is a standard approach for foreign companies wishing to operate in China.
Sources for The Intercept say the finalized version of the app could be launched in the next six to nine months, pending official approval. But this may not come easily. On August 3, Chinese state-affiliated media outlet Securities Daily denounced the Intercept report and quoted a Chinese analyst saying that Google could not re-enter China in the near future.
The recent experience of tech giant Facebook in China may provide a cautionary tale to its Silicon Valley competitor. Just two days after Facebook announced plans to open an innovation center in China, its Cyberspace Administration stepped in and barred Facebook from receiving a license to operate.
It is unclear what will happen next. While Google may not be able to enter China any time soon, the Intercept story reveals a disturbing trend among United States-based tech giants that appear prepared — even eager —  to sideline human rights principles in order to grow their businesses.
The anonymous source from Google told The Intercept:
I’m against large companies and governments collaborating in the oppression of their people, and feel like transparency around what’s being done is in the public interest […] what is done in China will become a template for many other nations.
The news about Google’s plan has attracted a lot of discussion among Chinese Twitter users. Many have been critical of the move.
One Twitter user referred to the recent activities of Apple in China and its subsequent rise on the stock market, a potential motivator for other companies to enter China:
今天苹果股价再次大涨，市值一举突破1万亿美元。苹果这次大涨最关键因素Q3 iPhone中国市场增长40% 。在中美贸易战背景下，市场对苹果前景有所担忧。Q3中国市场增长最强劲，极大提振市场信心。这给市场一些遐想：苹果似乎找到中美贸易战的出路，“一边一国”苹果应付自如。这也是谷歌寻求“变通”的动力。
— LIFETIME 视界 (@lifetimeuscn) August 2, 2018
Today Apple Inc. has sprung up again. Its market value is now more than US$100 billion dollars. The key factor behind its growth was the 40% increase in i-phone sale in Chinese market in Q3. In the context of a China-US trade war, the market has been worried about the future of Apple. But the strong performance in the Chinese market in Q3 has boosted the market confidence. The market is starting to believe that Apple Inc. has found its way out of the US-China trade war with its “country specific” business strategy. This is likely the motivation behind Google’s “re-strategizing”.
Apple Inc. transferred operation of its iCloud data center in mainland China to a local, state-managed corporation called Guizhou-Cloud Big Data in February 2018. While the company stressed that it still controls the encryption keys for user accounts and had not handed these to the local partners, Chinese users still worry that their privacy may be jeopardized.
There is no question that Google would be subject to the same regulatory requirements that led them to leave China in 2010, but it seems that Google's priorities may have changed. This could significantly impede on the human rights of users in China — and potentially elsewhere, depending on how product and service infrastructures are built.
Thus far, Google has not commented on the Intercept's report.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
Is Western media biased against China? (Part Two) · Global Voices
Guest Contributor

Does the volume of reporting about pollution and human rights in China correspond to readers’ interest? PHOTO: Marybeth_Whitehouse via Wikimedia Common. CC: AT.
By Pong Lai
(This is the second installment of a two-part post. Read Part One here.)
One of the major pieces of evidence cited by Chinese state-owned media as proof of western media bias against China is the large volume of negative reports about China's air pollution. According to China Daily:
China is […] castigated in the Western media for its terrible air pollution. Westerners have the impression that Chinese cities are the worst in the world in terms of air quality, when the most polluted cities are in India, the Middle East and Africa. Beijing is far down the list at number 57 or 153 in the latest rankings.
According to this pollution index, although Beijing's air quality is better than Delhi in 2018 (very high level compared to extremely high level), in mid-2018 total population index shows that China and India were ranked #12 and #23, respectively (the higher the worse). Therefore, it is fair to say these two countries are comparable. In addition, to our knowledge, the U.S. and other European countries do not consider India as an enemy, so there is no specific reason for the Western Media to attack India.
In Part One of this story, we ran the search queries “china AND econom*” and “china AND pollution” using Media Cloud. To investigate the claim that western media are biased against China when reporting on air pollution, we ran the queries “india AND econom*” and “india AND pollution” using the same search conditions as for the China-related search, in order to compare the results.
Figure 4 shows that western media's coverage of China and India on these two issues follow a similar pattern. The ratio of pollution news to economic news is 6% for China and 7% for India. Therefore, the data do not support the claim that western media necessarily focuses more on pollution in China than pollution in other countries.
Figure 4: The numbers of stories related to economy and pollution in China and India compared, based on Media Cloud.
One might also ask whether the volume of reporting about pollution and human rights in China corresponds to readers’ interests.
To examine this question, we used Google Trends, which offers unbiased samples of real Google search data, to explore readers’ search habits. (Google Trends’ normalized index for selected search terms is the proportion of all searches on all topics on Google at that time and location.)
We ran three queries: ‘china economy’, ‘china pollution’, and ‘china and human rights’. In order to make the comparison with our Media Cloud queries, we set the same time frame: from 2013/1/1 to 2017/1/1, and we set the region to be ‘worldwide’.
Google Trends’ normalized index for the three queries is 29, 13, and 3, respectively. When we divided the normalized index for ‘china pollution’ by the normalized index for ‘china economy’, the ratio of ‘china pollution’ to ‘china economy’ was 45%, and the ratio of ‘china “human rights”’ to ‘china economy’ was 10%. In other words, people in China are proportionally more interested in their country's pollution problems and human rights issues than people from other countries.
In Part One of this story, we ran the search queries “china AND econom*”, “china AND pollution” using Media Cloud. For the same time frame in global English language sources, the ratio of the number of the articles related to China's pollution to the number of the articles related to China's economy was 6%. The ratio of the number of the articles related to human rights in China (where the search query was ‘china AND protest’) to the number of articles related to China's economy was 27%.
Figure 5: The numbers and ratios of the stories published in global English language sources (based on Media Cloud) and the normalized index in Google Trends for different queries.
If we compare the numbers we found with Media Cloud and Google Trends (see Figure 5), compared to articles about China's economy, the number of articles published in English about pollution in China is 6%, and the search interest in Google about pollution in China is 45% worldwide. In another similar comparison, compared with articles about China's economy, the number of articles published in English about China's human rights is 27%, and the search interest in Google about human rights in China is 10%.
In other words, the English-language press published more stories about China's human rights than Google users’ interest in this topic, but it also published fewer stories about China's pollution than Google users’ interest in this topic. Overall, the English press published fewer stories about pollution and human rights in China than Google users’ interest about these two ‘negative’, compared with stories about China's economy (considered a ‘positive’ topic).
Although the results support the idea that western media may have some preferences or limitations with regard to reporting certain issues relating to China, our findings do not support the claim, expressed by some Chinese commentators, that western media sets out to purposefully discredit, embarrass, or undermine China.
The last step was to check how the volume of news reports related to the interest shown by readers. If readers are showing interest in an issue, the media, in covering that issue, cannot be being said to be firing up interest with the intention—as in the Chinese government expresses it—of interfering in the internal affairs of China.
Figure 6: The number of stories published vs reader interest over time for the keyword ‘xiaobo’ in July 2017, based on Media Cloud and Google Trends.
Figure 6 shows the relationship between news reports in the same news sources mentioned above (from Media Cloud) and reader interest (from Google Trends) in the term ‘xiaobo’ around the period when Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo died during house arrest in July 2017. There is a close correspondence between the news reports and reader interest, so it is difficult to judge which one occurred first.
Figure 7: The number of stories published vs reader interest over time for the keyword ‘tiananmen’ in June 2017, based on Media Cloud and Google Trends.
Figure 7 shows relationship between the volume of news reports and reader interest for the word ‘tiananmen’ around Jun 4, 2017. This chart clearly shows that reader interest was ramping up before the media began reporting on this topic. Every year, on the anniversary of the crushing of the democracy movement by Chinese military forces on Jun 4, 1989, the Chinese government censors many of the search keywords related to this event. Yet our findings show that people still search for information about these events around the anniversary date, before the media reminds them.
It should be noted that Google exited China in 2010 because of censorship issues, and its market share in China declined to 1.7% in 2013. Google Trends may therefore seriously underestimate the degree of the interest of Chinese users, though it does reflect a special group of people in China who use VPNs to get around China’s “Great Firewall”.
It has been reported that Google is planning to reenter China with a ‘censored’ version of its search engine.

author: Guest Contributor


text:
Killing speech softly: How the world’s biggest tech companies are quietly censoring critical expression in the Middle East · Global Voices
Afef Abrougui

Graphic by Omar Momani for 7iber (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
This post is published as part of an editorial partnership between Global Voices and Ranking Digital Rights.
Following the Charlie Hebdo shootings in January 2015, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted a message reflecting on religion, free expression and the controversial editorial line of the magazine.
“A few years ago, an extremist in Pakistan fought to have me sentenced to death because Facebook refused to ban content about Mohammed that offended him.
We stood up for this because different voices — even if they're sometimes offensive — can make the world a better and more interesting place,” Zuckerberg wrote on his page.
Later that same month, Facebook agreed to restrict access to an unspecified number of pages for “offending prophet Muhammad” in Turkey at the request of local authorities.
Turkey is notorious for the number of requests it makes to internet companies to remove content for violating its local laws, but it is not the only government in the Middle East to resort to such tactic to silence critical voices.
While a number of the region’s governments sometimes make direct requests for content removal — along with exerting “soft” pressure through other means — the failures of tech giants in moderating content in the region is a much bigger and more complex problem.
Across the region, social media platform “flagging” mechanisms are often abused to silence government critics, minority groups or views and forms of expression deemed not to be in line with the majority’s beliefs on society, religion and politics.
In 2016, Facebook suspended several Arabic-language pages and groups dedicated to atheism following massive flagging campaigns.
This effectively eliminated one of the few (in some cases, the only) spaces where atheists and other minorities could come together to share their experiences, and freely express themselves on matters related to religion. Across the region, atheism remains a taboo that could be met with harassment, imprisonment or even murder.
“[Abusive flagging] is a significant problem,” Jessica Anderson, a project manager at onlinecensorship.org which documents cases of content takedowns by social media platforms, told Global Voices.
“In the Middle East as well as other geographies, we have documented cases of censorship resulting from ‘flagging campaigns’—coordinated efforts by many users to report a single page or piece of content.”
Flagging mechanisms are also abused by pro-government voices. Earlier this year, Middle East Eye reported that several Egyptian political activists had their pages or accounts suspended and live-streams shut down, after they were reported by “pro-government trolls.”
“What we have seen is that flagging can exacerbate existing power imbalances, empowering the majority to ’police’ the minority,” Anderson said. “The consequences of this issue can be severe: communities that are already marginalized and oppressed lose access to the benefits of social media as a space to organize, network, and be heard.”
This past May, Apple joined the ranks of Facebook and Twitter — the more commonly-cited social media platforms in this realm — when the iTunes store refused to upload fives songs by the Lebanese band Al-Rahel Al-Kabir. The songs mocked religious fundamentalism and political oppression in the region.
A representative from iTunes explained that the Dubai-based Qanawat, a local content aggregator hired by Apple to manage its store for the region, elected not to upload the songs. An anonymous source told The Daily Star that iTunes did not know about Qanawat’s decision, which it made due to “local sensitivities.” In response to a petition from Beirut-based digital rights NGO SMEX and the band itself, iTunes uploaded the songs and pledged to work with another aggregator.
This case does not only illustrate how “local sensitivities” can interfere with decisions about which types of content get to be posted and stay online in the region, but also shows that companies need to practice due diligence when taking decisions likely to affect users’ freedom of expression rights.
Speaking to Global Voices, Mohamad Najem, co-founder of SMEX pointed out that both Facebook and Twitter have their regional offices located in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which he described as one of the “most repressive countries” in the region.
“This is a business decision that will affect free speech in a negative way,” he said. He further expressed concern that the choice of having an office in a country like the UAE “can sometimes lead to enforcing Gulf social norm[s]” on an entire [Arab] region that is “dynamic and different.”
Facebook and Twitter have offices in the UAE that are intended to serve the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), a region that is ethnically, culturally and linguistically diverse, and presents a wide range of political viewpoints and experiences. When companies are pressured by oppressive governments or other powerful groups to respect “local sensitivities,” they are being complicit in shutting down expression of such diversity.
“Platforms seem to take direction from louder, more powerful voices…In the Middle East, [they] have not been able to stand up to powerful interests like governments,” Anderson said.
Take, for example, Facebook’s willingness to comply with the Turkish government’s censorship demands. Throughout the years, the company was involved in censoring criticism of the government, religion and the republic’s founder Ataturk, Kurdish activists, LGBT content and even an anti-racism initiative.
Facebook’s complicity with these requests appears to be deeply ingrained. I spoke to a Turkish activist two years ago who told me that he believed the platform “was turning into a pro-government media.” Today, the platform continues to comply, restricting access to more than 4,500 pieces of content inside the country in 2017 alone. Facebook is not transparent about the number and rates of requests it complies with.
“The biggest shortcoming in [the] ways platforms deal with takedown requests is [their] lack of understanding of the political contexts. And even if there is some kind of idea of what is happening on the ground, I am not entirely sure, there is always due diligence involved,” Arzu Geybulla, a freelance writer who covers Turkey and Azerbaijan for Global Voices said.
In conference settings, representatives from Facebook are routinely faced with questions about massive flagging campaigns. They maintain that multiple abuse reports on a single post or page do not automate the process of the post or page being removed. But they offer little concrete information about how the company does see and respond to these situations. Does the company review the content more closely? Facebook representatives also say that they consult with local experts on these issues, but the specifics of these consultations are similarly opaque.
And the work of moderating content — deciding what meets local legal standards and Facebook’s own policies — is not easy. Anderson from onlinecensorship.org said:
Content moderation is incredibly labor intensive. As the largest platforms continue to grow, these companies are attempting to moderate a staggering volume of content. Workers (who may not have adequate knowledge and training, and may not be well paid) have to make snap decisions about nuanced and culturally-specific content, leading to frequent mistakes and inconsistencies.
For activists and human rights advocates in the region, it is also difficult to know the scope of this problem due to lack of corporate transparency. Cases like that of iTunes may be occurring more often than is publicly known — it is only when someone speaks out about being censored that these practices come to light.

author: Afef Abrougui