Latest news with #censorship
Daily Mail
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Joe Rogan's dystopian theory about why Mark Zuckerburg could transform America into 'dictatorship'
Joe Rogan laid out a nightmare scenario where social media giants turn the US into an oppressive dictatorship, and warned that the first steps have already taken place. During an interview on his podcast with professional mixed martial artist Cory Sandhagen, Rogan steered the conversation towards social media and his fears, triggered by recent attempts to censor speech in America. The host of the Joe Rogan Experience singled out Mark Zuckerberg 's Facebook as one of the platforms silencing people he said were posting 'factual information' during the COVID-19 pandemic. 'That was scary to me. Because that's very, very un-American,' Rogan declared. The podcaster revealed that his friend and new owner of X, Elon Musk, told him about the social media platform allowing the US government to censor posts from private citizens. He then unveiled his vision of a 'dangerous' future where platforms like Facebook work together with the government to eliminate all forms of protesting online. Rogan claimed that the entire tech world leans toward a 'very progressive left-wing ideology,' and feared that if the same thing happened during a conservative right-wing presidency, democracy would be lost forever. 'The problem is then what if the f****** right gets in place and they use the same rules that you used on them. Now we don't have a country anymore. I know now we're f*****. Now we're just like every other dictatorship,' Rogan exclaimed. Rogan has previously revealed how the US government, scientists, and social media critics allegedly attempted to 'cancel' him over his support for controversial COVID medicines like ivermectin. He also claimed that CNN edited a video to make his face look green after taking ivermectin, something the podcast host said made him consider suing the media outlet in 2021. 'Because I'm friends with Elon, I knew what was going on at Twitter behind the scenes. I knew how the government was stepping in and silencing posts,' Rogan said during the interview released on Thursday. In March, House Republicans issued subpoenas to officials at Google, demanding the tech giant turn over company information tied to the censorship of Americans during the Biden presidency. Republicans have long accused the Biden Administration of pressuring major companies into censoring free speech during and after the coronavirus pandemic. Republicans launched an investigation into government censorship after reclaiming the House majority in early 2023. Before Biden left office in January, Zuckerberg publicly confessed that both Meta and Facebook censored conservative opinions on an industrial scale during this time. Zuckerberg said the Biden Administration 'repeatedly pressured' the company to remove posts government officials claimed were 'COVID misinformation,' even if the posts were just humor or satire. Rogan compared the shocking levels of censorship in the US during the pandemic to other countries, which have been accused by nonprofit watchdogs of suppressing free expression. According to the political advocacy group Freedom House, 45 countries arrested their citizens for their COVID-related speech online. Twenty-eight countries were found to have censored websites or social media posts during the pandemic, a list that has now been confirmed to include the US. Other nations confirmed to have silenced public discourse included China, India, Turkey, Egypt, and Thailand. Countries in the European Union, like Germany and the UK, have also been accused of censoring online speech through regulations like the EU Digital Services Act. 'This is f****** dangerous man,' Rogan said Thursday. 'If they get a real grip on social media... you no longer can protest about things and express yourself about things, including a lot of things that happened to be true,' he added. That's when the podcast host, who publicly endorsed President Trump in 2024, focused his argument on the progressive left. 'All tech is primarily left and they have a very strong ideology,' Rogan claimed. He alleged that Democrats in the Biden White House and tech giants justified their actions by claiming that anyone who disagreed with the administration's COVID policies was not just wrong, but also attacking democracy. 'When they were in control and they were silencing things, I think the attitude was this is good because we're right and we need to stop these fascists or whatever we want to call them,' Rogan explained. At this point, President Trump and Republicans have not made any public statements that support the censorship of Americans on social media. Musk added in 2024 that he wanted X to 'maximize free speech' and opposed any form of content suppression unless the comments were explicitly illegal. Since Zuckerberg's admission about Facebook, the social media platform has officially shut down its third-party fact-checking program in the US on April 7. Meta also adopted Community Notes, a crowdsourced content moderation feature that allows users to add context, corrections, or clarifications to posts online, just like X does. Zuckerberg also promised to move the social media platform's content moderation teams from California to Texas to address perceptions of bias. However, former Facebook employees told The Guardian their teams were already in Texas before January 2025 and the promise was made to win over President Trump.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Iran strikes damage hard to assess under Israeli military censorship
Israel has acknowledged being hit by more than 50 missiles during the 12-day war with Iran, but the true extent of the damage may never be known due to stringent press restrictions. Such regulations are nothing new in Israel, where any written or visual publication deemed potentially harmful to the loosely defined concept of "national security" can be banned by law. Censorship predates the creation of Israel in 1948, when the territory was under a British mandate. But with the recent missile barrages from Iran that managed to breach Israel's vaunted air defences and kill 28 people, the restrictions were further tightened. Any broadcast from a "combat zone or missile impact site" requires written authorisation from the military censor, according to the Israeli Government Press Office, which is responsible for government communications and for accrediting journalists. This requirement is particularly stringent when strikes land near military bases, oil refineries, or other facilities deemed strategic. "There is, of course, a very real national security dimension. You don't want to tell the enemy exactly where its bombs landed, or help them improve targeting," said Jerome Bourdon, professor of media sociology at Tel Aviv University. "But this also maintains uncertainty around the country's vulnerability to external threats. We probably will never know the full extent of the damage," he added. – 'Reverse the narrative' – Most of the government's communication during the war focused on its military successes, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday praising a "historic victory" over Iran. For Bourdon, the tightening of media coverage also reflects "a very clear desire to reverse the narrative", at a time when Israel faces harsh international criticism over its war in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands and triggered dire humanitarian conditions. On June 19, Defence Minister Israel Katz accused Tehran of "deliberately targeting hospitals and residential buildings" after a hospital in the southern Israeli city of Beersheba was hit, injuring around 40 people. Katz accused Iran of "the most serious war crimes", while Iran denied intentionally targeting the health centre. Meanwhile, human rights defenders regularly condemn Israel's destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza and the targeting of hospitals under the claim that they are used by Palestinian militants. During the war with Iran, media coverage near sites of missile strikes in Israel's civilian areas was occasionally hindered, as foreign reporters were prevented from filming wide shots or specifying the exact location of the impacts. In the central Israeli city of Ramat Gan, police interrupted the live broadcast of two Western news agencies filming a gutted building, suspecting them of providing the footage to Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera. Israel banned the outlet in May 2024, alleging it has ties with Palestinian militant group Hamas, which Al Jazeera has denied. – 'Illegal content' – In a statement, police said they had acted to stop the broadcast of "illegal content" in accordance with the "policy" of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. The far-right cabinet member, known for his incendiary rhetoric against critics, vowed on June 16 to take tough action against anyone who "undermines the security of the state". "Zero tolerance for those who help the enemy," echoed Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi. The two ministers "make claims that exceed the legal framework of their powers, and also are very, very extreme," said Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute. "Usually, they make a lot of noise" in order to "get political gain from this publicity," she told AFP. Beyond political calculations, "these officials show a deep mistrust, a real hostility toward the liberal Israeli media, and especially toward the foreign media," said professor Bourdon. The Government Press Office on Thursday reaffirmed its commitment to "freedom of the press... as a fundamental right" and insisted it makes "no distinction between Israeli and non-Israeli journalists". cl/mj/glp/acc/rlp/dv
Khaleej Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Khaleej Times
Israel admits being hit by 50 missiles during Iran conflict
Israel has acknowledged being hit by more than 50 missiles during the 12-day conflict with Iran, but the true extent of the damage may never be known due to stringent press restrictions. Such regulations are nothing new in Israel, where any written or visual publication deemed potentially harmful to the loosely defined concept of "national security" can be banned by law. Censorship predates the creation of Israel in 1948, when the territory was under a British mandate. But with the recent missile barrages from Iran that managed to breach Israel's vaunted air defences and kill 28 people, the restrictions were further tightened. Any broadcast from a "combat zone or missile impact site" requires written authorisation from the military censor, according to the Israeli Government Press Office, which is responsible for government communications and for accrediting journalists. This requirement is particularly stringent when strikes land near military bases, oil refineries, or other facilities deemed strategic. "There is, of course, a very real national security dimension. You don't want to tell the enemy exactly where its bombs landed, or help them improve targeting," said Jerome Bourdon, professor of media sociology at Tel Aviv University. "But this also maintains uncertainty around the country's vulnerability to external threats. We probably will never know the full extent of the damage," he added. 'Reverse the narrative' Most of the government's communication during the war focused on its military successes, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday praising a "historic victory" over Iran. For Bourdon, the tightening of media coverage also reflects "a very clear desire to reverse the narrative", at a time when Israel faces harsh international criticism over its war in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands and triggered dire humanitarian conditions. On June 19, Defence Minister Israel Katz accused Tehran of "deliberately targeting hospitals and residential buildings" after a hospital in the southern Israeli city of Beersheba was hit, injuring around 40 people. Katz accused Iran of "the most serious war crimes", while Iran denied intentionally targeting the health centre. Meanwhile, human rights defenders regularly condemn Israel's destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza and the targeting of hospitals under the claim that they are used by Palestinian militants. During the war with Iran, media coverage near sites of missile strikes in Israel's civilian areas was occasionally hindered, as foreign reporters were prevented from filming wide shots or specifying the exact location of the impacts. In the central Israeli city of Ramat Gan, police interrupted the live broadcast of two Western news agencies filming a gutted building, suspecting them of providing the footage to Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera. Israel banned the outlet in May 2024, alleging it has ties with Palestinian militant group Hamas, which Al Jazeera has denied. 'Illegal content' In a statement, police said they had acted to stop the broadcast of "illegal content" in accordance with the "policy" of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. The far-right cabinet member, known for his incendiary rhetoric against critics, vowed on June 16 to take tough action against anyone who "undermines the security of the state". "Zero tolerance for those who help the enemy," echoed Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi. The two ministers "make claims that exceed the legal framework of their powers, and also are very, very extreme," said Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute. "Usually, they make a lot of noise" in order to "get political gain from this publicity," she told AFP. Beyond political calculations, "these officials show a deep mistrust, a real hostility toward the liberal Israeli media, and especially toward the foreign media," said professor Bourdon. The Government Press Office on Thursday reaffirmed its commitment to "freedom of the press... as a fundamental right" and insisted it makes "no distinction between Israeli and non-Israeli journalists".
Al Arabiya
2 days ago
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
Iran strikes damage hard to assess under Israeli military censorship
Israel has acknowledged being hit by more than 50 missiles during the 12-day war with Iran, but the true extent of the damage may never be known due to stringent press restrictions. Such regulations are nothing new in Israel, where any written or visual publication deemed potentially harmful to the loosely defined concept of 'national security' can be banned by law. Censorship predates the creation of Israel in 1948, when the territory was under a British mandate. But with the recent missile barrages from Iran that managed to breach Israel's vaunted air defenses and kill 28 people, the restrictions were further tightened. Any broadcast from a 'combat zone or missile impact site' requires written authorization from the military censor, according to the Israeli Government Press Office, which is responsible for government communications and for accrediting journalists. This requirement is particularly stringent when strikes land near military bases, oil refineries, or other facilities deemed strategic. 'There is, of course, a very real national security dimension. You don't want to tell the enemy exactly where its bombs landed, or help them improve targeting,' said Jerome Bourdon, professor of media sociology at Tel Aviv University. 'But this also maintains uncertainty around the country's vulnerability to external threats. We probably will never know the full extent of the damage,' he added. Reverse the narrative Most of the government's communication during the war focused on its military successes, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday praising a 'historic victory' over Iran. For Bourdon, the tightening of media coverage also reflects 'a very clear desire to reverse the narrative,' at a time when Israel faces harsh international criticism over its war in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands and triggered dire humanitarian conditions. On June 19, Defense Minister Israel Katz accused Tehran of 'deliberately targeting hospitals and residential buildings' after a hospital in the southern Israeli city of Beersheba was hit, injuring around 40 people. Katz accused Iran of 'the most serious war crimes,' while Iran denied intentionally targeting the health center. Meanwhile, human rights defenders regularly condemn Israel's destruction of the healthcare system in Gaza and the targeting of hospitals under the claim that they are used by Palestinian militants. During the war with Iran, media coverage near sites of missile strikes in Israel's civilian areas was occasionally hindered, as foreign reporters were prevented from filming wide shots or specifying the exact location of the impacts. In the central Israeli city of Ramat Gan, police interrupted the live broadcast of two Western news agencies filming a gutted building, suspecting them of providing the footage to Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera. Israel banned the outlet in May 2024, alleging it has ties with Palestinian militant group Hamas, which Al Jazeera has denied. Illegal content In a statement, police said they had acted to stop the broadcast of 'illegal content' in accordance with the 'policy' of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. The far-right cabinet member, known for his incendiary rhetoric against critics, vowed on June 16 to take tough action against anyone who 'undermines the security of the state.' 'Zero tolerance for those who help the enemy,' echoed Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi. The two ministers 'make claims that exceed the legal framework of their powers, and also are very, very extreme,' said Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute. 'Usually, they make a lot of noise' in order to 'get political gain from this publicity,' she told AFP. Beyond political calculations, 'these officials show a deep mistrust, a real hostility toward the liberal Israeli media, and especially toward the foreign media,' said professor Bourdon. The Government Press Office on Thursday reaffirmed its commitment to 'freedom of the press... as a fundamental right' and insisted it makes 'no distinction between Israeli and non-Israeli journalists.'
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Free speech fury after woke university censors professor for quoting a line every American learns in school
A free speech row has erupted in Oregon after a woke university blocked a professor online for quoting the Declaration of Independence. Dr Bruce Gilley, a political scientist and climate change researcher, was 'blocked' on X by the University of Oregon after he posted 'all men are created equal.' Dr Gilley — who is employed by Portland State University — was responding to a post by the college which encouraged people to 'interrupt racism.' In response, he filed a lawsuit claiming the University of Oregon had violated his First Amendment Rights. The university un-blocked him after 60 days, but federal judges allowed the case to proceed — saying the professor raised legitimate claims that the university had violated his free speech rights, given it is a state-funded, public institution. The two parties have now reached an out-of-court settlement, revealed this month, that sees the University of Oregon pay out more than $730,000 and update its social media policy. Under the agreement, the University of Oregon will pay $191,000 to Dr Gilley to cover his legal costs and another $533,000 to cover its own legal costs. Its social media policy will now also include guidelines for staff to avoid 'viewpoint-based censorship' and create and appeals process for those who believe they have been blocked by the university unfairly. Institute for Free Speech Senior Attorney Del Kolde, who worked on the case, heralded the fee award as a 'vindication' of fundamental constitutional rights. 'The university made a costly decision to prioritize DEI principles over constitutional principles,' he said. '[They] aggressively litigated this case for nearly three years rather than acknowledging the obvious — that blocking someone for quoting the Declaration of Independence violates the First Amendment.' As part of the deal, the University of Oregon has said it 'does not admit liability and believes it would have prevailed if the parties litigated to conclusion'. The dispute broke out in June 2022 after the University's Equity and Inclusion account — @UOEquity — posted a 'racism interrupter' tool designed to help people respond to remarks that they consider to be racist or offensive. It suggested that to 'interrupt racism' someone should say: 'It sounded like you just said____. Is that really what you meant?' Dr Gilley quote-tweeted their post, and added the response: 'My entry: ...you just said "all men are created equal".' He was shortly afterward blocked by the university staffer who ran the account, Tova Stabin — who identifies online as a 'Ashkenazi lesbian feminist'. In August, Dr Gilley filed a lawsuit against the university — seeking a temporary restraining order and $17.91 in nominal damages. Individuals generally cannot be sued for blocking people on X because this is seen as a private action, but public institutions can be. The university tried to have the case dismissed, but a federal judge rejected its claim in February 2023, saying the professor raised legitimate claims that the 60-day blocking violated his free speech rights. An appeals court allowed his preliminary injunction request in March 2024, saying the university had not shown that the conduct cannot reasonably be expected to occur again. The case was later dismissed after the two parties agreed to reach a negotiated settlement. Stabin resigned from the university shortly before the lawsuit was filed, with internal records released in the case showing that other staff members urged her to unblock Dr Gilley as soon as they were aware of the situation. The University's general counsel immediately emailed her requesting that Dr Gilley be unblocked unless he engaged in speech 'not protected by the United States and Oregon Constitutions'. The University's communications department also sent an email to staff reinforcing that '"viewpoint discrimination" isn't permitted when managing social media accounts.' Its equity and inclusion account has 823 followers online, and last posted in August 2022 shortly after the lawsuit was filed. According to court documents, Dr Gilley is a critic of diversity, equity and inclusion principles because he 'believes that DEI calls for discrimination against university faculty, students, and applicants who are not members of groups favored'. At his university, he also 'resists attempts' to impose DEI on campus and previously declined to sign a 'Black Lives Matter' statement because it was an 'ideological principle'.
