# data[].attributes.body
https://newsone.com/4463977/colorado-springs-police-brutality/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bruce is based in New York City and mainly covers politics, culture, race and criminal justice. He previously worked at the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Boston Globe's Boston.com, where he was a part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning team that covered the Boston Marathon bombing and manhunt. Follow him @ BCTW on social media.

Follow @bctw
WARNING: The images in this article are graphic and should be viewed with discretion.
Attorneys for a Black U.S. military veteran who was brutally beaten by police during a pretextual traffic stop in Colorado are making graphic photos from the incident public and calling for a criminal investigation.

Dalvin Gadson, who served in the Army National Guard as a helicopter mechanic, claims he was racially profiled and subjected to a brutal attack by multiple police officers in Colorado Springs while others looked on and didn't intervene after he was pulled over for his car failing to display its tags in October.

One of the photos taken in the aftermath of the beating shows an officer smiling while displaying what appears to be a bruised knuckle, presumably from the police violence.

While the traffic stop was taking place, an officer claimed he smelled marijuana and informed Gadson that he would have to take a DUI test. Gadson, who was homeless at the time, was ordered out of the car and told he would be placed in handcuffs.

When Gadson refused to exit his car and asked why he would need to be handcuffed, he said the question was only answered with swift force.

Gadson, who has set up a GoFundMe account to help him pay for legal representation, explained what happened next:
At that moment, one of the peace officers violently grabbed my hand, and my body's natural reaction was to pull my hand back. I did not think to do this. It was a natural reaction. The same police officer immediately started punching me in the face while pulling me out of my car. After the first punch, I tried to say okay, I tried to say sorry, I tried to lay on the ground, but multiple officers were grabbing me, kicking me in the head, kneeing and elbowing me in the face, and punching me everywhere possible. After I was punched several times in the face, I lost consciousness. (NOTE: No officers on the scene tried to stop this wrongdoing against me. There was thirteen peace officers on the scene) I regained awareness, lying on the asphalt. I was covered in blood, with two black eyes, one eye swelled shut with blood in my cornea, my whole body badly bruised, abrasions all over, lips busted, ribs and spine hurting and my eyesight was halfway gone (NOTE: my eyes, head, spine and back are still damaged from this incident).
Adding insult to literal injury, Gadson was charged with two counts of second degree assault on a police officer, resisting arrest, obstructing a peace officer, driving under the influence and driving without license plates. The assault charges were eventually dropped and the DUI charge was dismissed last week after it was determined that "there was insufficient probable cause to require a blood test."

One of Gadson's lawyers suggested the officers involved were motivated by race.

"Dalvin Gadson was a homeless veteran living out of his car as he worked to reenlist and continue serving his country. But all these officers saw was a black man and they beat him for it, smiling for the camera as he lay on the ground bleeding," civil rights attorney Harry Daniels said in a press release with graphic images of Gadson following the traffic stop. "They beat him mercilessly and now he's afraid to go outside and the VA can't see him to treat his injuries and PTSD until January."

Gadson said he's been left "terrified" of police officers.

"My liberty and pursuit of happiness is in jeopardy because of this incident," Gadson said. "I don't feel safe in my own neighborhood anymore."

To be sure, this isn't the first time Colorado Springs has been implicated in anti-Black and racist behavior.

Just last week, comedian and actor Mark Curry claimed he was racially profiled in a Colorado Springs hotel where he was booked to perform.

And back in February, the city of Colorado Springs was ordered to pay $175,000 to a Black Lives Matter protester to settle an excessive force lawsuit stemming from a violent encounter during the summer of 2020.

This is America.
SEE ALSO: 5 Officers Charged With Reckless Endangerment After Randy Cox Is Paralyzed During Police Fan Transport Family Of Rayshard Brooks Awarded $1 Million Settlement To Be Paid By City Of Atlanta

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Graphic Police Brutality Photos Show Cop Smiling After Beating Black Veteran Bloody In Colorado

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bruce is based in New York City and mainly covers politics, culture, race and criminal justice. He previously worked at the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Boston Globe's Boston.com, where he was a part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning team that covered the Boston Marathon bombing and manhunt.

# data[].attributes.body
https://krcrtv.com/news/local/san-francisco-police-could-soon-be-banned-from-making-certain-traffic-stops-over-racial-disparity-concerns-pretext-cops-california

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
San Francisco police may ban certain traffic stops to 'reduce racial disparities'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The police commission in San Francisco is set to vote on a proposal that would ban cops from making certain types of traffic stops in the city.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.koin.com/news/oregon/an-oregon-woman-painted-portraits-of-those-killed-by-police-violence-now-the-paintings-have-been-stolen/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anne Witherspoon said she'd like to speak to the person who stole her artwork

PORTLAND, Ore. ( KOIN) - George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Tenisha Anderson, Philando Castile, Elijah McClain - those are just some of the people artist Anne Witherspoon had painted portraits of and hung on her fence in Yamhill County.

After the 2020 social justice movement, Witherspoon spent a year learning about people who had been victims of police violence and victims of violence by other people in power. She then painted 25 portraits of them - all people of color - on 2-by-2-foot sheets of plywood and put them on display.

They stayed there for two years, but then, on December 30, they disappeared. Someone had stolen them.

"They had been screwed in. There were at least two screws in each painting, screwing it to the fence," Witherspoon said. "It was very intentional. Instead of just defacing them, they meticulously took them down."

She said the murder of George Floyd, a Black man, by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020 opened her eyes to racial violence in recent decades.

She grieved the lives that had been lost and felt she had kept her head buried in the sand and neglected it. One thing she did to deal with the grief was to paint.

"I would paint and try to draw out the image of the person that had died and I would cry and I'd pray and I would imagine what it's like for the families. You know, they all had brothers and sisters and wives and husbands," she said.

The 69-year-old, who considers herself "an aspiring artist," had no intention of putting the portraits on display. However, when she ran out of space in her studio, her children encouraged her to hang them on the fence of her property outside of Yamhill.

They hung there for two years. Witherspoon said she and her husband live along the bicycle path from Portland to Yamhill County and cyclists would stop by to thank her for her artwork and for putting the portraits on display.

In two years, she said she received nothing but positive input.

Witherspoon said she discovered the portraits were missing on December 31 but believes they were taken on December 30.

"They don't have street value at this point, having been on the fence for two years. They did [have value] to me because they were like my personal meditations," she said.

She imagines someone or a group of people took them down because they don't like what the portraits represent. She's afraid whoever took them might want to destroy them and hopes to get them back before they have the chance.

She's offering a monetary reward for anyone who comes forward with information. She asks anyone who knows anything about the stolen portraits to email her at Anniespoon@gmail.com.

"I'm just curious as to who would commit a crime in order to stop a story that was not threatening to anybody," Witherspoon said.

If the opportunity presents itself, Witherspoon said she'd like to have a conversation with the person who stole her paintings. She'd like to tell them more about the stories of each person she painted and ask them why they felt the need to take her paintings down.

Witherspoon said the painted pieces of plywood aren't what's important. What's important, she said, are the stories of the people she painted. Although her paintings might be lost forever, she hopes the people who passed by them and enjoyed them the last two years will help keep their stories alive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Yamhill County woman offers reward for stolen paintings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anne Witherspoon said she'd like to speak to the person who stole her artwork PORTLAND, Ore. ( KOIN) - George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Tenisha Anderson, Philando Castile, Elijah McClain - those are just some of the people artist Anne Witherspoon had painted portraits of and hung on her fence in Yamhill County.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.euronews.com/2023/01/11/words-have-power-what-are-the-origins-of-woman-life-freedom-iran-protest-chants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Words have power.

They shape our beliefs, drive our behaviour and ultimately create our world.

In Iran, three simple words have become immensely important in recent months: 'Woman, life, freedom'.

Ringing out across the country and in Iranian communities around the world, they are the rallying cry of anti-government protests that broke out in September, after the death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini, a young Kurdish woman.

But what are the origins of the phrase 'woman, life, freedom'? How did it spread to Iran? And why it is so important to protesters?

'From Turkey, to Syria, to Iran'

The phrase has a long history among Kurds in the Middle East.

It can be traced back to women in the Kurdish National Liberation Movement in Turkey and the writings of Abdullah Öcalan, the founder of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party).

The Kurds are a 30 million-strong ethnic group, scattered across Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran, who share a similar culture and language. They are one of the world's largest stateless peoples and have fought a centuries-long struggle for greater recognition and independence, particularly in Turkey.

"[Women, life, freedom] is reflected a lot in the political philosophy of Öcalan," Meghan Bodette, Director of Research at the Kurdish Peace Organisation, told Euronews.

"He famously wrote that to free society from economic exploitation [or] the Kurdish people from national oppression... the first form of oppression that must be tackled is the oppression of women, since it leads to all other hierarchies."

"The idea that women's freedom is essential for the freedom of all of society - that's what's encapsulated in the slogan," she added.

The phrase remained significant for the Kurdish movement in Turkey, being used at demonstrations and meetings of Kurdish women as early as 2003. However, it did not become widespread until the Syrian Civil War erupted in 2011.

As Syria disintegrated into its various regional and ethnic enclaves, Kurdish women in the YPJ, an all-female militia, put the phrase into practice fighting the Islamic State and helping establish an autonomous state in northern Syria, which passed progressive laws on the rights and status of women.

"This struggle captured the imagination of Kurds across the Middle East, especially the women in Iranian Kurdistan," said Dr Marouf Cabi, a Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics's Middle East Centre.

"People followed the news, they paid attention, they identified themselves with the fight against ISIS and what was going on in Rojava," he told Euronews. "This is when the phrase first entered people's consciousness."

How did the phrase women, life, freedom spread to Iran?

Fast forward to 17 September 2022.

During the funeral of Mahsa (Jina) Aminil, who died after being arrested by Iran's morality police, Kurdish women removed their headscarves that they must wear by law, and began chanting "women, life, freedom".

"Kurdish women protesting this murder would have likely seen what happened [to Amini] as an example of the patriarchal and state violence they as Kurds -- and as women -- face every day," said Bodette.

Amini's family and activists say she was killed by officers, who violently struck her head several times, though Iranian authorities claim the 22-year-old died of a heart attack.

She was arrested for allegedly not wearing her headscarf properly and sporting skinny jeans.

'Women, life, freedom' quickly spread across Iran as protests over Amini's death engulfed the country.

According to Bodette, the three-worded phrase became so popular because it resonates with exactly what people in Iran are struggling for. "It represents everything the Iranian state is against," she said.

Fights for gender equality and the rights of women and ethnic minorities in Iran began almost immediately after the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Despite promising that it would not happen, the new government soon set about enforcing strict Islamic laws and dress codes on the population, making it compulsory for women to wear a headscarf in 1983.

Meanwhile, attempts by the country's Kurdish population to forge their own independence were brutally suppressed in the years following the revolution, leading to at least 10,000 dead and 200,000 people displaced.

"These words ['women, life, freedom'] sum up a struggle against all kinds of religious extremists and authoritarian states both in Iran and the wider region", said Bodette.

'Its become a catchy phrase'

But there are some concerns about how the phrase is being used, which highlight historic issues impacting Kurdish populations in Iran and the Middle East.

"There's been criticism from many Kurds, particularly many Kurdish women, that the slogan has sometimes been separated from its Kurdish roots," says Bodette, especially when it is used by the international media, celebrities, brands and politicians.

For example, the words are occasionally only written in Persian or English, not Kurdish.

While she said many Kurds are happy to see protesters adopting the phrase -- viewing it positively that others are embracing their ideas -- Bodette claims this separation can "erase" the "radical history of resisting oppression" by Kurds everywhere that lies behind it.

"This history is really important to show the true power of these words, that women-led movements can unite society against oppressive governments, religious fundamentalism and ultra-nationalism," she told Euronews.

"Kurdish women believe that their movement is a universal movement for the freedom of women everywhere."

"Even if the Iranian government doesn't fall tomorrow, the protests have already proven that the idea of 'women, life, freedom' is a very powerful one."

"It's not going to go away anytime soon," Bodette added.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Words have power: The origins of 'woman, life, freedom' protest chant

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Words have power. They shape our beliefs, drive our behaviour and ultimately create our world. In Iran, three simple words have become immensely important in recent months: 'Woman, life, freedom'. Ringing out across the country and in Iranian communities around the world, they are the rallying cry of anti-government protests that broke out in September, after the death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini, a young Kurdish woman.

# data[].attributes.body
https://kansasreflector.com/2022/12/12/audit-shows-kansas-agencies-still-have-significant-it-flaws-gaps-in-it-security-training/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
TOPEKA - Kansas auditors found serious flaws in several state agencies' IT security measures, according to survey results spanning from January 2020 to December of this year.

The audit of 21 state agencies and school districts tested 40-50 IT security and control items. One entity was audited twice and counted as two separate entities. Out of the 21 entities, 10 scored poorly or very poorly in vulnerability tests - below 50% in security and IT standards.

During a legislative post audit committee meeting Monday, Alex Gard, principal IT auditor in the Kansas Legislative Division of Post Audit, said some of the entities surveyed hadn't fixed problem areas since the last time they were audited.

"State agencies and school districts continue to have similar IT security issues to those we've identified in audits we've conducted over the past 20 years," Gard said. "Several entities were audited for the second or third time during the past 10 years or so, and some entities improved from one audit to the next, while others had repeated findings."

Gard said most of the problems stemmed from either a lack of proper oversight, or a lack of staff resources to address IT security issues. Most of the audited entities had some level of unsupported software, and in some cases, the entities didn't have any IT security training or security plans for keeping data safe.

Gard said some entities also failed phishing tests, or didn't dispose of sensitive information in a safe manner.

"Overall, we found significant security issues in many systems with respect to account security, data protection, scanning and patching and risk and security assessment," Gard said.

Rep. John Barker, R-Abilene, said lawmakers needed to actively address gaps in IT security. He said he was worried the state was vulnerable to losing sensitive information.

"I just think the Legislature at some point needs to address this issue so we can see some improvement," Barker said. "Wait till we get hacked."

Barker said he wasn't sure if the state's IT problems came from leadership issues, or a lack of experienced personnel, but thought more needed to be done.

"Overall, the state, it doesn't seem like we're making any progress," Barker said.

For future IT security audits, starting in 2023, lawmakers decided to choose a broader audit plan that would focus on more entities, testing a few set IT areas instead of an intensive evaluation of fewer entities.

"It does cast a broader net, and then it does help us identify more potential problems," said Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee.

During the meeting, lawmakers also approved auditing K-12 school districts to evaluate the estimated costs of providing educational opportunities for every public school student to meet performance outcome standards set by the Kansas State Board of Education.

The audit also would evaluate the relationship between costs for these educational opportunities and the outcome of the expenditures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Audit shows Kansas agencies still have significant IT flaws, gaps in IT security training - Kansas Reflector

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TOPEKA - Kansas auditors found serious flaws in several state agencies' IT security measures, according to survey results spanning from January 2020 to December of this year. The audit of 21 state agencies and school districts tested 40-50 IT security and control items. One entity was audited twice and counted as two separate entities.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/01/us/george-floyd-three-videos-minneapolis/index.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
three videos show the final moments of george floyd's life - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Three videos piece together the final moments of George Floyd's life

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While many questions persist about George Floyd's killing -- namely why a Minneapolis policeman used lethal force while arresting Floyd -- three videos help stitch together the last minutes of the 46-year-old's life.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-army-helps-produce-song-nukes-wiping-out-nato-us-2022-12

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nknews.org/2023/01/new-north-korean-propaganda-posters-focus-on-economy-over-missiles/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New North Korean propaganda posters focus on economy over missiles

Despite recent call for increased weapons production, new art and slogans emphasize sectors like farming and fishing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New North Korean propaganda posters focus on economy over missiles | NK News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
North Korea rolled out new propaganda posters over the weekend designed to "arouse all people to implement" the ruling party's new year economic goals, according to state media, after kicking off a campaign to study the goals at a massive rally for 100,000 Pyongyang residents.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-intl-01-09-23/index.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Kathleen Magramo, Amy Woodyatt, Kathryn Snowdon, Mike Hayes and Leinz Vales, CNN

Updated 1:50 a.m. ET, January 10, 2023

What we covered here

Russian troops are making another attempt to advance on the small town of Soledar, which is near Bakhmut in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, according to officials.

"Everything is completely destroyed, there is almost no life left," President Volodymyr Zelensky said of the fierce fighting near Bakhmut.

Kyiv and Moscow carried out a prisoner exchange Sunday with a total of 100 soldiers returning to their home countries, according to officials in both nations.

Ukraine has dismissed Moscow's claim that a large number of Kyiv's soldiers were killed in a Russian attack last week in Kramatorsk, eastern Ukraine.

1:50 a.m. ET, January 10, 2023

Russia is focused on capturing the mining town of Soledar in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in his nightly address on Monday.

The Russians, "have concentrated their greatest efforts on Soledar," he said. "It is extremely difficult - there are almost no undamaged walls left."

Ukrainian troops have repelled a previous Russian attempt to capture the town, Zelensky's deputy defense minister said earlier Monday. Zelensky said his men's "resilience" had "won additional time" for Ukraine.

"Everything is completely destroyed, there is almost no life left. Thousands of their people have been lost: the whole ground near Soledar is covered with the corpses of the occupiers and scars from the blows. This is how madness looks like," he added.

Zelensky said that his administration was working to get the military equipment promised by Ukraine's allies to the frontline as soon as possible: "We are doing everything to ensure that there is as little time as possible between the agreement on additional support and the application of this support on the battlefield."

Two people have been killed in a missile strike on the city of Kramatorsk in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region late on Monday, a government official said on Telegram.

The missile hit a road and killed two people in a car, said Kyrylo Tymoshenko, Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.

Earlier Monday, two people died when a missile struck a village in the neighboring Kharkiv region, and another person died after shelling in the southern city of Kherson.

Two British nationals have gone missing in Ukraine, the UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) said in a statement to CNN Monday.

"We are supporting the families of two British men who have gone missing in Ukraine," an FCDO spokesperson said.

The spokesperson didn't provide further details about the two British nationals or their last known location.

The number of people killed in Monday's missile strike on the Kharkiv region has risen to two, the head of the regional administration, Oleh Syniehubov, said on Telegram.

"According to the updated information, 6 people were wounded as a result of a strike on the settlement of Shevchenkove. Two more people were killed," Syniehubov said. "Among wounded there is a child who received a shrapnel wound to the neck. The girl was immediately sent for surgery. Now doctors are fighting for her life."

The village of Shevchenkove was liberated in September after more than six months of Russian occupation.

Russian troops are making another attempt to advance on the small town of Soledar near Bakhmut in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar said on Telegram Monday.

"After an unsuccessful [previous] attempt to capture Soledar and retreat, the enemy regrouped, restored losses, deployed additional assault units, changed tactics and launched a powerful assault," Maliar said. "At the moment, the enemy has engaged a large number of assault groups formed from the best reserves of the Wagner's troops. The enemy is advancing literally on the corpses of their own soldiers, massively using artillery, multiple rocket launchers and mortars, covering even their own fighters with fire."

"Heavy fighting continues right at this moment," she added.

Earlier on Monday, Serhii Cherevatyi, a Ukrainian military spokesperson, told Ukrainian TV that Russia had "managed to concentrate more of its units" around Soledar and was deploying both "regular" troops and mercenaries working for the private sector group Wagner there.

The head of the Wagner group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, said Sunday that one of the reasons he wanted to take over Bakhmut and Soledar in order to control the system of mines in that area, which he described as "a network of underground cities."

Cherevatyi, spokesperson for Eastern Group of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, said they were trying to evacuate civilians from Soledar but not everyone was willing to leave.

"Soledar is actually destroyed," he said. "There are residents there. Everything is being done to evacuate them. It is difficult to talk about the numbers now. There is a part of people, especially the older generation, who have a great fear of change, of leaving their homes and to move somewhere. We are communicating with them, but not always everyone agrees [to leave]."

On Sunday night, President Volodymr Zelensky said that Soledar was "holding out" but it was "extremely hard."

Russian forces claimed to have taken the village of Bakhmuts'ke in Donetsk region on Monday, according to a statement published by the headquarters of the Territorial Defense of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) on its Telegram channel.

"As of January 9, 2023, Bakhmuts'ke village in the territory of the Donetsk People's Republic was liberated by the Russian Armed Forces," the statement claimed.

The village of Bakhmuts'ke is located near Soledar and Bakhmut - the area which has been the site of intense fighting for months.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Sunday called Bakhmut and Soledar "one of the bloodiest places on the frontline."

CNN has not been able to independently confirm DPR's claims.

8:52 a.m. ET, January 9, 2023
It's mid-afternoon in Kyiv. Here's what you need to know

Shelling has continued in northeastern and southeastern Ukraine, according to local regional heads. Meanwhile, the Kremlin has said that it has "absolute trust" in the information from the Russian Defense Ministry on carrying out a "retaliation" strike against Ukraine's Armed Forces in Kramatorsk.
Here are the latest developments:

Kharkiv shelling: Ukraine's Kharkiv region was targeted with a missile strike and shelling on Monday, the head of the Kharkiv regional state administration said on Telegram. "The enemy shelled the settlements of the Chuhuiv and Kupyansk districts with artillery, tanks and mortars," Oleg Sinegubov said. Seven civilians were injured as a result of a missile strike on the village of Shevchenkove, while a 60-year-old woman died, he added.

Shelling continues in Donetsk: Shelling has continued overnight in different parts of the front line in southeastern Ukraine, the head of the Donetsk region military administration said on Telegram. Pavlo Kyrylenko said Russian units continued "shelling at different parts of the front line overnight" in the southeast Ukrainian region. One person was wounded in one of several shelling incidents, which took place near Vuhledar, Soledar, Chasiv Yar and the direction of Lysychansk, Kyrylenko added.

Bakhmut area "one of the bloodiest places on the front line": A senior Ukrainian military commander, Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, has visited troops defending the embattled area of Bakhmut and Soledar, in eastern Ukraine. This comes as Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on Sunday called the area around the eastern Ukrainian cities "one of the bloodiest places on the front line." Bakhmut has become perhaps the most contested and kinetic part of the 1,300- kilometer (800 mile) front line in Ukraine and the scene of some of the fiercest fighting of the war.

Kremlin backs defense ministry: Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said during a conference call with journalists Monday that the defense ministry's daily briefings are "the main and only legitimate source of information about what is happening in the course of the special military operation." Russia claimed that more than 600 Ukrainian soldiers were killed in a Russian strike in Kramatorsk carried out in "retaliation" over the Ukrainian attack on Russian-occupied Makiivka last week. Ukrainian officials on Sunday dismissed Moscow's claim, with a Ukrainian official calling it "nonsense."

Moscow dismisses second wave of mobilization rumors: Peskov also dismissed rumors of a possible second wave of mobilization in Russia. "The primary source is the authorities headed by the President of the Russian Federation," Peskov said on a conference call with reporters.

Prisoner exchange: Russia and Ukraine carried out a prisoner exchange Sunday with a total of 100 soldiers returning home, according to authorities from both countries. This is the 36th exchange between Russia and Ukraine since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion.

Pope likens war to "crime against God": Pope Francis has likened the war in Ukraine to a "crime against God and against humanity," calling once again for an end to the conflict. Speaking during an address to the diplomatic corps in the Vatican on Monday, the Pope said that conflicts such as the war in Ukraine with its "wake of death and destruction" and "attacks on civil infrastructures" are akin to crimes "against God and humanity."

German assistance: Germany does not currently have plans to deliver Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, but it is preparing to send up to 40 infantry fighting Marder tanks, its defense ministry spokesman said Monday. The German army, the Bundeswehr, is ready to start training Ukrainian soldiers, Arne Collatz told journalists.

The supplies of Western weapons to Ukraine will "add pain" and "prolong suffering" for Ukrainians, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Monday.

Commenting on France's decision to deliver armored combat vehicles to Ukraine, Peskov said it hardly makes sense to speak only of the French supplies, since "Collective Europe, the US and NATO pumped tens of billions of dollars into Ukraine through the supply of weapons."

"The deliveries can add pain to the Ukrainian people, prolong their suffering. But they cannot fundamentally change anything [in Ukraine]," Peskov said.

"These supplies are not capable of disrupting the achievement of the goals of the special military operation," he added. Moscow has continuously referred to its invasion of Ukraine as a "special military operation."

Recent developments: Germany does not currently have plans to deliver Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, but it is preparing to send up to 40 infantry fighting Marder tanks, its defense ministry spokesman said Monday.

The German army, the Bundeswehr, is ready to start training Ukrainian soldiers, Arne Collatz told journalists. And last week, US President Joe Biden affirmed that the United States would supply Ukraine with Bradley fighting vehicles as part of a new security assistance package to the country as it nears the one-year anniversary of Russia's invasion.

The nearly $3 billion package is among the largest packages of military equipment sent from the Pentagon to Ukraine since the war began. It comes as Ukraine prepares for intensive fighting in the spring as the weather warms.

What we covered here

Russian troops are making another attempt to advance on the small town of Soledar, which is near Bakhmut in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, according to officials.

"Everything is completely destroyed, there is almost no life left," President Volodymyr Zelensky said of the fierce fighting near Bakhmut.

Kyiv and Moscow carried out a prisoner exchange Sunday with a total of 100 soldiers returning to their home countries, according to officials in both nations.

Ukraine has dismissed Moscow's claim that a large number of Kyiv's soldiers were killed in a Russian attack last week in Kramatorsk, eastern Ukraine.

1:50 a.m. ET, January 10, 2023

Russia is focused on capturing the mining town of Soledar in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in his nightly address on Monday.

The Russians, "have concentrated their greatest efforts on Soledar," he said. "It is extremely difficult - there are almost no undamaged walls left."

Ukrainian troops have repelled a previous Russian attempt to capture the town, Zelensky's deputy defense minister said earlier Monday. Zelensky said his men's "resilience" had "won additional time" for Ukraine.

"Everything is completely destroyed, there is almost no life left. Thousands of their people have been lost: the whole ground near Soledar is covered with the corpses of the occupiers and scars from the blows. This is how madness looks like," he added.

Zelensky said that his administration was working to get the military equipment promised by Ukraine's allies to the frontline as soon as possible: "We are doing everything to ensure that there is as little time as possible between the agreement on additional support and the application of this support on the battlefield."

Two people have been killed in a missile strike on the city of Kramatorsk in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region late on Monday, a government official said on Telegram.

The missile hit a road and killed two people in a car, said Kyrylo Tymoshenko, Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.

Earlier Monday, two people died when a missile struck a village in the neighboring Kharkiv region, and another person died after shelling in the southern city of Kherson.

Two British nationals have gone missing in Ukraine, the UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) said in a statement to CNN Monday.

"We are supporting the families of two British men who have gone missing in Ukraine," an FCDO spokesperson said.

The spokesperson didn't provide further details about the two British nationals or their last known location.

The number of people killed in Monday's missile strike on the Kharkiv region has risen to two, the head of the regional administration, Oleh Syniehubov, said on Telegram.

"According to the updated information, 6 people were wounded as a result of a strike on the settlement of Shevchenkove. Two more people were killed," Syniehubov said. "Among wounded there is a child who received a shrapnel wound to the neck. The girl was immediately sent for surgery. Now doctors are fighting for her life."

The village of Shevchenkove was liberated in September after more than six months of Russian occupation.

Russian troops are making another attempt to advance on the small town of Soledar near Bakhmut in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar said on Telegram Monday.

"After an unsuccessful [previous] attempt to capture Soledar and retreat, the enemy regrouped, restored losses, deployed additional assault units, changed tactics and launched a powerful assault," Maliar said. "At the moment, the enemy has engaged a large number of assault groups formed from the best reserves of the Wagner's troops. The enemy is advancing literally on the corpses of their own soldiers, massively using artillery, multiple rocket launchers and mortars, covering even their own fighters with fire."

"Heavy fighting continues right at this moment," she added.

Earlier on Monday, Serhii Cherevatyi, a Ukrainian military spokesperson, told Ukrainian TV that Russia had "managed to concentrate more of its units" around Soledar and was deploying both "regular" troops and mercenaries working for the private sector group Wagner there.

The head of the Wagner group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, said Sunday that one of the reasons he wanted to take over Bakhmut and Soledar in order to control the system of mines in that area, which he described as "a network of underground cities."

Cherevatyi, spokesperson for Eastern Group of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, said they were trying to evacuate civilians from Soledar but not everyone was willing to leave.

"Soledar is actually destroyed," he said. "There are residents there. Everything is being done to evacuate them. It is difficult to talk about the numbers now. There is a part of people, especially the older generation, who have a great fear of change, of leaving their homes and to move somewhere. We are communicating with them, but not always everyone agrees [to leave]."

On Sunday night, President Volodymr Zelensky said that Soledar was "holding out" but it was "extremely hard."

Russian forces claimed to have taken the village of Bakhmuts'ke in Donetsk region on Monday, according to a statement published by the headquarters of the Territorial Defense of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) on its Telegram channel.

"As of January 9, 2023, Bakhmuts'ke village in the territory of the Donetsk People's Republic was liberated by the Russian Armed Forces," the statement claimed.

The village of Bakhmuts'ke is located near Soledar and Bakhmut - the area which has been the site of intense fighting for months.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Sunday called Bakhmut and Soledar "one of the bloodiest places on the frontline."

CNN has not been able to independently confirm DPR's claims.

8:52 a.m. ET, January 9, 2023
It's mid-afternoon in Kyiv. Here's what you need to know

Shelling has continued in northeastern and southeastern Ukraine, according to local regional heads. Meanwhile, the Kremlin has said that it has "absolute trust" in the information from the Russian Defense Ministry on carrying out a "retaliation" strike against Ukraine's Armed Forces in Kramatorsk.
Here are the latest developments:

Kharkiv shelling: Ukraine's Kharkiv region was targeted with a missile strike and shelling on Monday, the head of the Kharkiv regional state administration said on Telegram. "The enemy shelled the settlements of the Chuhuiv and Kupyansk districts with artillery, tanks and mortars," Oleg Sinegubov said. Seven civilians were injured as a result of a missile strike on the village of Shevchenkove, while a 60-year-old woman died, he added.

Shelling continues in Donetsk: Shelling has continued overnight in different parts of the front line in southeastern Ukraine, the head of the Donetsk region military administration said on Telegram. Pavlo Kyrylenko said Russian units continued "shelling at different parts of the front line overnight" in the southeast Ukrainian region. One person was wounded in one of several shelling incidents, which took place near Vuhledar, Soledar, Chasiv Yar and the direction of Lysychansk, Kyrylenko added.

Bakhmut area "one of the bloodiest places on the front line": A senior Ukrainian military commander, Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, has visited troops defending the embattled area of Bakhmut and Soledar, in eastern Ukraine. This comes as Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on Sunday called the area around the eastern Ukrainian cities "one of the bloodiest places on the front line." Bakhmut has become perhaps the most contested and kinetic part of the 1,300- kilometer (800 mile) front line in Ukraine and the scene of some of the fiercest fighting of the war.

Kremlin backs defense ministry: Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said during a conference call with journalists Monday that the defense ministry's daily briefings are "the main and only legitimate source of information about what is happening in the course of the special military operation." Russia claimed that more than 600 Ukrainian soldiers were killed in a Russian strike in Kramatorsk carried out in "retaliation" over the Ukrainian attack on Russian-occupied Makiivka last week. Ukrainian officials on Sunday dismissed Moscow's claim, with a Ukrainian official calling it "nonsense."

Moscow dismisses second wave of mobilization rumors: Peskov also dismissed rumors of a possible second wave of mobilization in Russia. "The primary source is the authorities headed by the President of the Russian Federation," Peskov said on a conference call with reporters.

Prisoner exchange: Russia and Ukraine carried out a prisoner exchange Sunday with a total of 100 soldiers returning home, according to authorities from both countries. This is the 36th exchange between Russia and Ukraine since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion.

Pope likens war to "crime against God": Pope Francis has likened the war in Ukraine to a "crime against God and against humanity," calling once again for an end to the conflict. Speaking during an address to the diplomatic corps in the Vatican on Monday, the Pope said that conflicts such as the war in Ukraine with its "wake of death and destruction" and "attacks on civil infrastructures" are akin to crimes "against God and humanity."

German assistance: Germany does not currently have plans to deliver Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, but it is preparing to send up to 40 infantry fighting Marder tanks, its defense ministry spokesman said Monday. The German army, the Bundeswehr, is ready to start training Ukrainian soldiers, Arne Collatz told journalists.

The supplies of Western weapons to Ukraine will "add pain" and "prolong suffering" for Ukrainians, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Monday.

Commenting on France's decision to deliver armored combat vehicles to Ukraine, Peskov said it hardly makes sense to speak only of the French supplies, since "Collective Europe, the US and NATO pumped tens of billions of dollars into Ukraine through the supply of weapons."

"The deliveries can add pain to the Ukrainian people, prolong their suffering. But they cannot fundamentally change anything [in Ukraine]," Peskov said.

"These supplies are not capable of disrupting the achievement of the goals of the special military operation," he added. Moscow has continuously referred to its invasion of Ukraine as a "special military operation."

Recent developments: Germany does not currently have plans to deliver Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, but it is preparing to send up to 40 infantry fighting Marder tanks, its defense ministry spokesman said Monday.

The German army, the Bundeswehr, is ready to start training Ukrainian soldiers, Arne Collatz told journalists. And last week, US President Joe Biden affirmed that the United States would supply Ukraine with Bradley fighting vehicles as part of a new security assistance package to the country as it nears the one-year anniversary of Russia's invasion.

The nearly $3 billion package is among the largest packages of military equipment sent from the Pentagon to Ukraine since the war began. It comes as Ukraine prepares for intensive fighting in the spring as the weather warms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
By Kathleen Magramo, Amy Woodyatt, Kathryn Snowdon, Mike Hayes and Leinz Vales, CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Kathleen Magramo, Amy Woodyatt, Kathryn Snowdon, Mike Hayes and Leinz Vales, CNN Updated 1:50 a.m. ET, January 10, 2023 What we covered here Russian troops are making another attempt to advance on the small town of Soledar, which is near Bakhmut in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, according to officials.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/1/6/cambridge-police-shooting/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you or someone you know needs help at Harvard, contact Counseling and Mental Health Services at (617) 495-2042 or the Harvard University Police Department at (617) 495-1212. Several peer counseling groups offer confidential peer conversations; learn more here.

You can contact a University Chaplain to speak one-on-one at chaplains@harvard.edu or here.

You can also call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-TALK (8255) or text the Crisis Text Line at 741741.

A Cambridge Police officer shot and killed an allegedly armed man Wednesday, prompting dozens to protest police brutality and call for transparency at Cambridge City Hall Thursday.

The man was identified Wednesday evening by Cambridge Police Department as 20-year-old Sayed Faisal, a Cambridge resident and University of Massachusetts Boston student. Faisal's death is currently under investigation by the Middlesex District Attorney's Office. After seven years with the CPD, the officer who shot Faisal was placed on administrative leave.

At 1:15 p.m. Wednesday, a 911 caller reported that Faisal had jumped out of a window and appeared to be harming himself, according to a CPD press release. After a chase through several blocks in Cambridgeport, Faisal allegedly moved toward officers while wielding a kukri knife. A CPD officer shot Faisal with a non-lethal sponge round, the release said, and when this did not stop Faisal, an officer fatally shot him.

Faisal later died from his injuries after being transported to Massachusetts General Hospital.

The last fatal officer-involved shooting involving the Cambridge Police occurred more than 20 years ago in 2002, CPD spokesperson Jeremy C. Warnick wrote in an email Friday.

In a joint statement Wednesday, Cambridge Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui and City Manager Yi-An Huang '05 said they were "deeply saddened" by the shooting, adding that the city would hold a community meeting at an unspecified date to process Faisal's death.

"Our thoughts and condolences go out to the family and loved ones of the deceased," Siddiqui and Huang wrote. "We are committed to learning from this case to ensure the safety and well-being of everyone in our community."

The Bangladesh Association of New England, a cultural nonprofit for Bangladeshi Americans, condemned the killing of Faisal, which they called an act of police brutality in a Wednesday Facebook post.

"He was the only child of his family. This is not acceptable," the group wrote. "We need to bring justice for this young brother."

The organization has raised around $12,000 to cover costs for Faisal's funeral and support his family, as of Friday afternoon. The group also held a rally Thursday afternoon at Cambridge City Hall to protest the killing of Faisal, calling for complete transparency from the department.

The protest was attended by more than 50 people, including friends and family members. Some held handwritten signs reading "CPD IS NO EXCEPTION," "Justice for Sayed Faisal," and "We Don't Trust Your BS Investigation." Sayed Mujibullah, Faisal's father, stood among the demonstrators with tears in his eyes.

Mujibullah said through a translator that Faisal "was a very meritorious student" in an interview with WCVB.

"He was going to the University of Massachusetts," Mujibullah said, adding that he had hoped his son would become a doctor or engineer.

"Now, all hope is gone," he added.

Some protestors charged that Faisal's killing was racially motivated, and others questioned the need for police in Cambridge to wield lethal weapons at all, citing the city's low crime rate compared to other cities.

Warnick wrote in an email that "it would not be appropriate" to comment on individual allegations while the shooting is under active investigation, adding that the officer who shot Faisal had no complaints filed against him in his career.

"The District Attorney's office will be conducting a complete and transparent investigation," Cambridge Police Commissioner Christine A. Elow said at a Wednesday briefing after the shooting. "The Cambridge Police Department will be cooperating 100 percent with that investigation."

"Any time a life is lost in our community, it is tragic, so we are all mourning," she said.

At the rally, Bangladesh Association of New England President Pervin A. Chowdhury called for more accountability.

"He's a baby - you can't just shoot," Chowdhury said. "This police need to be trained."

Cambridge City Councilor Quinton Y. Zondervan offered his condolences to Faisal's family in an emailed statement to The Crimson and called for Cambridge to look into alternatives to policing for public safety.

"We must reject the racist system of policing that is failing our young people, failing our minority communities, and failing those experiencing a personal crisis," he wrote.

"If we don't drastically change our approach to public safety, it is only a matter of time before this happens again," Zondervan added.

A previous version of this article misspelled the name of Sayed Mujibullah.

-Staff writer Ryan H. Doan-Nguyen can be reached at ryan.doannguyen@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @ryandoannguyen.

-Staff writer Yusuf S. Mian can be reached at yusuf.mian@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @yusuf_mian2.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cambridge Police Fatally Shoot UMass Boston Student, Sparking Charges of Racism, Police Brutality | News | The Harvard Crimson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you or someone you know needs help at Harvard, contact Counseling and Mental Health Services at (617) 495-2042 or the Harvard University Police Department at (617) 495-1212. Several peer counseling groups offer confidential peer conversations; learn more here. You can contact a University Chaplain to speak one-on-one at chaplains@harvard.edu or here.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/world/americas/brazil-protests-videos.amp.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Videos Show How Rioters Stormed Brazil’s Capital

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Watch key moments of rioters attacking Brazil’s Congress, Presidential offices and the Supreme Court.

# data[].attributes.body
https://informburo.kz/novosti/cto-proisxodit-v-ukraine-glavnoe-za-den-9-yanvarya

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Президент Украины Владимир Зеленский заявил, что российская армия нарушила собственные обещания о "перемирии" и "молчании", обстреляв украинские города сразу после православного Рождества. По его словам, Россия "лжёт даже тогда, когда сама же своими заявлениями привлекает внимание к ситуации на фронте".

"Российский обстрел Херсона зажигательными боеприпасами - сразу после Рождества. Удары по Краматорску и другим городам Донбасса - именно по гражданским объектам и именно тогда, когда в Москве отчитывались о якобы "молчании" их армии. Очередные угрозы российских чиновников Европе и миру... Всё это тогда, когда в Москве что-то там рассказывали о неком "перемирии". Больше ни одна попытка России манипулировать дипломатией и политикой уже никогда не сработает", - написал Владимир Зеленский в своём Telegram-канале.

Генштаб ВСУ в очередной сводке утверждает, что боевая техника, которую российские военные переправляют из РФ в Беларусь для обучения свеженабранных солдат, находится не в лучшем состоянии и требует серьёзного технического обслуживания.

"По имеющейся информации, значительное количество вооружения и военной техники, которая прибывает для обучения личного состава противника в республику Беларусь из Российской Федерации, снята с долгосрочного хранения и требует обслуживания. Также известно, что к работе на этой технике привлекаются белорусские военнослужащие", - заявил спикер Генштаба ВСУ Александр Штупун.

Кроме того, по утверждению ВСУ, у российских военных снижается боевой дух. В частности, среди солдат дислоцированной в Севастополе 127-й отдельной разведывательной бригады якобы широко распространилась уверенность в том, что войну необходимо завершить как можно скорее и на любых условиях.

Независимых подтверждений этой информации нет, и к ней следует относиться с соответствующей осторожностью.

Украинские и российские военные ведут "жестокие бои" за небольшой город Соледар в Донецкой области, сообщает "Украинская правда" со ссылкой на спикера Восточной группировки ВСУ Сергея Череватого. По его словам, только за последние сутки город 106 раз обстреливали, там произошло 22 боестолкновения. Сейчас украинские войска стремятся удержать позиции. Сергей Череватый уточнил, что с наступлением морозной погоды ситуация изменится в пользу украинских военных, поскольку они смогут использовать тяжёлую технику для контрнаступления.

"Непосредственно принимаются меры для того, чтобы враг не мог продвинуться дальше, наносятся системные удары с нашей стороны. Вчера были выделены командирам, которые там в Соледаре, дополнительные силы и средства. Соледар на постоянном контроле. Я думаю, что совместными усилиями удастся стабилизировать обстановку", - сказал спикер Восточной группировки ВСУ.

Глава правления компании "Укрэнерго" Владимир Кудрицкий в интервью Financial Times признал, что Украина испытывает дефицит трансформаторов советского образца, необходимых для восстановления повреждённой российскими ударами энергетической инфраструктуры. Запас резервных трансформаторов, который использовался раньше, существенно сократился. Украина использует энергосистему старого образца, работающую на более высоком напряжении, чем в Европе, поэтому переориентироваться на трансформаторы из ЕС невозможно. Хотя некоторые страны (например, Литва) передали Украине своё оборудование, этого мало для полного перезапуска энергосистемы. Владимир Кудрицкий предположил, что кампанию по уничтожению украинской инфраструктуры российским военным помогали профессиональные инженеры.

"В течение первых восьми месяцев войны Украина не так сильно пострадала, потому что у нас был большой запас трансформаторов. Сейчас они крайне необходимы", - сказал глава "Укрэнерго".
Данные России
Секретарь Совета безопасности РФ Николай Патрушев в интервью "Аргументам и фактам" заявил, что Россия не воюет с Украиной. По его мнению, "история с Украиной для того и затевалась в Вашингтоне, чтобы отработать технологии размежевания и стравливания единого народа", а военное противостояние на самом деле происходит между РФ и странами НАТО. Помимо НАТО, США и Великобритании, Патрушев также обвинил в завязке конфликта "неонацистских преступников", которые якобы действуют в Украине.

"Мы не воюем с Украиной, потому что ненависти к простым украинцам у нас по определению быть не может. Украинские традиции близки жителям России, так же как и наследие русского народа неотделимо от культуры украинцев", - сказал секретарь Совбеза РФ.

В начале декабря 2022 года украинские власти предварительно оценивали количество мирных жителей, погибших в результате военного конфликта, как превышающее 20 тысяч человек.

Пресс-секретарь президента РФ Дмитрий Песков опроверг информацию о том, что заместитель главы администрации президента РФ Дмитрий Козак якобы ведёт переговоры с европейскими политиками о "корейском варианте" урегулирования российско-украинского конфликта, сообщает "Коммерсантъ". Ранее соответствующее заявление сделал секретарь Совета национальной безопасности и обороны (СНБО) Украины Алексей Данилов: по его словам, Россия рассматривает возможность разделения Украины на две части по аналогии с Северной и Южной Кореей.

"Оно (заявление Данилова. - Авт.) несправедливо, никто об этом не говорит, это очередная утка", - сказал спикер Кремля во время пресс-колла.

РФ считает Донецкую, Луганскую, Запорожскую и Херсонскую области своей частью на основании "референдумов", проведённых под контролем российских войск и не признанных подавляющим большинством стран мира. Ни один из этих регионов Россия не контролирует полностью. Ранее Дмитрий Песков заявлял, что любые мирные инициативы со стороны Украины должны учитывать "новую реальность", то есть присоединение частично оккупированных украинских областей к РФ.

Правительство РФ не поддержало законопроект о предоставлении бесплатной психологической помощи ветеранам боевых действий, передаёт ТАСС. Проект накануне внесли на рассмотрение депутаты от фракции ЛДПР и трое членов Совфеда. Он предполагал внесение изменений в закон "О ветеранах", которые давали бы участникам боевых действий право на бесплатную медико-психологическую реабилитацию после завершения служебного контракта. В отзыве правительственной комиссии утверждается, что военнослужащим уже сейчас предоставляют бесплатные психологические услуги - речь идёт, например, о "телефоне доверия" и получении экстренной помощи "с привлечением к этой работе психологов и священнослужителей", а также о возможности выйти в реабилитационный отпуск.

"Предлагаемая законопроектом норма об установлении инвалидам боевых действий и ветеранам боевых действий права на медико-психологическую реабилитацию при наличии соответствующих показаний является избыточной", - заявили в российском правительстве.

Партия "Единая Россия" с использованием искусственного интеллекта удалит противников военных действий на территории Украины из электронной базы своих сторонников, пишут "Ведомости". Из списка лояльных к власти граждан удалят тех россиян, которые негативно высказывались в соцсетях о "специальной военной операции" (эвфемизм, которым в РФ официально обозначают российско-украинский конфликт). Тех, кто поддерживает военные действия, напротив, внесут в базу сторонников "Единой России". Сейчас в этой базе числятся 13 млн россиян.

"Для чистки базы использовался искусственный интеллект и специальные алгоритмы, которые проводили проверку соцсетей сторонников - в основном в "Одноклассниках" и "ВКонтакте", - говорится в публикации издания.
Реакция мирового сообщества

Аналитики американского Института изучения войны (ISW) в очередном обзоре российско-украинского конфликта назвали ложью сообщение Минобороны РФ об "операции возмездия", в результате которой якобы погибли более 600 украинских военных. По официальной версии российской стороны, в качестве ответа на уничтожение российских мобилизованных резервистов в Макеевке новогодней ночью армия РФ 8 января нанесла ракетный удар по Краматорску, который, как утверждается, привёл к большим потерям ВСУ. Однако в ISW отрицают истинность этих заявлений. "Это ложное заявление: финский репортёр посетил место удара в Краматорске 8 января и отметил, что удар пришёлся по пустой школе. Некоторые российские "военкоры" негативно отреагировали на заявление Минобороны РФ, указывая, что министерство часто делает недостоверные утверждения, и раскритиковали российское военное командование за попытку сфабриковать легенду об "отмщении" за Макеевку вместо того, чтобы возложить вину за потери на российские власти", - подчёркивают аналитики.

Минобороны Великобритании со ссылкой на данные военной разведки указывает, что армия РФ ещё с июня использует в боевых действиях против Украины сверхзвуковые боевые самолёты Су-57 (Felon по классификации НАТО). Вероятнее всего, столь ценную авиатехнику применяют только на территории России - самолёты выпускают дальнобойные ракеты "воздух-земля" и "воздух-воздух" по целям в Украине. Минобороны Соединённого Королевства отмечает, что РФ проявляет крайнюю осторожность, когда применяет авиацию в ходе конфликта, поскольку опасается репутационных издержек, срыва контрактов на экспорт оружия и утечки ценных технологических данных в том случае, если хотя бы один Су-57 собьют над Украиной.

Представитель канцелярии президента Польши Якоб Кумах в интервью радиостанции Zet сообщил, что Польша сможет передать Украине лишь несколько танков Leopard. О поставках всех или хотя бы большинства танков, которые есть в распоряжении польской армии, речи не идёт. "Говорить о том, что польская сторона передаст несколько сотен (танков. - Авт.) - это абсурд и создание альтернативной реальности", - заявил Якоб Кумах. Он также выразил "глубокое разочарование" тем, что в украинских политических кругах формируется "культ Бандеры".

Папа Римский Франциск в ежегодной речи, обращённой к аккредитованным в Ватикане дипломатам, назвал военный конфликт в Украине "преступлением перед Богом и людьми", сообщает Reuters. Он напомнил, что Ватикан решительно осуждает любые военные действия, направленные на уничтожение целых городов или опустошение регионов, а также считает аморальным нанесение вреда гражданскому населению. "Война в Украине оставляет после себя смерть и разрушения. Из-за атак на гражданскую инфраструктуру она уносит жизни не только посредством обстрелов и актов насилия, но и посредством голода и леденящего холода", - подчеркнул Папа Римский.

Все новости о ситуации в Украине читайте здесь.

Читайте новости без рекламы. Скачайте мобильное приложение informburo.kz для iOS или Android.

Поделиться:

Если вы нашли ошибку в тексте, выделите её мышью и нажмите Ctrl+Enter

Если вы нашли ошибку в тексте на смартфоне, выделите её и нажмите на кнопку "Сообщить об ошибке"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Что происходит в Украине. Главное за день 9 января

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Президент Украины Владимир Зеленский заявил, что российская армия нарушила собственные обещания о "перемирии" и "молчании", обстреляв украинские города сразу после православного Рождества. По его словам, Россия "лжёт даже тогда, когда сама же своими заявлениями привлекает внимание к ситуации на фронте". "Российский обстрел Херсона зажигательными боеприпасами - сразу после Рождества.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.severreal.org/a/o-fenomene-rossiyskoy-propagandy/32194104.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Север.Реалии

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Антон Жезмер

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Расчеловечивание. О феномене российской пропаганды

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
В ушедшем 2022 году пропаганда окончательно овладела умами миллионов российских граждан, которые поддерживают войну, готовы оправдать любые военные преступления и написать донос на родных, коллег, соседей, позволяющих себе антивоенные высказывания. Почему и как пропаганда вытеснила в России...

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.currenttime.tv/a/za-lyuboe-vyrazhenie-antivoennogo-mneniya-ili-lyubuyu-podderzhku-ukrainy-gosduma-zaschitila-voennyh-ot-lyuboy-kritiki-novoy-statey-uk-/31931877.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Настоящее Время

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
В России военных еще больше пытаются защитить от любой критики со стороны населения. Госдума одобрила новую статью Уголовного кодекса, согласно которой можно будет наказывать за "Публичные призывы к осуществлению деятельности, направленной против безопасности государства" лишением свободы на срок до 4 лет.

Сейчас же одна из самых "популярных" статей, по которой обвиняют и осуждают граждан за антивоенную позицию, - о дискредитации вооруженных сил. Большинство дел административные, но есть и уголовные.

По данным "ОВД-Инфо", по статье 20.3.3 - "публичные действия, направленные на дискредитацию использования Вооруженных сил РФ в целях защиты РФ и ее граждан, поддержания международного мира и безопасности" - завели почти три тысячи дел с начала полномасштабной войны России против Украины. Новые дела появляются почти каждый день.

Статью "за дискредитацию использования Вооруженных сил РФ" Кодекса об административных правонарушениях придумали буквально сразу после начала полномасштабной войны России против Украины. Минимальный штраф по ней - порядка $500. И, как показывает практика последних месяцев, чтобы получить такое наказание, не надо выдумывать фейки про российскую армию. Достаточно, например, как это сделала российская школьница, встать на Пушкинской площади Москвы с плакатом, на котором написано: "Голый король обещает всем подданным на зиму теплые вещи. С открытыми ртами народ рукоплещет в восторге от пламенной речи его". Это слова из трека "Иордан" рэпера NOIZE MC.

Девушку наказали штрафом 30 тыс. рублей ($474). Защитники рассчитывают на отмену этого решения. Говорят, во-первых, в процитированном тексте про голого короля нет ни слова про Вооруженные силы России, во-вторых, к этому кейсу привязано большое внимание общественности. А это иногда еще важнее, чем здравый смысл. Так, например, административной ответственности по статье 20.3.3. удалось избежать лидеру рок-группы "ДДТ" Юрию Шевчуку вот за эти слова:

"Родина, друзья, это не жопа президента, которую надо все время мусолить, целовать. Родина - это бабушка нищая на вокзале, продающая картошку. Вот это родина".

Внимание к этому кейсу было настолько большое, что Дзержинский суд Санкт-Петербурга был вынужден вернуть в полицию протокол о дискредитации Вооруженных сил России. Но в целом система дает сбой редко и только в случае очень громких дел. Только юристы "Сетевых свобод" с начала войны в Украине работают над тремя сотнями подобных дел. А по данным "ОВД-Инфо", сейчас таких дел почти три тысячи. И почти 1800 человек уже привлечены к ответственности.

"За что привлекают людей и какие основания - они абсолютно случайные. Мы видим много доносов, видим много случаев, когда человек высказал свою позицию в разговоре, на фудкорте супермаркета. За посты в интернете - одно из основных оснований привлечения. Причем эти посты не обязательно как-то дискредитируют ВС РФ. Абсолютно случайно эту статью применяют за любое выражение антивоенного мнения или любую поддержку Украины", - объясняет юрист "ОВД-Инфо" Дарья Короленко.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
видео и статьи

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
война в украине

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
репрессии в россии

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Юрий Баранюк

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"За любое выражение антивоенного мнения или любую поддержку Украины". Госдума защитила военных от критики граждан новой статьей УК

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
В России военных еще больше пытаются защитить от любой критики со стороны населения. Госдума одобрила новую статью Уголовного кодекса, согласно которой можно будет наказывать за "Публичные призывы к осуществлению деятельности, направленной против безопасности государства" лишением свободы на срок до 4 лет.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/01/07/iran-executions-protesters/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A protester wearing a "Handmaid's Tale" costume during a silent march through central London on Saturday to raise awareness about the recent women-led uprising in Iran. (Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images)

Iran hanged two men tied to anti-government protests on Saturday, continuing a trend of using capital punishment to suppress dissent. The government has also killed hundreds of people, held thousands of sham trials and sentenced more people to death row, according to rights groups.
Are you on Telegram? Subscribe to our channel for the latest updates on Russia's war in Ukraine.
The men, Mohammad Mehdi Karami, 22, and Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini, 39, were both accused of taking part in the killing of a member of the Basij, a volunteer paramilitary force overseen by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, on Nov. 3 near the city of Karaj, according to the Mizan news agency, which is tied to Iran's judiciary.

They are the third and fourth protesters to be executed by the government since September and the first time two have been killed on the same day, perhaps indicating a ramping up of Iran's lethal campaign to deter protests that have rocked the country for nearly four months.

"These men weren't executed after a judicial process, they were lynched," said Hadi Ghaemi, the executive director of the Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI), a New York-based advocacy group. Detainees are frequently subject to physical and mental torture and forced to confess, according to Ghaemi and other rights activists.

He added, "The Islamic Republic is using executions and lethal force against street protesters to instill terror in the hearts of the population to crush the Iranian people's hopes and calls for change."

Students in Iran are risking everything to rise up against the government

Iran convicted 16 people in a mass trial in early December, including three minors, and sentenced five to death, including Karami, Hosseini and Hamid Ghare-Hassanlou, 53, a prominent doctor who his family and rights groups say was tortured in prison. Ghare-Hassanlou's death sentence was overturned earlier this week and he is scheduled to be retried.

Two other men, both 23, were separately executed in December after being accused of taking part in assaulting or killing members of the security forces.

There was widespread international condemnation of the executions in December, though it appears to have not deterred Iran's judiciary.

Protests kicked off in September after the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in the custody of the "morality police" for allegedly wearing improper clothing. At least 517 people have been killed in the subsequent crackdown and nearly 20,000 people arrested, according to the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA.)

Video posted online of the killing on Nov. 3 purportedly shows a mob of protesters beating a member of the Basij as he lies motionless on the road. Many of those in the crowd that day were returning from a ceremony commemorating Hadis Najafi, a young woman who was killed in September during an anti-government protest.

Karami and Hosseini were accused of taking part in the killing of the Basij member. Amnesty International called the court proceedings "a fast-tracked unfair sham group trial ... which bore no resemblance to judicial proceedings."

In a video posted online last month, Karami's father explained that his son, a karate champion, was fourth on the national team. Both he and Karami's mother then pleaded in the video that the judiciary not execute their son.

Karami had been on a hunger strike for four days before his execution to demand access to his lawyer, which he and the other detainees were denied, according to CHRI.

Hosseini was severely tortured in prison and forced to confess in violation of international law,according to his lawyer, Ali Sharifzadeh Ardakani.The abuse included binding Hosseini's hands and feet, kicking him in the head until he lost consciousness and subjecting him to electrical shocks throughout his body, Ardakani said in a tweet in December.

Their trial was held in the first branch of the Karaj Revolutionary Court, which is part of a judicial system set up to protect Iran's ruling clerics and fearsome Revolutionary Guard security forces. The presiding judge, Musa Asef al-Hosseini, has issued 23 verdicts, including five death sentences, according to HRANA.

Hosseini has so far issued the highest number of death sentences during this round of protests, Shiva Nazarahari, a member of the Volunteer Committee to Follow Up on the Situation of Detainees, based outside Iran,told The Washington Post. Another notoriously ruthless judge, Abolqasem Salavati is under U.S. sanctions and has issued 10 verdicts, including one death sentence.

Nazarahari's committee is tracking the arrests and sentences of protesters, a painstaking task as detainees and their families are under extreme state pressure not to speak out and information about trials is often not public.

Nazarahari said eight more people remain on death row, after several death sentences were successfully appealed, and more than 80 people currently face charges that could produce a death sentence.

When members of Iran's security forces "get hurt, injured or killed, they [authorities] would arrest tens of people, give them long prison sentences or sentence them to death, like in the case of today's execution," Nazarahari said. "On the other hand, over 500 protesters have been killed, but no one has taken responsibility for just one of them."

"It is inexplicable the pain we feel," she said, regarding Saturday's executions. "This is what they [Iran's leaders] want us to feel. So we have to get back on our feet."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran hangs two more people in brutal campaign against protesters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Iran hanged two men tied to anti-government protests on Saturday, continuing a trend of using capital punishment to suppress dissent. The government has also killed hundreds of people, held thousands of sham trials and sentenced more people to death row, according to rights groups. Are you on Telegram?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3647866-poland-calls-out-russian-truce-as-propaganda-trick.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face.

Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

The Polish official points out that Putin's decision on introducing a truce was made at the request of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill (Gundyaev), although the ROC patriarch has for years been affiliated with the Russian special services and is part of the government apparatus waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. Kirill personally supported the war, called on the Russians to go to the front lines, and justified crimes committed by Russian troops in Ukraine by claiming that the war is "religious" in its nature.

Read also: Russia's Christmas ceasefire proposal to do nothing to promote peace - Britain's top diplomat

"Declaring a 'ceasefire' is a propaganda move, an attempt to show 'Russia with a human face,' which supposedly respects the rules; and, at the same time, it is an attempt to force Ukraine to go on the defensive, to show that it is Kyiv that is aggressive; also it's a game to gain time for the next phase of aggression," Żaryn emphasized.

He added that Russia is once again trying to hide the true nature of its actions and is trying to confuse the world by covering up its criminal endeavors.

As previously reported, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill (Gundyaev) proposed that the warring sides cease fire and establish a truce from 12:00 on January 6 to 24:00 on January 7, "so that Orthodox people could attend services on Christmas Day." Kirill appeals "to all parties involved in what he refers to as an "internecine conflict."

The adviser to the head of the President's Office Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on Twitter that this is a "cynical trap" and an element of propaganda.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face. Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/social-media-firms-failed-once-again-in-brazil/2023/01/09/142ef97a-903d-11ed-90f8-53661ac5d9b9_story.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As Brazil picked up the pieces on Monday from the damage caused by supporters of ex-President Jair Bolsonaro, it was hard not to see echoes of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol - not least because both incidents were stoked by activity on social media. Brazilian users of Meta Platforms Inc.'s WhatsApp, as well as Telegram and TikTok, saw a surge in calls to attend a "war cry party" in the capital in the run-up to Sunday's violence in Brasilia, according to the Washington Post.

Even before that, ahead of the presidential election last October, Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp had been flooded with misinformation about the integrity of Brazil's vote, which saw Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva narrowly defeat Bolsonaro. It doesn't help that Meta allows misinformation from political candidates to go unchecked, a policy it should have changed long ago.

But it's not just Meta.

A search of #bolsonaro on TikTok on Monday morning led to at least two popular videos praising rioters as "patriots" or fighting for "freedom." YouTube channels touting Bolsonaro's claims of election fraud garnered tens of millions of views ahead of the vote. And Brazilian election deniers have seen a surge in followers on Twitter, according to an analysis by Rest Of World, a nonprofit journalism organization.

It all highlights the bigger problem: Social media firms are still not investing enough on controlling misinformation that can spin out of control, relying on cheaper methods such as software and contractors to weed out harmful content and - critically - underfunding such efforts outside the US. The whistleblower Francis Haugen, who exposed a range of harms neglected by Facebook in 2021, zeroed in on the company's inadequate efforts to tackle misinformation in foreign countries like India. She warned about forthcoming global elections and said the site "cuts corners and provides unequal and inadequate defenses." In the case of Twitter, new owner Elon Musk reportedly fired the company's Brazilian staff after he took over.

Ironically, Facebook and Twitter made impressive strides in preventing large misinformation campaigns from disrupting US midterm elections last year, according to multiple surveys. But those platforms have a long way to go elsewhere.

"Sometimes we see content staying up in Spanish and Portuguese far more than in English, even when its English counterpart has been taken down," says Roberta Braga, a Brazilian-American researcher with Equis Research, a public-opinion research group focused on Latinos.

"They don't focus anywhere like they do in the US," says Jiore Craig, who runs elections research for the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a London-based think tank that tracks online misinformation. He says that online narratives leading up to the Brazil riots looked similar to those used in the run-up to Jan. 6, and have also popped up ahead of elections in France and Australia, where posters use language like "traitors" and "fraud" and English-language hashtags like #StopTheSteal.

One big difference with the US is that WhatsApp has become one of the most popular platforms for spreading misinformation about the election, according to Braga.

While more radical Brazilians will go to Telegram, a loosely moderated messaging and broadcasting app, to engage with likeminded groups, the vast majority use WhatsApp to communicate with friends and family and conduct business, where many election-denying narratives gained a mainstream foothold. Braga, whose own family and friends in Brazil have become radicalized Bolsonaro supporters, says WhatsApp could do more to mitigate the reach of its broadcasting tools, which "exacerbate the circulation of misinformation, like it or not."

WhatsApp has tried since 2018 to impose stricter limits on message forwarding to make it harder for misinformation about election integrity or Covid-19 vaccines to go viral. It also adds a label saying "forwarded many times" to help slow down the spread of rumors and fake news. The company should do more, but that would mean upsetting advocates of free speech and privacy: much of the incendiary content is being spread in private groups which WhatsApp cannot see or interfere in, since all communications are encrypted.

Complicating matters is that viral content on WhatsApp or Telegram often starts somewhere else, like YouTube or TikTok. "Much of the activity is cross platform," says Craig. "One place you might see the narrative and the other you amplify the narrative. Taking down one doesn't take down the other."

To tackle the problem, social media firms will need to step up efforts to communicate with one another about forthcoming elections and election-fraud claims. Researchers also say social media firms need to be more transparent about how content flows and gains traction on their sites, to help them find new ways of stopping it from spiraling out of control.

But a big part of the problem is also, admittedly, out of their hands. Bolsonaro - like Donald Trump - laid much of the groundwork for the stolen-election narrative himself, having spent months claiming unfair treatment at the hands of Brazil's election authority.

"What we are seeing in Brazil is very similar to what we saw in the US," says Braga: "the trajectory of how the election-fraud narrative penetrated society, and the types of influencers spreading it."

More From Bloomberg Opinion:

* Musk Drags Twitter Down a Dangerous Rabbit Hole: Parmy Olson

* Jan. 6 Panel Makes Trump Prosecution Imperative: Timothy O'Brien

* How Peaceful Protest Lost Its Power: Leonid Bershidsky

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Parmy Olson is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is author of "We Are Anonymous."

More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com/opinion

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Analysis | Social Media Firms Failed Once Again in Brazil

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As Brazil picked up the pieces on Monday from the damage caused by supporters of ex-President Jair Bolsonaro, it was hard not to see echoes of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol - not least because both incidents were stoked by activity on social media.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinas-buildup-of-the-surveillance-state-intelligence-matters/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This week on "Intelligence Matters," host Michael Morell speaks with Wall Street Journal reporters Liza Lin and Josh Chin about their new book "Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control." Their new reporting examines how China's data collection goes beyond that of other countries as China seeks to create a model to export as an alternative to democratic governance. Lin and Chin detail Silicon Valley's involvement in the buildup of China's surveillance state and how the technology is used to surveil Uyghurs in Xinjiang.
HIGHLIGHTS:

CHINA'S ALTERNATIVE TO DEMOCRACY: LIZA LIN: China is probably the only country out there that hopes to use surveillance to create this techno-utopian state. And as we mentioned in our research and in the book, China has this ambition to use the data collected to analyze any future threats to its governance and to identify these threats quickly and do something about it, to create an alternative model to what democracy could offer.

HOW CHINESE SURVEILLANCE DIFFERS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES: LIZA LIN: "And I think the difference between China and many other countries is that all these cameras are largely state owned. Unlike in the U.S., where you have a ton of Amazon ring cameras that are privately owned, a lot of the surveillance cameras that you see on the street in China are owned by government agencies and largely by the Chinese police. And beyond access to those 400 million cameras, the Chinese government still has access to about a billion smartphones that the Chinese citizens use. And that's because there are a series of national security and intelligence laws that were put in place in China over the last decade that actually allow the Chinese government to have access to a lot of the information that Chinese tech companies collect."

SILICON VALLEY'S CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CREATION OF CHINA'S SURVEILLANCE STATE: JOSH CHIN: If you think about Silicon Valley involvement, it's huge. And not just in components. If you think about the financial aspect of things, a lot of U.S. private equity companies and venture capital companies were the first companies to give Chinese surveillance startups a leg up in the game by funding them. So there are a lot of ways that the West and in particular the U.S. has contributed to the development of China's surveillance apparatus.

Download, rate and subscribe here: iTunes, Spotify and Stitcher.
INTELLIGENCE MATTERS WITH LIZA LIN AND JOSH CHIN

PRODUCER: PAULINA SMOLINSKI

MICHAEL MORELL: Liza, Josh, it is great to have you on intelligence matters. Welcome.

JOSH CHIN: Thank you. It's a real pleasure to be here.

LIZA LIN: Thank you for having us.

MICHAEL MORELL:You guys are the authors of a terrific book. It's called Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control. Congratulations on the book. I read it from cover to cover. I found it interesting. I found it insightful. I found it readable and more than a bit scary. I'd like to start by asking you guys how you define a surveillance state. How do you think about it in terms of a definition?

JOSH CHIN: I think the way we thought about a surveillance state is a state in which governance, the act of managing society is driven by and really indivisible from advanced surveillance technologies. You see this really clearly in China, where the Communist Party there has melded its traditional approach to governing and controlling China with cutting edge technologies like facial recognition, techniques like data mining, in order to create a kind of more nimble form of authoritarianism.

MICHAEL MORELL: It's interesting that you talk about advanced surveillance technologies, because one of the questions I wanted to ask is, how does surveillance in China today compare to old Mao style surveillance where neighbor was spying on neighbor? How do you about think about that?

JOSH CHIN: It's interesting, when we started looking into this, as you know, one of the things we discovered was that really I mean, just to a certain degree, all states are surveillance states going back to the beginning of states. In the sense that anyone who's trying to govern a large number of people needs to have information about those people in order to govern them. James C. Scott sort of famously described this as rendering societies legible. And so this has been all the way back to the Romans conducting surveys so they knew who to tax and who to draft for the Roman Legion. It's as old as time, basically.

I think in the 20th century, what you started to see with Mao and with other totalitarian leaders was this utopian idea. This idea that you could collect enough information to mold society in a scientifically ideal way. I think the difference between Mao and what Mao was aiming for and the types of information he was collecting and what you see now is mostly a difference in volume and value of data collected. Mao obviously was limited to human data collection. So he had a lot of human spies. He had this vast domestic spying network, hundreds of thousands of people, and of course, was encouraging other people, regular people to inform on each other. And the Communist Party now, I mean, they still do some of that, but they have these other just vastly more powerful tools that are so much more efficient at collecting and analyzing information. And so they just have the ability to consider this utopian project of engineering society in a way that Mao never actually really could.

LIZA LIN: I just to add on to that, the intent for China to surveil its citizens was always there. But what we really saw in the last kind of 10 to 15 years was the ability because there's been huge advances in technology. For example, the advent of deep learning and the realization that you had these fast processing chips that could crunch that data in a very efficient manner. So crunched down large amounts of data and draw analysis from that data as per what Josh mentioned. That really actually spurred the development of China's modern day surveillance state.

MICHAEL MORELL: What are the key components of the surveillance system in China? How do you think about that?

LIZA LIN: To me the way China's surveillance state stands out is in two areas. One is the breadth, the data collection. And when we talk about the breadth of the data collection, I refer you to the amount of touch points where the Chinese government can actually extract data from its citizens. So the Chinese government has access to probably about 400 million cameras across the country.

And I think the difference between China and many other countries is that all these cameras are largely state owned. Unlike in the U.S., where you have a ton of Amazon ring cameras that are privately owned, a lot of the surveillance cameras that you see on the street in China are owned by government agencies and largely by the Chinese police. And beyond access to those 400 million cameras, the Chinese government still has access to about a billion smartphones that the Chinese citizens use. And that's because there are a series of national security and intelligence laws that were put in place in China over the last decade that actually allow the Chinese government to have access to a lot of the information that Chinese tech companies collect. And the difference in China versus other countries is that a lot of citizens are largely reliant on Chinese apps. And in particular, this one app called WeChat, which is made by and run by a company called Tencent. And on this app WeChat, it kind of functions quite similarly to a mesh of Facebook, Instagram, Google and Amazon. And on top of that, they are mobile payments. So the Chinese government, through this app, has the ability to figure out what its citizens are searching online, what they're saying online, what they're buying online and where they're traveling.

So there are a lot of these touch points in which the Chinese government could actually extract data from its citizens to just understand what's going on on the ground and add to that mobile phone trackers. And right now, over the last two years of COVID, we've definitely seen the Chinese government improve in its ability to collect data on where your smartphone has been. So, for example, a lot of the COVID health codes that China has been using over the last 2 to 3 years, which have been tracking your position and where you've been going in the last two weeks just to ascertain if you're a health risk. That's an additional layer of data that the Chinese government now has the ability to collect on all its citizens in real time.

So I would say that China really stands out for the breadth of the data collection and its ambition. So it's ambition really is the second reason why we see China as such a standout. Undoubtedly, China is probably the only country out there that hopes to use surveillance to create this techno-utopian state. And as we mentioned in our research and in the book, China has this ambition to use the data collected to analyze any future threats to its governance and to identify these threats quickly and do something about it, to create an alternative model to what democracy could offer. Because as a country itself, an authoritarian country does not have the same democratic institutions that developed Western countries do.

MICHAEL MORELL: Liza, that's a tremendous amount of data you just talked about. And then earlier, you talked about the use of A.I. machine learning to do something with that data that would allow the Chinese government to take actions that they think are necessary to protect the state. Can you talk a little bit more, guys, about how they actually use AI? How they use machine learning? I think that would be insightful.

JOSH CHIN: I think probably the most vivid example in China and it's one that the listeners of this podcast probably have heard of is Xinjiang, which is a remote region, far northwestern China on the doorstep of Central Asia. And Xinjiang stands out because it's home to a large population of Turkic Muslims, including the Uyghurs, who have always chafed at Communist Party and at Han Chinese Rule. And so there's always been a bit of conflict out there. And in recent years, the Communist Party, their solution to that has been to rule out what I think is probably the closest thing we've ever gotten to a sort of truly dystopian, sort of Orwellian surveillance state.And what they've done is they've gone out and, blanketed the entire region. It's twice the size of Texas. It's a massive place. But they blanketed the entire region in cameras and microphones, other sorts of sensors, security gates, to the point where if you're a Uyghur moving around in Xinjiang outside or even inside your home, basically everything you're doing is capable of being of being recorded and analyzed in real time.

And so all these sensors feed this data into a centralized data platform. It was actually built by a defense contractor. And it's modeled on systems that the U.S. military uses to coordinate things, sort of complicated joint operations like counterinsurgency operations. And so all this data gets sucked into the centralized platform and then they use it there. So these cameras have, the sensors themselves have artificial intelligence built into them. So the cameras can recognize people's faces. They can recognize people's voices, that sort of thing. And then all the data gets analyzed on this platform in ways that it's a bit of a black box. We don't know exactly how they calculate it, but they use this data to categorize people according to the level of threat that they, the Communist Party perceives in that.

In one system that we looked at, there were three categories: unsafe, safe and average. And and so for people who were deemed unsafe and that means that they may have filled up their car with gasoline one too many times, or they may have a digital Koran on their phone, or they may be friends with the wrong people or whatever sort of biographical markers the Communist Party is using. The people who have those markers, who are seen as unsafe for a long time were being shipped off to a gulag of re-education centers.

MICHAEL MORELL: So it's your discussion of Xinjiang in the book that really makes this whole thing chilling. But there's a flip side of the coin, right? You tell another story about how these tools can actually be used for good. And then I'm wondering if you can talk about that a little bit.

LIZA LIN: Josh did a ton of the reporting in Xinjiang. On my part, I traveled to a lot of these wealthy Han Chinese cities that were located on the east coast of China and in those wealthy cities, what you saw were the same systems often built by the same manufacturers as well, that were used for repression in Xinjiang, were used to make city governance a lot more efficient. So, for example, the facial recognition that would possibly identify a security threat in Xinjiang would be used by the Chinese police to identify buckets of society that they deemed as people that could cause national instability or some harm. So people that the Chinese police would use facial recognition in the wealthier Chinese cities to identify would be ex-convicts, for example, or ex-convicts that were just released. And they wanted to monitor just to make sure that they were settling back into society much better. And then other people that they would use these facial recognition systems and CCTV cameras to identify would be fugitives on the run or people that they knew were notorious drug pushers.

So all these are the kind of people that you really, as a normal regular person, you wouldn't be wanting to walk alongside on the street with. And it wasn't just identifying people of interest as well. These same sensors that were sucking up video and car counts or a number of people counts were used to identify traffic accidents really quickly to get first responders to the scene. For example,we pull out a city in east China called Hangzhou and Hangzhou might not ring a bell to most of your listeners, but the companies that are headquartered in Hangzhou are probably would. So a company like Alibaba, for example, is headquartered in Hangzhou and a company like Hikvision, which is the world's largest maker of CCTV cameras. They're also headquartered in Hangzhou. So for these reasons, the Hangzhou government just has tended to really try and lean towards making Hangzhou a smart city in a digital sense. They've been very embracing of using technology to run the city, and using these companies as partners.

Hangzhou used to be the fifth most congested city in China, probably about two or three years ago. What the city government did was to put in place a system of CCTV cameras and sensors that were absorbing how many cars were on the street and using that to optimize traffic lights. So in periods of peak traffic, the traffic lights would stay green for cars a lot longer. And that kind of helped Hangzhou drop from fifth most congested to 57th most congested city in a matter of a couple of years. For a reporter that had been traveling in the region so frequently, I often went to Hangzhou for work. And if you were stuck in a Hangzhou jam, you would be stuck for 40 minutes and you'd be moving maybe a mile just because the Hangzhou Road Network was not established and the subway system was very immature and yet population and car population in particular probably doubled or tripled.

It was small things like these that the city government had been using these surveillance systems to help just make life more frictionless. I think the one example that really stood out to us in our research and reporting was when we found a guy whose mother had fallen into a river and they lived on the outskirts of Hangzhou City. But in that area, the Hangzhou government was still starting to put these systems in place. His mom had fallen into the river and he was really lucky. And they were very lucky because a neighbor was around the corner and fished her out. But she still was in a condition where she needed medical help. So the nearest hospital had sent an ambulance over to get her. And once she was in the ambulance, the driver had turned on this system that allowed traffic lights and sensors to recognize its license plate. So, you know, the same sort of computer vision that's used in facial recognition in Xinjiang was used here to recognize the license plate of the ambulance and to turn all the traffic lights green from the point of picking her up to the hospital.

So that shaved off half the time that it needed for her to get to hospital and to get treatment and to drain out her lungs. So in such a life and death situation, it really makes you wonder if such surveillance systems actually might have a use. And in the case of Hangzhou, there were a lot of people that we spoke to which just felt like the positive externalities of having such a system outweighed any of the data collection, the more sinister data collection kind of outcomes.

MICHAEL MORELL: Given that, in Han China, is there a resistance in general to the surveillance state or is there an acceptance of it?

JOSH CHIN: This is actually one of the most fascinating aspects of doing all of this work. AndI think it's our understanding that changed the most in looking at this. And I think we started off like a lot of people, with the assumption that in China privacy actually doesn't matter that much. And in fact, if you look at the official Chinese government approved dictionary, the word for privacy doesn't appear there until the late nineties. So it is a relatively new concept. And I should say, I think at least up until recently, a large number of people in China, the vast majority of them probably just didn't really have the luxury to be thinking about things like privacy. They're more concerned with putting food on the table. But in larger cities, as we did more and more work and talk to more people, we realized that in bigger cities with more educated populations you do have the beginnings of a privacy movement, an understanding of privacy.

And you had quite a few controversies actually involving big Chinese tech companies. One of them was Baidu, which is the Chinese equivalent of Google. In one instance, the CEO had been at a forum and said, we Chinese tech companies have a huge advantage because our customers don't care about what we do with our data, so we can do anything we want with it. And that spurred a huge backlash. And what was interesting is the way that the Chinese government handled this was- it's a country with this really extremely successful and powerful censorship apparatus. You would expect them to just use that to quash any talk of privacy. But actually what they what they did was a little bit of jujitsu where they actually threw their support behind a lot of these controversies and they had state media going after Chinese companies for mishandling customer data and essentially put themselves on the side of the people and kind of defined privacy concerns exclusively in terms of what private companies did.

So the government use of data has never really, at least again, not until recently, been scrutinized much in China. And now we've gotten to a really interesting period, which is, anyone who's been paying attention to the headlines in China knows we recently had nationwide protests against the zero COVID regime that the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, had been promoting. It's hard to overstate how surprising these protests were. This was the biggest demonstration of public defiance against the Communist Party since 1989, since the pro-democracy protests back then. And at the center of it was this frustration with the controls that the Communist Party was imposing using its surveillance technologies. So I think we're at a new moment. It's be interesting to see how it plays out, because I think that this is one instance in which the Communist Party may have overplayed its hand.

MICHAEL MORELL: One of the things that I learned from the book was that China did not put this advanced surveillance system in place all by itself. It had some help. And can you talk about that?

LIZA LIN: Sure. So what we found in our research is that Silicon Valley has been there supporting the development of China's surveillance state right from its incubation. China's digital surveillance state, it's in its current form, really only started to take root at the turn of the century. So around the year 2000, 2001, you saw the Chinese police a lot more willing to turn to digital technology to gather data. And when it did so, it ran these huge fairs, large expos in which it invited foreign companies to come down and to basically showcase their wares. Just to allow Chinese police to have a look at what's out there and decide what they wanted to buy. And the companies that turned out at these exhibitions were all either pioneers of Silicon Valley or the who's who of the digital world at that point. So you saw people like Sun Microsystems come down. You saw Cisco attend the exhibition and showcase what they had to offer. You saw the now defunct Canadian company Nortel Networks come down. And there was also Siemens from Germany.

And all these big companies were right there at the very first Chinese exhibitions trying to sell things such as fingerprint database collection systems or other censorship systems like filters for the great Internet Firewall. So we definitely saw Silicon Valley play a very important role in the incubation of the early Chinese digital surveillance state. Fast forward two decades to the present day. What you're seeing is Silicon Valley companies, not not just providing systems, they're actually providing components to the surveillance state.

So if you think about the hot dish drive industry globally, it's really an oligopoly. The market share is mostly taken up by American companies such as Western Digital and Seagate. And these two companies have been known to be selling these hard disk drives to Chinese surveillance companies in large numbers and even optimizing some of the hard disk drives as surveillance hard drives for the Chinese. And it isn't just like hard disk drives. You need the processing power as well. So chip companies like Nvidia and Intel, they've been known to sell their GPUs and CPUs these really high end chips to Chinese surveillance companies in order to power the data analysis that goes on on the back end.

If you think about Silicon Valley involvement, it's huge. And not just in components. If you think about the financial aspect of things, a lot of U.S. private equity companies and venture capital companies were the first companies to give Chinese surveillance startups a leg up in the game by funding them. So there are a lot of ways that the West and in particular the U.S. has contributed to the development of China's surveillance apparatus.

MICHAEL MORELL: I want to switch gears a little bit, guys, and talk about China's export of its surveillance system to other countries. The conventional wisdom, as you know, says that China wants to shape the world in its image, in its authoritarian image as a surveillance state. And you push back on that notion. Can you talk about that?

JOSH CHIN: This view of China as wanting to push its system on the rest of the world, it makes sense. The people who have that view, it's not coming out of nowhere. One of the pieces of evidence that people often cite is Xi Jinping himself, China's leader. He's talked about how China wants to make contributions to the human pursuit of better governance systems and that sort of thing. And it's clearly diplomatically, it's spending a lot of capital, a lot of time trying to cultivate relationships around the globe. In some cases trying to co-opt global institutions like the WTO and W.H.O. But what we saw when we started looking deep into this is just in terms through the lens of exports, of surveillance. And this model that they have in particular of this sort of digital authoritarianism is that it's more complicated.

They are definitely selling these technologies and these systems and the ideas behind them around the globe. We don't have really great data on this now. But the most recent number we have is from a scholar at the University of Texas named Sheena Greitens who dug around and found that there were at least 80 countries globally in the year 2020 who had imported state surveillance systems from China. And those were those range from authoritarian countries all the way to Western democracies, local police stations in France and Germany and that sort of thing.

One example that we saw in detail was in Uganda. Which is one of these countries that kind of hovers between the United States and China and maintains relationships with both. It's nominally a democracy, but the leader there during the seventies won every election going back decades. And there are, of course, allegations of election fraud and whatnot. And China has been cultivating its relationship with Museveni for many years. And a few years ago, they sold him a sort of state surveillance starter kit. They flew Ugandan police out to China to go to Beijing, where they were given lessons in how these systems are used. And just like China, Museveni sort of initially said, oh, these systems are for fighting crime, but then quickly used them in political ways to track opposition political figures.

In some ways, what you saw in Uganda is China is exporting its system. But the way that it was used in Uganda is not the way it's used in China. And that's partly because it can't be. China has all these advantages that a lot of other countries don't. China has a lot of money. It has an immense, pretty well-trained, fairly tech savvy bureaucracy. A lot of countries really can't replicate China's model. And China, I think, realizes that. But what they're interested in is promoting this idea of governments being able to use these technologies in whatever way they see fit. So the idea is not that they want to copy themselves around the world, but they just want to disrupt the existing Western dominated order which suggests that state power should be restrained and individual rights protected against invasions of this kind. They want to upset that conversation and make it okay for governments to use these technologies to control societies.

MICHAEL MORELL: I want to ask you guys about the West's response to the rise of China's surveillance state. What have we been doing? Have we been effective and are there better approaches to what we're doing?

LIZA LIN: That's a great question, because in the last couple of months, you've definitely seen governments such as the U.S. take action to stop the flow of the components that I talked about earlier and to the Chinese surveillance state. So on October 7th, you saw the White House put out new export sanctions. And with these sanctions, with these regulations, they barred U.S. companies from assisting in the development of China's advanced chip and semiconductor industry. And that meant if you're a U.S. person or a U.S. company, you couldn't be selling components or you couldn't even be working or helping in any form. U.S. persons were not allowed to help with the development.

One of the reasons cited was military. So they didn't want to empower the Chinese military by helping with the development of high end chips. But they also wanted to stop the expansion of the Chinese surveillance state. And that was one of the reasons cited for these controls. So I definitely have seen some steps being taken in recent months. And on how these steps actually play out in China, it's still a big question mark at this point. Because as with many export controls, you do see workarounds and in small quantities, Chinese companies still can get these high end chips in very small quantities.

So when you think about what governments are doing to stop the flow of either money or technology into the Chinese surveillance state, one company that often keeps coming up is a company called SenseTime. SenceTimes is China's largest AI unicorn. And I would say it was probably one of the start ups that reading made this idea of facial recognition, using facial recognition in solving crimes really such a such a wide and global idea. So with Sensetime, what we saw was the U.S. government put one of Sensetime entities both on the entity list and on the investment blacklists. So if you were Sensetime's Beijing entity, you couldn't get chips from U.S. companies, you were on the entity list. And if you were Sensetime's Hong Kong entity, then you couldn't get any financing from U.S. investors.

And Sensetime is this company that had been really funded by people like Fidelity. Qualcomm had a stake in it. So what the U.S. government had essentially tried to do was to restrict the flow of money or chips to Sensetime. But in reality, because of all these loopholes that I mentioned earlier, it didn't succeed. So with Sensetime, what we found out was when the company listed last year, 2020 in the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, it actually had a statement coming out saying that even though it was technically on the entity list, it was only one subsidiary of Sensetime that was on the entity list. It was its Beijing subsidiary. So its Shanghai subsidiary was free to buy whatever Intel and Nvidia chips that they needed to power the surveillance systems. So the loophole that I talked about earlier, one of these legal loopholes, just putting one subsidiary on the entity list wasn't enough. And SenseTime was also put on a Treasury blacklist at the end of 2021, which really barred U.S. investors from investing in it. But what you saw when it eventually went to IPO was there was still U.S. money in it. And that was because, and this is according to a company, that was because its Hong Kong entity was on that Treasury blacklist. But it was a Cayman Islands entity that was listed in Hong Kong. So there are all these ways that the U.S. has been trying to stop the flow or stop its companies and investors from aiding the development of surveillance in China. But really, there are some limitations.

JOSH CHIN: The other plane on which this conversation exists. It's kind of just on the level of policy and ideology actually. The real challenge for the U.S. completely apart from the technological question is the appeal of this model, of the Chinese model. Which I think is around the globe, it's very simple. The Chinese government has this very simple message which is that these technologies can be used to increase security and improve certain aspects of lives in ways that we've never seen before. And they should just be, everyone should be able to use them however they want. And the U.S. doesn't really have a good response to that.There is no coherent Western vision or democratic vision of how these technologies should be deployed.

And I think that's, in part, in the U.S., it's an issue. The U.S. has always been schizophrenic about the role of technology and data in society. Especially, since the rise of Silicon Valley, because Silicon Valley companies push this idea that it's the free flow of information that gave rise to innovation in Silicon Valley. And so you can't cut it off even though there are potentially bad side effects from having huge amounts of personal data floating around and being exploited by companies and governments. That's just a price you have to pay for innovation. That's the U.S. view of things. And the conversation hasn't really moved significantly beyond that. It has started to move beyond that in other places. In Europe, for example, in the U.K., where you do have rules that are being implemented to really restrain some of the more invasive technologies like facial recognition. Right now, though, where you have regulators whose job it is to keep an eye on these things. But those are early days. And I think a lot of people feel that until the U.S. gets on board with it, you're really not going to have a compelling democratic alternative to the Chinese vision.

MICHAEL MORELL: But we need one. We absolutely need one. The book is Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control. The authors are Josh Chin and Liza Lin. Josh, Liza thank you very much for joining us.

JOSH CHIN: It was a tremendous pleasure. Thank you, Michael.

"Intelligence Matters" Podcast With Michael Morell
More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China's buildup of the surveillance state - "Intelligence Matters"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This week on "Intelligence Matters," host Michael Morell speaks with Wall Street Journal reporters Liza Lin and Josh Chin about their new book "Surveillance State: Inside China's Quest to Launch a New Era of Social Control."

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3647866-poland-calls-out-russian-truce-as-propaganda-trick.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face.

Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

The Polish official points out that Putin's decision on introducing a truce was made at the request of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill (Gundyaev), although the ROC patriarch has for years been affiliated with the Russian special services and is part of the government apparatus waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. Kirill personally supported the war, called on the Russians to go to the front lines, and justified crimes committed by Russian troops in Ukraine by claiming that the war is "religious" in its nature.

Read also: Russia's Christmas ceasefire proposal to do nothing to promote peace - Britain's top diplomat

"Declaring a 'ceasefire' is a propaganda move, an attempt to show 'Russia with a human face,' which supposedly respects the rules; and, at the same time, it is an attempt to force Ukraine to go on the defensive, to show that it is Kyiv that is aggressive; also it's a game to gain time for the next phase of aggression," Żaryn emphasized.

He added that Russia is once again trying to hide the true nature of its actions and is trying to confuse the world by covering up its criminal endeavors.

As previously reported, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill (Gundyaev) proposed that the warring sides cease fire and establish a truce from 12:00 on January 6 to 24:00 on January 7, "so that Orthodox people could attend services on Christmas Day." Kirill appeals "to all parties involved in what he refers to as an "internecine conflict."

The adviser to the head of the President's Office Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on Twitter that this is a "cynical trap" and an element of propaganda.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face. Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3647866-poland-calls-out-russian-truce-as-propaganda-trick.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face.

Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

The Polish official points out that Putin's decision on introducing a truce was made at the request of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill (Gundyaev), although the ROC patriarch has for years been affiliated with the Russian special services and is part of the government apparatus waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. Kirill personally supported the war, called on the Russians to go to the front lines, and justified crimes committed by Russian troops in Ukraine by claiming that the war is "religious" in its nature.

Read also: Russia's Christmas ceasefire proposal to do nothing to promote peace - Britain's top diplomat

"Declaring a 'ceasefire' is a propaganda move, an attempt to show 'Russia with a human face,' which supposedly respects the rules; and, at the same time, it is an attempt to force Ukraine to go on the defensive, to show that it is Kyiv that is aggressive; also it's a game to gain time for the next phase of aggression," Żaryn emphasized.

He added that Russia is once again trying to hide the true nature of its actions and is trying to confuse the world by covering up its criminal endeavors.

As previously reported, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill (Gundyaev) proposed that the warring sides cease fire and establish a truce from 12:00 on January 6 to 24:00 on January 7, "so that Orthodox people could attend services on Christmas Day." Kirill appeals "to all parties involved in what he refers to as an "internecine conflict."

The adviser to the head of the President's Office Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on Twitter that this is a "cynical trap" and an element of propaganda.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face. Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.dw.com/en/iran-probes-police-brutality-video-amid-rising-anger/a-63625175

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Rights watchdog Amnesty International has demanded a UN investigation into police violence in Iran as Tehran vowed officers would be "dealt with according to the law."

Iranian authorities have ordered a probe into a viral video that allegedly shows police officers beating a protester in Tehran, Iranian media reported on Wednesday.

Officials did not specify the video in question, but a two-minute recording widely circulated on social media has increased outrage over police brutality.

"The police do not approve of harsh and unconventional treatment, the offending police officers will certainly be dealt with according to the law," Iran's police said in a statement, according to state news agency IRNA.

Iran has been rocked by protests in recent weeks over the death of Jina Mahsa Amini. The 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman died in police custody after she was arrested by Iran's notorious morality police.

Protesters have since taken to the streets across the country to demand political change in a major challenge to the regime that has ruled Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iran protests: Revolutionary Guard deployed

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video

'Shocking' video

The footage, supposedly shot on a mobile phone in a southern Tehran district, seems to show a group of around a dozen policemen kicking and beating a man with their batons in an alley.

According to the video, a police officer ran over the man with a motorbike and another shot him at close range.

"This shocking video sent from Tehran today is another horrific reminder that the cruelty of Iran's security forces knows no bounds," human rights watchdog Amnesty International wrote on Twitter.

Amnesty called on the UN Human Rights council to "urgently investigate these crimes."

Several other videos on social media have allegedly shown police beating protesters.

Rights groups have slammed police brutality in Iran. According to the Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR), 176 people have been killed and thousands arrested in the crackdown on protests.

"Instead of accepting people's legal demands, the Islamic Republic [of Iran] is clamping down with repressive measures and show trials," said IHR director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam.

Under pressure, Iranian leaders have consistently claimed that Western countries were fueling the unrest and avoided responding to the people's demands of political change.

fb/es (AFP, dpa, Reuters)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran probes police brutality video amid rising anger - DW - 11/02/2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rights watchdog Amnesty International has demanded a UN investigation into police violence in Iran as Tehran vowed officers would be "dealt with according to the law."

# data[].attributes.headline
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.subject
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3647866-poland-calls-out-russian-truce-as-propaganda-trick.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face.

Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

The Polish official points out that Putin's decision on introducing a truce was made at the request of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Kirill (Gundyaev), although the ROC patriarch has for years been affiliated with the Russian special services and is part of the government apparatus waging a war of aggression against Ukraine. Kirill personally supported the war, called on the Russians to go to the front lines, and justified crimes committed by Russian troops in Ukraine by claiming that the war is "religious" in its nature.

Read also: Russia's Christmas ceasefire proposal to do nothing to promote peace - Britain's top diplomat

"Declaring a 'ceasefire' is a propaganda move, an attempt to show 'Russia with a human face,' which supposedly respects the rules; and, at the same time, it is an attempt to force Ukraine to go on the defensive, to show that it is Kyiv that is aggressive; also it's a game to gain time for the next phase of aggression," Żaryn emphasized.

He added that Russia is once again trying to hide the true nature of its actions and is trying to confuse the world by covering up its criminal endeavors.

As previously reported, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Kirill (Gundyaev) proposed that the warring sides cease fire and establish a truce from 12:00 on January 6 to 24:00 on January 7, "so that Orthodox people could attend services on Christmas Day." Kirill appeals "to all parties involved in what he refers to as an "internecine conflict."

The adviser to the head of the President's Office Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on Twitter that this is a "cynical trap" and an element of propaganda.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Poland calls out Russian "truce" as propaganda trick

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Russia's so-called truce for the Christmas period is a propaganda trick and yet another informational veil behind which Russia is trying to hide its true face. Stanislaw Żaryn, the Polish government envoy for the security of the information space, commented on the issue on Twitter, Ukrinform reports.

# data[].attributes.body
https://news.yahoo.com/mass-arrests-reported-protesters-storm-171725816.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Authorities in Brazil reported at least 1,200 people detained after protesters broke into government offices in the capital of Brasilia on Sunday, according to The New York Times.

Thousands of former Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro's supporters invaded the Brazilian Congress, the Supreme Court and the presidential palace Sunday to protest election results from October, when Bolsonaro lost reelection but failed to fully concede to now-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

The riots took place one week after Lula's inauguration on Jan. 1.

Protesters stormed the buildings, with some demanding that the military restore Bolsonaro to power. After the riots, authorities also began to dismantle Bolsonaro's supporters' camps that had been set up in the nation's capital since he lost the election, according to CNN.

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes has suspended Ibaneis Rocha, the governor of the district that includes Brazil's capital, for 90 days amid investigations looking into the security breach of government buildings, according to the Times.

The breaches and mass arrests are reminiscent of the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, in which hundreds of supporters of former President Trump stormed the building in an attempt to overturn his loss to President Biden.

A special congressional committee investigated the Capitol insurrection, and more than 950 arrests have been made, according to the Justice Department.

Brazil's health secretary told CNN that at least 70 people, including journalists and police officers, were injured during the riots.

Biden and other world leaders condemned the attacks and offered their support to the democratic institutions of Brazil and Lula. After hearing reports that Bolsonaro was in Florida seeking refuge from ongoing investigations, multiple U.S. lawmakers called on authorities to extradite the former president back to his home country.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mass arrests reported after protesters storm government offices in Brazil

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Authorities in Brazil reported at least 1,200 people detained after protesters broke into government offices in the capital of Brasilia on Sunday, according to The New York Times. Thousands of former Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro's supporters invaded the Brazilian Congress, the Supreme Court and the presidential palace Sunday to protest election results from October, when Bolsonaro lost...

# data[].attributes.body
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/03/1113982

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ramiz Alakbarov, who also serves as Deputy Special Representative, issued a statement saying that acute hunger in the country rose from 14 million in July, to 23 million in March, forcing households to resort to "desperate measures" to put food on the table.

"Unacceptable trade-offs have caused untold suffering, reduced the quality, quantity, and diversity of food available, led to high levels of wasting in children, and other harmful impacts on the physical and mental wellbeing of women, men, and children," he spelled out.

'Harsh reality'

A staggering 95 per cent of Afghans are not getting enough to eat, with that number rising to almost 100 percent in female-headed households, according to the UN Resident Coordinator, who is also deputy head of the UN assistance mission, UNAMA.

"It is a figure so high that it is almost inconceivable. Yet, devastatingly, it is the harsh reality," he said.

Mr. Alakbarov painted a picture of hospital wards filled with malnourished children, many weighing at age one what an infant of six months would weigh in a developed country, with some "so weak they are unable to move".

Alleviating hunger

As Afghanistan continues to grapple with the effects of a terrible drought, the prospect of another bad harvest this year, a banking and financial crisis so severe that it has left more than 80 per cent of the population facing debt, and an increase in food and fuel prices, the UN official attested, "we cannot ignore the reality facing communities".

" Enormous challenges lie ahead," he said, reiterating that the UN and partners, are "doing everything we can" to alleviate the impacts of hunger and malnutrition, while giving communities the means to protect and sustain their livelihoods in the future.

So far this year, humanitarian partners have supported 8.2 million people with life-saving and life-sustaining food assistance, including emergency food rations, school meals, agricultural supplies and nutritious foods and supplements for nursing mothers and their infants.

Over the next months, the UN and its partners will continue to focus on scaling-up response activities, reaching previously underserved and remote areas that active conflict had rendered inaccessible.

Reaching the malnourished

Acute malnutrition rates in 28 out of 34 provinces are high with more than 3.5 million children in need of nutrition treatment support, said Dr. Alakbarov.

He explained that since mid-August, over 2,500 nutrition treatment sites across all 34 provinces, both urban and rural, have been serving 800,000 acutely malnourished children, "and we plan to reach 3.2 million affected children this year".

"We also aim to reach one million people through vocational skills training, one million children through school feeding, and millions more people both directly and indirectly through programmes that will protect and boost the agricultural livelihoods upon which so much of the population depends," added the UN Representative.

Humanitarian response needed

Although a massive humanitarian response mounted since August has prevented "our worst fears from being realized over the winter," Dr. Alakbarov reminded that food insecurity and malnutrition remain "at historic highs" and require an "immediate, sustained, and large-scale humanitarian response."

On 31 March, the UN, United Kingdom, Germany and Qatar will co-host an international pledging conference in support of the humanitarian response.

"The fate of an entire generation of Afghans is at stake," he said, assuring that the UN would continue, over the coming weeks, to provide regular updates.

A plea for help

The senior UN official urged Member States to "dig deep" for the Afghanistan people and continue generously supporting life-saving efforts.

While acknowledging that humanitarian assistance alone is not enough to address today's or tomorrow's challenges, he underscored that "it is absolutely necessary to keep people alive and healthy, and to prevent vulnerable people in the most precarious situations from sliding ever further into need".

" As we collectively support millions of Afghans to rebuild their lives and communities, we must remember that the long road to a better future is impossible on empty stomach, " he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Afghanistan: Food insecurity and malnutrition threaten 'an entire generation'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ramiz Alakbarov, who also serves as Deputy Special Representative, issued a statement saying that acute hunger in the country rose from 14 million in July, to 23 million in March, forcing households to resort to "desperate measures" to put food on the table.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/26/us/politics/russia-propaganda-dirty-bomb.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A new push by the Kremlin frames the war as a counterterrorism operation and seeks to rally Russians to support the fight, officials and researchers say.

Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

Give this article Give this article Give this article

A priest blessed new military enlistees at a recruiting office in Moscow this month. By framing Ukraine as the potential nuclear aggressor, Russia can ratchet up tensions over escalating the war without incurring the wrath of its population or further undermining support for President Vladimir V. Putin. Credit... Nanna Heitmann for The New York Times

WASHINGTON - Since before the war, Russia has spread disinformation about its need to stamp out Nazism in Ukraine. But in recent days, Moscow's propaganda has shifted, arguing that it is battling terrorism and falsely accusing Ukraine of planning a dirty bomb attack as part of that narrative.

The new propaganda, spread on social media and in the news, also includes unsupported allegations that the Ukrainian government intends to destroy a dam in its own territory, according to European and American government officials and independent researchers.

The push is meant to shore up Russian support for the war but also to denigrate Ukraine in the West, potentially softening support for more arms shipments to Kyiv, officials and researchers say.

"They seem to have decided on a talking point that this is a counterterrorism operation now," said Kyle Walter, who leads the U.S. investigation team at Logically, a tech start-up that helps governments and businesses counter disinformation. "Rather than framing this as something that's anti-Nazi or anti-Satanist, you now have a concerted effort to frame it as a counterterrorism operation."

The counterterrorism narratives, according to U.S. officials, is part of a wider propaganda web, all aimed at making Russians feel more involved in the war.

The Kremlin, which has begun calling its fight in Ukraine the people's war, is trying to persuade the public that it is not a conflict of choice for Moscow but an existential fight to save the country. Russian officials have used disinformation about dirty bomb attacks to highlight others inside Russia by Ukraine, and to stoke anger toward Ukraine among the Russian people, according to American and European officials.

On Wednesday, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia repeated the unfounded claim that Ukraine's government was plotting a dirty bomb attack. The accusation came as Russia started its annual nuclear military exercises, but U.S. officials said those drills appeared routine and included all of the usual notifications.

The information operations do not appear to have swayed public opinion in the West, but social media posts on the possibility of a dirty bomb attack have gained traction in Russia.

FilterLabs, a firm that tracks public sentiment in Russia and elsewhere, noted a surge this week in discussions about nuclear terrorism by Ukraine. Russians have equated Ukraine's plans with Osama bin Laden's threats against the United States and say Washington should end its support of Ukraine.

Russia's claims that Ukraine is using terrorist tactics are not new; even narratives comparing Ukraine to bin Laden have been discussed in Russia since August. But the intensity of the discussions increased this week, said Jonathan Teubner, the chief executive of FilterLabs.

"The sources of the narrative are mostly Kremlin-aligned sites," Mr. Teubner said. "But it is being repeated by some independent outlets who are attempting to refute it."

Even before the Russian defense minister, Sergei K. Shoigu, made the dirty bomb accusation in public this weekend, the Russian news media had discussed the possibility that Ukraine could start a nuclear conflict.

A woman outside the U.S. Embassy in Moscow this month held a poster that said "U.S., NATO. Hands off Ukraine." Credit... Nanna Heitmann for The New York Times

By framing Ukraine as the potential nuclear aggressor, Russia can ratchet up tensions without incurring the wrath of its population or further undermining support for Mr. Putin.

Using disinformation and propaganda is an important part of Mr. Putin's playbook. Before the invasion, Moscow began pushing a variety of false narratives about Ukraine. Researchers at Logically and other firms tracked an increase in accusations that Ukrainians were Nazis and were planning a genocide against Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine.

U.S. officials said some of the accusations Russia leveled at Ukraine in social media before the war, such as that Kyiv was planning a chemical attack, were part of a ploy to create a false pretext for an invasion.

Now, U.S. officials are divided over whether Russia actually believes Ukraine intends to conduct a terrorism campaign, including use of a dirty bomb, or if the propaganda push is purely an excuse to justify tougher action.

Some American officials said that given other covert Ukrainian action, like the car bomb attack that killed the daughter of a prominent Russian ultranationalist and the strike against a bridge to Crimea, Russian officials have convinced themselves, potentially based on faulty intelligence, that Ukraine has a dirty bomb.

And the Russian news media has spread disinformation about a dirty bomb attack while discussing actual Ukrainian actions, such as the bridge strike, the car bomb and attacks against arms depots in Crimea and Russia.

"You can zero in on the dirty bombs specifically, but I think it represents a wider trend that's pretty cohesive in recent weeks," said Mr. Walter, the investigator at Logically. "Which is the idea that Russia is pushing that Ukraine is a terrorist state."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia Intensifies Its Propaganda Campaign Against Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new push by the Kremlin frames the war as a counterterrorism operation and seeks to rally Russians to support the fight, officials and researchers say. Send any friend a story As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

# data[].attributes.body
https://news.yahoo.com/un-food-insecurity-afghanistan-reaches-210308665.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The United Nations (U.N.) released data Monday reporting that food insecurity in parts of Afghanistan has reached "catastrophic" levels.

The analysis, conducted primarily by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Programme, found that 19.7 million Afghans are "facing high levels of acute food insecurity."

The almost 20 million people facing acute malnutrition represent 47 percent of the country's overall population and are concentrated mostly in northeast Afghanistan.

According to the five-level Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, 20,000 Afghans have reached the catastrophe phase, or the most dangerous level of food insecurity.

The remainder of the 19.7 million are classified in the crisis or emergency phase.

Apart from those experiencing these three levels of acute food insecurity, an additional 14.6 million are described as stressed in their relationship to food.

The analysis found that the main reasons for massive food insecurity in Afghanistan are economic decline, drought, high food prices and the global impact of Russia's war on Ukraine, which has caused food prices to rise across the world.

"Humanitarian assistance remains desperately important, as do the needs to rebuild shattered agricultural livelihoods and re-connect farmers and rural communities to struggling rural and urban markets across the country," said Afghanistan's FAO representative, Richard Trenchard, in response to the analysis. "Unless these happen, there will be no way out of this crisis."
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UN: Food insecurity in Afghanistan reaches 'catastrophic' level

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The United Nations (U.N.) released data Monday reporting that food insecurity in parts of Afghanistan has reached "catastrophic" levels. The analysis, conducted primarily by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Programme, found that 19.7 million Afghans are "facing high levels of acute food insecurity."

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.npr.org/2022/11/16/1137076864/fbi-says-china-could-use-tiktok-to-spy-on-americans-including-government-workers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
GOP Sen. Marco Rubio introduced a bill that would ban TikTok. NPR's A Martinez talks to Aynne Kokas, professor of media studies and the director of the East Asia Center at the University of Virginia.

A MARTÍNEZ, HOST:

The FBI says the video-sharing app TikTok poses national security concerns. The app is owned by the company ByteDance, headquartered in Beijing. And FBI Director Chris Wray told lawmakers yesterday that the Chinese government could use the app to influence users or control their devices. Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has introduced a bill that would ban the app nationwide.

We're going to turn to Aynne Kokas. She's professor of media studies and the director of the East Asia Center at the University of Virginia. Her new book is "Trafficking Data: How China Is Winning The Battle For Digital Sovereignty." Professor, TikTok, I think everyone knows you get viral videos, funny ones at that. But tell us about what more TikTok is used for and who uses it.

AYNNE KOKAS: So TikTok has a wide range of uses. Users under the age of 30 are - have used that as a platform for gaining political knowledge. We also see this is a site where people actually use it to search for information about the world. So in addition to it being an entertainment platform, it's also become a form of critical communications infrastructure.

MARTÍNEZ: All right. Now, as we heard, FBI Director Chris Wray and Senator Marco Rubio are among those who say that the Chinese Communist Party could use TikTok to spy on Americans, including government workers. TikTok says, no. It's not happening. But, professor, how would that work? How could the app be used as a spying tool?

KOKAS: So what's really interesting about TikTok is that it's part of a larger Chinese government effort to expand extraterritorial control over digital platforms. So the Chinese government has allowed for and has encouraged Chinese firms to actually engage in national security data audits of any data that's being gathered by a Chinese firm. Now, TikTok, which has a parent company in ByteDance, which is based in Beijing, is subject to those same national security data audits because it shares data with its parent company, ByteDance.

MARTÍNEZ: So the Chinese government really believes that this digital space is actually territory that, I guess, for lack of a better word, could be conquered?

KOKAS: Absolutely. And so this is something that's been very clearly articulated time and time again from the 2010 white paper on the internet in China all the way to the 2020 Hong Kong national security law, which allows oversight of national security interests outside of China.

MARTÍNEZ: Wow. Now, Americans use a number of apps owned by Chinese companies. WeChat, that's one that I can think of. Does it make sense, professor, to ban one app and maybe leave the others alone?

KOKAS: So this is where the challenge with the Rubio bill comes out. When we look at all of these wide-ranging apps that are connected to Chinese firms, it's actually almost nonsensical to ban just one when we see platforms in areas like precision agriculture, communications, gaming all connected to Chinese firms. So it's really important to develop more robust data privacy regulations in the United States to protect users.

MARTÍNEZ: OK. So banning, then, you would think, is maybe not the correct move altogether?

KOKAS: Essentially, it's playing a game of whack-a-mole as we see this expansion of China's digital territory.

MARTÍNEZ: All right. That's Aynne Kokas. She's the director of the East Asia Center at the University of Virginia. Her new book is called "Trafficking Data: How China Is Winning The Battle For Digital Sovereignty." Professor, thanks.

KOKAS: Thank you so much.

(SOUNDBITE OF DUSTY TRAILS' "CONGA STYLE")

Copyright © 2022 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
FBI says China could use TikTok to spy on Americans, including government workers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
GOP Sen. Marco Rubio introduced a bill that would ban TikTok. NPR's A Martinez talks to Aynne Kokas, professor of media studies and the director of the East Asia Center at the University of Virginia. A MARTÍNEZ, HOST: The FBI says the video-sharing app TikTok poses national security concerns.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2016/3/28/egypts-notorious-police-brutality-record

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Omar Ashour is Senior Lecturer in Security Studies at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies in University of Exeter.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, centre, poses for a photograph with members of the Egyptian armed forces. [Reuters]

"If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear and never to see them again, you should send them to Egypt," the Former CIA officer Robert Baer said in 2004, six years before the Arab uprisings started.

In 2015 alone, more than 1,250 forced disappearance and 267 alleged extrajudicial killings were recorded in Egypt with well over 40,000 political prisoners.

Those are not exhaustive numbers, just the cases that the few non-partisan (or less-partisan) human rights local organisations were able to document. Although Egypt has been ruled by repressive military-led regimes for more than half a century, these numbers are unprecedented in the country.

One of the reasons behind the intensity of repression is a belief within security and hawkish military factions that the main fault of Hosni Mubarak was his "leniency".

In their perspective, Egypt's former dictator allowed tiny margins for opposition and civil society, which should have been crushed before the 2011 uprising.

Another reason for the level of repression is the sustained international and domestic impunity. So far, there are no costs for torturing-to-death a 28-year-old Italian PhD student, Giulio Regeni - not to mention more than 600 local cases of torture documented by the Nadeem Centre in 2015.

There are significant costs for documenting and exposing such crimes, however. Nadeem Centre was one of about 200 NGOs, research centres and civil society figures under criminal investigations by regime's judiciary for "unauthorised foreign funding".

Those are "defendants" in criminal case number 173/2011. A less important reason behind the intensive level of repression is the inhuman politicisation of local NGOs and think-tanks, a consequence of the political polarisation that went too far, and sunk too low .
OPINION: More freedom of expression for the Middle East
Indeed, many of the NGOs listed and the figures legally targeted welcomed the military coup of July 2013 and then cheered for cracking down on their political foes. Only when the repression arrived on their doorsteps, did they

But as a colleague once reminded me, we should not confuse the cheerleaders with the players. Many of the NGO-affiliated "elites" were just the former, not the latter.

So, who are the players that constitute Egypt's structure of repression? According to their victims, they like to refer to themselves and their headquarters as "capitals of hell".

During Mubarak's times, three institutions mainly constituted them: General Intelligence Apparatus (GIA), the State Security Investigation (SSI - now renamed National Security Apparatus or NSA) and the Military Intelligence Apparatus (MIA).

The first is directly affiliated with the presidential establishment and has its own special status under the legal framework. The second falls under the Ministry of Interior, and by far the most powerful institution within it. The third belongs to the Ministry of Defence, and gradually grew in power and mandate - to dominate the two other institutions, and smaller ones since 2011.

"They [MIA officers] became the eyes and ears of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. The rest of intelligence apparatuses were not trusted," said a former brigadier-general, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the situation.

The eyes and the ears gradually became the brain, as well. The MIA intervened in parliamentary "elections", ran political prisons, and formulated anti-opposition policies.

Domestically, these armed security institutions competed to have "political wings". In the 2015 parliamentary elections, each of them different multi-party blocs and individual candidates.

They were trying to create their private mini-National Democratic Party - the NDP was Mubarak's party and the main political mobilisation machine, which was overtaken later by his son's henchmen.

But these institutions also compete when it comes to foreign security policy. One of their public clashes occurred this month. The Minister of Interior Magdy Abdel Ghaffar - a former head of the NSA/SSI - declared that Palestinian Hamas was directly involved in assassinating the former Attorney General, Hisham Barakat.

Six days later, the GIA invited the political leaders of Hamas to Cairo to discuss security and military cooperation in Northeast Sinai, where the regime has failed to quell a growing insurgency. "So, one institution considers them terrorists and the other considers them counterterrorism official partners. Bamboozling ... we certainly got multiple security policies, not a 'bad-cop, good-cop' one," a former major-general in the Egyptian armed forces told me.
OPINION: The Egyptian revolution - what went wrong?
How will these conflicting "capitals of hell" affect Egypt's security and political landscape? Probably, not so positively.

Competition and outbidding between these institutions more likely engender and sustain increased levels of domestic repression. Hence more torture, extra-judicial killings, mass-arrests, and political detentions continue to be an official policy and tools of outbidding.

And in the continuous absence of international and local accountability, oversight mechanism, reformist agendas, and under the shadow of depleting resources, the 90-million strong country is more likely heading towards further instability.
Omar Ashour is Senior Lecturer in Security Studies at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies at the University of Exeter and an Associate Fellow at Chatham House.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Omar Ashour is Senior Lecturer in Security Studies at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies in University of Exeter. "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria.

# data[].attributes.location_name
1000 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, D.C.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/why-government-should-not-regulate-content-moderation-social-media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump recently complained that Google searches are biased against Republicans and conservatives. Many conservatives argue that Facebook and Google are monopolies seeking to restrict conservative speech. In contrast, many on the left complain that large social media platforms fostered both Trump's election in 2016 and violence in Charlottesville in 2017. Many on both sides believe that government should actively regulate the moderation of social media platforms to attain fairness, balance, or other values.

Yet American law and culture strongly circumscribe government power to regulate speech on the internet and elsewhere. Regulations of social media companies might either indirectly restrict individual speech or directly limit a right to curate an internet platform. The First Amendment offers strong protections against such restrictions. Congress has offered additional protections to tech companies by freeing them from most intermediary liability for speech that appears on their platforms. The U.S. Supreme Court has decided that private companies in general are not bound by the First Amendment.

However, some activists support new efforts by the government to regulate social media. Although some platforms are large and dominant, their market power can disintegrate, and alternatives are available for speakers excluded from a platform. The history of broadcast regulation shows that government regulation tends to support rather than mitigate monopolies.

Others worry that social media leads to "filter bubbles" that preclude democratic deliberation. But the evidence for filter bubbles is not strong, and few remedies exist that are compatible with the Constitution.

Speech on social media directly tied to violence-for example, terrorism-may be regulated by government, but more expansive efforts are likely unconstitutional. Concern about "interference" in U.S. elections glosses over the incoherence of current policies. Some foreign speech, online and off, is legal if the relationship of a speaker and a foreign power is disclosed.

Preventing harms caused by "fake news" or "hate speech" lies well beyond the jurisdiction of the government; tech firms appear determined to deal with such harms, leaving little for the government to do.

Background

Our effort advances in two parts. First, we establish a starting point for our analysis. We show that the values and practices of the public demonstrate a legitimate but quite limited role for government regulation of speech on the internet and elsewhere. The public and policymakers prefer private governance of speech. Those who wish to introduce new public regulation of social media must overcome this presumption for the private. In the second part, we show that arguments for new public efforts fail to do that. We find that private content moderators have already taken effective and innovative steps to deal with some of these problems. It is private content moderators, not elected or appointed officials, who should have the power to regulate speech on social media.

The Presumption against Public Regulation of Social Media

What are social media? Many experts have offered different definitions. Tom Standage, deputy editor of The Economist, says social media are "two‐​way, conversational environments in which information passes horizontally from one person to another along social networks, rather than being delivered vertically from an impersonal central source."3 He identifies aspects of social media that bear on free expression:

Social media are platforms, not publishers. They provide the means for large numbers of people to produce and consume information. They are open to both producers and consumers. Social media managers regulate the content on a platform, but the platform does not host everything that is posted on it. The regulation is necessarily ex post. The number of users and their expectations of immediate publication preclude ex ante regulation.

In contrast, publishing involved a small number of people communicating information to mass or special audiences. Gatekeeping was inherent in publishing; it was relatively closed to producers but open to consumers. The constrained supply of content enabled ex ante regulation of a publication (i.e., gatekeeping).

Social media thus comprise four groups of people: users who generate content, users who consume content, users who generate commercial speech (advertising), and social media managers who host speech. Each element involves speech: users generate and consume information, and social media services create the forum in which speech happens. Individual speech is highly protected in the United States. The online activities of social media companies also have considerable protection from government regulation.

Yet social media platforms differ from traditional publishers. The regulation of social media content typically comes ex post after a user is found to have violated a platform's community standards. One might argue that ex post editorial decisions are less likely than ex ante decisions to involve expression. A company might remove existing content to create a pleasant experience for users (that is, for business reasons). Thus, social media content moderation might differ from editorial discretion in publishing and merit less constitutional protection.

Congress might have required social media to police their platforms to enforce accepted public standards for speech (e.g., liability for defamation). But Congress did not do so. At the same time, the section did not protect individuals from public accountability for violating the limited exceptions to freedom of speech, and it did not reduce government authority over those harms. Section 230 neither increased nor decreased government authority over speech on social media. Congress showed in these decisions a preference for private governance of internet speech.

In older decisions, the Supreme Court said private forums had to respect public limits regulating freedom of speech. In Marsh v. Alabama (1946), the court ruled that a company town, like a government, could not restrict First Amendment rights: "The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it." The fundamental rights of speech and religion outweighed the rights of private property.25 In 1968, the court also found that a shopping mall was the "functional equivalent" of the company town opened for public use and thus had to respect a right to picket on private property.26

But more recent cases have been friendlier to protecting private forums from public regulation. In Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner (1972), the Supreme Court overturned Logan Valley, saying a shopping mall did not constitute a public forum and thus need not obey the First Amendment.27 Four years later, in Hudgens v. NLRB (1976), a majority noted that

Thus, the First Amendment's freedom of speech clause offered no protection for pickets making their case in a privately owned enclosed shopping mall.

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins (1980) affirmed the proposition that being open to the public did not turn a shopping center into a public forum governed by the First Amendment.29 However, the decision depended on other considerations. The court also concluded that the California Constitution created a right to petition and speech even on private property. The court decided that the state's rights trumped any claims to protection for private property or the owner's freedom of speech.30 This extension of free speech rights did not appeal much to other states. Only six states beyond California adopted limited protections for speech on private property.31

Some Americans may believe free speech should trump private property in forums like shopping malls. But national judgments run the other way, supporting private governance of speech. The history of public values and social media suggests a strong presumption against government regulation. The federal government must refrain from abridging the freedom of speech, a constraint that strongly protects a virtual space comprising speech. The government has also generally refrained from forcing owners of private property to abide by the First Amendment. Hence individuals have no expectation that the government will force the owners of social media to refrain from suppressing speech on their platforms (provided the owners do not violate civil rights laws). Those who seek more public control over social media should offer strong arguments to overcome this presumption of private governance. Have they?

Arguments for Public Regulation of Social Media

Some idea of the public interest often undergirds government actions, including regulation of private firms. In other words, policymakers and others see government vindicating a public interest through regulation. A public interest argument comprises two parts. First, it should establish that government action is needed to secure some widely held value; private activity is assumed, in theory or fact, to be inadequate to achieving that end. Second, it should make the case that government action will achieve the values in question without significant costs to other important values. As we have seen with social media, fundamental values are at stake. The second part of the public interest argument must climb a steep incline.

This section will argue that proposed government regulations of social media fail on one or both criteria. The values pursued by regulation are more important than the restraint of government power. Government action is unlikely to attain the public interest cited by advocates of regulation. Finally, in some cases, the regulation may only attain some value at an unacceptable price in other rights and values.

The Anti‐​Monopoly Argument

If these firms are indeed monopolies, there would be a stronger case that their content moderation violates the First Amendment. But if these tech firms are not monopolies, then it matters much less whether their content moderation constitutes a violation of free speech. Private institutions discriminate among viewpoints all the time, and few would wish the government to manage their agendas to assure fairness or balance. Indeed, as we saw, the government may not manage their speech (unless in theory they are broadcast media). But if the monopoly claim is true, then bias in content moderation might matter more. If a private forum such as Facebook owns the only place to speak and to be heard, its discrimination among viewpoints will seem a lot like censorship by the government, notwithstanding its private status. If so, one might think government action (rather than constraint) would serve the cause of speech and debate. More voices might be heard if one company (or a small number) did not govern the private forum in question.

However, the question of viewpoint discrimination would matter a lot less if the dominance of current market leaders were insecure and if users and audiences who were excluded from a platform had alternatives. The discrimination argument also matters less if public regulation (e.g., turning social media into public utilities) seems likely to make matters worse regarding the monopoly question. Each of these contingencies appears true: the dominance of current firms is insecure, alternatives exist, and broad regulation seems likely to make things worse.

The tech companies involved in speech are large and successful. The Wall Street Journal reports that "these companies [Apple, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Facebook] are the five most valuable in the U.S. by market capitalization, the first time a single industry has occupied that position in several decades, according to S&P Capital Inc."36 Their success, however, does not necessarily mean that they enjoy a natural monopoly, a traditional justification for government antitrust action.

The case against the tech companies leans on an older economic theory of network effects. David S. Evans and Richard Schmalensee offer a pithy summary of the theory:

Does this theory comport with what we know from economics and with empirical reality?

Even speakers excluded from major platforms such as Facebook and YouTube can find a home for their speech somewhere else on the internet. LiveLeak, while less reputable precisely because of its willingness to host graphic content, will deliver video to viewers just as effectively as YouTube. Vimeo also exists as an alternative platform, which is owned by IAC, a firm that seemingly specializes in second‐​tier versions of a host of internet services, and Dailymotion is another option. There are also platforms that are not specifically dedicated to video hosting or sharing but are often used to do so. Snapchat can be used to send self‐​deleting clips, while file‐​storage sites like Google Drive or Dropbox are often repurposed as semipublic information repositories.

But even if firms dominate their markets, will government regulation deal with the problem or make it worse? The nation has had experience with similar regulation of communications for similar reasons regarding broadcasting. Such regulation reinforced the market dominance of large firms and threatened freedom of speech.

The federal government claimed control of the broadcasting spectrum in the 1920s. Congress set up the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate entry into and use of the spectrum. Between 1941 and 1953, the FCC allocated a large part of the spectrum for television broadcasting. To use the spectrum for television broadcasting required a license from the FCC.

Eventually, the courts became less tolerant of the FCC's hostility to competition and the agency itself became more open to markets in the 1980s. Those changes, however, came after decades of the FCC restricting competition in broadcasting markets.

The history of broadcast regulation suggests that increasing state control over social media would have a chilling effect on speech. Over time, both political parties might be expected to threaten any speech they find abhorrent.

The monopoly argument for regulating social media has weaknesses. We have reason to think the current market positions of large social media companies may not persist because network effects operate differently than in the past. In any case, speakers have alternatives if they are excluded from a specific platform. Finally, it should not be assumed that government regulation will produce more competition in the online marketplace of ideas. It may simply protect both social media owners and government officials from competition.

Democracy and Deliberation

The internet facilitated the exchange of views about everything, including politics. Once again, groups of the like‐​minded have formed. Indeed, the cost of speech and association has fallen so fast that we might expect that more people will be more involved in more like‐​minded groups than ever. One might see this as a tremendous success both in fostering speech and association or in satisfying individual preferences. But some see the association of the like‐​minded as a danger to democracy and to the individuals who associate this way.

By enabling and respecting individual choices, the internet complicates and even undermines both the diversity and the unity needed in a deliberative democracy. More diversity of views would improve the disharmony of the internet enclaves, and more unity across enclaves would militate against social and political fragmentation.

Sunstein's claims about filter bubbles and echo chambers seem plausible. We can imagine people choosing to avoid unpleasant people and views while affirming their prior beliefs. Such choices might be the easiest way forward for them. But the logic of this position does not entail its empirical accuracy. Communications researcher Cristian Vaccari notes that

Several recent studies have focused on either the United States and other developed nations or just European nations alone. Perhaps data and conclusions from other developed nations do not transfer to the United States. However, cultures and borders notwithstanding, citizens in developed nations are similar in wealth and education. Even if we put less weight on conclusions from Europe, such results bear more than modest consideration.

In 2017, Vaccari surveyed citizens in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom to test the extent of filter bubbles online. He concluded that "social media users are more likely to disagree than agree with the political contents they see on these platforms" and that "citizens are much more likely to encounter disagreeable views on social media than in face‐​to‐​face conversations." His evaluation of Sunstein's thesis is as follows:

Another recent study of the United Kingdom found that most people interested in politics who select diverse sources of information tended to avoid echo chambers. Only about 8 percent of their sample were in an echo chamber. The authors urge us to look more broadly at media and public opinion:

Whatever may be happening on any single social media platform, when we look at the entire media environment, there is little apparent echo chamber. People regularly encounter things that they disagree with. People check multiple sources. People try to confirm information using search. Possibly most important, people discover things that change their political opinions. Looking at the entire multi‐​media environment, we find little evidence of an echo chamber.67 Finally, another study of multiple countries found that social media was also related to incidental exposure to news, contrary again to Sunstein's view that older media promoted such unintended exposure while new media do not.68

We have seen that Sunstein's concerns about filter bubbles are open to question. Sunstein might disagree, and perhaps a maturing literature will support regulations to fight such bubbles. But Sunstein proposes restrained efforts to make internet users better citizens. If the literature cited in this report is correct, there is even less reason to regulate social media in the name of democracy. But there may be an inherent problem implicitly recognized in Sunstein's limited proposals for reform. Forcing people to read and interact with views they dislike or abhor implicates liberal values such as free speech and individual liberty. On the one hand, we may wish that people were more and better informed about politics; on the other hand, we may doubt the wisdom of forcing people to engage in public matters. If filter bubbles threatened popular government, the case for public action might have improved. But studies do not support that proposition.

National Security Concerns

Government traditionally protects the homeland from its enemies. A standard textbook explores the complex meaning of national security:

Our concern here is whether the government should increase its power over internet speech to achieve national security. That question inevitably concerns the relationship of speech to violence. But internet speech may involve other aspects of national security.

Terrorism. The clearest example of a threat to national security would be attacks on or occupation of the homeland or its citizens. Terrorism may be defined as "public violence to advance a political, social, or religious cause or ideology."79 Policymakers thus have reason for concern:

Posner seems concerned about two harms caused by speech that favors terrorism: the harm done to vulnerable individuals who end up being punished for materially supporting terrorism and the mayhem caused by the speech. Liberal governments generally do not protect people from the consequences of their beliefs; however, they do protect other people from those consequences if they are directly related to speech. Hence Posner rightly worries about violence caused by terrorist speech, a concern that informs the incitement exception in First Amendment doctrine. But his example, which is that 300 U.S.-based ISIS sympathizers were "lured" by Twitter into some affiliation with the group, does not establish that any harm was perpetrated by anyone in the group against other people. There is little doubt they might cause harm in the future, but we have no evidence they have done so because of hearing speech. Posner is proposing a revived "bad tendency" test that weighs free speech against possible harms carried out by beguiled people. One would think we need at least a few cases in which speech probably caused harm to change long‐​standing doctrine.

Courts have consistently refused to hold social media platforms liable for terrorist acts.85 The most plausible of these attempts, Fields v. Twitter, sought to make use of the civil remedies provision of the Anti‐​Terrorism Act (ATA), contending that in failing to prevent ISIS from using its platform Twitter knowingly and recklessly provided material support to a terrorist organization, rendering Twitter the proximate cause of harms suffered by ISIS victims. Suits brought under the ATA turn on its proximate cause or "by reason of" requirement. Under this requirement Fields and similar material‐​support claims falter. While ISIS certainly found value in the ability to tweet, it is unlikely that the organization's activities would be substantially hampered without access to Twitter. Furthermore, in Fields and similar cases, plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that ISIS's use of Twitter played an instrumental role in the attacks that victimized them. The District Court for the Northern District of California noted the following in Fields:

Given the plaintiffs' failure to establish ISIS's Twitter use as the proximate cause of their harms, the Ninth Circuit rejected Fields' appeal.

More broadly, any standard of liability that might implicate Twitter in terrorist attacks would also capture transport providers, restaurateurs, and cellular networks. All these services are frequently used by terrorists, though they cannot be seen as uniquely instrumental in the realization of terrorist plots.

As Posner notes, social media platforms have policies against terrorist speech. For example, YouTube's policy on "terrorist content" states:

Social media moderation may be more effective than the increases in government power desired by Posner. But that effectiveness may have been acquired by narrowing the kinds of speech heard on those platforms. However one assesses that narrowing, the case for more government power here remains at best unproven.

Electoral Integrity. Many believe that protecting national security also means preventing foreign powers from influencing American elections. In February 2018, Robert S. Mueller III, a special counsel to the U.S. Department of Justice, indicted 13 Russians for intervening in the 2016 U.S. election. The indictment charges that they intervened by purchasing advertising that mostly "focused on issues-like civil rights or immigration-and did not promote specific candidates."91 In other words, the ads were speech about issues discussed during the campaign. Of course, this was speech by foreign agents, which presumably makes all the difference. But should it? The First Amendment does not refer to speakers but rather to speech, which is protected from government abridgment. It might be assumed that foreign agents seek to do harm to the United States through speech. Indeed, Mueller's indictment and the law underlying it purport to protect national security from foreign actions during the election.92 But that harm could be ignored or rejected by internet users who are expected under the Constitution to act as a censor of dangerous speech. Lastly, social media users may have a right to receive materials from foreign speakers. Such a right would belong to a reader or listener rather than the speaker; the Russian speakers in this case have no right. In 1965, the Supreme Court invalidated a law requiring readers to sign at the Post Office to receive communist publications. The act of signing chilled a presumed right to receive a publication from abroad.93 In a concurring opinion, Justice William Brennan remarked:

The Peking Daily was printed on paper; Russian speech appeared online. But the difference does not merit protecting a reader's right to see the former and not the latter.

In this case, national security seems to have outweighed freedom of speech. But that conclusion is somewhat misleading. In fact, the United States both censors some foreign speech and permits other speech with disclosure of the source. We turn first to the case for censorship.

Why were the Russian efforts indictable? The indicted were supported by the Russian government and are said to have bought ads advocating the election or defeat of candidates for federal office. The relevant law comes from Title 11, Section 110.20(b) of the Code of Federal Regulations:

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) concisely explicates the relevant law:

The ads could have been a "thing of value," an "independent expenditure," or "disbursement for an electioneering communication."

Here we discern a descent toward incoherence. On the one hand, a foreign national is prohibited from spending money on American elections, including advertising. On the other hand, that ban extends only to spending on express advocacy for or against a candidate. As noted earlier, most of the spending by the Russians in 2016 involved issue advocacy and not express advocacy. What about internet speech by Russian agents? They were presumably paid to speak, so the same distinction applies; speech about the issues would be permitted. Of course, speech about issues by a foreign national "volunteer" would not be indictable.

The national security interest at stake appears to be the integrity of a fundamental institution-elections. A foreign national spending money on speech that advocates the election or defeat of a candidate apparently threatens the integrity of elections. A foreign national discussing the issues debated during an election does not pose the same threat. This distinction may belie an assumption that using money to support speech would enable a foreign power to coordinate direct influence over voters and thereby affect the outcome of an election. Observations by random foreign nationals would not likely be effective.

But what's entailed in that assumption is that without censorship voters and their votes would be affected by the foreign campaign to the detriment of national security. The assumption is paternalistic and contravenes many of the justifications for freedom of speech found in Supreme Court decisions about freedom of speech. At the same time, voters are assumed to be capable of dealing with issue advocacy by foreign nationals. So there is a tension here that reflects badly yet well on the United States.

Speech by foreign nationals is not just a threat to national security. If it were only a threat, that threat would be countered by banning all foreign speech. But speech by foreign nationals also offers benefits to Americans, so banning all foreign speech would involve significant costs. For this reason, foreign speech is often regulated but not prohibited.

This more liberal approach to foreign speech may be seen in FARA's statement of purpose:

In other cases, the interests of governments and peoples diverge, and the speech of foreign agents may run counter to the interests of the American people. Even though this speech could be divergent and a potential security threat, it does not require censorship. Diplomacy requires people employed by foreign powers to speak with policymakers on behalf of their governments. Public officials, including members of Congress and the executive branch, often meet and hear the arguments of foreign agents. Apparently, registering and thereby disclosing such agents sufficiently protects American security in those situations.

In sum, American law permits some speech by foreign nationals during an election. The law may permit issue advocacy by foreign nationals. It does not permit foreign nationals to spend money directly on elections, especially by buying advertising that supports or opposes a candidate.

There is little evidence that the Russian efforts had much effect on the American voters in 2016. Reporting by the New York Times suggests that Russian efforts may have persuaded a few people to show up at a small anti‐​Muslim rally in Texas.105 Speculation about other effects abounds. But as Brendan Nyhan, a professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, indicates, political science research shows how hard it is to change votes even with significant spending.106 The Russian effort was a minuscule portion of overall spending in 2016.107

Federal law seems needlessly incoherent. Allowing foreign nationals to buy ads with disclosure of their participation would vindicate freedom of speech. It might be objected that allowing such spending would permit a hostile foreign power to fund and coordinate a propaganda campaign capable of affecting the outcome of an American election. But allowing foreign nationals to fund lobbying efforts has not subjugated policymaking to foreign interests. Policymakers are assumed to be capable of sorting out arguments and interests. Perhaps voters are not as capable of doing so, although the unpopularity of RT suggests otherwise.

The Mueller indictment may never move to trial because the indicted are unlikely to come to the United States. But even if you believe Americans should be protected from Russian ads, there is little need for federal action.

A Private Alternative

Facebook is also enforcing disclosure on ad buyers:

Facebook now has a higher standard of ads transparency than has ever existed with TV or newspaper ads. You can see all the ads an advertiser is running, even if they weren't shown to you. In addition, all political and issue ads in the US must make clear who paid for them. And all these ads are put into a public archive which anyone can search to see how much was spent on an individual ad and the audience it reached.

The disclosure aims specifically at excluding expenditures by foreign nationals:

We now also require anyone running political or issue ads in the US to verify their identity and location. This prevents someone in Russia, for example, from buying political ads in the United States, and it adds another obstacle for people trying to hide their identity or location using fake accounts.

Facebook appears to be offering a private solution to the perceived threat to the integrity of elections and hence national security. No doubt some Russian accounts will escape the ban on fake accounts. But in this regard Facebook seems much better placed than the federal government to regulate Russian efforts. The private sector is doing what the public sector cannot and should not do.

This broad sweep of disclosure may be a response to the content of speech. Zuckerberg writes:

Most of the divisive ads the Internet Research Agency ran in 2016 focused on issues-like civil rights or immigration-and did not promote specific candidates. To catch this behavior, we needed a broad definition of what constitutes an issue ad.

So the broad definition is a response to what? The divisiveness of the speech? Or the source of the speech? To the extent the rule seeks the source, it is roughly similar to federal law governing prohibited sources of funding. But if divisiveness leads to disclosure, Facebook is regulating, though not suppressing, speech based on its content.

Preventing Harms Caused by Speech

The cases for regulation of both kinds of speech have a common weakness. If we do not know what a term means, we cannot know how it applies. Thus, vagueness fosters unconstitutionality, as Nadine Strossen explains:

Looked at another way, vagueness would lead government to suppress both prohibited and permitted speech. The "false positives," which are permitted speech wrongly suppressed, would involve a cost to freedom of speech. Given the importance attached to free speech in the United States, it is unlikely the benefits of suppressing speech would outweigh the costs of those false positives. Such costs would also indicate the chosen means were poorly tailored to the ends sought by the government; vagueness would suggest the government regulation of speech could not pass a strict scrutiny test.

For these reasons, the following analysis pays close attention to the meanings of fake news and hate speech. So far as we find the terms vague, we should have less confidence in calls to suppress such speech, however "fake" and however "hateful."

"False, often sensational, information disseminated under the guise of news reporting" (Collins Dictionary).

"(1) News that is made up or 'invented' to make money or discredit others; (2) news that has a basis in fact, but is 'spun' to suit a particular agenda; and (3) news that people don't feel comfortable about or don't agree with" (Reuters Institute, "Digital News Report 2017").

"All forms of false, inaccurate, or misleading information designed, presented and promoted to intentionally cause public harm or for profit" (European Commission, A Multidimensional Approach to Disinformation).

"Verifiably false or misleading information that is created, presented and disseminated for economic gain or to intentionally deceive the public, and in any event to cause public harm" (European Commission, "Tackling Online Disinformation: Commission Proposes An EU‐​wide Code of Practice").

"Perceived and deliberate distortions of news with the intention to affect the political landscape and to exacerbate divisions in society" (European Commission, "Joint Research Centre Digital Economy Working Paper 2018-02").

Some elements of these definitions clearly could not pass muster under American constitutional law. Speech that fits a particular agenda, that makes people uncomfortable, or that affects the political landscape would all be protected by American courts. Apart from that, the term fake news appears to comprise three elements: intentionality, falsity, and a public harm. Each of these elements poses serious problems to the First Amendment.

Apparently, only those who deliberately seek to mislead or divide listeners are liable for false or harmful speech, according to those who seek to regulate fake news.

But this intentionality standard itself does not work well with the remaining speech. If the government may not suppress false speech or speech that causes a public harm, then whether the speech is intended to cause a public harm does not matter. So we turn first to whether false and harmful speech may be sanctioned by the U.S. government.

In United States v. Alvarez, the court refused to recognize a general exception to the First Amendment for false speech: "The Court has never endorsed the categorical rule the Government advances: that false statements receive no First Amendment protection."121 In part, false speech was not a traditionally recognized exception. Also, giving the government the power to limit speech on behalf of truth would chill permitted speech, thereby calling into question "a foundation of our freedom."122 False speech about politics enjoys significant protection under the Constitution.

Courts have long recognized defamation as a general exception to the freedom of speech.123 The government may sanction speech integral to defamation. Individuals defamed by others on social media may seek relief for a tort; the state then enforces the sanction on libelous speech. State sanctions require both harm to reputation and falsity; the exception is not for false speech per se.124 Public figures must also show "actual malice" by defendants to recover compensation.125 Falsity alone is not enough to allow punishment for speech. The standard of actual malice is quite demanding on those seeking relief. Moreover, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 prevents social media platforms from being liable for the torts of their users.126 Defamation will provide a limited public response to fake news.127 It is not broad enough to underpin a substantial government effort to regulate false speech on social media.

This market failure argument for regulating fake news lacks empirical support. Scholarly literature notes that social media have offered both costs and benefits to consumers. However, "the impact of all these changes on the welfare of consumers, producers and society as a whole is not so clear. There is very little empirical evidence to date, also because relevant data are often proprietary and not accessible to independent researchers" (emphasis added).131 In light of this, we have little reason to believe that by regulating fake news the government will serve the important interests said to be at stake.

Private content moderators permit false speech. However, they manage such speech much more efficiently than the government. Facebook says:

Although Facebook does not block false speech, it does make certain categories of false speech more difficult to find and points users toward other presumably more accurate articles about a topic.133 Moreover, sites posting false speech often violate other Facebook rules (e.g., rules against spam, hate speech, or fake accounts) and are suppressed.134 Yet Facebook product manager Tessa Lyons says "we don't want to be and are not the arbiters of truth."135 Yet Facebook has delegated the task of determining the factual truth of contested content to a network of third‐​party fact‐​checkers.136 While this allows Facebook to avoid the difficult and politically fraught work of distinguishing fact from fiction, Facebook is still held responsible for its selection of fact‐​checkers and the impact of their decisions. In September, the Weekly Standard, the sole conservative organization admitted to Facebook's fact‐​checking program, deemed a ThinkProgress article, or at least its headline, false, limiting its distribution. ThinkProgress took umbrage with the decision and criticized Facebook for granting a conservative publication the ability to downrank its content.137

Facebook appears to want to let a thousand flowers bloom on its platform, yet it employs fact‐​checking gardeners that cut the false ones. The public values truth, and we hope that conspiracy theories and obvious falsehoods are bad for business. On the other hand, a tech company deciding between the competing truths offered by blue and red speakers invites political attacks against their platform and, over the long‐​term, sows doubt about the fairness of its content‐​moderation policies. Tech companies may sanction speech in circumstances where government must remain passive. Yet that empowerment has its own problems, not least of which is deciding between contending armies in an age of cultural wars.

We should thus keep in mind that the case for public as opposed to private regulation of fake news online is weak. Fake news has no fixed meaning, and regulations would be unconstitutionally vague. The public values truth, but the search for truth in the United States must abide by the First Amendment, and the courts have held that false speech-the whole of which fake news is a part-also has the protection of the First Amendment. Were this not true, the combination of vagueness and politics in a polarized age would mean virtually anything "the other side" said would be regulated as fake news. But fake news might not be the most likely reason for suppressing online speech.

Hate speech may be defined as "offensive words, about or directed toward historically victimized groups."144 That definition seems clear enough. But consider the case of The Bell Curve, a 1994 book by Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein. Among other things, the authors state that the average IQ score of African Americans is one standard deviation below the average score of the population. Many also thought the book argued that nature was far more important than nurture in determining the IQ of individuals and groups, a claim that suggested social reforms would have little effect on individual and group outcomes.145 The Bell Curve offended many people; "historically victimized groups" might well have taken offense. Was The Bell Curve hate speech? If not, where should elected officials draw the line between permitted and prohibited speech?

The Supreme Court has applied this general framework to protect speech hostile to racial minorities. In their decision in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, the court dealt with a Minneapolis ordinance punishing speech that "one knows or has reasonable grounds to know arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender."156 A lower court ruled that the ordinance reached protected as well as unprotected speech and thus was unconstitutionally overbroad. The same court interpreted the ordinance to apply only to "fighting words," which have been considered outside the protections of the First Amendment. Most of the Supreme Court went further, holding that Minneapolis had engaged in viewpoint discrimination by punishing some but not all "fighting words," a distinction based on the ideological content of some speech.

In theory, it is possible for the courts to uphold viewpoint discrimination. Such distinctions must pass the strict scrutiny test discussed earlier. To do so, the Minneapolis regulation would have needed to be narrowly drawn to achieve a compelling government interest. The court recognized the importance of protecting minorities. Yet the government had other means to achieve that end, means that were neutral toward the content of the speech.157 Most experts assume R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul precludes government suppression of hate speech. Accordingly, hate speech on social media lies beyond government power.158

In sum, the First Amendment does not permit government to censor speech to prevent harms to the public apart from known exceptions such as direct incitement to violence. The government may not censor fake news or hate speech. Private regulators are doing what government officials may not do: regulating and suppressing speech believed to cause harm to citizens generally and protected groups specifically. Private action thus weakens the case for moving the United States toward a more European approach to fake news and hate speech.

But such private action presents a mixed picture for supporters of robust protections for speech. The platforms offer less protection for speech than the government does. Social media managers discriminate among speakers according to the content of their speech and the viewpoints expressed. Tech companies have in part applied to speech the proportionality test long‐​recognized in Europe and rejected in this country. Private content governance of social media poses a quandary, particularly for libertarians and anyone who recognizes that private property implies a strong right for social media managers to control what happens on their internet platforms without government interference. It seems likely that social media managers choose to limit speech in the short term to fulfill their larger goal of building a business for the long term. They may believe that excluding extreme speech is required to sustain and increase the number of users on their platform.

Moreover, we should ask whether these efforts regarding hate speech (along with private suppression of Russian speech, terrorist incitement, or fake news) is truly a private decision and not state action. If Facebook or other platforms remove content to avoid government regulation, is such suppression state action or a hybrid of private choice determined by public threats and offers?

Conclusion

We began with Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince's concern about legitimate governance of speech on the internet. Prince's desire to bring government into online speech controversies is understandable but misplaced. American history and political culture assign priority to the private in governing speech online and particularly on social media. The arguments advanced for a greater scope of government power do not stand up. Granting such power would gravely threaten free speech and the independence of the private sector. We have seen that these tech companies are grappling with many of the problems cited by those calling for public action. The companies are technically sophisticated and thus far more capable of dealing with these issues. Of course, the efforts of the companies may warrant scrutiny and criticisms, now and in the future. But at the moment, a reasonable person can see promise in their efforts, particularly in contrast to the likely dangers posed by government regulation.

Government officials may attempt directly or obliquely to compel tech companies to suppress disfavored speech. The victims of such public‐​private censorship would have little recourse apart from political struggle. The tech companies, which rank among America's most innovative and valuable firms, would then be drawn into the swamp of a polarized and polarizing politics. To avoid politicizing tech, it is vital that private content moderators be able to ignore explicit or implicit threats to their independence from government officials.

It is Facebook, Medium, and Pinterest-not Congress or President Trump-that have a presumption of legitimacy to remove the speech of StormFront and similar websites. These firms need to nurture their legitimacy to moderate content. The companies may have to fend off government officials eager to suppress speech in the name of the "public good." The leaders of these businesses may regret being called to meet this challenge with all its political and social dangers and complexities. But this task cannot be avoided. No one else can or should do the job.

Notes

10. Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., 564 U.S. 552 (2011); Martin H. Redish, " Commercial Speech and the Values of Free Expression," Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 813, June 19, 2017.

35. Trump's campaign manager Brad Parscale has written, "Google claims to value free expression and a free and open internet, but there is overwhelming evidence that the Big Tech giant wants the internet to be free and open only to political and social ideas of which it approves." Brad Parscale, "Trump Is Right: More than Facebook and Twitter, Google Threatens Democracy, Online Freedom," USA Today, September 10, 2018. Parscale's article offers several examples of putative bias against conservatives. During the Republican primaries in 2016, Facebook employees admitted they "routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network's influential 'trending' news section." Facebook denied the charge. See Michael Nunez, "Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News," Gizmodo, May 9, 2016; see also Peter van Buren, "Extend the First Amendment to Twitter and Google Now," The American Conservative, November 7, 2017. This view appears to be spreading on the right; see Michael M. Grynbaum and John Herrman, "New Foils for the Right: Google and Facebook," New York Times, March 6, 2018.

37. David S. Evans and Richard Schmalensee, " Debunking the 'Network Effects' Bogeyman: Policymakers Need to March to the Evidence, Not to Slogans," Regulation 40 (Winter 2017-18): 36.

55. Sunstein, #Republic, p. 71, 259. Former president Barack Obama has said that "essentially we now have entirely different realities that are being created with not just different opinions, but now different facts. And this isn't just by the way Russian inspired bots and fake news. This is Fox News vs. The New York Times editorial page. If you look at these different sources of information, they do not describe the same thing. In some cases, they don't even talk about the same thing. And so it is very difficult to figure out how democracy works over the long term in those circumstances." He added that government should put "basic rules of the road in place that create level playing fields." Robby Soave, "5 Things Barack Obama Said in His Weirdly Off‐​the‐​Record MIT Speech," Hit and Run (blog), Reason, February 26, 2018.

64. Levi Boxell, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse M. Shapiro, " The Internet, Political Polarization, and the 2016 Election," Cato Institute Research Brief in Economic Policy no. 88, November 1, 2017.

85. See Pennie v. Twitter Inc., 2017 WL 5992143 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2017); Force v. Facebook Inc., 2018 WL 472807 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2018); Crosby v. Twitter Inc., 303 F. Supp. 3d 564 (E.D. Mich. April 2, 2018); Gonzalez v. Google Inc., 2018 WL 3872781 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2018); Cain v. Twitter Inc., 2018 WL 4657275 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2018); Cohen v. Facebook Inc., 2017 WL 2192621 (E.D.N.Y. May 18, 2017); and Fields v. Twitter Inc., 2018 WL 626800 (9th Cir. Jan. 31, 2018).

95. 11 CFR 110.20(f).

96. FEC​.gov, FEC Record: Outreach, "Foreign Nationals."

117. Bertin Martens, Luis Aguiar, Estrella Gomez‐​Herrera, and Frank Mueller‐​Langer, "The Digital Transformation of News Media and the Rise of Disinformation and Fake News-An Economic Perspective," Digital Economy Working Paper 2018-02, JRC Technical Reports, pp. 8-11.

126. Protection for Private Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material, 47 U.S. Code § 230.

141. European Union (website), Publications Office of the EU, A Multidimensional Approach to Disinformation: Report of the Independent High Level Group on Fake News and Online Disinformation, March 30, 2018. For the process going forward, see p. 33.

Vice President, Cato Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why the Government Should Not Regulate Content Moderation of Social Media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many conservatives argue that Facebook and Google are monopolies seeking to restrict conservative speech. In contrast, many on the left complain that large social media platforms fostered both Trump's election in 2016 and violence in Charlottesville in 2017. Many on both sides believe that government should actively regulate the moderation of social media platforms to attain fairness, balance, or other values.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/05/human-rights-north-korea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
North Korea is one of the world's most repressive states. The government restricts all civil and political liberties for its citizens, including freedom of expression, assembly, association, and religion. It prohibits all organized political opposition, independent media, civil society, and trade unions. The government routinely uses arbitrary arrest and punishment of crimes, torture in custody, forced labor, and executions to maintain fear and control. In recent years, the government has tightened domestic restrictions on travel and unauthorized cross-border travel with China, and punished North Koreans making contact with the outside world.

In his seventh year in power, Kim Jong Un-the third leader of the dynastic Kim family and head of the ruling Workers' Party of Korea (WPK)-continues to exercise almost total political control. North Korea's firing of 23 missiles during 16 tests and its sixth nuclear test in 2017 sent tensions between the United States and its allies and North Korea to their highest level in decades. In 2018, Kim Jong Un engaged in new diplomatic efforts with South Korea, the US, China, Russia, and others. Between March and May 2018, Kim Jong Un, who had not met any world leaders since he came to power in December 2011, met twice with Chinese President Xi Jinping, twice with South Korean President Moon Jae-in, and once with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

On human rights, the international community has continued to press the North Korean government to expand its engagement with United Nations human rights mechanisms, including action on the findings of the UN Commission of Inquiry (COI) report on human rights in North Korea that found the government committed crimes against humanity including extermination, murder, enslavement, torture, imprisonment, rape and other forms of sexual violence, and forced abortion.

On December 11, 2017, for the fourth consecutive year, the UN Security Council put North Korea's egregious human rights violations on its formal agenda as a threat to international peace and security. On March 23, 2018, the Human Rights Council adopted without a vote a resolution that maintained pressure on the need for advancing accountability mechanisms for the eventual prosecution of North Korean leaders and officials responsible for crimes against humanity.

North Korea has signed and ratified several human rights treaties, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the United Nations Charter, all of which obligate North Korea to cooperate with a variety of UN institutions and treaty bodies.

In 2017, North Korea undertook limited re-engagement with some UN human rights mechanisms, including the CRC and CEDAW committees, and with a short visit by the special rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, a first for a UN thematic special rapporteur, although North Korea did not uphold its commitments to fully cooperate with her requests. The government continues to refuse to cooperate with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Seoul and the UN special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in North Korea, Tomás Ojea Quintana.

Key Vulnerable Groups

In addition to the extensive abuses noted above, North Korea discriminates against individuals and their families on political grounds in key areas such as employment, residence, and schooling by applying songbun, a sociopolitical classification system that from its creation grouped people into "loyal," "wavering," or "hostile" classes. Pervasive corruption enables some room to maneuver around the strictures of the songbun system, and some people who bribe government officials are able to pursue market activities or travel domestically or abroad.

The government also fails to protect or promote the rights of numerous vulnerable groups, including women, children, people with disabilities, and people in detention and prison.

In addition to facing violations of their rights common to the rest of the population, women suffer a range of sexual and gender-based abuses as well. These include punishment for acts of their husbands or other relatives; torture, rape, and other sexual violence in detention facilities; sexual exploitation or forced marriage of North Korean women in China; and sexual and gender-based violence and discrimination. State authorities are sometimes perpetrators of abuses against women, and fail to offer protection or justice to women and girls facing gender-based and sexual abuse.

Gender-based discrimination appears to begin at childhood, where schools favor boys and men in leadership roles, and girls are socialized to stereotyped gender roles. Women are severely underrepresented in senior positions in the ruling Workers' Party of Korea, which serves as the gateway to any position of power. There are no women on the all-important National Defense Commission or the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the WPK, which determines the party's policies. As of 2016, according to North Korea's report to CEDAW, women made up only 10 percent of divisional directors in government bodies, 11.9 percent of judges and lawyers, 4.9 percent of diplomats, and 16.5 percent of officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Border Tightening

Kim Jong Un's government has bolstered efforts to prevent people from leaving North Korea without permission by increasing the number of border guards, CCTV cameras, and barbed wired fences on its border with China. Tactics include jamming Chinese cellphone services at the border and targeting those communicating with people outside the country. China has also increased checkpoints on roads leading from the border.

During the summer of 2017, Chinese authorities apparently intensified crackdowns on both North Koreans fleeing through China and the networks guiding them, resulting in fewer North Koreans being able to complete the arduous overland journey to Laos or Thailand, and from there, most often, to South Korea.

The Ministry of People's Security classifies defection as a crime of "treachery against the nation." Harsh punishments apply to North Koreans forcibly returned by China, including a potential death sentence. Former North Korean security officials and people who were forcibly returned after 2011 told Human Rights Watch that those forcibly returned face interrogation, torture, sexual violence, humiliating treatment, and forced labor.

The severity of punishment depends on North Korean authorities' assessments of what returnees did while in China. North Koreans caught working or living in China are sent to different types of forced labor camps-long-term ( kyohwaso) or short-term prisons ( rodong danryeondae). Those discovered to be trying to reach South Korea are treated as enemies of the state and may disappear into North Korea's horrific political prison camp system ( kwanliso), where prisoners face torture, sexual violence, forced labor, and other inhuman treatment.

North Koreans fleeing into China should be protected as refugees sur place regardless of their reason for flight because of the certainty of punishment on return. China treats them as illegal "economic migrants," and fails to meet its obligation to protect refugees as a state party of the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 protocol. Beijing denies the staff of the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, permission to travel to border areas where North Koreans are present.

Key International Actors

South Korea's Moon Jae-in administration has not made clear what its policy on North Korean human rights issues will be in the context of US-North Korean nuclear negotiations and the new diplomatic opening South Korea has with North Korea. Before the recent diplomatic flurry, key elements of its human rights policy included support for implementing the COI report recommendations; assistance for North Korean escapees detained in China and South Korean nationals detained in North Korea; regular publications on human rights conditions in North Korea; and the North Korean Human Rights Act that came into effect in September 2016. However, the South Korean government has yet to establish the North Korean Human Rights Foundation mandated by the act to conduct inquiries and develop policies on promoting human rights in North Korea.

In 2017, South Korea approved a US$8 million aid package for North Korean children and women at risk that will be distributed at an "appropriate time," and monitored by UNICEF and the UN World Food Programme (WFP).

Japan continues to demand the return of 12 Japanese citizens whom North Korea abducted in the 1970s and 1980s. Some Japanese civil society groups insist the number of abductees is much higher. The Japanese government has expressed concerns about making concessions to North Korea before the abductees issue is resolved and commitments are made on key rights issues.

The US government has imposed many of its own bilateral sanctions on the North Korean government in response to its weapons proliferation activities, especially since 2006. In recent years, the US imposed several new rounds of sanctions for responsibility for human rights violations, formally determining that dozens of North Korean government entities and actors have been implicated in such abuses. In July 2016, and in January and October 2017, the US government imposed targeted sanctions relating to human rights abuses on ten institutions, including the Ministry of People's Security, the Ministry of State Security, the Military Security Command (the military's secret police), and the Ministry of Labor. The government also imposed sanctions on 25 North Korean government officials, including Kim Jong Un; Choe Pu Il, a senior official in the Ministry of People's Security; Ri Song Chol, a senior official in the Ministry of Public Security; Kang Song Nam, a senior official in the Ministry of State Security; and Kim Yo Jong, Kim Jong Un's younger sister and vice director of the party's Propaganda and Agitation Department.

The US sanctions regime is now mandated under US law. In 2016, the US Congress also passed the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act, which obligates the president to investigate and list particular persons and entities involved in weapons proliferation, human rights abuses, and cyberhacking, and mandates the president to sanction them. The act also states that the sanctions may not be suspended unless North Korea takes major steps on ending weapons proliferation and related activities, as well as "accounting for and repatriating" citizens of other countries who were abducted by North Korea, "accepting and beginning to abide by internationally recognized standards for the distribution and monitoring of humanitarian aid," and "taking verified steps to improve living conditions in its political prison camps," among other criteria.

China is the most influential international actor in North Korea. Most of North Korea's energy supplies come from China, and it is the country's largest trading partner. China has more ability to pressure North Korea economically or on human rights, but it has never done so given its own weak policies on human rights, instead often closing the border to stop North Koreans from escaping, or returning those who entered China. Since May 2017, the Chinese government has agreed to enforce existing counter-proliferation sanctions more vigorously. There are also signs that China is more actively preparing contingency plans for refugee flight from North Korea. In December 2017, according to a leaked document from China's state-owned telecommunications company, three villages in Changbai county and two cities in the northeastern province of Jilin bordering North Korea had been designated to have refugee camps built in apparent preparation for a possible surge of North Koreans escaping into China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
North Korea is one of the world's most repressive states. The government restricts all civil and political liberties for its citizens, including freedom of expression, assembly, association, and religion.

# data[].attributes.body
https://abc7ny.com/minimum-wage-increase-new-york-state-protest/12457301/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NEW YORK (WABC) -- Protesters gathered at New York City Hall Tuesday to push for a higher minimum wage at the state level.

They are hoping for an increase from $15 to $20.

Protesters included workers, business owners, and lawmakers.

New York State Senator Jessica Ramos was among the attendees.
ALSO READ | Remains of fallen WWII soldier from NYC make journey home 75+ years later
"$15 just isn't cutting it anymore," Ramos said. "We see that the cost of living keeps increasing... the cost of rent, the cost of food, the cost of gasoline, and everything else. And working families are having a really tough time getting by."

The group "Raise New York" organized the gathering. Ten years ago, they successfully led the charge to raise the minimum wage to $15.

After the rally at City Hall, the group marched through parts of Lower Manhattan.

----------

* Get Eyewitness News Delivered

* More New York City news

* Send us a news tip

* Download the abc7NY app for breaking news alerts

* Follow us on YouTube

Submit a tip or story idea to Eyewitness News

Have a breaking news tip or an idea for a story we should cover? Send it to Eyewitness News using the form below. If attaching a video or photo, terms of use apply.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Protesters call for increase in New York minimum wage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEW YORK (WABC) -- Protesters gathered at New York City Hall Tuesday to push for a higher minimum wage at the state level. They are hoping for an increase from $15 to $20. Protesters included workers, business owners, and lawmakers. New York State Senator Jessica Ramos was among the attendees.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-46-our-russian-ally-(1945)/how-much-personal-freedom-in-russia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is the question that really interests us most of all about Russia's political system. In comparing our way of life with that of Russia, we should remember what things were like there before the Soviet government came to power. In 1917 the majority of the peasants and industrial workers had had relatively little experience with the freedoms familiar to us. The peasants had been serfs until 1861. Before 1914 only a small number owned enough land to enjoy a sense of economic freedom.

We should also recognize, however, that under the czarist regime the educated and relatively prosperous minority of the population-the aristocracy, the landowners, and the merchants, professional men, and intellectuals of the small middle class-did have certain limited freedoms. They had freedom of religious belief and worship-although there was severe discrimination against sects which broke away from the Russian Orthodox church and against the Jews. The latter were often subjected to organized massacres, called pogroms. There was some freedom of the press, and those who opposed the government could present their views from time to time to the minority of people who could read and write. But again and again government censorship interfered with this freedom.

The imperial Duma, or parliament, established in 1905 following the Russo-Japanese War and the revolution it precipitated, provided an opportunity for political organization. True, the vote for members of the Duma was weighted in favor of the propertied classes in town and country. But a real beginning had been made toward representation of more than one group or party in the state. Under this weighted franchise, the revolutionary parties in Russia-the Social Revolutionaries and the two Social Democratic groups, the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks-succeeded in having members elected to the Duma, where they expressed criticism of the government.

Russians lack our civil liberties

If we want to look at Russia realistically, we must admit that the civil liberties familiar to the United States and Britain have never existed in full in Russia-and do not now. The Communist Party is the only legal party and the right of political association is forbidden to other groups. The printed word is controlled by the government, which also regulates education and all means of communication-telephone, telegraph, and radio. News going out to foreign countries is subject to censorship.

Yet, in spite of strict government control over all forms of expression, the Russians have made notable progress under the Soviet regime in technical fields and in science. They have also done much in the promotion of health, education, and modern agricultural methods among a hitherto predominantly backward and illiterate population. They have not made equal progress in literature and the arts (music and the theater excepted). The explanation for this may lie in the fact that they have been living in a turbulent period, and have until recently tended to fit their creative efforts into the rigid Marxist mold.

While political freedoms and personal liberties are very clearly limited in Russia, the Russian people have been given considerable scope for initiative and what is known as "self-criticism" in the economic sphere. The Soviet press, for in-stance, never questions the government's political decisions or the general theory and practice of socialism. It does, however, carry daily comments on the inadequacy of coal production, delays in the manufacture of electric bulbs, and a thousand and one other items affecting details of the country's economic development. Such criticisms, on details and on economic means rather than ends, are not only permitted but encouraged.
From EM 46: Our Russian Ally (1945)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Much Personal Freedom in Russia? | AHA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the question that really interests us most of all about Russia's political system. In comparing our way of life with that of Russia, we should remember what things were like there before the Soviet government came to power.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.hindustantimes.com/videos/news/pak-police-brutality-on-cam-afghan-kids-tied-to-ropes-in-sindh-viral-video-sparks-anger-101671550515269.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pakistan's mistreatment of afghan refugees once again comes into limelight. A viral video showed five afghan kids purportedly tied to each other by Pakistan police. The shocking incident took place in Pak's Sindh province and drew sharp criticism on social media. Watch this video for more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pak police brutality on cam; Afghan kids tied to ropes in Sindh | Watch

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pakistan's mistreatment of afghan refugees once again comes into limelight. A viral video showed five afghan kids purportedly tied to each other by Pakistan police. The shocking incident took place in Pak's Sindh province and drew sharp criticism on social media. Watch this video for more.

# data[].attributes.location_name
Brasília - Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil

# data[].attributes.headline
Brasília - Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil 1/9/2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Brasília - Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil 1/9/2023

# data[].attributes.body
https://abc7ny.com/insurrection-brazil-jair-bolsonaro-capital-brazilian-protests/12680175/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
RIO DE JANEIRO -- Hundreds of supporters of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro stormed three of the most emblematic official buildings in the country's capital over refusal to accept the results of the election.

The demonstrators partook in violent protests on Sunday at the Supreme Court, Congress and the presidential office, called the Planalto Palace, in Brasilia.

Right-wing supporters of the former Brazilian president were asking the new president, leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, to leave -- falsely claiming that he won in a "stolen election."

The unrest began when 100 buses full of Bolsonaro supporters arrived in the capital on Sunday for a planned protest.

Despite more than 4,000 protesters taking the streets of the capital, police presence was minimal.

Several hundred protestors broke police barriers and were able to enter the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate through the roof. Later, they were even able to break into the Planalto Palace.

All of these buildings were empty, as Lula was in Sao Paulo, and Congress and the Supreme Court are in recess until February.

Rioters were armed with sticks and committed vandalism, including destroying pieces of art such as Chinese porcelain vases in the president's office.

By 4 p.m. local time, cavalry police were sent for intervention and threw tear gas at protesters. Rubber bullets were also fired at the crowd.

So far, 400 people have been arrested, according to Brazilian Federal District Gov. Ibaneis Rocha.

Control of the buildings has since been reestablished, according to The Associated Press.

Bolsonaro, 67, is currently in Florida, where he traveled to just before Lula was sworn in as the 39th president of Brazil. Lula also served as the country's 35th president.

Lula, 77, said he will travel back to Brasilia Sunday and vowed to punish all invaders, including potential military police officers.

Lula also accused security forces of "incompetence, bad faith and malice, as they have been unable to stop rioters from accessing Congress."

He said there is "no precedent in the history of our country" regarding Sunday's events and described the violence as "acts of vandals and fascists."

The national guard is now in charge of restoring order in Brasilia.

In a series of tweets, Bolsonaro condemned the "depredations and invasions of public buildings," according to a translation of his tweet.

President Joe Biden condemned the violent assault on Sunday while traveling in El Paso, Texas, calling it "outrageous."

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan tweeted, "The United States condemns any effort to undermine democracy in Brazil. President Biden is following the situation closely and our support for Brazil's democratic institutions is unwavering. Brazil's democracy will not be shaken by violence."

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. condemns the attacks, writing: "Using violence to attack democratic institutions is always unacceptable. We join @lulaoficial in urging an immediate end to these actions."
ABC News' Julia Jacobo and Conor Finnegan contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bolsonaro supporters storm Brazilian capital over claims of 'stolen' election

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
RIO DE JANEIRO -- Hundreds of supporters of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro stormed three of the most emblematic official buildings in the country's capital over refusal to accept the results of the election. The demonstrators partook in violent protests on Sunday at the Supreme Court, Congress and the presidential office, called the Planalto Palace, in Brasilia.

# data[].attributes.body
https://globalvoices.org/2023/01/03/undertones-in-russia-war-propaganda-the-west/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This story is part of Undertones, Global Voices' Civic Media Observatory's newsletter. Russian researchers reflect on their country's media ecosystems and what we can expect in 2023. Whenever you click on a narrative, you will be able to see more analysis and related media posts upholding it. Subscribe to Undertones.
The lives of Ukrainians changed forever on February 24, 2022, when Putin's regime invaded Ukraine. On the other side of the border, Russian state propaganda escalated, independent media was shut down, and anti-war dissent was violently repressed. In 2023, researchers expect anti-war Russians to question more and more how Russia came to this.

The state's control over narratives

We have closely followed Russian state narratives from before the invasion, when state actors said the tensions between the two countries were made up by the West. Since the war broke out, state narratives have hardened and our researchers expect them to solidify in 2023.

Russia has used different narratives to justify the war on Ukraine. One argument, which has weakened in recent months, is that Russia is engaging in the " denazification" of Ukraine for the good of humanity. Russia has also blamed Ukraine for staging its own massacres, going as far as claiming that Ukraine would be ready to bomb itself with a "dirty" nuclear weapon just to blame Russia for it.

The most popular narrative justifies the war on the grounds of self-defense. The Russian state alleges that the West, and specifically NATO, were planning an armed attack against Russia through Ukraine, and therefore a preemptive attack was necessary. The narrative is summed up as " Ukrainians and the West were planning to harm Russia first, so Russia was forced to launch the military operation," and has gained particular prominence since the West started providing weapons to Ukraine.

These narratives have not sprouted from just anywhere. Years of government propaganda have prepared the Russian population to vilify the West. Some of these are an expression of Russia's pride in helping defeat Nazi regimes during World War II.

What is said on social media

Since the war in Ukraine, the Russian state has blocked Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and 200,000 websites, which are now only accessible with a VPN. Many Russian citizens are left with only the above-mention propaganda narratives peddled on state-sanctioned media and social networks like Telegram and Vkontakte. What is said about the war, then, can vary drastically depending on whether you are checking Facebook or VKontakte.

It is difficult to know how many Russians are pro- or anti-war because of severe repression of dissenting opinions. With our data analysis, we have scraped media channels, dissected over 250 Russian media items that illustrate local perceptions, and investigated the narratives at play.

Most anti-war content is found on Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube, whereas Instagram and Telegram are polarized. Many Russians posting anti-war content are based outside the country. Sometimes, they lament the fact that Russians could not take down Putin ahead of time (" Every Russian bears responsibility for the war with Ukraine"), at other times they call Putin supporters "zombies" who are misled and misinformed by propaganda ( "Pro-war Russians are ignorant and blind "). Many have started to question what it means to be Russian.

Russian anti-war resistance is strongly associated with decentralized grassroots activist movements such as the Russian feminist movement. Anti-war actions have continued within the country, despite the risks. "Anti-war groups are still decentralized, the only place they can be centralized is in jail," our researcher says.

Many pro-war narratives can be found on state-owned VKontakte. They include the following: " Russians should be proud of their nation and of themselves" and " Failing to support the Russian government in the war against Ukraine is an act of treason."

Putin's call for mobilization to strengthen the Russian army in September 2022 further polarized the country. Here, the narratives were also split into two, with on one side " Russians should not be scared about conscription into the army" and on the other, " Russians should resist being drafted to fight in Ukraine."

The West is scorned on either side

The Russian state and its supporters argue that NATO, which includes the United States and many European members, is an enemy seeking to attack Russia, as allegedly proven by their arms supply to Ukraine. Anti-war Russians deplore the lack of support by the West for anti-Putin activists and European arms sales to Russia up until 2021.

In 2022, there have been investigations that Finnish Nokia sold equipment to monitor protesters and that US-based Sandvine equipped the Russian state with Internet censoring technologies. Russians have also complained that the mention of prohibiting the supply of tear gas and taser shockers was only included in the European Union's ninth sanctions package in December 2022.

"Ironically, both the propagandists and anti-war Russians are dissatisfied with the West," our researcher says.

Anti-war Russians criticize the West's "hypocrisy" by stating that " Western countries never tangibly supported Russia's pro-democracy movement" and that " EU countries enabled Putin and the Russian regime." It does not seem that the West's popularity will improve anytime soon.

Other noteworthy Russian narratives:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Undertones in Russia: War, Propaganda, the West

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This story is part of Undertones, Global Voices' Civic Media Observatory's newsletter. Russian researchers reflect on their country's media ecosystems and what we can expect in 2023. Whenever you click on a narrative, you will be able to see more analysis and related media posts upholding it. Subscribe to Undertones.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-more-half-police-killings-usa-are-unreported-and-black-americans-are-most-likely

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Researchers compared data from the US National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) to three non-governmental, open-source databases on fatal police violence and found that NVSS under-reported deaths from police violence by 55.5% between 1980-2018.

Over the 40-year study period (1980-2019), Black Americans were estimated to be 3.5 times more likely to die from police violence than white Americans.

Open-source databases should be better utilized to improve reporting on fatal police violence and support policy changes to address systemic racism and reduce police violence.

More than 55% of deaths from police violence in the USA from 1980-2018 were misclassified or unreported in official vital statistics reports according to The highest rate of deaths from police violence occurred for Black Americans, who were estimated to be 3.5 times more likely to experience fatal police violence than white Americans.

Researchers estimate that the US National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), the government system that collates all death certificates in the USA, failed to accurately classify and report more than 17,000 deaths as being caused by police violence during the 40-year study period.

"Recent high-profile police killings of Black people have drawn worldwide attention to this urgent public health crisis, but the magnitude of this problem can't be fully understood without reliable data. Inaccurately reporting or misclassifying these deaths further obscures the larger issue of systemic racism that is embedded in many US institutions, including law enforcement. Currently, the same government responsible for this violence is also responsible for reporting on it. Open-sourced data is a more reliable and comprehensive resource to help inform policies that can prevent police violence and save lives," says co-lead author Fablina Sharara of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington School of Medicine, USA. [1]

To examine the extent of under-reporting, researchers compared NVSS data to three non-governmental, open-source databases on police violence: Fatal Encounters, Mapping Police Violence, and The Counted [2]. These databases collate information from news reports and public record requests. When compared, the researchers' new estimates highlight the extent to which deaths from police violence are under-reported in the NVSS and the disproportionate effect of police violence on Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous people in the USA.

Across all races and states in the USA, researchers estimate that NVSS data failed to report 17,100 deaths from police violence out of 30,800 total deaths from 1980-2018 (the most recent years of available NVSS data), accounting for 55.5% of all deaths from police violence during this period. Using a predictive model, researchers also estimated the total number of deaths from police violence in the USA, for all races/ethnicities and all states for 2019, estimating an additional 1,190 deaths, bringing the total number of deaths from police violence from 1980-2019 to 32,000.

Black Americans experienced fatal police violence at a rate 3.5 times higher than white Americans, according to this analysis, with nearly 60% of these deaths misclassified in the NVSS (5,670 unreported deaths from police violence out of 9,540 estimated deaths). From the 1980s to the 2010s, rates of police violence increased by 38% for all races (with 0.25 deaths from police violence per 100,000 person-years in the 1980s as compared to 0.34 deaths from police violence per 100,000 person-years in the 2010s).

Compared to the deaths recorded in the new analysis, NVSS also missed 56% (8,540 deaths out of 15,200) of deaths of non-Hispanic white people, 33% (281 deaths out of 861) of non-Hispanic people of other races, and 50% (2,580 deaths out of 5,170) of Hispanic people of any race.

Deaths due to police violence were significantly higher for men of any race or ethnicity than women, with 30,600 deaths in men and 1,420 deaths in women from 1980 to 2019.

Previous studies covering shorter time periods have found similar rates of racial disparities, as well as significant under-reporting of police killings in official statistics. This new study is one of the longest study periods to date to address this topic.

The authors call for increased use of open-source data-collection initiatives to allow researchers and policymakers to document and highlight disparities in police violence by race, ethnicity, and gender, allowing for targeted, meaningful changes to policing and public safety that will prevent loss of life.

Additionally, the researchers point out that because many medical examiners or coroners are embedded within police departments, there can be substantial conflicts of interest that could disincentivize certifiers from indicating police violence as a cause of death. Managing these conflicts of interest in addition to improved training and clearer instructions for physicians and medical examiners on how to document police violence in text fields on death certificates could improve reporting and reduce omissions and implicit biases that cause misclassifications.

"Our recommendation to utilize open-source data collection is only a first step. As a community we need to do more. Efforts to prevent police violence and address systemic racism in the USA, including body cameras that record interactions of police with civilians along with de-escalation training and implicit bias training for police officers, for example, have largely been ineffective. As our data show, fatal police violence rates and the large racial disparities in police killings have either remained the same or increased over the years. Policymakers should look to other countries, such Norway and the UK, where police forces have been de-militarized and use evidence-based strategies to find effective solutions that prioritize public safety and community-based interventions to reduce fatal police violence," says co-lead author Eve Wool of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington School of Medicine, USA. [1]

The authors acknowledge some limitations in the study. This paper does not calculate or address non-fatal injuries attributed to police violence, which is critical to understanding the full burden of police violence in the USA and should be examined in future studies. The data also do not include police officers killed by civilians, police violence in USA territories, or residents who may have been harmed by military police in the USA or abroad. Because the researchers relied on death certificates, which only allow for a binary designation of sex, they were unable to identify non-cisgender people, potentially masking the disproportionately high rates of violence against trans people, particularly Black trans people. The authors note that the intersectionality of gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other identities and the relationship to fatal police violence should be studied in the future.

A Lancet Editorial adds, "The study is a potential turning point for improving national estimates of fatalities from police violence by incorporating non-governmental open-source data to correct NVSS data...Better data is one aspect of a public health approach; introducing harm-reduction policies is another. Policing in the USA follows models of hostile, racialised interactions between civilians and armed agents of the state. Marginalised groups are more likely to be criminalized through the war on drugs or homelessness. Reducing hostile or violent interactions between police and civilians, particularly those who are most vulnerable overall, is a forceful case for investment in other areas of community-based health and support systems, including housing, food access, substance use treatment, and emergency medical services. Strategies to lower fatalities from police violence must include demilitarisation of police forces, but with the broader call to demilitarize society by, for example, restricting access to firearms...Police forces too must take greater responsibility for police-involved injuries and deaths. Such changes are long overdue."

NOTES TO EDITORS

This study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. A full list of authors and institutions is available in the paper.

The labels have been added to this press release as part of a project run by the Academy of Medical Sciences seeking to improve the communication of evidence. For more information, please see: http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/AMS-press-release-labelling-system-GUIDANCE.pdf if you have any questions or feedback, please contact The Lancet press office [email protected]

[1] Quote direct from author and cannot be found in the text of the Article.

[2]Fatal encounters: https://fatalencounters.org/; Mapping police Violence: mappingpoliceviolence.org; The Counted: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/counted-us-police-killings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Lancet: More than half of police killings in USA are unreported and Black Americans are most likely to experience fatal police violence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Researchers compared data from the US National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) to three non-governmental, open-source databases on fatal police violence and found that NVSS under-reported deaths from police violence by 55.5% between 1980-2018. Over the 40-year study period (1980-2019), Black Americans were estimated to be 3.5 times more likely to die from police violence than white Americans.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.kbtx.com/2022/12/21/huntsville-votes-privatize-library-after-dispute-over-banned-books-pride-display/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HUNTSVILLE, Texas (KBTX) -The Huntsville City Council voted 6-3 in favor of privatizing and outsourcing its public library operations.

Tuesday's decision comes after concerns were raised throughout the year about banned books and LGBTQ displays at the Huntsville Public library.

A pride display at the library was removed in August and in October, concerns were raised after a Huntsville police officer was seen behind the checkout desk in what was believed to be an attempt to remove certain books. During this time the City Librarian was also placed on leave.

City leaders, including the city manager and police chief, have declined our multiple requests to discuss these matters in more detail, but documents attached to Tuesday's city council agenda say a change in operations is needed to improve day-to-day operations at the library and would help reduce costs by $750,000 over a 10-year period.

Entering into the agreement with LS&S allows the Huntsville Public Library access to an already established network of library professionals with years of experience that can serve to assist the current staff members. They will assist with collection development and programming that meets the needs of the community. The unique public-private partnership model with LS&S means community leaders will continue to control policy, direction, and assets while LS&S employs personnel and manages day to day operations. The City Council will maintain the authority to appoint the members of the Library Board, and approve policies in accordance with adopted ordinances. LS&S will evaluate the library's current operational procedures and follow up with support and training to the employees to further enhance the library services once the agreement is executed. Should the City decide to enter into a contract with the professionals from LS&S services, the responsibility of management and staffing of the library would transfer from the City to LS&S. At the time of the effective date of the contract, anticipated to be by the end of January 2023 if approved, the library staff will no longer be employees of the City of Huntsville. LS&S has expressed interest in retaining current employees and they will have an opportunity to potentially work for them, at the discretion of LS&S. The employees will also have an opportunity for employment within the City for which they are qualified.

Staff reached out to other communities regarding their experience with LS&S and received all positive Page 67 of 108 comments. There were consistent remarks on two major components: customer service and collection development. References stated that partnering with LS&S increased their level of customer service. References also stated that collection development, once very time consuming, was a more streamlined process with LS&S and no longer exhausted much of staff members' time. In summary, the partnership with LS&S will reduce the cost of library operations, enhance library services, increase efficiency across library operations, focus on patron and community service, leverage library experts and dedicated support for back office functions, and implement library industry best practices while at the same time allowing the City to maintain control of the assets and strategic direction of the Huntsville Public Library. Previous Council Action: No previous council action taken Financial Implications: The current departmental budget for the library is $711,805. The proposed management fee for the operations of the library is $545,000 plus the addition of $45,050 for collection acquisition, for a total cost of $590,050 in the first year of operations. Under the agreement, the annual increase for the duration of the 10-year contract is limited to 3%. After allowances for additional funds for utilities and building maintenance, it is estimated that the City will reduce the cost of running the library by about 10%. The estimated savings to the City over the duration of the contract is projected to be more than $750,000. Should the contract be approved, a budget amendment will be provided for future Council consideration to reallocate the funding within the departmental budget chiefly moving monies from salary and benefits to contractual services.

Dozens of Huntsville residents voiced their concerns during Tuesday's city council meeting about the outsourcing to Library Systems & Services, LLC, a Maryland-based private for-profit company that manages municipal libraries on an outsourced basis.

"This is a form of censorship that's going on and that it's going on behind our backs," said one resident. "This is a public library. If it's public, then the public should have a chance to vote on this and we need to get a lot more information."

"Like many others, we've been dealing with a series of issues in our library and some of those other cities have simply resorted to defunding their libraries and closing them," said another resident. "I don't think that's the option that we want to discuss.

Huntsville Ward 1 Councilwoman Daiquiri Beebe released a personal statement in opposition to the privatization of the public library.

"I am not in support of losing our dedicated Huntsville library employees or allowing an outside firm to determine how our beloved, local library is run. I will speak up for that viewpoint tonight at the council meeting," said Beebe.

Other residents voiced their concerns, not over banned books or displays but about staff and the library's contents.

"To a genealogist, weeding is a very concerning term because you're oldest out-of-print books are genealogy's most valuable resources, they're irreplaceable and they're more valuable than recent publications," said one Walker County resident.

"Many of the employees are long-time staff members who know our community and have served for many years providing programming needs suited to the needs expressed by their patrons," said one Walker County resident.

Many residents expressed that the move to make the decisions was rushed and would have preferred that it be tabled until a later date but the council declined that option and voted to approve the contract with LS&S services.

Changes at the Huntsville Public Library are expected to take place in January.

City leaders have stated LS&S has expressed interest in retaining current employees and they will have an opportunity to potentially work for them, at the discretion of LS&S. City leaders also say employees will also have an opportunity for employment within the City for which they are qualified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Huntsville votes to privatize library after dispute over banned books and pride display

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
HUNTSVILLE, Texas (KBTX) -The Huntsville City Council voted 6-3 in favor of privatizing and outsourcing its public library operations. Tuesday's decision comes after concerns were raised throughout the year about banned books and LGBTQ displays at the Huntsville Public library.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjttbG76rr8AhU9lWoFHWd5Cb0QxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2022%2F12%2F21%2Fpolitics%2Fair-force-b2-bomber-grounded%2Findex.html&usg=AOvVaw0IWl-C7fgCNysCq5uONaz4

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjuwejP6br8AhWmMjQIHeXvDvEQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oilandgasmiddleeast.com%2Fnews%2Fsaudi-arabias-futuristic-emissions-free-city-the-line-5-facts-you-need-to-know&usg=AOvVaw3JNeg87az8BouUminJIXGA

# data[].attributes.headline
Government Brainwashes kids in North Korea

# data[].attributes.subject
Government Brainwashes kids in North Korea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Most North Korean children grow up with the understanding that they will serve in the military. Militaristic songs, tiny soldiers' uniforms, and cartoon soldiers all serve to indoctrinate North Korean children.

"From a very young age, we are taught that it is an honor to be General Kim's army. Almost all of the education of children is to impose allegiance to the dictator," North Korean refugee Hyun Lee told INSIDER.

North Korea has 1.2 million active-duty soldiers in its military, the fourth-largest in the world.

Visit INSIDER's homepage for more stories.

North Korea's military is the fourth-largest in the world, according to the Council on Foreign Relations , with 1.2 million active-duty soldiers. Military service is compulsory for most citizens; while many countries have conscription requirements, North Korean military indoctrination begins early.

" When I was young, I thought it was obvious I should become a soldier," Hyun Lee, a North Korean refugee now living in the US, told INSIDER via email.

"Each element of North Korea's student education instills a brainwashing idea of being loyal to Kim family in student's mind," he said. "Students should be the army to protect Kim family, to be loyal to them."

In the US, by contrast, the military doesn't typically begin recruiting until high school and those who choose to enlist swear to defend the US constitution, rather than to any particular leader.
Read more: North Korean hackers reportedly stole $2 billion from banks and cryptocurrencies to build Kim Jong Un's nuclear weapons
Anna Fifield's book "The Great Successor: The Divinely Perfect Destiny of Brilliant Comrade Kim Jong Un" details the ways the regime indoctrinates children early on.

"I went to a nursery with a sign across the front saying 'Thank you, Respected General Kim Jong Un,'" she writes.

"Inside, it was decorated with cartoon raccoon soldiers holding rocket-propelled grenade launchers and sailor ducklings with machine guns.. The toddlers posed with plastic Kalashnikovs while visiting reporters took photos," Fifield writes.

Lee echoed that sentiment, saying, "From a very young age, we are taught that it is an honor to be General Kim's army. Almost all of the education of children is to impose allegiance to the dictator."

Lee's parents both served in the military, he said, but they didn't talk about their service "and I didn't ask about it," he wrote.

While some young people are exempt from military service - namely, students from special high schools like Pyongyang Foreign Language School, where Lee went to high school, children of high-level elites are required to go into what Lee called social military service.

Lee, for example, practiced martial arts in the military, and demonstrated before visiting foreign leaders to show off the skill and lethality of the Kim family's military.

Military prowess is baked into the Kim family's narrative; Kim Il Sung, the first leader of North Korea, built his mythic status in part on his prowess as a guerilla fighter against the Japanese army during its occupation of the Korean peninsula. And while Kim Jong Un didn't serve in the military, he pushed the country toward a military-first approach and conducted the first nuclear tests in 2006.

Kim Jong Un also avoided military service, but he is reported to have attended Kim Il Sung Military University in Pyongyang, where he studied "juche-oriented military leadership," according to Fifield's book. Juche is the North Korean concept of self-sufficiency.
Read more: Kim Jong Un graduated 'with honors' from an elite military academy, but experts are skeptical he ever attended
Reaching back even further, Fifield notes that Kim Jong Un was called Comrade General - even by adults - from the time he was ten. She describes him as often wearing a child-sized general's uniform, too.

He's not the only one; many photos of Chairman Kim feature children - even toddlers - in military uniform.

And, as Lee described, North Korea's version of the Boy Scouts (albeit with a more militaristic mindset) sing a song about how they'll fight - and sacrifice themselves - for General Kim: "3 million boy scouts will be guns and bombs/ We will be guns and bombs for the General," the lyrics promise.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North Korea is 'brainwashing' children as young as 4 for future service in Kim Jong Un's massive military, a refugee says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most North Korean children grow up with the understanding that they will serve in the military. Militaristic songs, tiny soldiers' uniforms, and cartoon soldiers all serve to indoctrinate North Korean children. "From a very young age, we are taught that it is an honor to be General Kim's army.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

The Chinese government has reportedly arbitrarily detained more than a million Muslims in reeducation camps since 2017. Most of the people who have been detained are Uyghur, a predominantly Turkic-speaking ethnic group primarily in China's northwestern region of Xinjiang. Beyond the detentions, Uyghurs in the region have been subjected to intense surveillance, forced labor, and involuntary sterilizations, among other rights abuses.

The United States and several other foreign governments have described China's actions in Xinjiang as genocide, while the UN human rights office said that the violations could constitute crimes against humanity. Chinese officials have said that they have not infringed on Uyghurs' rights and claimed that they closed the reeducation camps in 2019. However, international journalists and researchers have documented an ongoing system of mass detention throughout the region using satellite images, individual testimonies, and leaked Chinese government documents.

When did mass detentions of Muslims start?

An estimated eight hundred thousand to two million Uyghurs and other Muslims, including ethnic Kazakhs and Uzbeks, have been detained since 2017, according to international researchers and U.S. government officials [PDF]. The Chinese government calls the facilities "vocational education and training centers;" the most common terms used by international media organizations and researchers are reeducation camps, internment camps, and detention camps. Some activists describe them as concentration camps.

Outside of the camps, the eleven million Uyghurs living in Xinjiang-officially called the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region-have continued to suffer from a decades-long crackdown by Chinese authorities.

Experts estimate that reeducation efforts started in Xinjiang in 2014 and were drastically expanded in 2017. Beginning that year, they documented the construction of new reeducation camps and expansion of existing facilities for mass detention. Reuters journalists, observing satellite imagery, found that thirty-nine of the camps almost tripled in size between April 2017 and August 2018; they covered a total area roughly the size of 140 soccer fields. Similarly, analyzing local and national budgets over the past few years, Germany-based Xinjiang expert Adrian Zenz found that construction spending on security-related facilities in Xinjiang increased by 20 billion yuan (around $2.96 billion) in 2017.

In late 2019, Xinjiang's governor said that people detained in the reeducation camps had "graduated." Journalists found that several camps were indeed closed. But the following year, researchers at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) identified [PDF] more than 380 suspected detention facilities using satellite images. They found that China refashioned some lower-security reeducation camps into formal detention centers or prisons; expanded existing detention centers; and constructed new, high-security detention centers throughout Xinjiang. (Chinese officials have said that ASPI is an anti-China tool funded by Australia and the United States.) Instead of detaining people in reeducation camps, authorities have increasingly used the formal justice system to imprison people for years. In 2022, Human Rights Watch reported that half a million people had been prosecuted since 2017, according to Xinjiang government figures. The Associated Press found that in one county, an estimated one in twenty-five people had been sentenced to prison on terrorism-related charges, all of them Uyghurs.

What has happened in the reeducation camps?

Most people detained in the reeducation camps were never charged with crimes and had no legal avenues to challenge their detentions. The detainees seem to have been targeted for a variety of reasons, according to media reports, including traveling to or contacting people from any of the twenty-six countries China considers sensitive, such as Turkey and Afghanistan; attending services at mosques; having more than three children; and sending texts containing Quranic verses. Often, their only crime is being Muslim, human rights groups say, adding that many Uyghurs have been labeled as extremists simply for practicing their religion.

Information on what happened in the camps remains limited, but many detainees who have since fled China described harsh conditions. The UN human rights office released a report [PDF] in 2022 based on interviews with dozens of people, including twenty-six individuals who were detained, that found "patterns of torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment" in the camps between 2017 and 2019.

The UN report affirmed previous findings by international journalists, researchers, and rights organizations. Various exposés showed that detainees were forced to pledge loyalty to the CCP and renounce Islam, as well as sing praises for communism and learn Mandarin. Some people reported prison-like conditions, with cameras and microphones monitoring their every move and utterance. Others said they were tortured and subjected to sleep deprivation during interrogations. Women have shared stories of sexual abuse, including rape. Some released detainees contemplated suicide or witnessed others kill themselves.

Detention also disrupted families. Children whose parents were sent to the camps were often forced to stay in state-run orphanages. Many Uyghur parents living outside of China faced a difficult choice: return home to be with their children and risk detention, or stay abroad, separated from their children and unable to contact them.

What do Chinese officials say about the camps?

Government officials first denied the camps' existence. By late 2018, they started acknowledging that there were "vocational education and training centers" in Xinjiang. They publicly stated that the camps had two purposes: to teach Mandarin, Chinese laws, and vocational skills, and to prevent citizens from becoming influenced by extremist ideas, to "nip terrorist activities in the bud," according to a government report. Pointing out that Xinjiang has not experienced a terrorist attack since December 2016, officials claimed the camps have prevented violence.

As global condemnation of the abuses has grown, Chinese officials and state media have worked to discredit reports on Xinjiang using a range of tactics, including disseminating disinformation and harassing activists. They have repeated a narrative that "anti-China forces" in the United States and other Western countries are spreading "vicious lies." Beijing tried to prevent the UN human rights office from releasing its report. After its release, Chinese officials described it as false information and published a rebuttal describing how foreign governments and organizations "spread numerous rumors and lies" about Xinjiang.

Why is China targeting Uyghurs in Xinjiang?

Chinese officials are concerned that Uyghurs hold extremist and separatist ideas, and they viewed the camps as a way of eliminating threats to China's territorial integrity, government, and population.

Xinjiang has been claimed by China since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) took power in 1949. Some Uyghurs living there refer to the region as East Turkestan and argue that it ought to be independent from China. Xinjiang takes up one-sixth of China's landmass and borders eight countries, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kazakhstan.

Under Chinese President Xi Jinping, the CCP has pushed to Sinicize religion, or shape all religions to conform to the officially atheist party's doctrines and the majority Han-Chinese society's customs. Though the government recognizes five religions -Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam, and Protestantism-it has long feared that foreigners could use religious practice to spur separatism.

The Chinese government has come to characterize any expression of Islam in Xinjiang as extremist, a reaction to past independence movements and occasional outbursts of violence. The government has blamed terrorist attacks on the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a separatist group founded by militant Uyghurs, in recent decades. (In 2020, the United States removed the group from its list of terrorist organizations, saying there was no credible evidence that the group had operated for at least the previous decade.) Following the 9/11 attacks, the Chinese government started justifying its actions toward Uyghurs as part of the Global War on Terrorism. It said it would combat what it calls "the three evils"-separatism, religious extremism, and international terrorism-at all costs.

In 2009, rioting in Xinjiang's capital, Ürümqi, broke out as mostly Uyghur demonstrators protested against state-incentivized Han Chinese migration in the region and widespread economic and cultural discrimination. Nearly two hundred people were killed, and experts say it marked a turning point in Beijing's attitude toward Uyghurs. In the eyes of Beijing, all Uyghurs could potentially be terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. During the next few years, authorities blamed Uyghurs for attacks at a local government office, train station, and open-air market, as well as Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

While visiting Xinjiang in 2014, Xi warned of the "toxicity of religious extremism" and advocated for using the tools of "dictatorship" to eliminate Islamist extremism in a series of secret speeches. In the speeches, revealed by the New York Times in 2019, Xi did not explicitly call for arbitrary detention but laid the groundwork for the crackdown in Xinjiang.

In 2017, Xinjiang's government passed an anti-extremism law that prohibited people from growing long beards and wearing veils in public. It also officially recognized the use of training centers to eliminate extremism. Arbitrary detention became widely used by regional officials under Chen Quanguo, Xinjiang's Communist Party secretary, who moved to the region in 2016 after holding a top leadership position in Tibet. Known for increasing the number of police and security checkpoints, as well as state control over Buddhist monasteries in Tibet, Chen dramatically intensified security in Xinjiang. He repeatedly called on officials to "round up everyone who should be rounded up," according to the New York Times report. Chen left the position in late 2021.

Are economic factors involved in this crackdown?

Xinjiang is an important link in China's Belt and Road Initiative, a massive development plan stretching through Asia and Europe. Beijing hopes to eradicate any possibility of separatist activity to continue its development of Xinjiang, which is home to China's largest coal and natural gas reserves. Human rights organizations have observed that the economic benefits of resource extraction and development are often disproportionately enjoyed by Han Chinese people, and Uyghur people are increasingly marginalized.

Many people who were arbitrarily detained have been forced to work, according to multiple reports [PDF]. ASPI estimated that, between 2017 and 2020, eighty thousand previously detained Uyghurs were sent to factories throughout China linked to eighty-three global brands. Researchers from the Center for Strategic and International Studies say forced labor is an important element of the government's plan for Xinjiang's economic development, which includes making it a hub of textile and apparel manufacturing. Chinese officials have described the policy as "poverty alleviation."

What is happening outside the camps in Xinjiang?

International journalists who have visited the region say that Xinjiang has been turned into a surveillance state that relies on cutting-edge technology to monitor millions of people. Under Chen, Xinjiang was placed under a grid management system, as described in media reports, in which cities and villages were split into squares of about five hundred people. Each square has a police station that closely monitors inhabitants by regularly scanning their identification cards, taking their photographs and fingerprints, and searching their cell phones. In some cities, such as western Xinjiang's Kashgar, police checkpoints are found every one hundred yards or so, and facial-recognition cameras are everywhere. The government also collects and stores citizens' biometric data through a required program advertised as Physicals for All.

Much of that information is collected in a massive database, known as the Integrated Joint Operations Platform, which then uses artificial intelligence to create lists of so-called suspicious people. Classified Chinese government documents released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in 2019 revealed that more than fifteen thousand Xinjiang residents were placed in detention centers during a seven-day period in June 2017 after being flagged by the algorithm. The Chinese government called the leaked documents "pure fabrication."

Many aspects of Muslim life have been erased, journalists reporting from Xinjiang have found. Communist Party members have been recruited since 2014 to stay in Uyghur homes and report on any perceived "extremist" behaviors, including fasting during Ramadan. Officials have destroyed thousands of mosques, often claiming the buildings were shoddily constructed and unsafe for worshippers. Halal food, which is prepared according to Islamic law, has become harder to find in Ürümqi as the local government has launched a campaign against it.

Uyghur and other minority women have reported forced sterilizations and intrauterine device insertions [PDF], and officials have threatened to detain anyone who violates birth-control orders or has too many children. Analyzing government data, Zenz found that in Xinjiang's two prefectures with the highest proportions of Uyghurs, the natural population growth rates (which exclude population change from migration) fell by 84 percent between 2015 and 2018, and declined further still in 2019. Uyghur parents are banned from giving their babies certain names, including Mohammed and Medina.

Beijing has also pressured other governments to repatriate Uyghurs who have fled China, with a 2022 report [PDF] by the Wilson Center finding that more than 1,500 Uyghurs abroad have been detained in their host countries or forced to return to China. In 2015, for example, Thailand returned more than one hundred Uyghurs, and in 2017 Egypt deported several students. The documents released by ICIJ showed that the Chinese government instructed officials to collect information on Chinese Uyghurs living abroad and called for many to be arrested as soon as they reentered China.

What has the global response been?

Much of the world has condemned China's detention of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. The UN human rights office has urged China to release people who have been arbitrarily detained and disclose the whereabouts of those who are missing. After the office released its report in 2022, several Western countries on the UN Human Rights Council were considering a motion against China, potentially with an investigative mechanism.

Lawmakers in several countries, including Canada and the United Kingdom, have declared that China is committing genocide against Uyghurs; the U.S. government was the first to do so, in January 2021. Many countries have sanctioned Chinese officials and entities linked to rights abuses. The European Union (EU) also sanctioned Chinese officials in 2021, marking the first time the bloc placed restrictions on China since 1989.

Additionally, foreign governments have imposed restrictions to address forced labor in Xinjiang. The United States has essentially banned all imports from the region through its Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, and the United Kingdom has proposed measures to fine companies that fail to guarantee their supply chains do not use forced labor. The European Parliament adopted a nonbinding resolution in mid-2022 urging EU countries to ban imports made with forced labor.

China's partners have been notably silent. Prioritizing their economic ties and strategic relationships with China, many governments have ignored the human rights abuses. In June 2022, sixty countries signed a statement calling for the UN human rights chief to respect that Xinjiang-related issues are "China's internal affairs" and stating that they "oppose the politicization of human rights." Muslim-majority countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were among the signatories; human rights groups have criticized Muslim-majority countries for condoning the abuses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China's Repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than a million Muslims have been arbitrarily detained in China's Xinjiang region. The reeducation camps are just one part of the government's crackdown on Uyghurs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Iran: Security Forces Fire On, Kill Protesters

# data[].attributes.subject
Iran: Security Forces Fire On, Kill Protesters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Beirut) - Iranian authorities have ruthlessly cracked down on widespread anti-government protests with excessive and lethal force throughout Iran, Human Rights Watch said today.

Based on videos of protests, and interviews with witnesses and a security force member, Human Rights Watch documented numerous incidents of security forces unlawfully using excessive or lethal force against protesters in 13 cities across Iran. Videos showed security forces using shotguns, assault rifles, and handguns against protesters in largely peaceful and often crowded settings, altogether killing and injuring hundreds. In some cases, they shot at people who were running away.

"The Iranian authorities' brutal response to protests across many cities indicates concerted action by the government to crush dissent with cruel disregard for life," said Tara Sepehri Far, senior Iran researcher at Human Rights Watch. "The security forces' widespread shooting of protesters only serves to fuel anger against a corrupt and autocratic government."

Protests began on September 16, 2022, after 22-year-old Mahsa (Jina) Amini's death in the custody of Iran's abusive "morality police". Concerned governments should cooperate to increase pressure on Iran and undertake a United Nations-led independent inquiry into serious abuses committed during the protests and recommend avenues for holding those responsible to account.

Human Rights Watch verified 16 videos posted on social media that depict protests from September 17 to 22. The videos show police and other security forces using excessive and lethal force against protesters in Tehran, the capital, and the cities of Divandarreh, Garmsar, Hamedan, Kerman, Mashhad, Mehrshahr, Rasht, and Shiraz. They include instances of security forces using firearms, such as handguns and Kalashnikov-pattern assault rifles. Human Rights Watch also interviewed five witnesses to the crackdowns in Sanandaj, Marivan, Saghez, and Mashhad, and a security forces member.

Human Rights Watch also analyzed photos and videos showing grievous, and sometimes lethal, injuries to demonstrators. This research did not include the deadly crackdown by security forces in Zahedan on September 30, nor subsequent attacks against protesters, including on Sharif University Campus in Tehran on October 2.

Human Rights Watch compiled the names of 47 individuals whom human rights groups or credible media outlets documented as having been killed, most by bullets. These included at least nine children, two of them girls, and six women. As of September 30, Iranian state media-affiliated outlets reported the death toll to be around 60 and also announced the death of 10 security forces members. The death toll of protesters is likely significantly higher. Iranian authorities continue to heavily disrupt internet access in large parts of the country and block messaging applications, making documentation and verification more difficult.

"We had gathered to chant, [when] security forces on motorcycles came toward us," said a 35-year-old year woman from Sanandaj city about a protest that took place near the Gendarmerie (Palestine) intersection on September 19. "We ran toward the alley as they followed us and started throwing teargas and some started shooting bullets. A man behind us was shot in the leg and fell on the ground. People dragged him into another alley and inside someone's home. [...] His wound was bleeding very heavily and was very deep."

In one video, filmed in Shahre-Rey city, south of Tehran, a security force member wearing camouflage clothing and surrounded by others in riot gear is seen aiming and firing twice with a Kalashnikov-pattern assault rifle at targets that are not visible. In another, filmed in the city of Rasht, a police officer leading a team of riot police is firing a handgun.

Human Rights Watch also reviewed and verified four videos of security forces firing at crowds of protesters, some fleeing. At least four videos showed security forces using shotguns, which can be loaded with ammunition containing multiple rubber or metal pellets. A security force member confirmed that police forces "typically use Winchester shotguns with different ammunition - rubber or metal pellets."

A woman from Sanandaj city said that on September 21, security forces there directly shot at her upper chest using so-called "less lethal" ammunition, causing superficial injuries, when she asked them not to detain a teenager.

"[Security forces] ran toward a 13-year-old boy who was standing among the crowd," she said. "He was so delicate and small that he didn't even resist. He was on the grass protecting his head while they were beating him. I yelled 'Leave him alone!' and walked towards them. They fired in the air and people started fleeing while they dragged the boy across the street. While I was running, I kept yelling 'He is my brother!', thinking that was going to provoke their mercy. I saw an officer turning, sitting down, and aiming at me. I saw the fire from his weapon. I got scared and ran away. I had a burning sensation until I got home and realized that I was hit in my chest."

The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms prohibit the use of firearms except in cases of imminent threat of death or serious injury. The UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has stated that "Firearms are not an appropriate tool for the policing of assemblies, and must never be used simply to disperse an assembly.... [A]ny use of firearms by law enforcement officials in the context of assemblies must be limited to targeted individuals in circumstances in which it is strictly necessary to confront an imminent threat of death or serious injury."

The 2020 UN guidance on "less-lethal weapons" in law enforcement says, "Multiple projectiles fired at the same time are inaccurate and, in general, their use cannot comply with the principles of necessity and proportionality. Metal pellets, such as those fired from shotguns, should never be used."

A woman in Saghez city, in Kurdistan province, said that on September 18, the second day of the protests in the city, security forces shot at their group of protesters when her friend started filming security personnel striking their batons at a house's metal door, forcing them to seek refuge inside a nearby house. She said: "After some time when we felt that it was safe, we left the house, but security forces were hiding behind the trees at the end of the street and started shooting at us from behind as we were running away."

Human Rights Watch examined two photos that Rohini Haar, an independent medical analyst, said showed protesters with serious injuries that are "diagnostic" of those sustained by metal pellets.

In two videos, one of them graphic, verified to have been filmed in the city of Kerman, demonstrators can be seen carrying away an unconscious woman bleeding from the head while a large crowd runs away.

Videos also show police officers and other security forces members, including plainclothes agents, operating side-by-side with the police, punching, kicking, and beating peaceful protesters and bystanders with batons. Police forces also used less-lethal weapons, including pepper ball launchers and riot guns.

The 35-year-old woman said that on October 1, she saw security forces attacking a group of women peacefully protesting in Sanandaj with metal cables and batons. She said that in response, "we also started protesting. They rushed towards us and the rest of the crowd. ... A person in plain clothes started hitting a woman. I went forward, I cursed him, I told him not to. He came back toward me and started hitting me with a metal tow cable. One of them grabbed my neck when I was leaving and the other two came and hit me one or two times." She shared photos of hematomas on her back, arm, and abdomen that she said resulted from the beatings.

Human Rights Watch found that most protesters were peaceful, but some threw rocks and other objects. In some cases, protesters assaulted security forces. The use of violence by protesters does not justify the excessive use of force by security forces, Human Rights Watch said.

In Garmsar, graphic videos show security forces responding with automatic weapons fire to protesters attacking a police station with rocks and other projectiles. In one graphic video, a protester who appeared to present no imminent risk to security forces collapses immediately after gunfire is heard. A later graphic video shows the protester dead with a catastrophic injury to the head.

Since September 16, Iranian security agencies have also arrested hundreds of activists, journalists, and human rights defenders outside the protests. These include Niloufar Hamedi, a reporter of the Shargh Daily paper, and Elaheh Mohammadi, a reporter with Hammihan daily paper, both of whom reported on the death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini. Amini's family requested the presence of independent medical reviewers to determine the cause of her death.

Under Iranian law, women who appear without "proper" hijab in public, based on the judgment of the country's abusive "morality police," can be fined or sentenced from between 10 days to two months in prison. Iran's morality police regularly arrest women in public places. Over the past five years, authorities have prosecuted several activists, including the prominent lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh as well as Yasman Ariani, Saba Kordafshari, Monireh Arabshahi, Mojgan Keshavarz and Farhad Meysami for their peaceful opposition to compulsory hijab laws.

Since the outbreak of the protests, Iranian authorities have heavily disrupted internet access across the country. They have blocked several social media platforms, including WhatsApp messaging application and Instagram, since September 21 by an order of Iran's National Security Council. Over the past four years, Iranian authorities have used partial or total internet shutdowns during widespread protests to restrict access to information and prohibit dissemination of information, in particular videos of the protests, Human Rights Watch said.

Internet shutdowns violate multiple rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and access to information, and the rights to peaceful assembly and association. Under international human rights law, Iran has an obligation to ensure that internet-based restrictions are provided by law and are a necessary and proportionate response to a specific security concern. Officials should not use broad, indiscriminate shutdowns to curtail the flow of information, nor to harm civilians' ability to freely assemble and express political views.

Over the past four years, Iran has experienced several waves of widespread protests. Authorities have responded to these widespread protests across the country with excessive and lethal force and the arbitrary arrests of thousands of protesters. In one of the most brutal crackdowns, in November 2019, security forces unlawfully used excessive and unlawful lethal force against massive protests across the country. Amnesty International estimated that at least 340 people were killed during the 2019 protests. Iranian authorities have failed to conduct any credible and transparent investigations into the security forces' serious abuses.

"People in Iran are protesting because they do not see the death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini and the authorities' crackdown as an isolated event, but rather the latest example of the government's systematic repression of its own people," Sepehri Far said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran: Security Forces Fire On, Kill Protesters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Beirut) - Iranian authorities have ruthlessly cracked down on widespread anti-government protests with excessive and lethal force throughout Iran, Human Rights Watch said today. Based on videos of protests, and interviews with witnesses and a security force member, Human Rights Watch documented numerous incidents of security forces unlawfully using excessive or lethal force against protesters in 13 cities across Iran.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Guantanamo-Bay-detention-camp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Guantánamo Bay detention camp, also called Gitmo, U.S. detention facility on the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, located on the coast of Guantánamo Bay in southeastern Cuba. Constructed in stages starting in 2002, the Guantánamo Bay detention camp (often called Gitmo, which is also a name for the naval base) was used to house Muslim militants and suspected terrorists captured by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere ( see also Iraq War). The facility became the focus of worldwide controversy over alleged violations of the legal rights of detainees under the Geneva Conventions and accusations of torture or abusive treatment of detainees by U.S. authorities.

In early 2002 the camp began receiving suspected members of al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks, and fighters for the Taliban, the Islamic fundamentalist faction that had ruled Afghanistan (1996-2001) and harboured al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his followers. Eventually hundreds of prisoners from several countries were held at the camp without charge and without the legal means to challenge their detentions. The administration of Republican Pres. George W. Bush maintained that it was neither obliged to grant basic constitutional protections to the prisoners, since the base was outside U.S. territory, nor required to observe the Geneva Conventions regarding the treatment of prisoners of war and civilians during wartime, as the conventions did not apply to "unlawful enemy combatants." In 2006 the U.S. Supreme Court declared that the system of military commissions that was to be used to try selected prisoners held at Guantánamo was in violation of the Geneva Conventions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The legality of the commissions was restored in 2006 by the Military Commission Act, which also denied the federal courts jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions on behalf of foreign detainees. In 2008, however, the court overturned the latter provision of the law by ruling (in ) that foreign detainees did have the right to challenge their detentions in the federal courts. Despite the court's decision, several prisoners who had been cleared for release in other countries or for transfer to their home countries continued to be detained, either because no country would accept them or because their home countries were deemed too volatile to guarantee their secure imprisonment.

The camp was repeatedly condemned by international human rights and humanitarian organizations-including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Committee of the Red Cross-as well as by the European Union and the Organization of American States (OAS), for alleged human rights violations, including the use of various forms of torture during interrogations. In response to such criticism, the Bush administration generally insisted that detainees were well cared for and that none of the "enhanced interrogation techniques" employed on some prisoners were torturous. (In 2009, however, the U.S. official in charge of military commissions at Guantánamo declared that the detainee suspected as a would-be hijacker in the September 11 attacks could not be prosecuted because he had been tortured.) Additionally, according to U.S. officials, the use of such techniques had in many cases-e.g., in the interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the alleged mastermind of the September 11 plot-yielded valuable intelligence on the leadership, methods, and plans of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.

On January 22, 2009, Democratic Pres. Barack Obama fulfilled a campaign pledge by ordering the closure of the facility at Guantánamo within one year and a review of ways to transfer detainees to the United States for imprisonment or trial. He also required interrogators to use only the techniques contained in the U.S. Army's field manual on interrogation, none of which was considered torturous. The closure of the Guantánamo camp was subsequently delayed by opposition from Republicans and some Democrats in Congress, who argued that housing the detainees in prisons on U.S. soil would imperil national security. In 2013 more than half of the camp's 166 detainees, some of whom had been cleared for release or transfer, engaged in a hunger strike to draw attention to their situation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guantanamo Bay detention camp | History, Location, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guantanamo Bay detention camp, U.S. detention facility on the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, located on the coast of Guantanamo Bay in southeastern Cuba. Constructed in stages starting in 2002, the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was used to house Muslim militants and suspected terrorists.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.axios.com/2023/01/06/russian-hackers-ukraine-mandiant-turla-team

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Russian cyber espionage group is suspected of repurposing another malware campaign's old infrastructure to spy on a Ukrainian computer network.

Driving the news: Researchers at Google-owned Mandiant recently discovered an espionage campaign where Turla Team, a Russian government-linked cyber espionage group, is suspected of re-registering domain names used nine years ago in a previously unconnected attack to spread a banking trojan malware via infected USB drives.

Some of the infected computers were on a Ukrainian network onto which the new hackers later installed additional malware and backdoors.

The big picture: The campaign highlights an evolution in Russian state-sponsored hackers' tactics, allowing them to rely on others' leftovers to remain undetected on victim networks.

Russian government hackers are known to test out new tricks in Ukraine.

What they're saying: "Now they are taking advantage of another actor's work by taking over their command and control," John Hultquist, head of threat intelligence at Mandiant, said in a statement.

Details: Mandiant researchers first stumbled upon the campaign in September while investigating a breach on an unnamed Ukrainian computer network.

Researchers concluded that the hackers re-registered an old domain name in January 2022 and spent a few months combing through infected devices to determine which victims they now had access to.

From there, the new hackers installed two new malware strains that Turla Team is known to have used in past campaigns onto selected Ukrainian computers.

In total, Turla is suspected of re-registering three domain names linked to hundreds of device infections.

Between the lines: Mandiant observed the group downloading Turla-connected malware onto only a single network - the Ukrainian one - "suggesting a high level of specificity in choosing which victims received a follow-on payload," per the report.

However, Turla has practiced a similar disguise before: In 2019, British intelligence warned that the group was using Iranian hackers' servers to masquerade attacks on dozens of countries.
Sign up for Axios' cybersecurity newsletter Codebook here.
The intrigue: This is the first time Mandiant has spotted Turla targeting Ukrainian organizations since the Russian invasion in February.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Suspected Russian cyber spies are repurposing old malware to target Ukrainian networks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Russian cyber espionage group is suspected of repurposing another malware campaign's old infrastructure to spy on a Ukrainian computer network. Driving the news: Researchers at Google-owned Mandiant recently discovered an espionage campaign where Turla Team, a Russian government-linked cyber espionage group, is suspected of re-registering domain names used nine years ago in a previously unconnected attack to spread a banking trojan malware via infected USB drives.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.hrc.org/news/idaho-house-passes-discriminatory-bill-to-criminalize-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-youth

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/idaho-trans-health-care-youth-bill-rcna19287

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Idaho House approved legislation today that makes it a felony for a doctor to provide age-appropriate, medically-necessary, best practice gender affirming care for transgender children. H.675 now heads to the Idaho Senate for further consideration.
Human Rights Campaign State Legislative Director and Senior Counsel Cathryn Oakley issued the following statement in reaction to today's vote:
"It is so disappointing that some politicians in Boise have decided to follow Texas and Alabama down the path of imposing felony criminal penalties upon doctors who are simply doing their jobs. By making it impossible for doctors to provide care for their patients, transgender youth are denied the age-appropriate, best practice, medically-necessary, gender-affirming care that a new study just found the risk of moderate or severe depression by 60% and suicidality by 73%."

"Every kid in Idaho deserves the chance to grow up feeling safe and respected for who they are. Denying someone medically-necessary health care simply because you don't approve of who they are is textbook discrimination. Decisions about what kind of care is appropriate for young people should be left up to the young person and their parents, in consultation with health care professionals, not by politicians looking to score political points at the expense of the well-being of transgender youth. It's critical that the Senate listens to medical professionals, parents, and kids and refuse to entertain this flagrantly discriminatory legislation any further."

The legislative fight to pass discriminatory anti-transgender legislation has already been fast and furious this year, led by national groups aiming to stymie LGBTQ+ progress made on the national level and in many states. There are so far more than 300 anti-LGBTQ+ bills under consideration in state legislatures across the country.

Caught in the crosshairs of anti-LGBTQ+ elected officials' divisive political strategy are kids who are simply trying to navigate their adolescence - kids who face relentless targeting and increased levels of discrimination in their community, as evidenced by the record incidents of fatal violence against transgender and gender non-binary people in 2021.
Anti-Transgender Attacks As A Political Talking Point
Legislators in a record 34 states introduced 147 anti-transgender bills in 2021, focusing on discriminatory anti-equality measures to drive a wedge between their constituents and score short-term political points. In 2021, legislators in twelve states enacted anti-LGBTQ+ bills despite failing to provide examples of what exactly they were legislating against.

Merely introducing anti-transgender bills and peddling anti-transgender rhetoric has already had a damaging impact, leading to LGBTQ+ youth resources being surreptitiously removed from a government website, 11-year old kids literally having trouble sleeping, and a school district banning graphic novels with a transgender character after a parent's complaint. 2021 and 2020 were the deadliest and second deadliest years on record for trans & gender non-conforming people respectively, with the Human Rights Campaign tracking violent deaths in 2021 alone. A new Trevor Project survey shows that a startling 85% of transgender or gender non-binary youth say their mental health has been negatively affected by these legislative attacks.

Anti-transgender content on social media is also a radicalizing issue all by itself. This is in large part because transgender young people are among the most marginalized, voiceless, and defenseless communities in America, and because right-wing arguments play on long-standing misogynistic, racist, and sexist tropes about gender roles.
Anti-Equality Forces Are Spending Big
These bills are the result of a concerted effort by right-wing organizations that have been battling against LGBTQ+ progress for years. Across recent elections, one of the key anti-equality groups working to turn back decades of LGBTQ+ progress has been the American Principles Project (APP). APP and its chief underwriter Sam Fieler have invested millions of dollars in support of anti-LGBTQ+ candidates. In 2020, APP spent more than $2.6 million in ad spending in support of anti-equality candidates. In Virginia in 2021, APP spent at least $300,000 on digital advertising in support of Glenn Youngkin's gubernatorial campaign.

Restoration PAC, run and funded by major anti-LGBTQ+ bankroller Dick Uihlein, spent at least $1.9 million in advertising across Virginia in support of Youngkin and donated $942,000 to the political arm of anti-abortion group Women Speak Out Virginia. Anti-equality group Free to Learn Action launched a $1 million ad campaign spreading widely debunked anti-transgender misinformation in support of Youngkin's campaign.
Businesses, Advocacy Groups, and Athletes Oppose Anti-Trans Legislation
More than 150 major U.S. corporations have stood up and spoken out to oppose anti-transgender legislation being proposed in states across the country. Companies like Amazon, American Airlines, Apple, AT&T, AirBnB, Dell, Dow, Google, IBM, Lyft, Marriott, Microsoft, Nike, and Paypal have objected to these bills. Four of the largest U.S. food companies also condemned "dangerous, discriminatory legislation that serves as an attack on LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly transgender and nonbinary people," and the Walton Family Foundation issued a statement expressing "alarm" at the trend of anti-transgender legislation that recently became law in Arkansas.

Many are rightly protective of the legacy of women's sports in this country, and a robust Title IX is central to that legacy. Importantly, advocates for women and girls in sports - such as the National Women's Law Center, the Women's Sports Foundation, Women Leaders in College Sports, and others - support trans-inclusive policies and oppose efforts to exclude transgender students from participating in sports. So do prominent female athletes including Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, and Cheryl Reeve. That's because while there are real issues facing women's sports, including a lack of resources devoted to supporting them, transgender participation in athletics is not one of them.

The nation's leading child health and welfare groups representing more than 7 million youth-serving professionals and more than 1,000 child welfare organizations released an open letter calling for lawmakers in states across the country to oppose dozens of bills that target LGBTQ+ people, and transgender children in particular.

Nearly 550 college athletes have stood up to anti-transgender legislation by demanding the NCAA pull championships from states that have enacted anti-trans sports laws.
Trans Equality Is Popular Across All Demographics
The reality is that however sensational and polarizing this issue may seem, public opinion polling across the country show strong support for trans-inclusive and pro-equality policies:

Recent PRRI data shows a large majority of Americans (82%) favor laws that protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing, and majorities of Republicans (67%), independents (85%), and Democrats (92%) favor nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ Americans.

A PBS/NPR/Marist poll states that 67% of Americans, including 66% of Republicans, oppose the anti-transgender sports ban legislation proliferating across 30 states.

In a 10-swing-state poll conducted by the Human Rights Campaign & Hart Research Group in 2020 showed:

At least 60% of Trump voters across each of the 10 swing states say transgender people should be able to live freely and openly.

At least 87% of respondents across each of the 10 swing states say transgender people should have equal access to medical care, with many states breaking 90% support

When respondents were asked about how they prioritized the importance of banning transgender people from participating in sports as compared to other policy issues, the issue came in dead last, with between 1% and 3% prioritizing the issue.

Another poll conducted by the Human Rights Campaign & Hart Research Group revealed that, with respect to transgender youth participation in sports, the public's strong inclination is on the side of fairness and equality for transgender student athletes. 73% of voters agree that "sports are important in young people's lives. Young transgender people should be allowed opportunities to participate in a way that is safe and comfortable for them."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Idaho House Passes Discriminatory Bill to Criminalize Gender Affirming Care for Transgender Youth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Idaho House approved legislation today that makes it a felony for a doctor to provide age-appropriate, medically-necessary, best practice gender affirming care for transgender children. H.675 now heads to the Idaho Senate for further consideration.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2021/10/look-what-isps-know-about-you-must-read-report-ftc

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The FTC just released a report based on data received from major players in the mobile Internet market and A Look at What ISPs Know About You: Examining the Privacy Practices of Six Major Internet Service Providers is an eye opener. According to the FTC, several Internet service providers collect and share far more personal data than their customers expect while failing to give customers meaningful choice about how that data can be used.

Under Section 6(b) of the FTC Act, the agency may require companies to file "reports or answers in writing to specific questions" about their business practices. In 2019 the orders went to six ISPs that make up about 98% of the mobile Internet market:

AT&T Mobility,

Cellco Partnership (Verizon Wireless),

Charter Communications Operating,

Comcast Cable Communications (Xfinity),

T-Mobile US, and

Google Fiber.

The FTC also sent 6(b) orders to three advertising companies affiliated with those ISPs: AT&T's Appnexus (now Xandr), Verizon's Verizon Online, and Oath Americas (now Verizon Media).

You'll want to read the entire report for more about data collection and privacy practices, but here are just a few observations that merit closer consideration:

Many ISPs amass large pools of sensitive consumer data. Several ISPs and affiliates collect significant amounts of consumer information across a broad range of products. Add to that the fact that people are using so many other services that depend on their Internet access - for example, home security and automation, video streaming, content creation, advertising, email, search, wearables, and connected cars. The result is the collection of detailed data about individual subscribers. When combined with even more information from third party data brokers, those ISPs are able to draw highly specific insights and inferences not just about subscribers, but about their families and households, too.

Several ISPs in the study gather and use data in ways consumers don't expect and could cause them harm. Consumers may expect ISPs to collect certain information about the sites they visit as part of the task of providing internet service, but it goes way beyond that. Many ISPs in the study also collect and combine other highly sensitive data - browsing information, TV viewing history, contents of email and search, data from connected devices, location information, and data about race and ethnicity, to name just a few categories. That raises the specter of how that information could be used for discriminatory or other harmful purposes.

Although many ISPs in the study purport to offer consumers choices, those choices are often illusory. Several ISPs in the study claim to offer choices about data collection, but how clearly do they explain that to their subscribers? And to what extent do those ISPs nudge people toward sharing more data?

Many ISPs in the study can be at least as privacy-intrusive as large advertising platforms. Despite ISPs' relative size in a market dominated by Google, Facebook, and Amazon, the privacy implications of ISPs are amplified. Four reasons suggest why: 1) Many ISPs have access to 100% of consumers' unencrypted internet traffic; 2) many ISPs can verify the identity of their subscribers; 3) several ISPs can track consumers across websites and geographic locations; and 4) a significant number of ISPs can combine subscribers' browsing and viewing history with large amounts of other information they get from additional Internet-dependent products, services, and features they offer.

Read A Look at What ISPs Know About You: Examining the Privacy Practices of Six Major Internet Service Providers for key details.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Look at What ISPs Know About You: A must-read report from the FTC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The FTC just released a report based on data received from major players in the mobile Internet market and A Look at What ISPs Know About You: Examining the Privacy Practices of Six Major Internet Service Providers is an eye opener.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64204048

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ukraine denies Moscow claim it killed 600 soldiers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Moscow has said it killed more than 600 Ukrainian forces in a "mass missile strike" in Kramatorsk.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here's what Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill would do, and what it wouldn't do

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Legal experts dissect whether the bill would prevent the "instruction" or "discussion" of sexual orientation and gender identity and which grade levels would be affected.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said this year that nuclear war is "back within the realm of possibility."

Russian President Vladimir Putin also suggested in December that Russia may abandon its "no first use" military doctrine.

A Russian nuclear attack would likely focus on high-value targets in North Dakota or Montana.

The UN secretary-general said that nuclear war is "back within the realm of possibility" following Russia's warning earlier this year it was putting its nuclear forces on alert amid its war in Ukraine, which threatens to draw NATO into direct combat with Russia. Since then, nuclear threats have continued to raise concerns a nuclear weapon could be used in a conflict for the first time in decades.

Much of the focus as of late has been on the risk of Russian President Vladimir Putin using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine in a desperate move to change his army's forturnes on the battlefield, but the Russian leader has also directed warnings at the US and NATO.

In December, Putin also suggested that Russia may abandon its "no first use" military doctrine, which says Russia would only use nuclear weapons as a last resort.

"They [the US] have it in their strategy, in the documents it is spelled out - a preventive blow," Putin said at a news conference in Kyrgyzstan. "We don't. We, on the other hand, have formulated a retaliatory strike in our strategy."

"So if we're talking about this disarming strike, then maybe think about adopting the best practices of our American partners and their ideas for ensuring their security," he added. "We're just thinking about it."

While the risk of tensions between the US and Russia escalating to open conflict and nuclear war is low, the threat exists.

In 2017, Russian state media detailed how Moscow would annihilate US cities and areas after a nuclear treaty collapsed and put the Cold War rivals back in targeting mode - a shocking threat even by the Russian regime's extreme standards.

Hyping up a then-new hypersonic nuclear-capable missile, Russian state TV said the Pentagon, Camp David, Jim Creek Naval Radio Station in Washington, Fort Ritchie in Maryland, and McClellan Air Force Base in California, would be targets, according to Reuters.

But the latter two have been closed for over two decades, making them strange choices for targets.
Read more: Russian state media says Putin's hypersonic missiles would instantly vaporize these 5 US targets
With most everything from Russia or its heavily censored media, it's best to take its claims with a grain of salt. Instead of taking Russia's word for it when it comes to nuclear targets, Insider got an expert opinion on where Moscow would likely try to strike.

Since the Cold War, the US and Russia have drawn up plans on how to best wage nuclear war against each other, and while large population centers with huge cultural impact may seem like obvious choices, strategists believe a nuclear attack will focus on countering the enemy's nuclear forces - destroying them before they can counter-attack.

According to Stephen Schwartz, the author of " Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of US Nuclear Weapons Since 1940," as the Cold War progressed and improvements in nuclear weapons and intelligence-collection technologies enabled greater precision in where those weapons were aimed, the emphasis in targeting shifted from cities to nuclear stockpiles and nuclear war-related infrastructure.

This map shows the essential points Russia would have to attack to wipe out the US's nuclear forces, according to Schwartz:

The map represents targets for an all-out attack on the US's fixed nuclear infrastructure, weapons, and command-and-control centers, but even a massive strike like this wouldn't guarantee anything.

"It's exceedingly unlikely that such an attack would be fully successful," Schwartz told Insider. "There's an enormous amount of variables in pulling off an attack like this flawlessly, and it would have to be flawless. If even a handful of weapons escape, the stuff you missed will be coming back at you."

Even if every single US intercontinental ballistic missile silo, stockpiled nuclear weapon, and nuclear-capable bomber were flattened, US nuclear submarines could - and would - retaliate.

According to Schwartz, at any given time, the US has four to five nuclear-armed submarines "on hard alert, in their patrol areas, awaiting orders for launch."

Even high-ranking officials in the US military don't know where the silent submarines are, and there's no way Russia could chase them all down before they fired back, which Schwartz said could be done in as little as 5 to 15 minutes.

But a strike on a relatively sparsely populated area could still lead to death and destruction across the US, depending on how the wind blew. That's because of fallout.

The US has strategically positioned the bulk of its nuclear forces, which double as nuclear targets, far from population centers. But if you happen to live next to an ICBM silo, fear not.
Update: This article was originally published in 2017 but has since been updated and re-published amid concerns that the war in Ukraine could escalate to nuclear war.
There's a "0.0% chance" that Russia could hope to survive an act of nuclear aggression against the US, according to Schwartz. So while we all live under a nuclear "sword of Damocles," Schwartz added, people in big cities like New York and Los Angeles most likely shouldn't worry about being struck by a nuclear weapon.

Read the original article on Business Insider

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The UN has said nuclear war is 'back within the realm of possibility.' Here are the places in the US most likely to be hit in a nuclear attack.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said this year that nuclear war is "back within the realm of possibility." Russian President Vladimir Putin also suggested in December that Russia may abandon its "no first use" military doctrine. A Russian nuclear attack would likely focus on high-value targets in North Dakota or Montana.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
china is installing surveillance cameras outside people's front doors ... and sometimes inside their homes - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China is installing surveillance cameras outside people's front doors ... and sometimes inside their homes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The coronavirus pandemic has brought surveillance cameras closer to people's private lives: from public spaces in the city to the front doors of their homes -- and in some rare cases, surveillance cameras inside their apartments.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.newsweek.com/russias-propaganda-more-persuasive-we-think-opinion-1771678

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the surface, Russia's war in Ukraine has hit the Kremlin's once-formidable propaganda machine hard. Practically overnight, Moscow's long-running influence campaign in the West foundered, as European governments tightened controls on Russian disinformation, banned state outlets like RT and Sputnik from broadcasting and implemented a raft of new restrictions to limit the reach of Moscow's malign influence.

To be sure, some of these setbacks are the product of self-inflicted messaging wounds. Russian officials probably could have expected that their arguments about the need to "denazify" a country with a Jewish president would be met with widespread ridicule. Russian arguments about Satanic practices in Ukraine, as well as U.S.-sponsored biolabs there, have similarly fallen short.

Even so, the current triumphalism among many in the West regarding the decline of Russian disinformation is somewhat premature. That's because, while Russian propaganda outlets are now having a more difficult time reaching European nations, they're still making major gains in advancing the Kremlin's position-and eroding that of the West-throughout the developing world.

Latin America is a case in point. There, Russia has erected a formidable messaging apparatus experts say ranks as among the most influential in the region. According to Joseph Humire of the Center for Secure Free Society, a think tank focusing on security trends in the Americas, Russia is today outstripping the United States in terms of the scope and breadth of its outreach toward regional states.

The effects are pronounced. Not only is Russia shaping local attitudes about what is transpiring in its war against Ukraine, its broader message-about imperial destiny and the restoration of lost lands-has successfully tapped into local grievances and political discontent. The Kremlin's messaging is "basically a gift to authoritarians worldwide, especially in Latin America, who are now using that kind of narrative to be able to try to recreate lost empires of the past," said Humire. This, in turn, has contributed to contemporary tensions in the region, where a number of national boundaries and borders are relatively newly drawn.

In Africa, meanwhile, a different set of Russian narratives are resonating. Since the start of the Ukraine war, Moscow's propaganda outlets have played upon local fears of economic hardship and food insecurity. This past summer, a report by the State Department's Global Engagement Center (GEC) accused the Russian government and its proxies of carrying out a "massive disinformation campaign" shifting the blame for rising global food and energy prices to the West. That campaign is "intended to both hide Russia's culpability and persuade leaders of at-risk countries to support an end to sanctions designed to stop Russia's unjust and brutal war in Ukraine," the report said.

Increasingly, other players are getting in on the act as well. Kremlin-connected oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin, for instance, has been identified by the U.S. government as the mastermind behind a major propaganda campaign in Africa to expand regional support for an asymmetric Russian presence on the continent. Working through proxies and Kremlin-aligned actors, a November GEC report outlined, Prigozhin "has co-opted some Pan-African activists to promote Russia's interests across the continent, including African voices calling for the removal of French and Western influence across the Sahel while encouraging more Kremlin influence. These influencers allow Kremlin-linked entities to maintain plausible deniability of Russia's hand in African affairs, while attempting to mold African opinions favorable to the Kremlin's policy goals."

All of this outreach to the Global South is having a real impact. This past summer, the latest edition of the Democracy Perception Index, the world's largest annual study on democracy, found a wide gap between Western and Latin American attitudes toward Russia, with a number of Latin American nations (including Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela) remaining in favor of maintaining economic ties with Moscow despite the Ukraine war and its atrocities there.

The differences are even more pronounced in Africa. In a recent Gallup study of publics in 27 African nations, 42 percent of respondents had positive views of Russia generally and President Vladimir Putin in particular, while 27 percent either didn't know or simply refused to answer the question.

This sort of goodwill has real world consequences, as it did last spring, when the U.N. considered a resolution to suspend Russia from the body's Human Rights Council and just a handful of Africa's 54 countries voted in favor. It also provides a painful reminder that, while the persuasive power of Russian propaganda may be declining in the West, there are other parts of the world where it is still far from a spent force.
Ilan Berman is senior vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, D.C., where he directs the Council's Future of Public Diplomacy Project. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia's Propaganda Is More Persuasive Than We Think

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the surface, Russia's war in Ukraine has hit the Kremlin's once-formidable propaganda machine hard. Practically overnight, Moscow's long-running influence campaign in the West foundered, as European governments tightened controls on Russian disinformation, banned state outlets like RT and Sputnik from broadcasting and implemented a raft of new restrictions to limit the reach of Moscow's malign influence.

# data[].attributes.headline
Government and Protest in Puerto Rico, January 7th, 2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Government and Protest in Puerto Rico, January 7th, 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the most striking pieces in a new exhibit of Puerto Rican artists wrestling with life after (and before) Hurricane Maria is a simple electric post, suspended in the air as if a hurricane had swooped it up, right that minute.

It's a commentary on the almost complete failure of the archipelago's electric grid after the hurricane five years ago. But because attached to the pole is a sign in Spanish - "Value your American citizenship. Vote for statehood" - it's clear that the piece also wonders: Where is the U.S. government? Why hasn't it solved this very basic issue of electricity?

Yet, would things have been better after the hurricane if Puerto Rico were a state? Some think not.

"We can talk about how Puerto Ricans are [already] citizens. So what kind of citizenship is citizenship?" asked Marcela Guerrero, the Jennifer Rubio Associate Curator at the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York. She moved to New York from Puerto Rico not long before the hurricane.

Guerrero is the curator of the exhibit, called "no existe un mundo poshuracán: Puerto Rican Art in the Wake of Hurricane Maria." It means a post-hurricane world doesn't exist. And in this case a hurricane, she said, is a metaphor for a force you can't escape.

Much of this exhibit is about those forces - colonialism, mismanagement at all levels of government, climate change, earthquakes, and the failure of the power grid.

"It's just - this again. And again. It's an ever-perpetuating cycle of unjust conditions imposed on the daily lives of Puerto Ricans," Guerrero said. "I want people to understand that it's not just an inconvenience. It's not just you can't watch Netflix! You can't refrigerate medicines, [for example]. It makes living very hard."

There's a deep anger running through "no existe," a feeling that the United States has never had Puerto Rico's best interests at heart; that maybe the storm wouldn't have been such a historic disaster if the government didn't prioritize investing in beaches instead of basic infrastructure, and if it didn't seem to care more about tourists than about the people who actually live there.

Who is Puerto Rico for?

"B-roll," a video piece by the visual artist Sofía Gallisá Muriente, points that out by juxtaposing lush, tourist-office scenes of an island paradise with remixed field recordings from the 2016 Puerto Rico investment summit that extolled the archipelago to investors.

"I am optimistic for the long-term growth prospects for Puerto Rico," the video says, accompanied by electronic music composed by Daniel Montes Carro. "It has a perfect climate. You can minimize your taxes."

"I was really interested in, what are the images that are being produced to entice people to move or invest in Puerto Rico? And what do they say about us and how we offer ourselves to the world?" Muriente said. "And, you know, a lot of them are beautiful beaches with no people in them. A lot of them are, you know, beautiful landscapes kind of open for consumption, but without locals."

She said she just wanted to reveal "how sinister" those visual images could be. And they DO seem sinister, with men in suits looking down from helicopters at empty streets.

Listening in at the kitchen table

The exhibit, though, is not all tragedy. And much of it is very personal. The 20 artists, some living in Puerto Rico and some in the diaspora, explore love, hope and pride. There are posters of resistance in eye-popping colors by Garvin Sierra, a painting of another man-made disaster by Gamaliel Rodríguez, and photographic works by Gabriella N. Báez that stitch together her late father and herself with red string.

Ron Amstutz / Whitney Museum of American Art

Whitney Museum of American Art

Mixed-media artist Sofía Córdova's video piece, part of a larger work looking at resource scarcity called "dawn chorus," starts with a cellphone video taken by her aunt. Rain and wind beat at the windows on the night the storm hits; the electricity is out. She narrates what she's seeing. "It's getting worse," she says.

The two-hour work has images of Puerto Rico post-hurricane, where you see flooded streets and broken residences. But it also shows quiet beauty: a lizard, a landscape. Through it all plays intimate interviews of Córdova's relatives, processing everything they've been through. It feels as though you are sitting around a kitchen table with them, listening to their stories. You get to know them as people who are thinking their way around a problem: what should they do now?

That's what Córdova intended.

Individuals sometimes become invisible during and after a disaster - they're just seen as collective victims. But in this artist's hands, they are full people, relating their experiences with all their contradictions.

"Caribbean peoples and marginalized peoples and oppressed peoples - our histories are never the ones that get put in the great archives," Córdova said. "So we witness for each other. And storytelling becomes such a foundational piece of struggle and survival."

"no existe un mundo poshuracán: Puerto Rican Art in the Wake of Hurricane Maria" runs through April 2023 at the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York.

Copyright 2023 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When people are less important than beaches: Puerto Rican artists at the Whitney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the most striking pieces in a new exhibit of Puerto Rican artists wrestling with life after (and before) Hurricane Maria is a simple electric post, suspended in the air as if a hurricane had swooped it up, right that minute.

# data[].attributes.headline
Anti Government Protests in Brazil. January 8th, 2023

# data[].attributes.subject
Anti Government Protests in Brazil. January 8th, 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brazilian Authorities Clear Government Offices of Rioters, Official Says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Supporters of Jair Bolsonaro had stormed into Congress, presidential offices and the Supreme Court in the capital, building barricades and breaking windows. More than 200 people were arrested.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiu4tvG-7j8AhUyj4kEHcYtChYQxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2023%2F01%2F07%2Fworld%2Fmiddleeast%2Firan-executes-protesters.html&usg=AOvVaw1DP5OyW6E3out99T0aAFii

# data[].attributes.headline
Anonymous, hacktivism and the rise of the cyber protester

# data[].attributes.subject
Anonymous, hacktivism and the rise of the cyber protester

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Computer 'hacktivists' cause havoc targeting the websites of governments, companies and the police but who they are and what motivates them?

It is 4 o'clock in the morning and I'm waiting for a Skype call from a computer hacker on the run in Canada.

After weeks of contact through Twitter and encrypted emails with "Commander X", I should finally have the chance to speak to him in person. After an hour with no call, I give up and return to bed.

"You can never have complete certainty as to what's going on, who's involved," says Gabriella Coleman, an anthropologist at McGill University in Canada, who has spent years studying hackers operating under the banner of Anonymous.

But, she says, "not being able to fully understand who's behind the mask" is what gives Anonymous political power.

Even if you have never heard of Anonymous, you have probably seen their supporters wearing the distinctive Guy Fawkes masks made famous in the comic book series and film V for Vendetta.

The movement emerged in 2008 following an attack on the website of the Church of Scientology. Since then their targets have ranged from companies like PayPal through to politicians and governments. But who are the people carrying out these attacks and why do they do it?

"It's about the right not to be oppressed by governments or any organisation for that matter," says a young Scottish activist talking to me from a webcam in his bedroom.

"We want to fight the powers-that-be when they overstep the lines," he adds.

He goes by the nickname Dr Steelhammer, and his first operation this year was to attack Catholic Church websites over the Church's opposition to gay marriage in Scotland.

Dr Steelhammer tells me they brought down one website for half an hour - but, I wondered, what was the point?

"The internet is not some playground that corporations and governments can take basic civil liberties with and destroy them and get away with it," he says.

As far as big companies are concerned he says "we have shown that around 10,000 angry people can make them lose a lot of profit by taking down their websites."

He is referring to the notorious hacking of the Sony website in 2011 when the company's PlayStation network was taken down for weeks and millions of users accounts were accessed.

It is estimated to have cost the company over $100 million and was part of a 50-day rampage by a group of hackers known as Lulz Security - or LulzSec - which targeted organisations ranging from the FBI to Britain's Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA).

Over a dozen people around the world have been arrested and charged over the attacks and if convicted, they could face years in prison.

'Tier One threat'

I spoke to one of them who is currently on bail - so we are not using his name. Smart and articulate, he is also a realist.

"I'm not under the illusion that we're going to change the world," he tells me, "but if we can make a big enough noise for people to notice there's a problem and scream loud enough, someone's going to take notice. That's what Anonymous is."

Although he is a skilled programmer, he says Anonymous has grown quickly because you do not need to be tech savvy to become involved.

"People who are too lazy or don't have the guts to go out and actively protest and campaign... it's so easy with Anonymous, the normal Joe can just click a button and you're away."

I find out just how easy it is in a cafe in Edinburgh where I meet a hacker, Martin - not his real name. He arrives with a netbook and, in a few minutes, shows me how to download software which has a big red button asking you to fire the laser.

If you do, it will send millions of page requests to a website or server trying to overload it, causing it to crash.

This is what worries the people who are trying to deter and catch the Anonymous hackers, like Detective Superintendent Charlie McMurdy - head of the Metropolitan Police's beefed up e-Crime unit, who has over 100 staff under her command. She classes these attacks as a "Tier One" threat.

"People tend to think it's online, it's almost like a game rather than that clicking that button is actually causing serious harm," she says.

In just a few years, Anonymous has grown from a handful of hardened hackers into a movement whose targets range from the Syrian government to paedophile websites.

Although currently at the entry level of activism, Dr Steelhammer has some advice for those pursuing Anonymous:

"What I would say to Scotland Yard, the FBI, the federal government in America is 'why are you even bothering to pursue us because there are too many of us?'"

The Hackers will be broadcast on Tuesday 27 November at 20:00 GMT on BBC Radio 4. Listen again via the Radio 4 website.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anonymous, hacktivism and the rise of the cyber protester

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Computer 'hacktivists' cause havoc targeting the websites of governments, companies and the police but who they are and what motivates them? It is 4 o'clock in the morning and I'm waiting for a Skype call from a computer hacker on the run in Canada.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.state.gov/russias-top-five-persistent-disinformation-narratives/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over many years, Russia has fabricated a set of false narratives that its disinformation and propaganda ecosystem persistently injects into the global information environment. These narratives act like a template, which enables the Kremlin to adjust these narratives, with one consistency - a complete disregard for truth as it shapes the information environment to support its policy goals.

Russian military and intelligence entities are engaging in this activity across Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem, to include malign social media operations, the use of overt and covert online proxy media outlets, the injection of disinformation into television and radio programming, the hosting of conferences designed to influence attendees into falsely believing that Ukraine, not Russia, is at fault for heightened tensions in the region, and the leveraging of cyber operations to deface media outlets and conduct hack and release operations.

Here are five major reoccurring Russian disinformation themes that the Kremlin is currently readjusting in an attempt to fill the information environment with false narratives about its actions in Ukraine.
Theme #1: "Russia is an Innocent Victim"
Russian government officials falsely portray Russia as a perpetual victim and its aggressive actions as a forced response to the alleged actions of the United States and our democratic allies and partners. To further these claims, Russia turns to one of its favorite labels to attempt to hit back: " Russophobia." After invading Ukraine in 2014, the Russian government and state-controlled disinformation outlets began to accuse anyone who questioned Russia's actions of being xenophobic Russophobes.

For example, Russia claims that the international community's negative reaction to its invasion of an independent country was simply because people feared and hated Russia. According to the chart below, Russophobia was not an issue of major concern to the Russian Foreign Ministry or state-funded disinformation outlets until the Russian military invaded Ukraine. Claims of "Russophobia" persist across a range of topics and are employed whenever the Russian government wants to play the victim, when it is actually the aggressor.
Theme #2: Historical Revisionism
When history does not align with the Kremlin's political objectives, Russian government officials and their proxy voices deny historical events or distort historical narratives to try to cast Russia in a more favorable light and serve its domestic and geopolitical agenda. For example, the 1939 non-aggression pact between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which helped precipitate World War II, is politically inconvenient for the Putin regime. In 2020, in an attempt to minimize and rationalize Stalin's decision to align himself with Hitler, Putin published a twisted version of the start of World War II, downplaying the Soviet role and shifting blame for the war to other countries. Russia often takes this a step further by labeling those who disagree with its twisted version of history as Nazis or Nazi sympathizers.

The Kremlin also applies this formula to the history of Ukraine's statehood, NATO's conduct during the collapse of the Soviet Union, its GULAG prison system, the famine in Ukraine known as Holodomor, and many other events where the Kremlin's historical actions do not serve its current political goals.
Theme #3: "The Collapse of Western Civilization is Imminent"
Russia pushes the false claim that Western civilization is collapsing and has strayed from " traditional values" because it works to ensure the safety and equality of LGBTQI+ people and promotes concepts such as female equality and multiculturalism. The demise of Western civilization is one of Russia's oldest disinformation tropes, with claims of "the decaying west" documented since the 19 th century.

This "values"-based disinformation narrative evokes ill-defined concepts including "tradition," "family values," and "spirituality." Russia argues it is the bastion of so-called "traditional values" and gender roles and serves as a moral counterweight to the "decadence" of the United States and Western countries. For example, President Putin has claimed the West has practically cancelled the concepts of "mother" and "father," and instead has replaced them with "parent 1 and 2," while Foreign Minister Lavrov wrote that Western students "learn at school that Jesus Christ was bisexual."
Theme #4: "Popular Movements are U.S.-sponsored 'Color Revolutions'"
The Kremlin has difficulty accepting that all individuals should have the human right to freedom of expression, and that the government should be accountable to its people. Russia has accused the United States of either instigating uprisings or plotting " color revolutions" in Georgia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Ukraine, and throughout the Middle East and Africa. If a popular movement is pro-democracy and pro-reform and not deemed to be in Russia's geopolitical interests, the Kremlin will often attack its legitimacy and claim that the United States is secretly behind it. These baseless accusations often target local and international civil society organizations, as well as independent media that expose human rights abuses and corruption. The Kremlin seeks to deny that people in neighboring countries could have agency, dignity, and independent aspirations to advocate for themselves, just as it denies these qualities to the people of Russia.
Theme #5: Reality is Whatever the Kremlin Wants It to Be
The Kremlin frequently tries to create multiple false realities and insert confusions into the information environment when the truth is not in its interests. Often intentionally confusing, Russian officials make arguments designed to try to shift the blame away from the Russian government's role, even if some of the narratives contradict one another. However, in time, presenting multiple conflicting narratives can itself become a technique intended to generate confusion and discourage response. Other elements in Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem, such as the abuse of state-funded disinformation outlets and weaponized social media, help push multiple false narratives.

It was clear to the world, for example, that Russia attempted to assassinate former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia with the nerve agent Novichok in Salisbury, England, on March 4, 2018. In the four weeks following that incident, Russian state-funded and directed outlets RT and Sputnik disseminated 138 separate and contradictory narratives via 735 articles, according to the Policy Institute at King's College London.

Russia has used the same technique of flooding the information space with many false claims following other events, such as the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, and Russia's 2008 invasion and ongoing occupation of Georgia, to distract conversations from their role in the events. Again, the purpose is to confuse and distract others and manipulate the truth to suit Kremlin interests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia's Top Five Persistent Disinformation Narratives - United States Department of State

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over many years, Russia has fabricated a set of false narratives that its disinformation and propaganda ecosystem persistently injects into the global information environment. These narratives act like a template, which enables the Kremlin to adjust these narratives, with one consistency - a complete disregard for truth as it shapes the information environment to support its policy goals.

# data[].attributes.body
https://blackamericaweb.com/2023/01/04/nypd-cop-punch-girl-outside-school/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An NYPD police officer has been suspended after a shocking video showed a 12-year-old Black girl being repeatedly and brutally beaten on her head by an officer outside of a middle school in New York City's borough of Staten Island, according to reports.

There is no context to the brief eight-second video, which opens abruptly with a crowd of apparent students surrounding two fully uniformed officers and the girl, whose head was being pounded by one of the cops' fists. The other officer can be seen throwing at least one blow at the same 12-year-old girl.

An onlooker's voice can be heard exclaiming incredulously, "he's hitting her?"
The below video is graphic and violent and should be viewed with discretion.
The violence resulted in a 14-year-old girl being arrested and the 12-year-old being written up as a juvenile.

The New York Daily News reported that the NYPD said officers were intervening in a fight that was already underway.

From the New York Daily News:
The assault took place as cops responded to a fight between kids at a bus stop on Willowbrook Road and Forest Ave. near the Edwin Markham Middle School in Port Richmond about 2:40 p.m. Tuesday, cops said. During the fight, two sisters, ages 12 and 14, were assaulting a 14-year-old girl, cops said. The cop was assaulted by the girls as he tried to break up the fight. The officer pummeled the 12-year-old girl during the melee, police sources said.
The Daily News estimated that the girl was hit by the officer at least nine times

The NYPD said in a statement Wednesday morning that one officer had been suspended pending an investigation. There was no mention of possible any criminal charges for what appeared to be police brutality.

"Last evening, the NYPD became aware of an incident that occurred on Staten Island where officers responded to a fight between a group of youths," the statement said. "The actions of those officers is under investigation by the Internal Affairs Bureau. At this time, one officer has been suspended."

To be sure, the NYPD has a long and established history of violence and brutality against Black people, including children. NewsOne compiled a series of videos showing the extent of the type of violence NYPD officers have been seen employing on Black children, including in 2020 when a nonviolent Black teenager was manhandled out of a Brooklyn subway station over alleged fare evasion.

Standing in stark contrast to that incident, the police violence in Staten Island came one day after a viral video showed NYPD officers willingly allowing identifying members of the Proud Boys - a hate group aligned with racists - to ride the subway without paying their fares last week.

The video was posted to the TikTok account of a user named Brenna Lip, according to BuzzFeed News.

From BuzzFeed:
In the clip, Lip points out that they are evading the fare and asks, "Proud Boys don't have to pay for the fare?" to which a member of the far-right group responds, "We're special. Thank you. Appreciate it from your taxes." Lip then tries to walk through the emergency door herself but is stopped by an officer. "Oh, I have to pay for the fare, but they don't?" she says to the officer, who is blocking her from using the gate. "Is that the situation you're saying?" "That's correct," the officer responds. SEE ALSO: NYC Mayor Defends NYPD Cop Who Punched Woman's Face On Video: He 'Showed Great Restraint' Brooklyn Subway Shooting Came Despite 'Record' Number Of NYPD Cops Patrolling Stations And Trains
The post Video Shows NYPD Cop Brutally Beating 12-Year-Old Girl's Head Outside School appeared first on NewsOne.

Video Shows NYPD Cop Brutally Beating 12-Year-Old Girl's Head Outside School was originally published onnewsone.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video Shows NYPD Cop Brutally Beating 12-Year-Old Girl's Head Outside School

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An NYPD police officer has been suspended after a shocking video showed a 12-year-old Black girl being repeatedly and brutally beaten on her head by an officer outside of a middle school in New York City's borough of Staten Island, according to reports.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.marketplace.org/2023/01/06/the-costs-of-banning-women-from-education-in-afghanistan-are-felt-everywhere/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This week, the State Department launched a new initiative meant to break down barriers that keep women around the world from participating in the economy. But in some places, those barriers are only getting higher: a few weeks ago in Afghanistan, the Taliban prohibited women from attending universities there. That's after an earlier ban prevented them from going to secondary, or high school. The costs of not educating women are felt by individuals, of course, and their communities, but will also have far-reaching economic consequences.

One person who felt the consequences immediately was 18-year-old Wurranga Arif. A few weeks ago, she had just finished her last exam of the semester at Nangarhar University in eastern Afghanistan, and she was feeling good.

"I really had a very good exam," she said. "I was just about to switch on my computer and watch a movie. Suddenly my brother told me 'your university's banned [you].' It was the worst feeling ever."

Arif had been studying civil engineering, and said being cut off from school felt like being deprived of oxygen.

"When someone tells you that you cannot live anymore, you cannot survive, you cannot breathe ... that was like that," said Arif.

According to the United Nations, in 2018, about 90,000 women in Afghanistan were enrolled in higher education. That's less than 5% of the total female population, but still a 1,700% increase from 2001.

Now enrollment in both college and high school is likely closer to zero, estimates Quentin Wodon, an economist with UNESCO.

He did a study with the World Bank in 2018 that found the cost of not educating girls through high school is between $15 trillion and $30 trillion in lost lifetime productivity and earnings.

"If you are better educated, you are more likely to be in the labor force, to be working," said Wodon.

You're also likely to make more money. Other benefits: educated women are likely to have healthier children, are less likely to get married as children themselves, and are more likely to positively influence other girls.

"When you have women who are role models, as teachers or head of schools, that gives an additional incentive for adolescent girls to stay in school," said Wodon.

But the Taliban's laws are meant to ensure that adolescent girls don't become formally educated women, points out Sara Wahedi, an entrepreneur and dual citizen of both Canada and Afghanistan, now a student at Columbia University. She had been living in Afghanistan until August 2021.

"It was decades of planning, of dreams, that women had been establishing, that were completely stripped," said Wahedi.

Fifteen-year-old Sofia Orya is one of those whose dreams have changed.

"My dream was to be a pilot," said Orya, who lives in Kabul with her parents, grandparents, and two younger brothers.

She was forced to leave her school in August 2021, and switched to taking English classes at a nearby university, with the intent to become a teacher. Then, the most recent ban went into effect.

"I want to try new things. But in this situation, I can't do it," said Orya.

Orya's dad was a flight attendant, but is now out of work, and her mom is working as a tailor. Orya says it's her responsibility to get an education, and eventually earn money. She's now looking to online classes to try to make that happen, but Afghanistan's infrastructure makes that challenging.

"[Often] we don't have electricity, and we have the problems with the internet, so it's really hard for us to connect," said Orya.

Wurranga Arif, who had to leave her university, has also been trying to keep up with her lessons by watching YouTube videos at home on things like linear equations. She says Afghanistan needs civil engineers like her to build infrastructure.

"Everything we need!" she said. "Buildings. Dams. The material of roads are not good. So we need engineers for highways."

A good example of how the effects of educating-or not educating-women has ramifications for the surrounding world.
There's a lot happening in the world. Through it all, Marketplace is here for you.
You rely on Marketplace to break down the world's events and tell you how it affects you in a fact-based, approachable way. We rely on your financial support to keep making that possible.

Your donation today powers the independent journalism that you rely on. For just $5/month, you can help sustain Marketplace so we can keep reporting on the things that matter to you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The costs of banning women from education in Afghanistan are felt everywhere

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This week, the State Department launched a new initiative meant to break down barriers that keep women around the world from participating in the economy. But in some places, those barriers are only getting higher: a few weeks ago in Afghanistan, the Taliban prohibited women from attending universities there.

# data[].attributes.body
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/hyderabad-facing-5-major-issues-m-kodandaram/articleshow/79403430.cms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Telangana Jana Samithi founder-president M Kodandaram

HYDERABAD: Telangana Jana Samithi president M Kodandaram on Tuesday said the residents of Greater Hyderabad were facing problems on five major fronts: Air and noise pollution, the lack of civic amenities, the pathetic condition of government schools, poor facilities in government hospitals, and traffic and transport issues.
"The reason for the situation reaching such a bad state of affairs in the city is due to the government's failure to involve the citizens or civil society organisations in planning and policy-making process," he said. 'Bangaru Telangana' can't be achieved till issues are solved in Greater Hyderabad as one-third of the population of the state resides in Hyderabad, he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hyderabad facing 5 major issues: M Kodandaram | Hyderabad News - Times of India

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Telangana Jana Samithi founder-president M Kodandaram HYDERABAD: Telangana Jana Samithi president M Kodandaram on Tuesday said the residents of Greater Hyderabad were facing problems on five major fronts: Air and noise pollution, the lack of civic amenities, the pathetic condition of government schools, poor facilities in government hospitals, and traffic and transport issues."The reason for the situation reaching such a bad state of affairs in the city is due to the government's failure to involve the citizens or civil society organisations in planning and policy-making process," he said.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.thepitchkc.com/kansas-city-has-a-major-violent-crime-problem-what-to-do-about-it/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the last few weeks, we've been speaking with Kansas City mayoral candidates about how they'd use the office to approach the biggest challenges facing Kansas City. Pick up our March issue, out now, for a preview of the race.
In the first two months of 2019, there have been 20 homicides in Kansas City (as of Feb. 26). In 2018, there were 136 homicides total, and in 2017 the city ranked fifth for the highest homicide rate in the U.S., at 30.9 murders per 100,000 residents. Kansas City has a major problem with violent crime, but no one seems to know how to bring the crime rate in the city down.

Many of this year's mayoral candidates say that tackling the city's crime issue is at the top of their priority list. We recently asked them how they would approach the problem in Kansas City. Most said there isn't one simple solution to the problem, and their answers included ideas like mental health programs, more community policing, and asking the community for their thoughts on a solution.

Kansas City is also the only municipality in the country that does have local control of its police department. (A state-appointed Board of Police Commissioners has been in charge since 1939.) Many of the candidates discussed bringing bring local control back to the Kansas City Police Department. Their thoughts are included below.
PHIL GLYNN
"Short-term, I am open to looking at staffing and other administrative changes just to increase coverage. As I talk to people all over town, one thing I hear from people is, 'I want to see more officers in my community.' Another short-term thing I think we could do is on focus and deterrence, and I believe that KC NOVA is a good concept. I want to continue with it; I think it's a good model. The thing that I believe is missing from it is that it does not have enough of a focus on people who are returning to life - formerly incarcerated people - who are rotating back to our community and into their neighborhoods ... Long term, the only way for us to make a safer and healthier community is for us to become an economically more successful community. Our whole economic strategy has been just focus on investing in buildings and not including the aspect of investing in people. Real estate development is important, and it brings a lot of jobs to Kansas City, but I think because of our sole focus on that alone for the last 20 years, we have missed this other growing problem of job-skill development ... The problem is we have 3,000-5,000 thousand tech jobs that average $90,000 a year that we can't fill. We have good career paths open to people in Kansas City now; yet at the same time we have neighborhoods in Kansas City where the unemployment rate is shockingly high. So what that tells me as a business owner is that we have a gap between the skills that our employers demand and the skills that people are graduating from 12th grade with."

The Pitch: Would you support moving the police department from state to local control? "I think that, while it's not the ideal arrangement, the Board of Police Commissioners, and the mayor of being a member of it allows an accountability measure of Kansas Citians who work in those leadership roles ... My job as mayor will be to invest the resources we have to get the most return that we can. The goal of our policing efforts needs to be to make our community safe, which is right now at an unacceptable level of violence. I think the amount of political capital and time and energy it would take to change our government structure could consume four years just right there ... So if I am going to have to go down to Jefferson City and persuade the state to change its thinking about that, and if I am going to have to allocate my time, and energy, and the money that there is in this community, I would much rather help with affordable housing and quality jobs, because healthy communities are safe communities."
QUINTON LUCAS
"I do think police are an important part of the equation for fighting crime. I think it's a cop-out when people just say, 'Well, it's [other] socioeconomic factors that are the big issue.' Poverty will continue to be a challenge in our society, as well as access to a number of different opportunities. What I think that means for us is: How, while having those type of situations, and very real challenges, can we make it so it's a safer place for people that we're not afraid of? I completely reject the idea that just because you're poor that means that you are going to commit crime, or be more subject to that kind of lifestyle. I am someone who believes that to the extent that we can create more opportunities in our community, that's one thing. To the extent that we can restrict crime in certain communities, I think that's another that's going to be important. And to the extent that we can see the presence of officers throughout our neighborhoods, I think that's going to be key for our long-term crime-fighting efforts."
The Pitch: Would you support moving control of police department from state to local control?
" For a very simple reason I would support it: representative government is important and if the people are mad at how the police are operating, they should actually be able to speak to that. And if they're mad at how Quinton Lucas funds the police they should vote me out of office. And if I'm mad about how the police are actually allocating resources - no body cameras still - then I think there should be some closer type of accountability. Now, don't get me wrong. I think we should talk to the police department about how we're doing it. I think we should avoid the challenges St. Louis had, but I think we - fundamentally, long-term - it would be important to have local control of everything that's local."
SCOTT TAYLOR
"We need to look at it holistically, and our health departments are a great resource. They've been looking at crime as a disease to address those issues just like you would a health disease. So I think we can elevate the health discussion and empower them to be involved ... We also need to address things more quickly in a short-term manner. That's why I really advocated for more community policing, more police on the streets, and also increasing the reward money. Rewards [for homicide tips] used to be $1,000 when I came on the council, and that had been the same figure probably for the last 20 or 30 years. That doesn't really get people's attention if they're motivated by a reward. This new police chief agrees - he went with the corporate community and the city manager and council, and we raised it from $1,000 to $5,000 and then we got it up to $10,000. And what we're seeing is a record number of tips coming in. What you're also seeing, if you look at the clearance rate.... A couple of years ago, we were at 50 percent for homicide. So you had a fifty-fifty chance of getting away with a homicide. And the people who are committing these homicides know that. It's now up, it's close to 80 percent now. In other communities, like Omaha, where they have a higher reward, rate - I think it's $20,000 to $25,000 - I think they're closer to, like, a 90 percent clearance rate [yep: 91 percent, actually]. So it creates an accountability, because it's a very small percentage of people committing these crimes. We just need to get them off the streets to protect neighborhoods."
The Pitch: Would you support moving control of police department from state to local control?
"That is something we talked about back in 2011 or 2012.The mayor informed a citizen's task force to look at whether we should push for that. The citizen's commission came back and said they did not think it was warranted at the time. We are the only ones in that arrangement, but we do have local representatives that are appointed, that have been a part of the community, and so I think it's something we can certainly discuss again - maybe have another citizen's commission, but I'm not sure it's the magic thing that will solve [the crime issue]. I'm more focused on getting results, on getting crime statistics down. There are a lot of communities that have local control, and that doesn't necessarily translate to reduced crime."
ALISSIA CANADY
"The first thing we have to do is look at police staffing. I'm not saying more police officers, I'm saying making sure they have enough staff where it's needed. Police response times have been an issue for a while. I've received complaints from residents who said it took too long for us to show up, and then I've also talked to police officers that say, 'I don't have enough time between calls to even go take a potty break if I need to.' The next thing is engaging in the community because the issues as they relate to gun violence and crime are different in each community - having that conversation with the stakeholders and what they perceive as the biggest issue as it relates to crime and violence in our community. And then also what do they think are the remedies for that because as a policy maker, I may say, you know, 'We need more 'x' and the community may say we need more 'y'... I also believe that the real issue a lot of times we're dealing with is a combination of these three things I've consistently seen: substance abuse, mental health, and hopelessness. People that are optimistic about life and are a "reasonable person" don't shoot people and kill them over in most cases ... You're not dealing with a reasonable person, you're dealing with someone that has been trauma-exposed, and hasn't really learned how to properly deal with that ... So, we have got to provide more access to treatment for substance abuse and mental health."
The Pitch: Would you support moving control of police department from state to local control?
"While St. Louis did get local control, it wasn't done very smoothly. I think Kansas City could do it in a more gradual way, so it wouldn't be such a drastic change and we could get an idea of what local control might look like without going all in. We've already looked at consolidating departments like IT, so if we were to do that with different departments over time, then we won't hopefully see that whiplash effect if we ever do go for full local control."
SCOTT WAGNER
"There's still both an issue of real safety and perception of safety here in the city. What I want to do is actually bring a holistic approach to that issue. It's not just having police officers. It has to do not only with the enforcement piece, but it has to do with all the other pieces that we have kind of siloed and treated separately. Those things include everything from the preventative nature of things, we have issues with prosecution, not necessarily at the municipal level, but we want to actually have a better relationship with the prosecutor's office as well as dealing with our issues at the jail. Those things aren't necessarily city issues, but we are impacted by them and so it's taking all of those pieces and working them together at the same time."
The Pitch: Would you support moving control of police department from state to local control?
"I think our ultimate goal should be local control, but I don't believe that we should force it. And what I mean by that is - you have had essentially two parallel paths between the city and the police department since 1939. You do not just kind of throw it all together and hope it all works out. That's what St Louis did, and as you'll recall, it has caused nothing but chaos."
STEVE MILLER
"There is no simple solution to crime, which means we are going to need a multifaceted approach. We are going to have to strengthen our neighborhoods, and get them to build their buildings to include partnerships with the police department. We're going to have to build trust between the police department, and the strategy to do that is increasing social workers we have in the police department, and to have better training in both our communities. We are going to have to make certain changes with our prosecutor's office by better targeting those who have become serious criminals and not being harsh with mass incarceration. That is going to take a really local approach, a 360-degree approach."
The Pitch: Would you support moving control of police department from state to local control?
" I am open to a conversation about that. What I get worried about sometimes is people want to change things just for the purpose of change. I am focused on outcomes. I think what we need to talk about if we were to change the system, can we change outcomes? But we have to remember is we have lived with a commission system, which by the way, has consisted over the years of all Kansas Citians. These aren't people on the outside making decisions, these are people that are respected in Kansas City, and have been nominated by the government. The question is, if we change [the police board of commissioners], does it go from a five-person commission to a 13-person council? What difference will that make? ... I really would like to have that discussion."
HENRY KLEIN
" I'm not a police officer, nor am I a police administrator, so I can't give you the answer to what [the answer is to tackling violent crime.] If somebody tells me that we need more resources, let's understand what those resources are. If its dollars, fine, but the better answer would be local control ... Say you live in an area that's served by my branch [Klein manages a bank at 63rd and Prospect] and you're unhappy with this situation ... Well, you might go to the mayor because the mayor is one of the board [of police commissioners] members; you might try to seek out one of those board members; you might try to go to your local police station. But with the exception of the mayor, would any of these people have any motivation to listen to you? Where's the accountability? ... It's hard to ask of our citizens, particularly those that live in these areas particularly challenged from a crime standpoint ... how can they trust the police department when they are in need of help? In the past when I've run for mayor and people talked about local police - the idea that you would have police officers on a beat that would get to understand the residents that they serve - how can you have any of that when you don't have local control of the police department? That means what you're relegated to do is going to a police station or whatever in our community and asking them to participate. I am not saying they won't participate, I'm simply saying the link is very weak, and so I'm back to why we need local control. I'm really looking for a solution to better response rates, lower crime levels, etc. If somebody could make a really strong statement as to how we get there without local control funding, let's have that discussion. But I just don't believe the two can be exclusive, and I don't believe you can have state control and the right kind of accountability."
JERMAINE REED
"I have not made a decision personally about local control. I think that it is an issue that we as a community [should decide]. I would plan to have a task force, but it's not something that I as the mayor should champion in one way or the other. I often say, 'If it's not broke, don't fix it.' ... I think that the police commissioners have done a good job. Obviously as mayor, I will be a commissioner on the committee and there has been a pretty solid relationship between the police and the city. We have a number of issues that we need to be tackling from community policing, to being able to make sure that we are recruiting and retaining officers on the actual police force and being able to get officers out of their cars and on the streets interacting with the folks in the city. I think that it requires a larger community conversation about local control."
The Pitch: So you think the answer to solving the city's crime problem is more community policing?
"Sure. That is one [answer]. I think what we've seen with the community resource officers has been great, but we've got to be able to get more police that actually know the communities in which they are working. And so I think that requires, of course, officers that live in the community, that are working in a community. That they know who the folks are at the local church, they know who the folks are who frequent the convenience stores, or the gas station, or the grocery store, or wherever they may be. I think that type of presence and the relationships that you're able to build as community policing officers would really allow for them to create a new sort of dynamic of how they should approach policing. Because it's not that you are policing just to be policing, you should really be working to help everyone within your actual community ... And I think providing, of course, more resources for officers ... being able to make sure that we have more officers that are able to be throughout all areas of this city is important. When you look at the number of officers they we may have up north on any given night, especially on the weekend, versus how many officers are within the central city, that is an issue that I think we have to be able to tackle."
JOLIE JUSTUS
" I think that the top issue facing the city right now is the issue of violent crime and public safety. I think that you address it in a multitude of ways. The first thing is acknowledging that we have this problem, that it is a systemic issue that's not resolved just by City Hall getting involved. It's understanding that it is a symptom of an awful lot of other issues that we have. As far as specifically addressing public safety and crime, I think it's going to be incredibly important to make sure that we are doing things in a smart, holistic manner. I think that we need to continue the work that we're doing with the Kansas City Police Department and their increased emphasis on social work. The second piece of it is making sure that we have more enhanced community interaction officers the way we have been. Because that, to me, is on the ground, you're seeing results. You take a look at the Northeast part of town for instance, due to some very specific community and neighborhood programs in conjunction with the police department, we have been able to reduce the number of homicides specifically in one neighborhood ... I am also a firm believer that programs that look at violent crime as a public health issue are incredibly important because then you're starting to look at all sorts of different things including the economic status of individuals who are in higher-crime neighborhoods, housing and job opportunities, education opportunities, ensuring that we're funding our schools at a level that is able to help us with getting kids ready for kindergarten, providing conflict resolution in the school. It's really just layer, after layer, after layer, and what I will be doing as mayor of Kansas City is making sure that all of those resources are being really well hung together."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kansas City has a major violent crime problem. What to do about it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the last few weeks, we've been speaking with Kansas City mayoral candidates about how they'd use the office to approach the biggest challenges facing Kansas City. Pick up our March issue, out now, for a preview of the race.In the first two months of 2019, there have been 20 homicides in Kansas City (as of Feb.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.omct.org/en/resources/statements/libya-new-patterns-of-human-rights-violations-and-absence-of-accountability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Observations of the Libyan Anti-torture Network from January 2022 to early June 2022

Tunis, June 28, 2022 - In the wake of the International Day in support of victims of torture, the Libyan Anti-torture Network (LAN) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) come together to unveil new and troubling patterns of human rights violations and to stress the pressing need for accountability in Libya.

Political instability and government fragmentation following the postponement of December's presidential elections have created a particularly tense environment where insecurity continues to prevail, with fears of a new open conflict looming. In this context, the Libyan Anti-torture Network (LAN) and the OMCT express their deep concern over human rights violations and abuses that have occurred since January 2022.

Human rights violations in Libya have been a consistent issue for years despite the cessation of the armed conflict. However, since the beginning of this year, new widespread and systematic patterns of violations have emerged across the country in the absence of any accountability mechanisms. Perpetrators of such violations and abuses are not only not prosecuted, but they are often well integrated into the Libyan State structures and allegedly mostly funded by the State budget[1]. These armed groups commit grave violations of international law, such as unlawful killings, torture, interception, and arbitrary detention of Libyan civilians, migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers[2]. Moreover, the blurred lines between State and non-State armed groups and the precarious security environment severely impede proper access to justice for victims of such violations and constitute a serious obstruction to the transitional justice process.

Read the full briefing here.

[1] Report: Dbeibah is using his influence to remain in power in Libya, 218 News, paragraph 3, March 2022 Amnesty International, Libya: Hold Stability Support Authority militia leaders to account, May 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Libya: New patterns of human rights violations and absence of...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Observations of the Libyan Anti-torture Network from January 2022 to early June 2022 Tunis, June 28, 2022 - In the wake of the International Day in support of victims of torture, the Libyan Anti-torture Network (LAN) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) come together to unveil new and...

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/turkey-doubles-down-violations-digital-privacy-and-free-expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Turkey's recent history is rife with human rights-stifling legislation and practices. The Internet Law , its amendments, and the recent decision of Turkey's regulator (BTK ) further cemented that trend . The Internet Law and amendments require large platforms to appoint a local representative, localize their data, and speed up the removal of content on-demand from the government. Turkey has also adopted a data protection law ; however, it has failed to protect fundamental rights in practice. For instance, Turkey implemented emergency surveillance decrees , after the 2016 coup, that granted the Turkish government unrestricted access to communications data without a court order-a carte blanche for government spying. Platforms should stand with their users and uphold international human rights law and standards that protect privacy and free expression. We fear that platforms instead might knuckle under pressure from the Turkish government.

All these legal changes are happening in the midst of Turkey's rule of law and democracy deficit, and lack of independence in the judiciary. Turkey has dismissed and forced the removal of more than 30 Turkish judges and prosecutors, which the European Commission has led to self-censorship in the judiciary, further undermining its independence and impartiality. The government has also jailed political opponents, which the European Court of Human Rights has recognized, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the extensions of detention of a political opposition leader had pursued the predominant ulterior purpose of stifling pluralism and limiting freedom of political debate, a core component of a democratic society.
Forced A ppointment of Turkish Representatives or Face Hefty Fines
In Turkey, foreign companies with a large social media presence in Turkey are required to appoint a local representative by November 2nd--30 days after BTK sent them a first warning. The law requires this of companies with "daily access" of one million; but it is unclear how "daily access" is measured. This representative must be a duly incorporated company under Turkish law or a Turkish citizen. But the appointment of a legal representative is a complex decision that can make companies vulnerable to domestic legal actions, including potential arrest and criminal charges. Appointing a local representative requires difficult line-drawing choices that are hard to get right when legally mandated.

Prior to this requirement, the Turkish government sent takedown content or access-blocking demands to platforms' headquarters in the EU or the U.S. Some local representatives may now respond to such government demands, and can potentially be subject to retaliation for non-compliance with a disproportionate order.

has communicated to the Turkish Government that they won't comply with the law. Twitter, Google, and TikTok have not made any official statement about their intentions on appointing Turkish representatives, though the deadline expired on November 2nd. To date, only the Russian social media company, VKontakte a local representative in Turkey. The Turkish regulator BTK on November 4th that they imposed a first-time fine of TRY 10 million (more than 1 million USD) on social network providers who have not appointed local representatives , including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Periscope, YouTube and TikTok.
Forced Data Localization
The law creates draconian fines for those companies that do not appoint a representative and second-time fines of TRY 30 million (more than 3.5 million USD). If the provider still chooses not to comply, the BTK will prohibit Turkish taxpayers from placing ads on the provider's platform and making payments to them. Even worse, if the provider still chooses not to appoint a representative, the BTK can apply to the Peace Criminal Court to throttle (slow down) the provider's bandwidth by 50%. If the provider hasn't still appointed a representative, BTK can apply for a further bandwidth reduction; this time the judge can decide to throttle the provider's bandwidth anywhere between 50%-90%. Throttling can make sites practically inaccessible within Turkey, fortifying Turkey's censorship machine and silencing speech--a very disproportionate measure that practically censors users' ability to access online content within Turkey.

Once the data is stored in the country, the company has less ability to control the exploitation of vulnerabilities and unauthorized access. If companies keep users' data within Turkey, that nation will have an easier time accessing the data. This forces companies to comply with government demands in a country with a poor human rights record. Here, too, some local representatives may over-comply with government demands out of fear of reprisal.
Wide-ranging Privacy Rules, with No Balancing For Free Expression
Overall, this measure seeks to strengthen the Turkish government's ability to control content published in social media and make it easier for it to obtain users' data, which will expose their associations and locations.
De-indexing Contested Search Results for Violation of Personal Rights
The new amendments create a number of powerful new tools for those who wish to remove personal information off the Internet: to de-link search engine entries, order hosts to delete information, and to block foreign hosts that refuse to comply. While dealing with the consequences to privacy of an open Internet is a matter that every country is now struggling with, Turkey's provisions are overbroad, and fail to balance the equally important right of Internet users to send and share information.
Content Removal and Blocking for Violation of Personal Rights
The new amendments to the Internet law and BTK decisions would require providers (via its local representative) to de-index from their search results users' names from the internet address of a publication that violates users' personal rights upon a court order--a similar provision to that of the 2014 European Right to be Forgotten . The EU standard, however, asks whether an individual's privacy rights outweigh the public's interest in having continued access to the data. No matter how carefully a de-indexation provision is drafted, conflicting principles of due process and free expression inevitably render it a complex and contested task. The problem is exacerbated due to Turkey's lack of independence of the judiciary. Turkey is also for its internet censorship mac hine, and its government's obscuring of f acts from Turkish online historical records including denunciations of government corruption. Check several examples of news censored based on "personal rights." ).

Users can also directly ask the Peace Criminal Court to order the Union of Access Providers to remove content or block access within 24 hours. According to the new amendments, the Union of Access Providers (an association that reunites all access providers in the country) will notify hosting, access, and content providers (via the local representatives) to comply with the court order in four hours, and in Turkish.

This quick turnaround would encourage providers to remove legal speech to avoid steep fines. Turkey lacks an independent judiciary and refuses to respect due process standards creates a fertile ground for meritless court orders. This can lead to the removal of speech that silenced voices that deserve to be heard, including those denouncing government corruption or other misconduct.
Access Blocking for Violation of the Right to Private Life
Companies should push back against orders that are inconsistent with the permissible limitation test under international human rights law. In addition to legal pressure and hefty fines, the UN Special Rapporteur on Free Expression expressed concern that Internet Service Providers have also "faced extralegal intimidation in certain jurisdictions, such as threats to the safety of their employees and infrastructure in the event of non-compliance."
Content Removal and Blocking under International Human Rights Standards
Further, the individual must also submit their request to the Peace Criminal Court within 24 hours. The judge will decide within 48-hour deadline, otherwise the access blocking ends automatically. In case of emergency, BTK can carry out the access blocking directly upon the BTK's Chairman order and submit it to the Peace Criminal Court. The judge can review the request retroactively within 48 hours.

Further, prohibiting a site or a dissemination system from publishing material that may be critical of the government or the political social system espoused by the government is also inconsistent with the three-step test. Nor can it be as a justification for "the muzzling of any advocacy of multi-party democracy, democratic tenets and human rights. Nor, under any circumstance, can an attack on a person, because of the exercise of their freedom of expression, including such forms of attack as arbitrary arrest, torture, threats to life and killing." The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression has gone further recommending States to only seek to restrict content upon a court order issued by an independent and impartial judicial authority, with due process and full compliance with the legality, necessity, proportionality, and legitimacy principles.

"Mandatory blocking of entire websites, IP addresses, ports, network protocols or types of uses (such as social networking) is an extreme measure - analogous to banning a newspaper or broadcaster - which can only be justified in accordance with international standards, for example where necessary to protect children against sexual abuse."

Press Freedom Crisis in Turkey and Podcasts as Alternative Channels
Blocking of websites is always an inherently disproportionate measure under international human rights law. It leads to over-blocking, false positives, false negatives, causes a serious interference with the Internet's infrastructure, reduces internet traffic speed, and does not solve the root cause problem.

Amidst the state capture of media , the Internet plays a pivotal role. As , journalists, academics, and writers who criticize the government risk criminal prosecution and harassment. Turkish citizens increasingly experience social and economic problems, too; the Turkish lira has hit record lows against the U.S. dollar. Amidst this atmosphere, Turkish citizens find it hard to obtain newsworthy information in a neutral, objective manner, or to voice their concerns.
Tech Platforms Must Respect Human Rights
Podcasts have become a for communication of ideas in Turkey. However, a recent regulation threatens this last bastion of freedom. In August 2019, the government platforms that offer radio, television, or on-demand publication services over the internet to obtain a license to continue operating in Turkey. Spotify was recently compelled to obtain the license, to avoid access blocking within Turkey. Netflix, upon obtaining the license, faced systematic censorship on its platform. Academics predict the licensing requirement will pave the way for censoring on Spotify as well.

Social media companies must respect international human rights law, ev en when it conflicts with local laws. The UN Special Rapporteur on free expression has called upon companies to recognize human rights law as the authoritative global standard for freedom of expression on their platforms, not domestic laws. We agree. Human rights law "gives companies the tools to articulate and develop policies and processes that respect democratic norms and counter authoritarian demands." Likewise, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provides that companies must respect human rights and avoid contributing to human rights violations. Companies must also "seek to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to their operations ..., even if they have not contributed to those impacts."

"First, it carefully examines the domestic law cited to assess its specific requirements and application to the particular data access or removal requested. If the law is ambiguous, Google may interpret it in a narrow manner to avoid or restrict the government's request. Next, its practice is to apply domestic law only to content and data within the scope of the issuing jurisdiction."

GNI also explains that Google reaches out to the relevant government entity to seek clarification on how the content is violating local laws when the removal request is unclear. This may include, for example, where the content is precisely located (specific URLs) and which portion of the content allegedly infringes the law. The GNI report also explains how Google assesses risks to users in individual jurisdictions when determining where data should be physically collected and retained:

"The company may vary the nature of data collected or processed in specific jurisdictions based on these risks. The company also uses encryption, and limits on internal access, to mitigate risks to data that is collected and stored."

Turkey Data Protection Adequacy Standards After the Schrems Rulings
Google's Transparency report for Turkey explains that Google assesses such government demands under its community rules. Google has reported that they refused to take down content including speech by Kurdish minorities and Gezi Parki protestors as well as corruption claims involving public officials and politicians. On the other hand, Google complied with requests when the content concerned national security interests or violated Google community rules. It remains to be seen if or to what extent Google will comply with the Social Media Law.

While, after a 35-year legislative process, Turkey adopted a data protection law that mirrors the previous EU Data Protection Directive, Turkey has not yet obtained an adequate level of data protection equivalent to the European Union. The adequacy standard allows the transfer of personal data from the EU to Turkey ( and vice versa ) without any further safeguard being necessary. Turkish Data Protection Authority recently published a public announcement stating they are preparing for negotiations with the European Commission for an adequacy decision.

"the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, relevant legislation, both general and sectoral, including concerning public security, defence, national security and criminal law and the access of public authorities to personal data, as well as the implementation of such legislation..., case-law, as well as effective and enforceable data subject rights and effective administrative and judicial redress for the data subjects whose personal data are being transferred;"

Government Surveillance
The Court of Justice of the European Union judgment in Schrems I. v. Data Protection Commissioner, also made clear that legal frameworks that grant public authorities access to data on a generalized basis compromise "the essence of the fundamental right to private life," as guaranteed by Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. In other words, any law that compromises the "essence to right private life" cannot ever be proportionate nor necessary.

Turkey has also adopted more than thirty decrees during its two-year state of emergency, extended seven times. Following the 2016 coup attempt in Turkey, the Executive Branch adopted these decrees without parliamentary approval or oversight. The decrees resulted in permanent legislative and structural changes and mass dismissal of public servants, falling short of EU human rights standards. grants many unspecified institutions unfettered access to communications data without a court order. The surveillance decree was designed to be used against coup plotters and so-called "terrorist organizations." Such unfettered power violates the rule of law and the Principle of Legality , necessity and proportionality under international human rights law. The decree also compels companies to comply with BTK reques ts. Failure to do so leads to hefty fines, and the possibility that the BTK will take over an ISP's premises.
Conclusion
EFF has not done a full assessment of Turkish surveillance laws and practice, however, we've learned from Citizen Lab that Turkey's largest ISP , Türk Telekom, (of which the Turkish government owns 30%) had used deep packet inspection to redirect hundreds of users in Turkey to nation-state spyware when those users attempted to download certain apps. Citizen Lab also found that DPIs were being used to block political, journalistic, and human rights content. Another leaked document revealed that Türk Telekom use s deep packet inspection (DPI) to spy on users and extract not only "usernames and passwords from unencrypted traffic, but also their IP addresses, what sites they'd visited and when." These are just a tip of the iceberg of the real level of privacy and data protection in Turkey.

Turkey's poor human rights records should be a wake-up call for platforms to stand with their users and uphold international human rights law. Companies should not remove content that is inconsistent with the permissible limitation test. Blocking measures, in our opinion, are always inconsistent with the necessary and proportionate principles . Companies should legally challenge such blocking orders. They should also fight back strategically under any pressure from the Turkish government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Turkey Doubles Down on Violations of Digital Privacy and Free Expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Turkey's recent history is rife with human rights-stifling legislation and practices. The Internet Law, its amendments, and the recent decision of Turkey's regulator (BTK) further cemented that trend. The Internet Law and amendments require large platforms to appoint a local representative,...

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.voanews.com/a/after-jordan-deadly-fuel-protests-calls-grow-for-reforms/6886283.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Weeks of protests by truckers over high fuel prices have stalled Jordan's economy and resulted in the killing of a senior Jordanian police officer.

In recent days, three other Jordanian police officers were killed in a raid on the suspected killers' hideout, where at least one militant Islamist was shot and killed.

Jordan's government met some of the striking transport workers' demands in the hopes they would return to work. But as Jordanian analyst Osama al-Sharif pointed out, underlying problems remain unresolved as ordinary Jordanians feel squeezed by the steady rise in fuel prices.

Writing in the Saudi Arab News, the analyst said the price hike has deeply impacted the cost of living for many Jordanians, whose average monthly salary hovers around $700. However, kerosene - the essential heating oil for poor families and many others - currently costs $1,200, making it difficult to stay warm during the winter.

While the government said the price of oil derivatives in Jordan could decrease in the new year, it argues it cannot abolish taxes on the commodity nor afford to subsidize it because that would have a negative impact on the troubled state budget.

Osama al-Sharif told VOA that Jordan needs to borrow $2.8 billion every year, which creates a deficit and increases the national debt. Up to 75% of the state budget goes to pay public sector salaries, leaving almost nothing for capital expenditures, he said, explaining the dilemma. The economy is not producing new projects or creating jobs and the economic situation, he said, needs reform.

"We do have this black hole in our budget which we are unable to cover so the government increases taxes and that, of course, that raises the prices of oil derivatives to historic levels which people simply cannot afford," he said. "I'm really surprised that the government didn't anticipate a backlash as we have seen in the public transportation strike that took place. Any incident will trigger something, unfortunately, of what we have seen in the past 2 to 3 weeks."

Jordanian analyst Amer al-Sabaileh, a nonresident fellow at the Washington-based Stimson Center, argues that intentional increases in the fuel prices by the government in winter should have been reconsidered.

Writing in the Jordan Times newspaper, he said "in delicate moments like this, Jordan needs a government that works to guarantee that Jordanians are not victims of spiraling problems but can work to secure their basic needs. There is no doubt that Jordan has been facing huge economic challenges and regional risks, but Jordan must work to avoid any kind of internal protests, popular anger and instability."

Meanwhile, though protests and violence in Jordan are decreasing, the U.S. Embassy in Amman advised restricting nighttime travel outside of the capital.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
After Jordan's Deadly Fuel Protests, Calls Grow for Reforms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Weeks of protests by truckers over high fuel prices have stalled Jordan's economy and resulted in the killing of a senior Jordanian police officer. In recent days, three other Jordanian police officers were killed in a raid on the suspected killers' hideout, where at least one militant Islamist was shot and killed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

The Chinese government has reportedly arbitrarily detained more than a million Muslims in reeducation camps since 2017. Most of the people who have been detained are Uyghur, a predominantly Turkic-speaking ethnic group primarily in China's northwestern region of Xinjiang. Beyond the detentions, Uyghurs in the region have been subjected to intense surveillance, forced labor, and involuntary sterilizations, among other rights abuses.

The United States and several other foreign governments have described China's actions in Xinjiang as genocide, while the UN human rights office said that the violations could constitute crimes against humanity. Chinese officials have said that they have not infringed on Uyghurs' rights and claimed that they closed the reeducation camps in 2019. However, international journalists and researchers have documented an ongoing system of mass detention throughout the region using satellite images, individual testimonies, and leaked Chinese government documents.

When did mass detentions of Muslims start?

An estimated eight hundred thousand to two million Uyghurs and other Muslims, including ethnic Kazakhs and Uzbeks, have been detained since 2017, according to international researchers and U.S. government officials [PDF]. The Chinese government calls the facilities "vocational education and training centers;" the most common terms used by international media organizations and researchers are reeducation camps, internment camps, and detention camps. Some activists describe them as concentration camps.

Outside of the camps, the eleven million Uyghurs living in Xinjiang-officially called the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region-have continued to suffer from a decades-long crackdown by Chinese authorities.

Experts estimate that reeducation efforts started in Xinjiang in 2014 and were drastically expanded in 2017. Beginning that year, they documented the construction of new reeducation camps and expansion of existing facilities for mass detention. Reuters journalists, observing satellite imagery, found that thirty-nine of the camps almost tripled in size between April 2017 and August 2018; they covered a total area roughly the size of 140 soccer fields. Similarly, analyzing local and national budgets over the past few years, Germany-based Xinjiang expert Adrian Zenz found that construction spending on security-related facilities in Xinjiang increased by 20 billion yuan (around $2.96 billion) in 2017.

In late 2019, Xinjiang's governor said that people detained in the reeducation camps had "graduated." Journalists found that several camps were indeed closed. But the following year, researchers at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) identified [PDF] more than 380 suspected detention facilities using satellite images. They found that China refashioned some lower-security reeducation camps into formal detention centers or prisons; expanded existing detention centers; and constructed new, high-security detention centers throughout Xinjiang. (Chinese officials have said that ASPI is an anti-China tool funded by Australia and the United States.) Instead of detaining people in reeducation camps, authorities have increasingly used the formal justice system to imprison people for years. In 2022, Human Rights Watch reported that half a million people had been prosecuted since 2017, according to Xinjiang government figures. The Associated Press found that in one county, an estimated one in twenty-five people had been sentenced to prison on terrorism-related charges, all of them Uyghurs.

What has happened in the reeducation camps?

Most people detained in the reeducation camps were never charged with crimes and had no legal avenues to challenge their detentions. The detainees seem to have been targeted for a variety of reasons, according to media reports, including traveling to or contacting people from any of the twenty-six countries China considers sensitive, such as Turkey and Afghanistan; attending services at mosques; having more than three children; and sending texts containing Quranic verses. Often, their only crime is being Muslim, human rights groups say, adding that many Uyghurs have been labeled as extremists simply for practicing their religion.

Information on what happened in the camps remains limited, but many detainees who have since fled China described harsh conditions. The UN human rights office released a report [PDF] in 2022 based on interviews with dozens of people, including twenty-six individuals who were detained, that found "patterns of torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment" in the camps between 2017 and 2019.

The UN report affirmed previous findings by international journalists, researchers, and rights organizations. Various exposés showed that detainees were forced to pledge loyalty to the CCP and renounce Islam, as well as sing praises for communism and learn Mandarin. Some people reported prison-like conditions, with cameras and microphones monitoring their every move and utterance. Others said they were tortured and subjected to sleep deprivation during interrogations. Women have shared stories of sexual abuse, including rape. Some released detainees contemplated suicide or witnessed others kill themselves.

Detention also disrupted families. Children whose parents were sent to the camps were often forced to stay in state-run orphanages. Many Uyghur parents living outside of China faced a difficult choice: return home to be with their children and risk detention, or stay abroad, separated from their children and unable to contact them.

What do Chinese officials say about the camps?

Government officials first denied the camps' existence. By late 2018, they started acknowledging that there were "vocational education and training centers" in Xinjiang. They publicly stated that the camps had two purposes: to teach Mandarin, Chinese laws, and vocational skills, and to prevent citizens from becoming influenced by extremist ideas, to "nip terrorist activities in the bud," according to a government report. Pointing out that Xinjiang has not experienced a terrorist attack since December 2016, officials claimed the camps have prevented violence.

As global condemnation of the abuses has grown, Chinese officials and state media have worked to discredit reports on Xinjiang using a range of tactics, including disseminating disinformation and harassing activists. They have repeated a narrative that "anti-China forces" in the United States and other Western countries are spreading "vicious lies." Beijing tried to prevent the UN human rights office from releasing its report. After its release, Chinese officials described it as false information and published a rebuttal describing how foreign governments and organizations "spread numerous rumors and lies" about Xinjiang.

Why is China targeting Uyghurs in Xinjiang?

Chinese officials are concerned that Uyghurs hold extremist and separatist ideas, and they viewed the camps as a way of eliminating threats to China's territorial integrity, government, and population.

Xinjiang has been claimed by China since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) took power in 1949. Some Uyghurs living there refer to the region as East Turkestan and argue that it ought to be independent from China. Xinjiang takes up one-sixth of China's landmass and borders eight countries, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kazakhstan.

Under Chinese President Xi Jinping, the CCP has pushed to Sinicize religion, or shape all religions to conform to the officially atheist party's doctrines and the majority Han-Chinese society's customs. Though the government recognizes five religions -Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam, and Protestantism-it has long feared that foreigners could use religious practice to spur separatism.

The Chinese government has come to characterize any expression of Islam in Xinjiang as extremist, a reaction to past independence movements and occasional outbursts of violence. The government has blamed terrorist attacks on the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a separatist group founded by militant Uyghurs, in recent decades. (In 2020, the United States removed the group from its list of terrorist organizations, saying there was no credible evidence that the group had operated for at least the previous decade.) Following the 9/11 attacks, the Chinese government started justifying its actions toward Uyghurs as part of the Global War on Terrorism. It said it would combat what it calls "the three evils"-separatism, religious extremism, and international terrorism-at all costs.

In 2009, rioting in Xinjiang's capital, Ürümqi, broke out as mostly Uyghur demonstrators protested against state-incentivized Han Chinese migration in the region and widespread economic and cultural discrimination. Nearly two hundred people were killed, and experts say it marked a turning point in Beijing's attitude toward Uyghurs. In the eyes of Beijing, all Uyghurs could potentially be terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. During the next few years, authorities blamed Uyghurs for attacks at a local government office, train station, and open-air market, as well as Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

While visiting Xinjiang in 2014, Xi warned of the "toxicity of religious extremism" and advocated for using the tools of "dictatorship" to eliminate Islamist extremism in a series of secret speeches. In the speeches, revealed by the New York Times in 2019, Xi did not explicitly call for arbitrary detention but laid the groundwork for the crackdown in Xinjiang.

In 2017, Xinjiang's government passed an anti-extremism law that prohibited people from growing long beards and wearing veils in public. It also officially recognized the use of training centers to eliminate extremism. Arbitrary detention became widely used by regional officials under Chen Quanguo, Xinjiang's Communist Party secretary, who moved to the region in 2016 after holding a top leadership position in Tibet. Known for increasing the number of police and security checkpoints, as well as state control over Buddhist monasteries in Tibet, Chen dramatically intensified security in Xinjiang. He repeatedly called on officials to "round up everyone who should be rounded up," according to the New York Times report. Chen left the position in late 2021.

Are economic factors involved in this crackdown?

Xinjiang is an important link in China's Belt and Road Initiative, a massive development plan stretching through Asia and Europe. Beijing hopes to eradicate any possibility of separatist activity to continue its development of Xinjiang, which is home to China's largest coal and natural gas reserves. Human rights organizations have observed that the economic benefits of resource extraction and development are often disproportionately enjoyed by Han Chinese people, and Uyghur people are increasingly marginalized.

Many people who were arbitrarily detained have been forced to work, according to multiple reports [PDF]. ASPI estimated that, between 2017 and 2020, eighty thousand previously detained Uyghurs were sent to factories throughout China linked to eighty-three global brands. Researchers from the Center for Strategic and International Studies say forced labor is an important element of the government's plan for Xinjiang's economic development, which includes making it a hub of textile and apparel manufacturing. Chinese officials have described the policy as "poverty alleviation."

What is happening outside the camps in Xinjiang?

International journalists who have visited the region say that Xinjiang has been turned into a surveillance state that relies on cutting-edge technology to monitor millions of people. Under Chen, Xinjiang was placed under a grid management system, as described in media reports, in which cities and villages were split into squares of about five hundred people. Each square has a police station that closely monitors inhabitants by regularly scanning their identification cards, taking their photographs and fingerprints, and searching their cell phones. In some cities, such as western Xinjiang's Kashgar, police checkpoints are found every one hundred yards or so, and facial-recognition cameras are everywhere. The government also collects and stores citizens' biometric data through a required program advertised as Physicals for All.

Much of that information is collected in a massive database, known as the Integrated Joint Operations Platform, which then uses artificial intelligence to create lists of so-called suspicious people. Classified Chinese government documents released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in 2019 revealed that more than fifteen thousand Xinjiang residents were placed in detention centers during a seven-day period in June 2017 after being flagged by the algorithm. The Chinese government called the leaked documents "pure fabrication."

Many aspects of Muslim life have been erased, journalists reporting from Xinjiang have found. Communist Party members have been recruited since 2014 to stay in Uyghur homes and report on any perceived "extremist" behaviors, including fasting during Ramadan. Officials have destroyed thousands of mosques, often claiming the buildings were shoddily constructed and unsafe for worshippers. Halal food, which is prepared according to Islamic law, has become harder to find in Ürümqi as the local government has launched a campaign against it.

Uyghur and other minority women have reported forced sterilizations and intrauterine device insertions [PDF], and officials have threatened to detain anyone who violates birth-control orders or has too many children. Analyzing government data, Zenz found that in Xinjiang's two prefectures with the highest proportions of Uyghurs, the natural population growth rates (which exclude population change from migration) fell by 84 percent between 2015 and 2018, and declined further still in 2019. Uyghur parents are banned from giving their babies certain names, including Mohammed and Medina.

Beijing has also pressured other governments to repatriate Uyghurs who have fled China, with a 2022 report [PDF] by the Wilson Center finding that more than 1,500 Uyghurs abroad have been detained in their host countries or forced to return to China. In 2015, for example, Thailand returned more than one hundred Uyghurs, and in 2017 Egypt deported several students. The documents released by ICIJ showed that the Chinese government instructed officials to collect information on Chinese Uyghurs living abroad and called for many to be arrested as soon as they reentered China.

What has the global response been?

Much of the world has condemned China's detention of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. The UN human rights office has urged China to release people who have been arbitrarily detained and disclose the whereabouts of those who are missing. After the office released its report in 2022, several Western countries on the UN Human Rights Council were considering a motion against China, potentially with an investigative mechanism.

Lawmakers in several countries, including Canada and the United Kingdom, have declared that China is committing genocide against Uyghurs; the U.S. government was the first to do so, in January 2021. Many countries have sanctioned Chinese officials and entities linked to rights abuses. The European Union (EU) also sanctioned Chinese officials in 2021, marking the first time the bloc placed restrictions on China since 1989.

Additionally, foreign governments have imposed restrictions to address forced labor in Xinjiang. The United States has essentially banned all imports from the region through its Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, and the United Kingdom has proposed measures to fine companies that fail to guarantee their supply chains do not use forced labor. The European Parliament adopted a nonbinding resolution in mid-2022 urging EU countries to ban imports made with forced labor.

China's partners have been notably silent. Prioritizing their economic ties and strategic relationships with China, many governments have ignored the human rights abuses. In June 2022, sixty countries signed a statement calling for the UN human rights chief to respect that Xinjiang-related issues are "China's internal affairs" and stating that they "oppose the politicization of human rights." Muslim-majority countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were among the signatories; human rights groups have criticized Muslim-majority countries for condoning the abuses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China's Repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than a million Muslims have been arbitrarily detained in China's Xinjiang region. The reeducation camps are just one part of the government's crackdown on Uyghurs.

# data[].attributes.body
San Francisco, California - 15:19, 05/08/2001 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four#Political_geography

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nineteen Eighty-Four (also published as 1984) is a dystopian social science fiction novel and cautionary tale by English writer George Orwell. It was published on 8 June 1949 by Secker & Warburg as Orwell's ninth and final book completed in his lifetime. Thematically, it centres on the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance and repressive regimentation of people and behaviours within society. Orwell, a democratic socialist, modelled the authoritarian state in the novel on Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany. More broadly, the novel examines the role of truth and facts within societies and the ways in which they can be manipulated.

The story takes place in an imagined future in the year 1984, when much of the world is in perpetual war. Great Britain, now known as Airstrip One, has become a province of the totalitarian superstate Oceania, which is led by Big Brother, a dictatorial leader supported by an intense cult of personality manufactured by the Party's Thought Police. Through the Ministry of Truth, the Party engages in omnipresent government surveillance, historical negationism, and constant propaganda to persecute individuality and independent thinking.

The protagonist, Winston Smith, is a diligent mid-level worker at the Ministry of Truth who secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion. He keeps a forbidden diary and begins a relationship with his colleague Julia, and they learn about a shadowy resistance group called the Brotherhood. However, their contact with the Brotherhood turns out to be a Party agent, and Smith is arrested. He is subjected to months of psychological manipulation and torture by the Ministry of Love and is released once he has come to love Big Brother.

Nineteen Eighty-Four has become a classic literary example of political and dystopian fiction. It also popularised the term " Orwellian" as an adjective, with many terms used in the novel entering common usage, including "Big Brother", " doublethink", " Thought Police", " thoughtcrime", " Newspeak", and " 2 + 2 = 5". Parallels have been drawn between the novel's subject matter and real life instances of totalitarianism, mass surveillance, and violations of freedom of expression among other themes. included the novel on its list of the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to 2005, and it was placed on the Modern Library's 100 Best Novels list, reaching number 13 on the editors' list and number 6 on the readers' list. In 2003, it was listed at number eight on The Big Read survey by the BBC.

The Orwell Archive at University College London contains undated notes about ideas that evolved into Nineteen Eighty-Four. The notebooks have been deemed "unlikely to have been completed later than January 1944, and there is "strong suspicion that some of the material in them dates back to the early part of the war".

In one 1948 letter, Orwell claims to have "first thought of [the book] in 1943," while in another he says he thought of it in 1944 and cites 1943's Tehran Conference as inspiration: "What it is really meant to do is to discuss the implications of dividing the world up into 'Zones of Influence' (I thought of it in 1944 as a result of the Tehran Conference), and in addition to indicate by parodying them the intellectual implications of totalitarianism." Orwell had toured Austria in May 1944 and observed maneuvering he thought would likely lead to separate Soviet and Allied Zones of Occupation.

In January 1944, literature professor Gleb Struve introduced Orwell to Yevgeny Zamyatin's 1924 dystopian novel . In his response Orwell expressed an interest in the genre, and informed Struve that he had begun writing ideas for one of his own, "that may get written sooner or later." In 1946, Orwell wrote about the 1931 dystopian novel Brave New World by Aldous Huxley in his article "Freedom and Happiness" for the Tribune, and noted similarities to We. By this time Orwell had scored a critical and commercial hit with his 1945 political satire Animal Farm, which raised his profile. For a follow-up he decided to produce a dystopian work of his own.

In a June 1944 meeting with Fredric Warburg, co-founder of his British publisher Secker & Warburg, shortly before the release of Animal Farm, Orwell announced that he had written the first 12 pages of his new novel. He could only earn a living from journalism, however, and predicted the book would not see a release before 1947. Progress was slow going; by the end of September 1945 Orwell had written some 50 pages. Orwell became disenchanted with the restrictions and pressures involved with journalism and grew to detest city life in London. His health also suffered, with the harsh winter worsening his case of bronchiectasis and a lesion in one lung.

In May 1946, Orwell arrived on the Scottish island of Jura. He had wanted to retreat to a Hebridean island for several years, to which David Astor recommended he stay at Barnhill, a remote farmhouse on the island that his family owned. Barnhill had no electricity or hot water, but it was here where Orwell intermittently drafted and finished Nineteen Eighty-Four. His first stay lasted until October 1946, during which he made little progress on the few alredy completed pages and at one point, did no work on it for three months. After spending the winter in London Orwell returned to Jura; in May 1947 he reported to Warburg that despite progress being slow and difficult, he was roughly a third of a way through. He sent his "ghastly mess" of a first draft manuscript to London where Miranda Christen volunteered to type a clean version. Orwell's health took a turn in September, however, and was confined to bed with inflammation of the lungs. He lost almost two stone in weight and had recurring night sweats, but he decided not to see a doctor and continued writing. On 7 November 1947, he completed the first draft in bed and subsequently travelled to East Kilbride near Glasgow for medical treatment, where a specialist confirmed a chronic and infectious case of tuberculosis.

Orwell was discharged in the summer of 1948, after which he returned to Jura and produced a full second draft of Nineteen Eighty-Four, which he finished in November. He asked Warburg to have someone come to Barnhill and retype the manuscript, which was so untidy the task was only possible if Orwell was present as only he could understand it. The previous volunteer had left the country and no other could be found at short notice, so an impatient Orwell retyped it himself at a rate of roughly 4,000 words a day during bouts of fever and bloody coughing fits. On 4 December 1948, Orwell sent the finished manuscript to Secker & Warburg and left Barnill for good in January 1949. He recovered at a sanitorium in the Cotswolds.

Shortly before completion of the second draft, Orwell hesitated between two titles for the novel: The Last Man in Europe, an early title, and Nineteen Eighty-Four. Warburg suggested the latter, which he took to be a more commercially viable choice. There has been a theory - doubted by Dorian Lynskey (author of a 2019 book about Nineteen Eighty-Four) - that 1984 was chosen simply as an inversion of the year 1948, the year in which it was being completed. Lynskey says the idea was "first suggested by Orwell's US publisher," and it was also mentioned by Christopher Hitchens in his introduction to the 2003 edition of Animal Farm and 1984, which also notes that the date was meant to give "an immediacy and urgency to the menace of totalitarian rule". However, Lynskey does not believe the inversion theory:

This idea [...] seems far too cute for such a serious book. [...] Scholars have raised other possibilities. [His wife] Eileen wrote a poem for her old school's centenary called 'End of the Century: 1984.' G. K. Chesterton's 1904 political satire The Napoleon of Notting Hill, which mocks the art of prophecy, opens in 1984. The year is also a significant date in The Iron Heel. But all of these connections are exposed as no more than coincidences by the early drafts of the novel [...] First he wrote 1980, then 1982, and only later 1984. The most fateful date in literature was a late amendment."

In the run up to publication Orwell called the novel "a beastly book" and expressed some disappointment towards it, thinking it would have been improved had he not been so ill. This was typical of Orwell, who had talked down his other books shortly before their release. Nevertheless, the book was enthusiastically received by Secker & Warburg, who acted quick; before Orwell had left Jura he rejected their proposed blurb that portrayed it as "a thriller mixed up with a love story." He also refused a proposal from the American Book of the Month Club to release an edition without the appendix and chapter on Goldstein's book, a decision which Warburg claimed cut off about £40,000 in sales.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was published on 8 June 1949 in the UK; Orwell predicated earnings of around £500. A first print of 25,575 copies was followed by a further 5,000 copies in March and August 1950. The novel had the most immediate impact in the US, following its release there on 13 June 1949 by Harcourt Brace, & Co. An initial print of 20,000 copies was quickly followed by another 10,000 on 1 July, and again on 7 September. By 1970, over 8 million copies had been sold in the US and in 1984, it topped the country's all-time best seller list.

In June 1952, Orwell's widow Sonia Bronwell sold the only surviving manuscript at a charity auction for £50. The draft remains the only surviving literary manuscript from Orwell, and is presently held at the John Hay Library at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island.

In 1984, civilisation has been ravaged by world war, civil conflict, and revolution. Airstrip One (formerly known as Great Britain) is a province of Oceania, one of the three totalitarian super-states that rule the world. It is ruled by "The Party" under the ideology of " Ingsoc" (a Newspeak shortening of "English Socialism") and the mysterious leader Big Brother, who has an intense cult of personality. The Party brutally purges out anyone who does not fully conform to their regime, using the Thought Police and constant surveillance through telescreens (two-way televisions), cameras, and hidden microphones. Those who fall out of favour with the Party become "unpersons", disappearing with all evidence of their existence destroyed.

In London, Winston Smith is a member of the Outer Party, working at the Ministry of Truth, where he rewrites historical records to conform to the state's ever-changing version of history. Winston revises past editions of , while the original documents are destroyed after being dropped into ducts known as memory holes, which lead to an immense furnace. He secretly opposes the Party's rule and dreams of rebellion, despite knowing that he is already a " thought-criminal" and is likely to be caught one day.

While in a prole neighbourhood he meets Mr. Charrington, the owner of an antiques shop, and buys a diary where he writes criticisms of the Party and Big Brother. To his dismay, when he visits a prole quarter he discovers they have no political consciousness. As he works in the Ministry of Truth, he observes Julia, a young woman maintaining the novel-writing machines at the ministry, whom Winston suspects of being a spy, and develops an intense hatred of her. He vaguely suspects that his superior, an Inner Party official O'Brien, is part of an enigmatic underground resistance movement known as the Brotherhood, formed by Big Brother's reviled political rival Emmanuel Goldstein.

One day, Julia secretly hands Winston a love note, and the two begin a secret affair. Julia explains that she also loathes the Party, but Winston observes that she is politically apathetic and uninterested in overthrowing the regime. Initially meeting in the country, they later meet in a rented room above Mr. Charrington's shop. During the affair, Winston remembers the disappearance of his family during the civil war of the 1950s and his tense relationship with his estranged wife Katharine. Weeks later, O'Brien invites Winston to his flat, where he introduces himself as a member of the Brotherhood and sends Winston a copy of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Goldstein. Meanwhile, during the nation's Hate Week, Oceania's enemy suddenly changes from Eurasia to Eastasia, which goes mostly unnoticed. Winston is recalled to the Ministry to help make the necessary revisions to the records. Winston and Julia read parts of Goldstein's book, which explains how the Party maintains power, the true meanings of its slogans, and the concept of perpetual war. It argues that the Party can be overthrown if proles rise up against it. However, Winston never gets the opportunity to read the chapter that explains 'why' the Party is motivated to maintain power.

Winston and Julia are captured when Mr. Charrington is revealed to be a Thought Police agent, and imprisoned at the Ministry of Love. O'Brien arrives, also revealing himself as a Thought Police agent. O'Brien tells Winston that he will never know whether the Brotherhood actually exists and that Goldstein's book was written collaboratively by him and other Party members. Over several months, Winston is starved and tortured to bring his beliefs in line with the Party. O'Brien takes Winston to Room 101 for the final stage of re-education, which contains each prisoner's worst fear. When confronted with a cage holding frenzied rats, Winston betrays Julia by wishing the torture upon her instead.

Winston is released back into public life and continues to frequent the Chestnut Tree café. One day, Winston encounters Julia, who was also tortured. Both reveal that they betrayed the other and no longer possess mutual affections. Back in the café, a news alert celebrates Oceania's supposed massive victory over Eurasian armies in Africa. Winston finally accepts that he loves Big Brother.

Winston Smith - the 39-year old protagonist who is a phlegmatic everyman harbouring thoughts of rebellion and is curious about the Party's power and the past before the Revolution.

Julia - Winston's lover who is a covert "rebel from the waist downwards" who publicly espouses Party doctrine as a member of the fanatical Junior Anti-Sex League. Julia enjoys her small acts of rebellion and has no interest in giving up her lifestyle.

O'Brien - A mysterious character, O'Brien is a member of the Inner Party who poses as a member of The Brotherhood, the counter-revolutionary resistance, to catch Winston. He is a spy intending to deceive, trap, and capture Winston and Julia. O'Brien has a servant named Martin.

Aaronson, Jones, and Rutherford - former members of the Inner Party whom Winston vaguely remembers as among the original leaders of the Revolution, long before he had heard of Big Brother. They confessed to treasonable conspiracies with foreign powers and were then executed in the political purges of the 1960s. In between their confessions and executions, Winston saw them drinking in the Chestnut Tree Café-with broken noses, suggesting that their confessions had been obtained by torture. Later, in the course of his editorial work, Winston sees newspaper evidence contradicting their confessions, but drops it into a memory hole. Eleven years later, he is confronted with the same photograph during his interrogation.

Ampleforth - Winston's one-time Records Department colleague who was imprisoned for leaving the word "God" in a Kipling poem as he could not find another rhyme for "rod"; Winston encounters him at the Ministry of Love. Ampleforth is a dreamer and intellectual who takes pleasure in his work, and respects poetry and language, traits which cause him disfavour with the Party.

Charrington - an officer of the Thought Police posing as a sympathetic antiques dealer amongst the proles.

Katharine Smith - the emotionally indifferent wife whom Winston "can't get rid of". Despite disliking sexual intercourse, Katharine married Winston because it was their "duty to the Party". Although she was a "goodthinkful" ideologue, they separated because the couple could not conceive children. Divorce is not permitted, but couples who cannot have children may live separately. For much of the story Winston lives in vague hope that Katharine may die or could be "got rid of" so that he may marry Julia. He regrets not having killed her by pushing her over the edge of a quarry when he had the chance many years previously.

Tom Parsons - Winston's naïve neighbour, and an ideal member of the Outer Party: an uneducated, suggestible man who is utterly loyal to the Party, and fully believes in its perfect image. He is socially active and participates in the Party activities for his social class. He is friendly towards Smith, and despite his political conformity punishes his bullying son for firing a catapult at Winston. Later, as a prisoner, Winston sees Parsons is in the Ministry of Love, as his daughter had reported him to the Thought Police, saying she heard him speak against Big Brother in his sleep. Even this does not dampen his belief in the Party, and he states he could do "good work" in the hard labour camps.

Mrs. Parsons - Parsons's wife is a wan and hapless woman who is intimidated by her own children.
The Parsons children - a nine-year-old son and seven-year-old daughter. Both are members of the Spies, a youth organization that focuses on indoctrinating children with Party ideals and training them to report any suspected incidents of unorthodoxy. They represent the new generation of Oceanian citizens, without memory of life before Big Brother, and without family ties or emotional sentiment; the model society envisioned by the Inner Party.

Syme - Winston's colleague at the Ministry of Truth, a lexicographer involved in compiling a new edition of the Newspeak dictionary. Although he is enthusiastic about his work and support for the Party, Winston notes, "He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly." Winston predicts, correctly, that Syme will become an unperson.

Additionally, the following characters, mentioned in the novel, play a significant role in the world-building of 1984. Whether these characters are real or fabrications of Party propaganda is something that neither Winston nor the reader is permitted to know:

Many of Orwell's earlier writings clearly indicate that he originally welcomed the prospect of a socialist revolution in the UK, and indeed hoped to himself take part in such a revolution. The concept of "English Socialism" first appeared in Orwell's 1941 essay " The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius", in which Orwell outlined a relatively humane revolution-establishing a revolutionary regime which "will shoot traitors, but give them a solemn trial beforehand, and occasionally acquit them" and which "will crush any open revolt promptly and cruelly, but will interfere very little with the spoken and written word"; the "English Socialism" which Orwell foresaw in 1941 would even "abolish the House of Lords, but retain the Monarchy".

In the novel, Winston Smith's memories and his reading of the proscribed book, The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Emmanuel Goldstein, reveal that after the Second World War, the United Kingdom became involved in a war during the early 1950s in which nuclear weapons destroyed hundreds of cities in Europe, western Russia and North America. Colchester was destroyed, and London also suffered widespread aerial raids, leading Winston's family to take refuge in a London Underground station. The United States absorbed the British Commonwealth and Latin America, resulting in the superstate of Oceania. The new nation fell into civil war, but who fought whom is left unclear (there is a reference to the child Winston having seen rival militias in the streets, each one having a shirt of a distinct colour for its members). It is also unclear what The Party's name was while there were more than one, and whether it was a radical faction of the British Labour Party or a new formation arising during the turbulent 1950s. Eventually, Ingsoc won and gradually formed a totalitarian government across Oceania. Orwell does not explain in the novel how the US came to embrace "English Socialism" as its ruling ideology; in his lifetime, a socialist revolution was a concrete possibility in the UK, and taken seriously, but socialism of any kind was a marginal phenomenon in the United States.

Meanwhile, Eurasia was formed when the Soviet Union conquered mainland Europe, creating a single state stretching from Portugal to the Bering Strait, under a Neo- Stalinist regime. In effect, the situation of 1940-1944-the UK facing an enemy-held Europe across the Channel-was recreated, and this time permanently-neither side contemplating an invasion, their wars held in other parts of the world. Eastasia, the last superstate established, emerged only after "a decade of confused fighting". It includes the Asian lands conquered by China and Japan. (The book was written before the 1949 victory of Mao Zedong's Chinese Communist Party in the Civil War). Although Eastasia is prevented from matching Eurasia's size, its larger populace compensates for that handicap.

While citizens in each state are trained to despise the ideologies of the other two as uncivilised and barbarous, Goldstein's book explains that in fact the superstates' ideologies are practically identical and that the public's ignorance of this fact is imperative so that they might continue believing otherwise. The only references to the exterior world for the Oceanian citizenry are propaganda and (probably fake) maps fabricated by the Ministry of Truth to ensure people's belief in "the war".

However, due to the fact that Winston only barely remembers these events as well as the Party's constant manipulation of historical records, the continuity and accuracy of these events are unknown, and exactly how the superstates' ruling parties managed to gain their power is also left unclear. Winston notes that the Party has claimed credit for inventing helicopters and aeroplanes, while Julia theorises that the perpetual bombing of London is merely a false-flag operation designed to convince the populace that a war is occurring. If the official account was accurate, Smith's strengthening memories and the story of his family's dissolution suggest that the atomic bombings occurred first, followed by civil war featuring "confused street fighting in London itself" and the societal postwar reorganisation, which the Party retrospectively calls "the Revolution".

It is very difficult to trace the exact chronology, but most of the global societal reorganisation occurred between 1945 and the early 1960s. Winston and Julia meet in the ruins of a church that was destroyed in a nuclear attack "thirty years" earlier, which suggests 1954 as the year of the atomic war that destabilised society and allowed the Party to seize power. It is stated in the novel that the "fourth quarter of 1983" was "also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan", which implies that the first three-year plan began in 1958. By that same year, the Party had apparently gained control of Oceania.

Among other things, the Revolution completely obliterates all religion. While the underground "Brotherhood" might or might not exist, there is no suggestion of any clergy trying to keep any religion alive underground. It is noted that, since the Party does not really care what the proles think or do, they might have been permitted to have religious worship had they wanted to-but they show no such inclination. Among the manifestly absurd "confessions" extracted from "thought criminals" is religious belief-however, but no one takes this seriously. Churches have been demolished or converted to other uses- St Martin-in-the-Fields has become a military museum, while Saint Clement Danes, destroyed in a WWII bombing, is in this future never rebuilt. The idea of a revolutionary regime totally destroying religion, with relative ease, is shared with the otherwise very different future of H.G.Wells' The Shape of Things to Come.

In 1984, there is a perpetual war between Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, the superstates that emerged from the global atomic war. The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, by Emmanuel Goldstein, explains that each state is so strong that it cannot be defeated, even with the combined forces of two superstates, despite changing alliances. To hide such contradictions, the superstates' governments rewrite history to explain that the (new) alliance always was so; the populaces are already accustomed to doublethink and accept it. The war is not fought in Oceanian, Eurasian or Eastasian territory but in the Arctic wastes and a disputed zone comprising the sea and land from Tangiers (Northern Africa) to Darwin (Australia). At the start, Oceania and Eastasia are allies fighting Eurasia in northern Africa and the Malabar Coast.

That alliance ends, and Oceania, allied with Eurasia, fights Eastasia, a change occurring on Hate Week, dedicated to creating patriotic fervour for the Party's perpetual war. The public are blind to the change; in mid-sentence, an orator changes the name of the enemy from "Eurasia" to "Eastasia" without pause. When the public are enraged at noticing that the wrong flags and posters are displayed, they tear them down; the Party later claims to have captured the whole of Africa.

Goldstein's book explains that the purpose of the unwinnable, perpetual war is to consume human labour and commodities so that the economy of a superstate cannot support economic equality, with a high standard of life for every citizen. By using up most of the produced goods, the proles are kept poor and uneducated, and the Party hopes that they will neither realise what the government is doing nor rebel. Goldstein also details an Oceanian strategy of attacking enemy cities with atomic rockets before invasion but dismisses it as unfeasible and contrary to the war's purpose; despite the atomic bombing of cities in the 1950s, the superstates stopped it for fear that it would imbalance the powers. The military technology in the novel differs little from that of World War II, but strategic bomber aeroplanes are replaced with rocket bombs, helicopters were heavily used as weapons of war (they were very minor in World War II) and surface combat units have been all but replaced by immense and unsinkable Floating Fortresses (island-like contraptions concentrating the firepower of a whole naval task force in a single, semi-mobile platform; in the novel, one is said to have been anchored between Iceland and the Faroe Islands, suggesting a preference for sea lane interdiction and denial).

Claude Rozenhof notes that:

None of the war news in Nineteen Eighty-Four can be in any way trusted as a report of something which actually happened (within the frame of the book's plot). Winston Smith himself is depicted as inventing a war hero who never existed and attributing to him various acts which never took place. After Oceania's shift of alliance, fighting Eastasia rather than Eurasia, the entire Ministry of Truth staff is engaged in an intensive effort to eradicate all reports of the war with Eurasia and "move the war to another part of the world"-so we do know for a fact that all records of the previous five years of war are henceforward false, depicting battles which never happened in places where there had been no war-but it might well be that the earlier records of a war with Eurasia, which were destroyed and eradicated, had been just as false. (...) The same doubts apply also to the major piece of war news in the final chapter-a titanic battle engulfing the entire continent of Africa, won by Oceania due to a brilliant piece of strategic surprise and finally proving to Smith the genius of Big Brother. There is no way of knowing whether any such battle "really" took place in Africa. Nor can we know if this piece of spectacular war news was broadcast all over Oceania, or whether it was an exclusive "show" broadcast solely into the telescreen in the Chestnut Tree Cafe, with the sole purpose of having on Winston Smith exactly the psychological effect which it did have. Indeed, there is the passage where Julia doubts that any war is taking place at all, and suspects that the rockets falling occasionally on London are fired by the government of Oceania itself, to keep the population on their toes-though Winston does not let his doubts of the official propaganda go that far. (...) And how much can we, living in a supposedly free and democratic society, objectively check the verity of what our supposedly Free press tells us?

Three perpetually warring totalitarian superstates control the world in the novel:

Oceania (ideology: Ingsoc, known in Oldspeak as English Socialism), whose core territories are "the Americas, the Atlantic Islands, including the British Isles, Australasia and the southern portion of Africa."

Eurasia (ideology: Neo-Bolshevism), whose core territories are "the whole of the northern part of the European and Asiatic landmass from Portugal to the Bering Strait."

Eastasia (ideology: Obliteration of the Self, also known as Death-Worship), whose core territories are "China and the countries south to it, the Japanese islands, and a large but fluctuating portion of Manchuria, Mongolia and Tibet."

The perpetual war is fought for control of the "disputed area" lying between the frontiers of the superstates, which forms "a rough quadrilateral with its corners at Tangier, Brazzaville, Darwin and Hong Kong", which includes Equatorial Africa, the Middle East, India and Indonesia. The disputed area is where the superstates capture slave labour. Fighting also takes place between Eurasia and Eastasia in Manchuria, Mongolia and Central Asia, and between Eurasia and Oceania over various islands in the Indian and Pacific Ocean.

In London, the capital city of Airstrip One, Oceania's four government ministries are in pyramids (300 m high), the façades of which display the Party's three slogans - "WAR IS PEACE", "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY", "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH". As mentioned, the ministries are deliberately named after the opposite ( doublethink) of their true functions: "The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation." (Part II, Chapter IX - The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism).

While a ministry is supposedly headed by a minister, the ministers heading these four ministries are never mentioned. They seem to be completely out of the public view, Big Brother being the only, ever-present public face of the government. Also, while an army fighting a war is typically headed by generals, none is ever mentioned by name. News reports of the ongoing war assume that Big Brother personally commands Oceania's fighting forces and give him personal credit for victories and successful strategic concepts. This goes much further than Soviet propaganda ever did, even at the height of Stalin's cult of personality.

The Ministry of Peace supports and engages in Oceania's perpetual war against either of the two other superstates:

The primary aim of modern warfare (in accordance with the principles of doublethink, this aim is simultaneously recognised and not recognised by the directing brains of the Inner Party) is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. Ever since the end of the nineteenth century, the problem of what to do with the surplus of consumption goods has been latent in industrial society. At present, when few human beings even have enough to eat, this problem is obviously not urgent, and it might not have become so, even if no artificial processes of destruction had been at work.

The Ministry of Plenty rations and controls food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, it claims to have raised the standard of living, even during times when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. The Ministry of Truth substantiates the Ministry of Plenty's claims by manipulating historical records to report numbers supporting the claims of "increased rations". The Ministry of Plenty also runs the national lottery as a distraction for the proles; Party members understand it to be a sham process in which winnings are never paid out.

The Ministry of Truth controls information: news, entertainment, education, and the arts. Winston Smith works in the Records Department, "rectifying" historical records to accord with Big Brother's current pronouncements so that everything the Party says appears to be true.

The Ministry of Love identifies, monitors, arrests and converts real and imagined dissidents. This is also the place where the Thought Police beat and torture dissidents, after which they are sent to Room 101 to face "the worst thing in the world"-until love for Big Brother and the Party replaces dissension.

Ingsoc (English Socialism) is the predominant ideology and philosophy of Oceania, and Newspeak is the official language of official documents. Orwell depicts the Party's ideology as an oligarchical worldview that "rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it does so in the name of Socialism."

The Big Brother is a fictional character and symbol in the novel. He is ostensibly the leader of Oceania, a totalitarian state wherein the ruling party Ingsoc wields total power "for its own sake" over the inhabitants. In the society that Orwell describes, every citizen is under constant surveillance by the authorities, mainly by telescreens (with the exception of the proles). The people are constantly reminded of this by the slogan "Big Brother is watching you": a maxim that is ubiquitously on display.

In modern culture, the term "Big Brother" has entered the lexicon as a synonym for abuse of government power, particularly in respect to civil liberties, often specifically related to mass surveillance.

The keyword here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.

The Principles of Newspeak is an academic essay appended to the novel. It describes the development of Newspeak, an artificial, minimalistic language designed to ideologically align thought with the principles of Ingsoc by stripping down the English language in order to make the expression of "heretical" thoughts (i.e. thoughts going against Ingsoc's principles) impossible. The idea that a language's structure can be used to influence thought is known as linguistic relativity.

Whether or not the Newspeak appendix implies a hopeful end to Nineteen Eighty-Four remains a critical debate. Many claim that it does, citing the fact that it is in standard English and is written in the past tense: "Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised" (p. 422). Some critics (Atwood, Benstead, Milner, Pynchon) claim that for Orwell, Newspeak and the totalitarian governments are all in the past.

Thoughtcrime describes a person's politically unorthodox thoughts, such as unspoken beliefs and doubts that contradict the tenets of Ingsoc (English Socialism), the dominant ideology of Oceania. In the official language of Newspeak, the word crimethink describes the intellectual actions of a person who entertains and holds politically unacceptable thoughts; thus the government of the Party controls the speech, the actions, and the thoughts of the citizens of Oceania. In contemporary English usage, the word thoughtcrime describes beliefs that are contrary to accepted norms of society, and is used to describe theological concepts, such as disbelief and idolatry, and the rejection of an ideology.

Nineteen Eighty-Four expands upon the subjects summarised in Orwell's essay " Notes on Nationalism" about the lack of vocabulary needed to explain the unrecognised phenomena behind certain political forces. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the Party's artificial, minimalist language 'Newspeak' addresses the matter.

Positive nationalism: For instance, Oceanians' perpetual love for Big Brother. Orwell argues in the essay that ideologies such as Neo-Toryism and Celtic nationalism are defined by their obsessive sense of loyalty to some entity.

Negative nationalism: For instance, Oceanians' perpetual hatred for Emmanuel Goldstein. Orwell argues in the essay that ideologies such as Trotskyism and Antisemitism are defined by their obsessive hatred of some entity.

Transferred nationalism: For instance, when Oceania's enemy changes, an orator makes a change mid-sentence, and the crowd instantly transfers its hatred to the new enemy. Orwell argues that ideologies such as Stalinism and redirected feelings of racial animus and class superiority among wealthy intellectuals exemplify this. Transferred nationalism swiftly redirects emotions from one power unit to another. In the novel, it happens during Hate Week, a Party rally against the original enemy. The crowd goes wild and destroys the posters that are now against their new friend, and many say that they must be the act of an agent of their new enemy and former friend. Many of the crowd must have put up the posters before the rally but think that the state of affairs had always been the case.

O'Brien concludes: "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power."

In the book, Inner Party member O'Brien describes the Party's vision of the future:

There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always-do not forget this, Winston-always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever.

-  Part III, Chapter III, Nineteen Eighty-Four

One of the most notable themes in Nineteen Eighty-Four is censorship, especially in the Ministry of Truth, where photographs and public archives are manipulated to rid them of "unpersons" (people who have been erased from history by the Party). On the telescreens, almost all figures of production are grossly exaggerated or simply fabricated to indicate an ever-growing economy, even during times when the reality is the opposite. One small example of the endless censorship is Winston being charged with the task of eliminating a reference to an unperson in a newspaper article. He also proceeds to write an article about Comrade Ogilvy, a made-up party member who allegedly "displayed great heroism by leaping into the sea from a helicopter so that the dispatches he was carrying would not fall into enemy hands."

In Oceania, the upper and middle classes have very little true privacy. All of their houses and apartments are equipped with telescreens so that they may be watched or listened to at any time. Similar telescreens are found at workstations and in public places, along with hidden microphones. Written correspondence is routinely opened and read by the government before it is delivered. The Thought Police employ undercover agents, who pose as normal citizens and report any person with subversive tendencies. Children are encouraged to report suspicious persons to the government, and some denounce their parents. Citizens are controlled, and the smallest sign of rebellion, even something as small as a suspicious facial expression, can result in immediate arrest and imprisonment. Thus, citizens are compelled to obedience.

According to Goldstein's book, almost the entire world lives in poverty; hunger, thirst, disease, and filth are the norms. Ruined cities and towns are common: the consequence of perpetual wars and extreme economic inefficiency. Social decay and wrecked buildings surround Winston; aside from the ministries' headquarters, little of London was rebuilt. Middle class citizens and proles consume synthetic foodstuffs and poor-quality "luxuries" such as oily gin and loosely-packed cigarettes, distributed under the "Victory" brand, a parody of the low-quality Indian-made "Victory" cigarettes, which British soldiers commonly smoked during World War II.

Winston describes something as simple as the repair of a broken window as requiring committee approval that can take several years and so most of those living in one of the blocks usually do the repairs themselves (Winston himself is called in by Mrs. Parsons to repair her blocked sink). All upper-class and middle-class residences include telescreens that serve both as outlets for propaganda and surveillance devices that allow the Thought Police to monitor them; they can be turned down, but the ones in middle-class residences cannot be turned off.

In contrast to their subordinates, the upper class of Oceanian society reside in clean and comfortable flats in their own quarters, with pantries well-stocked with foodstuffs such as wine, real coffee, real tea, real milk, and real sugar, all denied to the general populace. Winston is astonished that the lifts in O'Brien's building work, the telescreens can be completely turned off, and O'Brien has an Asian manservant, Martin. All upper class citizens are attended to by slaves captured in the "disputed zone", and "The Book" suggests that many have their own cars or even helicopters.

However, despite their insulation and overt privileges, the upper class are still not exempt from the government's brutal restriction of thought and behaviour, even while lies and propaganda apparently originate from their own ranks. Instead, the Oceanian government offers the upper class their "luxuries" in exchange for them maintaining their loyalty to the state; non-conformant upper-class citizens can still be condemned, tortured, and executed just like any other individual. "The Book" makes clear that the upper class' living conditions are only "relatively" comfortable, and would be regarded as "austere" by those of the pre-revolutionary élite.

The proles live in poverty and are kept sedated with pornography, a national lottery whose winnings are rarely paid out, which fact is obscured by propaganda and the lack of communication within Oceania, and gin, "which the proles were not supposed to drink". At the same time, the proles are freer and less intimidated than the upper classes: they are not expected to be particularly patriotic and the levels of surveillance that they are subjected to are very low. They lack telescreens in their own homes and often jeer at the telescreens that they see. "The Book" indicates that because the middle class, not the lower class, traditionally starts revolutions, the model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer-Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or "reintegration" by the Ministry of Love, and proles can be allowed intellectual freedom because they are deemed to lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believes that "the future belonged to the proles".

The standard of living of the populace is extremely low overall. Consumer goods are scarce, and those available through official channels are of low quality; for instance, despite the Party regularly reporting increased boot production, more than half of the Oceanian populace goes barefoot. The Party claims that poverty is a necessary sacrifice for the war effort, and "The Book" confirms that to be partially correct since the purpose of perpetual war is to consume surplus industrial production. As "The Book" explains, society is in fact designed to remain on the brink of starvation, as "In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance."

Nineteen Eighty-Four uses themes from life in the Soviet Union and wartime life in Great Britain as sources for many of its motifs. Some time at an unspecified date after the first American publication of the book, producer Sidney Sheldon wrote to Orwell interested in adapting the novel to the Broadway stage. Orwell wrote in a letter to Sheldon (to whom he would sell the US stage rights) that his basic goal with Nineteen Eighty-Four was imagining the consequences of Stalinist government ruling British society:

[ Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office.

According to Orwell biographer D. J. Taylor, the author's A Clergyman's Daughter (1935) has "essentially the same plot of Nineteen Eighty-Four ... It's about somebody who is spied upon, and eavesdropped upon, and oppressed by vast exterior forces they can do nothing about. It makes an attempt at rebellion and then has to compromise".

The statement " 2 + 2 = 5", used to torment Winston Smith during his interrogation, was a communist party slogan from the second five-year plan, which encouraged fulfilment of the five-year plan in four years. The slogan was seen in electric lights on Moscow house-fronts, billboards and elsewhere.

The switch of Oceania's allegiance from Eastasia to Eurasia and the subsequent rewriting of history ("Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. A large part of the political literature of five years was now completely obsolete"; ch 9) is evocative of the Soviet Union's changing relations with Nazi Germany. The two nations were open and frequently vehement critics of each other until the signing of the 1939 Treaty of Non-Aggression. Thereafter, and continuing until the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, no criticism of Germany was allowed in the Soviet press, and all references to prior party lines stopped-including in the majority of non-Russian communist parties who tended to follow the Russian line. Orwell had criticised the Communist Party of Great Britain for supporting the Treaty in his essays for Betrayal of the Left (1941). "The Hitler-Stalin pact of August 1939 reversed the Soviet Union's stated foreign policy. It was too much for many of the fellow-travellers like Gollancz [Orwell's sometime publisher] who had put their faith in a strategy of construction Popular Front governments and the peace bloc between Russia, Britain and France."

The description of Emmanuel Goldstein, with a "small, goatee beard", evokes the image of Leon Trotsky. The film of Goldstein during the Two Minutes Hate is described as showing him being transformed into a bleating sheep. This image was used in a propaganda film during the Kino-eye period of Soviet film, which showed Trotsky transforming into a goat. Like Goldstein, Trotsky was a formerly high-ranking party official who was ostracized and then wrote a book criticizing party rule, The Revolution Betrayed, published in 1936.

The omnipresent images of Big Brother, a man described as having a moustache, bears resemblance to the cult of personality built up around Joseph Stalin.

The news in Oceania emphasized production figures, just as it did in the Soviet Union, where record-setting in factories (by " Heroes of Socialist Labour") was especially glorified. The best known of these was Alexey Stakhanov, who purportedly set a record for coal mining in 1935.

The tortures of the Ministry of Love evoke the procedures used by the NKVD in their interrogations, including the use of rubber truncheons, being forbidden to put your hands in your pockets, remaining in brightly lit rooms for days, torture through the use of their greatest fear, and the victim being shown a mirror after their physical collapse.

The random bombing of Airstrip One is based on the area bombing of London by Buzz bombs and the V-2 rocket in 1944-1945.

The Thought Police is based on the NKVD, which arrested people for random "anti-soviet" remarks. The Thought Crime motif is drawn from Kempeitai, the Japanese wartime secret police, who arrested people for "unpatriotic" thoughts.

The confessions of the "Thought Criminals" Rutherford, Aaronson, and Jones are based on the show trials of the 1930s, which included fabricated confessions by prominent Bolsheviks Nikolai Bukharin, Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev to the effect that they were being paid by the Nazi government to undermine the Soviet regime under Leon Trotsky's direction.

The song " Under the Spreading Chestnut Tree" ("Under the spreading chestnut tree, I sold you, and you sold me") was based on an old English song called "Go no more a-rushing" ("Under the spreading chestnut tree, Where I knelt upon my knee, We were as happy as could be, 'Neath the spreading chestnut tree."). The song was published as early as 1891. The song was a popular camp song in the 1920s, sung with corresponding movements (like touching one's chest when singing "chest", and touching one's head when singing "nut"). Glenn Miller recorded the song in 1939.

The "Hates" (Two Minutes Hate and Hate Week) were inspired by the constant rallies sponsored by party organs throughout the Stalinist period. These were often short pep-talks given to workers before their shifts began (Two Minutes Hate), but could also last for days, as in the annual celebrations of the anniversary of the October revolution (Hate Week).

Orwell fictionalised "newspeak", "doublethink", and "Ministry of Truth" based on both the Soviet press, and British wartime usage, such as "Miniform". In particular, he adapted Soviet ideological discourse constructed to ensure that public statements could not be questioned.

Winston Smith's job, "revising history" (and the "unperson" motif) are based on censorship of images in the Soviet Union, which airbrushed images of "fallen" people from group photographs and removed references to them in books and newspapers. In one well-known example, the second edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia had an article about Lavrentiy Beria. After his fall from power and execution, subscribers received a letter from the editor instructing them to cut out and destroy the three-page article on Beria and paste in its place enclosed replacement pages expanding the adjacent articles on F. W. Bergholz (an 18th-century courtier), the Bering Sea, and Bishop Berkeley.

Big Brother's "Orders of the Day" were inspired by Stalin's regular wartime orders, called by the same name. A small collection of the more political of these have been published (together with his wartime speeches) in English as "On the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union" By Joseph Stalin. Like Big Brother's Orders of the day, Stalin's frequently lauded heroic individuals, like Comrade Ogilvy, the fictitious hero Winston Smith invented to "rectify" (fabricate) a Big Brother Order of the day.

The Ingsoc slogan "Our new, happy life", repeated from telescreens, evokes Stalin's 1935 statement, which became a CPSU slogan, "Life has become better, Comrades; life has become more cheerful."

In 1940, Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges published " Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius", which describes the invention by a "benevolent secret society" of a world that would seek to remake human language and reality along human-invented lines. The story concludes with an appendix describing the success of the project. Borges' story addresses similar themes of epistemology, language and history to 1984.

During World War II, Orwell believed that British democracy as it existed before 1939 would not survive the war. The question being "Would it end via Fascist coup d'état from above or via Socialist revolution from below?" Later, he admitted that events proved him wrong: "What really matters is that I fell into the trap of assuming that 'the war and the revolution are inseparable'."

Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and Animal Farm (1945) share themes of the betrayed revolution, the individual's subordination to the collective, rigorously enforced class distinctions (Inner Party, Outer Party, proles), the cult of personality, concentration camps, Thought Police, compulsory regimented daily exercise, and youth leagues. Oceania resulted from the US annexation of the British Empire to counter the Asian peril to Australia and New Zealand. It is a naval power whose militarism venerates the sailors of the floating fortresses, from which battle is given to recapturing India, the "Jewel in the Crown" of the British Empire. Much of Oceanic society is based upon the USSR under Joseph Stalin- Big Brother. The televised Two Minutes Hate is ritual demonisation of the enemies of the State, especially Emmanuel Goldstein ( viz Leon Trotsky). Altered photographs and newspaper articles create unpersons deleted from the national historical record, including even founding members of the regime (Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford) in the 1960s purges ( viz the Soviet Purges of the 1930s, in which leaders of the Bolshevik Revolution were similarly treated). A similar thing also happened during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror in which many of the original leaders of the Revolution were later put to death, for example Danton who was put to death by Robespierre, and then later Robespierre himself met the same fate.

In his 1946 essay " Why I Write", Orwell explains that the serious works he wrote since the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) were "written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism". Nineteen Eighty-Four is a cautionary tale about revolution betrayed by totalitarian defenders previously proposed in Homage to Catalonia (1938) and Animal Farm (1945), while Coming Up for Air (1939) celebrates the personal and political freedoms lost in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949). Biographer Michael Shelden notes Orwell's Edwardian childhood at Henley-on-Thames as the golden country; being bullied at St Cyprian's School as his empathy with victims; his life in the Indian Imperial Police in Burma and the techniques of violence and censorship in the BBC as capricious authority.

Other influences include Darkness at Noon (1940) and The Yogi and the Commissar (1945) by Arthur Koestler; The Iron Heel (1908) by Jack London; 1920: Dips into the Near Future by John A. Hobson; Brave New World (1932) by Aldous Huxley; (1921) by Yevgeny Zamyatin which he reviewed in 1946; and The Managerial Revolution (1940) by James Burnham predicting perpetual war among three totalitarian superstates. Orwell told Jacintha Buddicom that he would write a novel stylistically like A Modern Utopia (1905) by H. G. Wells.

Extrapolating from World War II, the novel's pastiche parallels the politics and rhetoric at war's end-the changed alliances at the " Cold War's" (1945-91) beginning; the Ministry of Truth derives from the BBC's overseas service, controlled by the Ministry of Information; Room 101 derives from a conference room at BBC Broadcasting House; the Senate House of the University of London, containing the Ministry of Information is the architectural inspiration for the Minitrue; the post-war decrepitude derives from the socio-political life of the UK and the US, i.e., the impoverished Britain of 1948 losing its Empire despite newspaper-reported imperial triumph; and war ally but peace-time foe, Soviet Russia became Eurasia.

The term "English Socialism" has precedents in Orwell's wartime writings; in the essay " The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius" (1941), he said that "the war and the revolution are inseparable... the fact that we are at war has turned Socialism from a textbook word into a realisable policy"-because Britain's superannuated social class system hindered the war effort and only a socialist economy would defeat Adolf Hitler. Given the middle class's grasping this, they too would abide socialist revolution and that only reactionary Britons would oppose it, thus limiting the force revolutionaries would need to take power. An English Socialism would come about which "will never lose touch with the tradition of compromise and the belief in a law that is above the State. It will shoot traitors, but it will give them a solemn trial beforehand and occasionally it will acquit them. It will crush any open revolt promptly and cruelly, but it will interfere very little with the spoken and written word."

In the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, "English Socialism" (or " Ingsoc" in Newspeak) is a totalitarian ideology unlike the English revolution he foresaw. Comparison of the wartime essay "The Lion and the Unicorn" with Nineteen Eighty-Four shows that he perceived a Big Brother regime as a perversion of his cherished socialist ideals and English Socialism. Thus Oceania is a corruption of the British Empire he believed would evolve "into a federation of Socialist states, like a looser and freer version of the Union of Soviet Republics".

When it was first published, Nineteen Eighty-Four received critical acclaim. V. S. Pritchett, reviewing the novel for the New Statesman stated: "I do not think I have ever read a novel more frightening and depressing; and yet, such are the originality, the suspense, the speed of writing and withering indignation that it is impossible to put the book down." P. H. Newby, reviewing Nineteen Eighty-Four for The Listener magazine, described it as "the most arresting political novel written by an Englishman since Rex Warner's The Aerodrome." Nineteen Eighty-Four was also praised by Bertrand Russell, E. M. Forster and Harold Nicolson. On the other hand, Edward Shanks, reviewing Nineteen Eighty-Four for The Sunday Times, was dismissive; Shanks claimed Nineteen Eighty-Four "breaks all records for gloomy vaticination". C. S. Lewis was also critical of the novel, claiming that the relationship of Julia and Winston, and especially the Party's view on sex, lacked credibility, and that the setting was "odious rather than tragic".

Throughout its publication history, Nineteen Eighty-Four has been either banned or legally challenged as subversive or ideologically corrupting, like the dystopian novels (1924) by Yevgeny Zamyatin, Brave New World (1932) by Aldous Huxley, Darkness at Noon (1940) by Arthur Koestler, (1940) by Karin Boye, and Fahrenheit 451 (1953) by Ray Bradbury.

On 5 November 2019, the BBC named Nineteen Eighty-Four on its list of the 100 most influential novels.

According to Czesław Miłosz, an exile from Stalinist Poland, the book also made an impression behind the Iron Curtain. Writing in The Captive Mind, he stated "[a] few have become acquainted with Orwell's 1984; because it is both difficult to obtain and dangerous to possess, it is known only to certain members of the Inner Party. Orwell fascinates them through his insight into details they know well [...] Even those who know Orwell only by hearsay are amazed that a writer who never lived in Russia should have so keen a perception into its life." Writer Christopher Hitchens has called this "one of the greatest compliments that one writer has ever bestowed upon another [...] Only one or two years after Orwell's death, in other words, his book about a secret book circulated only within the Inner Party was itself a secret book circulated only within the Inner Party."

In the same year as the novel's publishing, a one-hour radio adaptation was aired on the United States' NBC radio network as part of the NBC University Theatre series. The first television adaptation appeared as part of CBS's series in September 1953. BBC Television broadcast an adaptation by Nigel Kneale in December 1954. The first feature film adaptation, 1984, was released in 1956. A second feature-length adaptation, Nineteen Eighty-Four, followed in 1984, a reasonably faithful adaptation of the novel. The story has been adapted several other times to radio, television, and film; other media adaptations include theater (a musical and a play), opera, and ballet.

The first Simplified Chinese version was published in 1979. It was first available to the general public in China in 1985, as previously it was only in portions of libraries and bookstores open to a limited number of people. Amy Hawkins and Jeffrey Wasserstrom of The Atlantic stated in 2019 that the book is widely available in Mainland China for several reasons: the general public by and large no longer reads books; because the elites who do read books feel connected to the ruling party anyway; and because the Communist Party sees being too aggressive in blocking cultural products as a liability. The authors stated "It was-and remains-as easy to buy 1984 and Animal Farm in Shenzhen or Shanghai as it is in London or Los Angeles." They also stated that "The assumption is not that Chinese people can't figure out the meaning of 1984, but that the small number of people who will bother to read it won't pose much of a threat."

By 1989, Nineteen Eighty-Four had been translated into 65 languages, more than any other novel in English at that time.

The effect of Nineteen Eighty-Four on the English language is extensive; the concepts of Big Brother, Room 101, the Thought Police, thoughtcrime, unperson, memory hole (oblivion), doublethink (simultaneously holding and believing contradictory beliefs) and Newspeak (ideological language) have become common phrases for denoting totalitarian authority. Doublespeak and groupthink are both deliberate elaborations of doublethink, and the adjective "Orwellian" means similar to Orwell's writings, especially Nineteen Eighty-Four. The practice of ending words with "-speak" (such as mediaspeak) is drawn from the novel. Orwell is perpetually associated with 1984; in July 1984, an asteroid was discovered by Antonín Mrkos and named after Orwell.

In 1955, an episode of BBC's The Goon Show, 1985, was broadcast, written by Spike Milligan and Eric Sykes and based on Nigel Kneale's television adaptation. It was re-recorded about a month later with the same script but a slightly different cast. 1985 parodies many of the main scenes in Orwell's novel.

In 1970, the American rock group Spirit released the song "1984" based on Orwell's novel.

In 1973, ex-Soft Machine bassist Hugh Hopper released an album called 1984 on the Columbia label (UK), consisting of instrumentals with Orwellian titles such as "Miniluv," "Minipax," "Minitrue," and so forth.

In 1974, David Bowie released the album Diamond Dogs, which is thought to be loosely based on the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It includes the tracks "We Are The Dead", "1984" and "Big Brother". Before the album was made, Bowie's management (MainMan) had planned for Bowie and Tony Ingrassia (MainMan's creative consultant) to co-write and direct a musical production of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, but Orwell's widow refused to give MainMan the rights.

In 1977, the British rock band The Jam released the album This Is the Modern World, which includes the track "Standards" by Paul Weller. This track concludes with the lyrics "...and ignorance is strength, we have God on our side, look, you know what happened to Winston."

In 1984, Ridley Scott directed a television commercial, "1984", to launch Apple's Macintosh computer. The advert stated, "1984 won't be like 1984", suggesting that the Apple Mac would be freedom from Big Brother, i.e., the IBM PC.

An episode of , called "The God Complex", depicts an alien ship disguised as a hotel containing Room 101-like spaces, and quotes the nursery rhyme as well.

The two part episode Chain of Command on Star Trek: The Next Generation bears some resemblances to the novel.

Radiohead's 2003 single "2 + 2 = 5", from their album Hail to the Thief, is Orwellian by title and content. Thom Yorke states, "I was listening to a lot of political programs on BBC Radio 4. I found myself writing down little nonsense phrases, those Orwellian euphemisms that [the British and American governments] are so fond of. They became the background of the record."

In September 2009, the English progressive rock band Muse released The Resistance, which included songs influenced by Nineteen Eighty-Four.

In Marilyn Manson's autobiography The Long Hard Road Out of Hell, he states: "I was thoroughly terrified by the idea of the end of the world and the Antichrist. So I became obsessed with it... reading prophetic books like... 1984 by George Orwell..."

English band Bastille references the novel in their song "Back to the Future," the fifth track on their 2022 album Give Me the Future, in the opening lyrics: "Feels like we danced into a nightmare/We're living 1984/If doublethink's no longer fiction/We'll dream of Huxley's Island shores."

Released in 2004, KAKU P-Model/Susumu Hirasawa's song Big Brother directly references 1984, and the album itself is about a fictional dystopia in a distant future.

References to the themes, concepts and plot of Nineteen Eighty-Four have appeared frequently in other works, especially in popular music and video entertainment. An example is the worldwide hit reality television show Big Brother, in which a group of people live together in a large house, isolated from the outside world but continuously watched by television cameras.

In November 2011, the US government argued before the US Supreme Court that it wants to continue utilising GPS tracking of individuals without first seeking a warrant. In response, Justice Stephen Breyer questioned what that means for a democratic society by referencing Nineteen Eighty-Four. Justice Breyer asked, "If you win this case, then there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movement of every citizen of the United States. So if you win, you suddenly produce what sounds like Nineteen Eighty-Four... "

The book touches on the invasion of privacy and ubiquitous surveillance. From mid-2013 it was publicised that the NSA has been secretly monitoring and storing global internet traffic, including the bulk data collection of email and phone call data. Sales of Nineteen Eighty-Four increased by up to seven times within the first week of the 2013 mass surveillance leaks. The book again topped the Amazon.com sales charts in 2017 after a controversy involving Kellyanne Conway using the phrase " alternative facts" to explain discrepancies with the media.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was number three on the list of "Top Check Outs Of All Time" by the New York Public Library.

In accordance with copyright law, Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm both entered the public domain on 1 January 2021 in most of the world, 70 calendar years after Orwell died. The US copyright expiration is different for both novels: 95 years after publication.

Brave New World comparisons

In October 1949, after reading Nineteen Eighty-Four, Huxley sent a letter to Orwell in which he argued that it would be more efficient for rulers to stay in power by the softer touch by allowing citizens to seek pleasure to control them rather than use brute force. He wrote

Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful. My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.

...

Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

In the decades since the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four, there have been numerous comparisons to Huxley's Brave New World, which had been published 17 years earlier, in 1932. They are both predictions of societies dominated by a central government and are both based on extensions of the trends of their times. However, members of the ruling class of Nineteen Eighty-Four use brutal force, torture and mind control to keep individuals in line, while rulers in Brave New World keep the citizens in line by drugs and pleasurable distractions. Regarding censorship, in Nineteen Eighty-Four the government tightly controls information to keep the population in line, but in Huxley's world, so much information is published that readers do not know which information is relevant, and what can be disregarded.

Elements of both novels can be seen in modern-day societies, with Huxley's vision being more dominant in the West and Orwell's vision more prevalent with dictatorships, including those in communist countries (such as in modern-day China and North Korea), as is pointed out in essays that compare the two novels, including Huxley's own Brave New World Revisited.

Comparisons with later dystopian novels like The Handmaid's Tale, Virtual Light, The Private Eye and The Children of Men have also been drawn.

Aubrey, Crispin; Chilton, Paul, eds. (1983). Nineteen Eighty-four in 1984: Autonomy, Control, and Communication (repr. ed.). London: Comedia Pub. Group. ISBN 978-0-906890-42-4.

Bowker, Gordon (2003). Inside George Orwell: A Biography. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-312-23841-4.

Hillegas, Mark R. (1967). The Future as Nightmare: H. G. Wells and the Anti-Utopians. Southern Illinois University Press. ISBN 978-0-8093-0676-3

Howe, Irving, ed. (1983). 1984 Revisited: Totalitarianism in Our Century. New York: Harper Row. ISBN 978-0-06-080660-6.

Meyers, Jeffery. Orwell: Wintry Conscience of a Generation. W. W. Norton. 2000. ISBN 978-0-393-32263-7

Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four. A novel. London: Secker & Warburg.

--- (1984). Davison, Peter (ed.). Nineteen Eighty-Four: The Facsimile Manuscript. London, United Kingdom: Secker and Warburg. ISBN 978-0-436-35022-1.

--- (2003). Nineteen Eighty-Four. Thomas Pynchon (foreword); Erich Fromm (afterword). Plume. ISBN 978-0-452-28423-4.

Afterword by Erich Fromm (1961), pp. 324-37.

Orwell's text has a "Selected Bibliography", pp. 338-39; the foreword and the afterword each contain further references.

The Plume edition is an authorised reprint of a hardcover edition published by Harcourt, Inc.

The Plume edition is also published in a Signet edition. The copyright page says this, but the Signet ed. does not have the Pynchon foreword.

Copyright is explicitly extended to digital and any other means.

Orwell, George. 1984 (Vietnamese edition), translation by Đặng Phương-Nghi, French preface by Bertrand Latour ISBN 978-0-9774224-5-6.

Shelden, Michael (1991). Orwell: The Authorised Biography. London: Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-434-69517-1.

Smith, David; Mosher, Michael (1984). Orwell for Beginners (1st ed.). [London], Eng.: Writers and Readers Pub. Cooperative. ISBN 978-0-86316-066-0.

Steinhoff, William R. (1975). George Orwell and the Origins of 1984. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-87400-2.

Tuccille, Jerome (1975). Who's afraid of 1984? The case for optimism in looking ahead to the 1980s. New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House Publishers. ISBN 978-0-87000-308-0.

Bloom, Harold, George Orwell's 1984 (2009), Facts on File, Inc. ISBN 978-1-4381-1468-2

Di Nucci, Ezio and Storrie, Stefan (editors), 1984 and Philosophy: Is Resistance Futile? (2018), Open Court Publishing Company. ISBN 978-0-8126-9985-2

Goldsmith, Jack and Nussbaum, Martha, On Nineteen Eighty-Four: Orwell and Our Future (2010), Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-2664-3

Plank, Robert, George Orwell's Guide Through Hell: A Psychological Study of 1984 (1994), Borgo Pres. ISBN 978-0-89370-413-1

Taylor, D. J. On Nineteen Eighty-Four: A Biography (2019), Abrams. ISBN 978-1-68335-684-4

Waddell, Nathan (editor), The Cambridge Companion to Nineteen Eighty-Four (2020), Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-84109-2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nineteen Eighty-Four (also published as 1984 ) is a dystopian social science fiction novel and cautionary tale by English writer George Orwell. It was published on 8 June 1949 by Secker & Warburg as Orwell's ninth and final book completed in his lifetime.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/06/1147376644/iran-protests-crackdown-mahsa-amini

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ISTANBUL - The protests that have gripped Iran since September may have diminished to some extent in recent days, but demonstrators reached by NPR insist the protests will not die out or fade away regardless of the government's brutal crackdown. The demonstrators managed to be in touch with NPR despite Tehran's efforts to curtail internet access and other means of communication.

But analysts say Iran's hard-line government that answers to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei can only maintain its grip on power by continuing to arrest - and sometimes kill - protesters. Security forces have arrested thousands and shot people on the streets. Compliant courts have handed down death sentences. Two executions have been carried out, with fears of more to come.

Although authorities released well-known Iranian actress Taraneh Alidoosti from prison this week after she posted bail, she still faces charges stemming from comments she made in support of a protester who had been executed.

The protests, frequently led by women, broke out in northwestern Iran following the death of a young Kurdish woman, 22-year-old Mahsa Amini - known by her Kurdish name, Jina, to family and friends - in the custody of Iran's co-called "morality police." Demonstrations quickly spread across the country, and soon transformed from protesting the mandatory Islamic headscarf, the hijab, to calling for the end of Iran's cleric-led regime.

The government responded with a series of harsh crackdowns. Iranian authorities claim some 200 people have been killed, but the Norway-based group Iran Human Rights reported in late December that the death toll had reached at least 476.

Signs of a protest slowdown?

Recently, some observers have suggested that the size and frequency of the demonstrations are both on the wane. Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, founder and CEO of the London-based Bourse & Bazaar Foundation think tank, posted a chart to Twitter that appears to show such declines. Compared with the massive protests that erupted in 2009 and became known as the "Green Movement," Batmanghelidj asks why the current "protest movement motivated by such righteous anger has not generated large and durable protests - so far."

Javad, a 55-year-old protester from north-central Iran, tells NPR he has no doubt the protests will continue, and will get larger. He asked that his family name not be used in order to protect himself and his relatives from retaliation by the authorities.

"It is possible that the protests may stop on some occasions," he says, "but since the crisis for Iran is massive and multidimensional, and is both domestic and international, during this new year objections and oppositions will continue to be expressed and will even get intensified."

Protests have also taken place among the Iranian diaspora in Turkey, Europe, the U.S. and beyond. But, Javad notes, the protesters in Iran have yet to make a truly productive connection to those in the diaspora, who would also love to see the cleric-led regime toppled.

"Without this cooperation and coming up with a plan to put pressure on the Islamic Republic and facilitate the transition from this government to a new government, it'll be harder for new groups of people to join the movement," he says. "People will find it difficult to trust the opposition without such a cooperation."

Warnings of more brutal repression

Analyst Ali Vaez at the International Crisis Group says on one level, it's remarkable that the regime has essentially driven young Iranians onto the streets, primarily through its own incompetence and corruption. He sees a historic parallel.

"My sense is that the Islamic Republic is where the Soviet Union was in the early, not late, 1980s," he says. "Early 1980s in the sense that it is a system that is ideologically bankrupt, economically broken, at a political dead end and simply unable to address its problems with the same cast of characters who created this deadlock to begin with."

But one thing Vaez says the Iranian government has not lost is its will to fight.

"And therefore," he warns, "it is still capable of using much more brutal repression against its own people."

Nearly four months into these demonstrations, the protesters are still a minority voice, and Vaez believes that leaves the situation, for now, in a stalemate.

"As long as the protests don't reach critical mass, the regime is unlikely to fracture and lose its willingness to repress," he says. "But as long as it doesn't show any signs of losing its willingness to repress, it's unlikely that more protesters would come to the streets."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran demonstrators vow to continue protests despite ongoing crackdowns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The protests that have gripped the country since September may have diminished to some extent recently, but demonstrators in Iran reached by NPR insist the protests will not die out or fade away.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.quadcities.com/arts-and-entertainment-news/just-what-exactly-is-the-black-eye-club-and-why-are-so-many-celebrities-a-part-of-it/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How many people do you know who currently have black eyes?

How many people in the past year have you seen who have had black eyes?

Just in general, how many people can you remember having black eyes in your life over the past year, two years, five years, ten years?

Unless you're a boxer, you train in MMA, or you run an underground fight club (damn! I wasn't supposed to talk about that!), you probably don't see many, if any, folks with black eyes running around. Heck, I trained in karate, boxing, tae kwan do, and muy thai kickboxing over the course of about about 20 years, and I didn't even see that many folks with black eyes.

And yet, somehow, there's been an epidemic of black eyes on celebrities and public figures over the past couple of years.

Which is incredibly strange, and even stranger the more you think about it.

I mean, think about the fact that we proletarians among the working class hoi paloi rarely see people walking around among us with black eyes, and we mix and mingle at places which could potentially afford us a much greater chance of encountering them. We don't have bodyguards, or secret service agents, and we don't mingle with the rich and famous, who don't exactly swim in dangerous circles of potential fisticuffs. "After all, who wants to break a nail after that $5,000 manicure, am I right? Am I right?"

Yes, you're right, abstract snobby celebrity rich person I threw into there for comedic effect, you are very right.

Seriously, this is strange. It's utterly bizarre to see everyone from Vladimir Putin to Barack Obama to The Pope sporting black eyes.

I'm not kidding. Here's a list of just some of the celebs and prominent people who have sported black eyes over the past year or two:

Jennifer Lopez, Vladimir Putin, Boy George, Barack Obama, John McCain, Richard Branson, Ben Affleck, Madonna, Perez Hilton, Adam Sandler, Harry Reid, George W. Bush, John Kerry, Kanye West, etc. etc. etc. etc.

And, of course, because it's incredibly strange, it's spawned a fantastic conspiracy theory.

The theory?

That the black eyes are all part of an Illuminati ritual, and that as part of getting into their little club, the celebs have to get black eyes and be seen in public with them.

According to the UK Daily Mail:

"A bizarre conspiracy theory has emerged suggesting that celebrities seen sporting a black left eye are part of the Illuminati.

Elizabeth Hurley, Boy George and Robert Downey Jnr. are among the A-listers who have been photographed with bruising in the eye area in recent years.

Former US President George W. Bush, along with the Pope, Prince Philip and Prince Andrew, have all also been photographed with black eyes.

According to some conspiracy theorists, the black left eye is part of a cult or 'Illuminati' high-level initiation ritual during which the pledger is

said to be forced to 'eat pain' in a quest to become more powerful."

Well, if I was Boy George, or Elizabeth Hurley, I'd probably ask for my money back. I'm not seeing the results. When I think of Illuminati membership, I don't think of the biggest perk being "starring" in a late night infomercial.

Of course, one conspiracy theory isn't enough for folks nowadays, so there's an EVEN MORE elaborate conspiracy theory out there as well!

The Mail further reports:

"Author and internet radio show host Sherry Shriner - who wrote the book Interview With The Devil, in which she claimed to converse with Lucifer, has spoken of the link between these black eyes and 'soul scalping'.

According to Shriner, government leaders, people on TV with their own shows and hundreds of popular entertainers have sold their souls to Satan.

'You cannot be on TV now, without signing on the dotted line. The bizarre recurrence of facial bruises on Illuminati politicians and entertainers has resulted in speculation that their souls have been replaced in a satanic ritual called "soul scalping",' she said.

She said that this can one done in a number of ritualistic ways, all of which result in a 'possession', whereby the human soul is removed and the body taken over by the demonic entity.

In conspiracy circles, this process is also known as a 'walk-in'. Some people believe the blackened eye is a result of soul scalping."

Oh my God! Can you believe this!??! Can you believe I'm breaking this story right now??!! I mean, seriously, can you imagine how stunning this is, how earth-shattering this information is, and how incredible it is that the mainstream media has been ignoring it??? After all, there are really only two explanations for so many rich celebrities having black eyes, and those are underground fight clubs and demonic possession. DUH! EVERYONE knows that!

Except...

There actually IS a pretty logical and reasonable explanation for all of these rich celebrities and politicians, people in the public eye (pun intended), people who are subject to a certain vanity and concern for their image, being seen with these black eyes.

It's not as fantastic or spicy as the other theories, so I hate to burst your bubble. But it is more realistic and logical.

Cosmetic surgery.

Yup. That's right. Cosmetic surgery, especially surgery to get rid of bags under the eyes, circles under the eyes, crow's feet, and the like, can and often does, result in bruising around the eye area.

After all, rich celebrities are very well-known for getting a lot of cosmetic surgery. It's such a well-worn subject that stand-up comedians and pop cultural commentators such as myself have been ribbing them about it for decades. Johnny Carson had a fleet of jokes about it regarding any number of celebrities going back to the 1970s "Tonight Show" era.

And this illustrates an interesting point about the world we live in right now. With the plethora of information we have available to us, we're able to access and accumulate a staggering amount of data. And with that data comes a sort of pattern recognition that takes place, because it's a psychological habit for our brain to try to make sense of it. And as various people start to put together the pieces of the puzzles and start to see certain trends and waves of behaviors, people will then react to the news of these patterns being put out there by their brains seeking to assimilate them through some sort of filter of logic to place them within the known world.

But the thing is, nowadays, the first reaction of so many people is to place these things within the realm of conspiracy theories and outlandish explanations which, yeah, COULD be potentially plausible in some cases, but upon even further examination, are usually eclipsed by something much more reasonable, banal and far less interesting.

And I admit, I do love a good conspiracy theory. I really do. They're very entertaining. And when I first heard about this "black eye club" thing, I was intrigued and fascinated by it, thinking, "this is so utterly bizarre! why would so many famous and rich people have black eyes when so few regular people don't???" Until I got to actually researching it, and thinking about the fact that the vast majority of regular people don't have the money or inclination to get plastic surgery on their eyes, and that cosmetic surgery to remove bags or crows feet is actually one of the most popular surgeries out there. So, boringly enough, yeah, it makes perfect sense that a bunch of rich celebrities are getting cosmetic surgery and that their schedules preclude them from avoiding the public completely during their recuperation, so they get seen having a black eye.

I'm not sure why the Pope would be getting it, but maybe he legit had a black eye. Maybe there's an underground fight club at the Vatican?

Hmmmm....

Hey! THERE'S a new conspiracy theory to pursue...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Just What Exactly Is 'The Black Eye Club,' And Why Are So Many Celebrities A Part Of It? | Quad Cities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How many people do you know who currently have black eyes? How many people in the past year have you seen who have had black eyes? Just in general, how many people can you remember having black eyes in your life over the past year, two years, five years, ten years?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/13/lie-of-the-year-2022-putins-lies-to-wage-war-and-o/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It was 6 a.m. Moscow time on Feb. 24 when Russian President Vladimir Putin announced his "special military operation" in Ukraine.

"The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime," Putin said in a televised address, employing the Russian spelling of Ukraine's capital city. "To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation."

About 500 miles and a time zone away, residents of Kyiv awoke to the sounds of explosions. In the small eastern city of Sloviansk in Ukraine's Donetsk region, loud booms drove people from their beds in panic. Families packed belongings, swarmed ATMs and gas stations, and tried to flee the Russian invasion in cars, trains, planes and on foot.

One hundred Ukrainian soldiers and civilians would be dead by day's end.

Hundreds of thousands more would be injured or killed by year's end.
***
The war that Putin launched that day was built on a foundation of lies.

Government lies have abetted the invasion every day since.

Putin joined history's most brutal authoritarians, deploying a well-worn and highly sophisticated propaganda machine to wage an unprovoked war. More than political rhetoric, spin or occasional lying, this playbook uses coordinated networks - hundreds of websites, state-run media, social media channels, fake fact-checking and oppressive censorship laws - to disseminate ruthless falsehoods. The aim is to justify brutality, blindfold its citizens and persuade potential allies.

Ukraine wasn't being led by neo-Nazis and it wasn't committing genocide. Putin employed those lies to co-opt Russian citizens whose family members would be sent to fight a war, kill others and possibly die themselves.

The lies have permeated the assault. When hundreds of bodies were discovered lying in the streets and homes of Bucha after weeks of Russian occupation, horrifying the world and generating global outrage, Putin's regime claimed Ukrainians had staged the scenes. That was a lie.

To orchestrate his power and land grab, Putin long denied Ukraine was even a country - falsely characterizing its history and culture, suggesting the Ukrainians were simply Russians who needed to be brought back into the fold.

Although there's little revelatory about Putin lying - the former KGB leader is widely understood to be the sponsor of worldwide disinformation efforts and cybermeddling (including in U.S. elections) - the human toll of the invasion of Ukraine is inescapable and horrific. By U.S. estimates, each side has seen 100,000 troops killed or injured. More than 40,000 Ukrainian civilians are dead. Fifteen million people have been driven from their homes.

The consequential nature of Putin's disinformation made our choice clear: Putin's lies about Ukraine are the 2022 Lie of the Year.

'A monstrous forgery': Russia's lies about occupation and civilian casualties

Five days after Russian tanks crossed Ukraine's border, the Russian embassy in Canada tweeted a lengthy - and to anyone watching from outside Russia, ridiculous - statement.

"The Russian army does not occupy Ukrainian territory and takes all measures to preserve the lives and safety of civilians," said the March 1 tweet, parroting Putin's earlier statements that his effort would not involve an occupation. But even Russia's own state-sponsored media had reported otherwise.

As journalists chronicled the violence and scenes of possible war crimes emerged, Russia's leadership claimed it was Russia that was under attack, not Ukraine. By accounts posted in Kremlin-run Telegram channels and Russian embassy tweets, the dead were not dead, the invasion was not an invasion and Ukraine's allies were complicit in atrocities.

On March 9, Russia bombed a maternity hospital in Mariupol. Officials and news accounts reported 17 injured and at least three dead, including a pregnant woman. The next day, the Russian embassy in London falsely tweeted that Ukrainians had faked the incident using crisis actors. This outrageous claim was amplified in the U.S., when One America News Network's Pearson Sharp told viewers the incident "had the makings of yet another false flag operation" orchestrated by the U.S. under President Joe Biden "and his cronies" to distract from problems at home. Sharp has previously promoted false far-right claims about the 2020 U.S. election and COVID-19 vaccines.

In early April, images of brutality emerged from Bucha, a western suburb of Kyiv that the Russian military had occupied for weeks. Journalists and satellites captured scenes of people lying dead in the streets, in kitchens, in basements, in yards, in woods.

The Kremlin called the reports a "monstrous forgery." In an April 3 Telegram post, Russia's Defence Ministry called them "just another provocation." The dead in these images were actors, this and other posts falsely said. In a post entitled "facts," the ministry wrote, "Not a single local resident has suffered from any violent action."

By August, Bucha officials had put the final accounting of the dead at 458, of which 419 showed evidence of having been shot. A Dec. 7 United Nations report said its Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine documented killings of 73 civilians in Bucha (54 men, 16 women, two boys and one girl) and was corroborating an additional 105 alleged killings.

Ol'ga Kosyanchuk, 63, left, stands next to the coffin of her husband Anatoliy Kosyanchuk, 56, who was captured by Russian soldiers on March 29, and found dead with heavy head injuries in Bucha, in the outskirts of Kyiv, Ukraine, on April 15, 2022. (AP)

As these "false flag" claims were debunked, more surfaced, designed to keep the Russian public outraged and supporting the war.

Russian filmmaker Nadezhda Kolobaeva said she was outraged in April when a colleague alerted her to a report on state-owned Russia-24 TV channel that claimed to show Ukrainians were exaggerating civilian war casualties. The news report stole behind-the-scenes footage from a fictionalized series Kolobaeva had been working on. The clip showed two people, Kolobaeva's colleagues, adjusting a mannequin for a shot. But the Russian news station falsely told viewers the video was real footage of Ukrainians using mannequins to stand in for corpses.

Kolobaeva spoke out about the incident and later fled with her family to Germany. Her grandmother, who remains in Russia, is convinced of Putin's justification for the war, she said. They have not spoken in months.

"I always hated Putin and his government, his propaganda," Kolobaeva told PolitiFact. "This case changed my life and the lives of my wife and daughter."

Russia masters authoritarian playbook with modern-day efficiency

Putin is far from the first authoritarian to employ lies in the commission of war.

In 1788, Sweden's King Gustav III wanted to wage war on Russia. To generate support, he had his head opera costumer create fake Russian uniforms and staged an attack on a Swedish outpost.

The Japanese military staged an explosion in 1931 to justify its invasion of China.

Before Germany invaded Poland in 1939, Adolf Hitler's Gestapo staged a Polish raid on a German broadcasting tower, leaving behind as "evidence" several dead concentration camp prisoners they had re-dressed as German guards. Soviet dictator Josef Stalin mounted a similar staged provocation purportedly by Finland the same year.

Putin took a page from the playbook of subterfuge in 2014 when he sent what Ukrainians called "little green men" - soldiers in fatigues but without identifying insignia - to occupy strategic locations in Crimea, a region of Ukraine. Putin initially denied that they were Russian troops, but later awarded commendations to their commanders. Eventually, Russia annexed Crimea, though few countries recognized this status.

Modern-day Russia's command of advanced communication tools makes disinformation "loud, multi-channel, inconsistent, and at times surreal," the nonpartisan group Protect Democracy wrote in a report on authoritarian propaganda.

A woman cries in front of a house damaged during Russian shelling in the town of Vyshgorod near Kyiv, Ukraine, on Nov. 24, 2022. (AP)

The U.S. digital intelligence firm Nisos in Alexandria, Virginia, found in October that four platforms - Gab, Gettr, Truth Social and roughly 275 accounts on Twitter - were methodically sharing video content that tracked to one source: a Telegram account tied to the state-run media organization RT, formerly known as Russia Today.

Subtitled into 18 languages, the posts showed first-person videos in which people who were described as Ukrainian civilians testified about how their lives were aided by the Russian military and harmed by Ukrainian forces.

"The overall goal, consistent with Russian propaganda objectives, is to reframe the narrative on the war in Ukraine," Nisos wrote in its report. "The channel's videos all tell the same story from different angles, claiming that the Russian military is generously saving a Ukrainian population besieged by a corrupt, genocidal government and by Nazi militants."

'Ukraine is not a country': Putin's foundational lie

In 1990, Ukraine's parliament declared its independence from the Soviet Union, a call it repeated in August 1991. Ukraine finally gained its independence four months later. In December 1991, Ukrainians voted overwhelmingly for independence, and within days, the USSR dissolved. In 1994, Ukraine agreed with the U.S., the United Kingdom and Russia to exchange its nuclear arsenal, the world's third-largest, for security guarantees.

But the rush of post-Soviet history grated on Putin.

A veteran of the KGB, the Soviet Union's internal security services, Putin has served as Russia's top leader since 1999, with a four-year period in which he was nominally No. 2 but was widely considered the country's ultimate center of power.

He has long sought to establish the theoretical foundations for escalating the war in Ukraine, a country with about one-third the population of Russia and about one-ninth the gross domestic product.

As early as 2008, he told then-President George W. Bush that "Ukraine is not a country."

Since then, Putin has asserted that there is no such thing as a Ukrainian people separate from Russia.

"These claims were designed to deny the existence and agency of the Ukrainian nation," said Erik Herron, a West Virginia University political scientist and author of the book "Elections and Democracy after Communism."

Yet, the history of Ukraine has involved several empires or states, some of which were entirely separate from Russia, Eugene Finkel, an associate professor with Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, told PolitiFact on the eve of the war.

Putin set the table for the 2022 invasion with a 5,000-word essay in July 2021. In it, he argued that much of modern-day Ukraine occupies historically Russian lands and that "Russia was robbed" of them.

In remarks to the Russian security council Feb. 25, Putin addressed the Ukrainian army with a warning: "Do not let these neo-Nazis (and ultra-nationalists) use your women, your children, your elderly as human shields."

Scholars widely agree: Soon after the war started in February, more than 140 signed a letter denouncing Putin's narrative as "factually wrong, morally repugnant and deeply offensive to the memory of millions of victims of Nazism and those who courageously fought against it, including Russian and Ukrainian soldiers of the Red Army."

'A war fought on disinformation': Tracing the lies

At NewsGuard, a journalistic website that rates the credibility of news sources, journalists rolled out the Russia-Ukraine Disinformation Tracking Center. The project has identified more than 300 websites that regularly share false claims about the war. The sites were in many languages, but more than half were in English.

Matt Skibinski, NewsGuard's general manager, said that when news of the invasion broke, the organization's response "was clear as day: If there's a war being fought over disinformation, we need to be tracking it as closely as we possibly can."

Pro-Russia accounts have used Telegram and other platforms to spread fake posts that pretend to be reports by BBC News or CNN. Adding to the confusion, some supposed "wartime" videos that have spread across platforms like TikTok and Facebook don't show the Ukraine conflict at all; their sources have ranged from video games to past conflicts to unrelated training exercises.

The European Union banned state-run media RT from sharing its content in Europe, but researchers at the U.K.-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue identified numerous duplicate websites created to evade the restrictions. The same outlet funneled misleading content to TikTok; NewsGuard found TikTok was offering Russian disinformation within minutes of new users logging in.

Madeline Roache, NewsGuard's managing editor in the United Kingdom, said Russia's disinformation apparatus is expert at confusing the public.

"Because Russia is so good at being persistent at putting out disinformation, I really worry that the constant drumbeat, even with all the fact-checks that we put out, will still affect people's perceptions of Ukraine, perceptions of Russia," Roache said.

Internally displaced people from Mariupol and nearby towns arrive at a refugee center fleeing from the Russian attacks, in Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine, Thursday, April 21, 2022. (AP)

If disinformation campaigns are part of Putin's arsenal, they are even more powerful in combination with the nation's censorship efforts.

Moscow bans Western websites and social media platforms, with tough penalties for social media users. People sharing content about Russian troops that the government deems to be "fake" face imprisonment. Although Russian residents can use virtual private networks, or VPNs, to circumvent bans, propaganda holds a powerful grip.

Figures from Russia's only independent polling research firm, Levada, suggest Russia's control of information has been effective inside its borders: Putin's approval ratings have improved since the war began - from 69% in January to 79% in November - while negative attitudes toward the U.S. and EU have risen.

It's not unusual for authoritarian leaders to lie in an attempt to strengthen their hold on power. What sets Putin apart "is the length to which he is willing to go - destroying his own country and a neighbor - for fanciful, unrealistic, imperial motives," said Yoshiko Herrera, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist and author of "Imagined Economies: The Sources of Russian Regionalism."

'Biolabs': When lies find co-conspirators

If Putin was looking for U.S. allies in the disinformation space, he found a winner Feb. 25, the day after the invasion.

That was the day a QAnon-tied Twitter user with the now-suspended handle @WarClandestine posted a false conspiracy theory that Russia was invading Ukraine to target dangerous U.S.-run bioweapons labs.

Numerous fact-checks debunked this claim. There are no U.S.-run bioweapons facilities in Ukraine, which joined the U.S. in signing the 1972 convention that prohibited the development, production and possession of biological weapons. The U.S. has instead helped support and secure Ukrainian biological research labs as they study pathogens and strive to prevent infectious disease outbreaks.

But the false narrative gave people who dislike the current U.S. leadership an easy-to-understand story that made Russia seem heroic in the face of a scheming U.S.-Ukraine partnership.

The lie fit with previous Russian disinformation efforts that sought to convince the world that the U.S. was cooking up bioweapons in labs in Ukraine. This time, it was amplified by China's Foreign Ministry, Fox News host Tucker Carlson and conservative commentator Candace Owens. Far-right media outlet The Gateway Pundit went further, falsely claiming that the Pentagon "admitted" there were 46 such labs.

By March, the subject became a line of questioning in a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. At the White House, then-Press Secretary Jen Psaki warned Russia could be using the narrative as cover.

By April, the narrative included a new, misleading claim that Biden's son Hunter was funding the supposed bioweapons labs.

NewsGuard's Roache said the claim spread partly because Hunter Biden was affiliated with an investment company that raised money for a startup that does work related to global health. His involvement with the investment decision is frequently cited by his father's political enemies, but remains unproven.

"The claims that I have seen spread to be more widespread are the ones that have a grain of truth," Roache said.

Profound pain, far and wide

The global consequences of a war premised on lies have been severe.

Rebuilding Ukraine will cost at least $349 billion, or more than 1.5 times the size of Ukraine's prewar economy, the World Bank estimated in October - and Russia has intensified its attacks since.

Shortages in electricity, shelter and basic goods are subjecting civilians to extreme suffering.

Russia is the world's largest natural gas producer and is a major oil producer. The war has upended global markets and left countries grappling with high energy costs as winter arrives. The disruption in the energy markets has, in turn, hurt industrial production in Europe and the developing world, battering a supply chain that had already been stretched by the coronavirus pandemic and feeding global inflation.

Russia's pursuit of war has "globalized the economic damage," said Hannibal Travis, law professor at Florida International University. Countries with currency crises, extreme poverty and food insecurity are likely to suffer the worst, he said.

Then there's Putin's homeland.
Russians stand in line to withdraw U.S. dollars and Euros from an ATM in St. Petersburg on Feb. 25, 2022. (AP)
Far from toppling Kyiv in a matter of days, Russia was forced to focus on areas in eastern Ukraine that have heavier concentrations of Russian speakers. And, in recent months, Russia has had to cede some of the areas it has gained, such as the city of Kherson, because it couldn't secure them militarily.

Vladimir Putin " On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians," July 12, 2021

Vladimir Putin, " Address by the President of the Russian Federation," Feb. 21, 2022

Vladimir Putin, " Address by the President of the Russian Federation," Feb. 24, 2022

Washington Post, " Read Putin's national address on a partial military mobilization," Sept. 21, 2022

PolitiFact, " Russian spokesman's statement ignores centuries of Russian attacks," Feb. 21, 2022

PolitiFact, " Putin's one-sided history of Ukraine's relationship with Russia," Feb. 23, 2022

PolitiFact, " Russia's economy and Western sanctions: What you need to know," Feb. 25, 2022

PolitiFact, " Russia's Pants on Fire claim that it is not occupying Ukrainian territory," March 3, 2022

PolitiFact, " Could a strike by Russia on Poland trigger Article 5 and bring NATO into war?" March 14, 2022

PolitiFact, " Russia, Ukraine, and the contested language of genocide," April 11, 2022

PolitiFact, " What are 'tactical' nuclear weapons? And what do they mean for Russia, Ukraine and the world?" April 19, 2022

PolitiFact, " War crime prosecutions in the Russia-Ukraine war: What to expect," April 26, 2022

PolitiFact, " One America News runs conspiratorial segment claiming strike on Mariupol hospital was US false flag," March 22, 2022

PolitiFact, " Russia pushes false crisis actor claims about video from Bucha, Ukraine," April 4, 2022

PolitiFact, " How 'War on Fakes' uses fact-checking to spread pro-Russia propaganda," Aug. 8, 2022

PolitiFact, " False flags: They're real, but far less widespread than social media suggest," Feb. 8, 2022

United Nations, " UN report details summary executions of civilians by Russian troops in northern Ukraine," Dec. 7, 2022

World Bank, " Russian Invasion of Ukraine Impedes Post-Pandemic Economic Recovery in Emerging Europe and Central Asia," Oct. 4, 2022

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, " Paying the Price of War: OECD Economic Outlook, Interim Report," September 2022

Brookings Institution, " Crimea: Six years after illegal annexation," March 17, 2020

Bruegel, " European natural gas imports," Nov. 22, 2022

BBC, " Ukraine war: US estimates 200,000 military casualties on all sides," Nov. 10, 2022

Insider, " Russian troops in Ukraine have suffered as many deaths as the entire 9-year Afghan war that contributed to the USSR's collapse," April 25, 2022

CBS News, " New report details Russian torture of Ukrainian civilians," July 15, 2022

New York Times, " Russian invasion forces penetrate Ukraine on multiple fronts and close in on Kyiv," Feb. 24, 2022

Forbes, " War Has Caused $108 Billion In Damage To Ukraine's Infrastructure, Study Finds," Aug 2, 2022

New York Review of Books, " The Victory of Ukraine," April 7, 2016

FactCheck.org, " The Facts on 'De-Nazifying' Ukraine," March 31, 2022

Jewish Journal, " Statement on Statement on the War in Ukraine by Scholars of Genocide, Nazism and World War II," Feb. 27, 2022

CBS News' 60 Minutes, " The stories of the victims found in a mass grave in Bucha, Ukraine," Oct. 16, 2022

Twitter post, April 3, 2022

Russian Ministry of Defense on Telegram ( archived), April 3, 2022

Russian Ministry of Defense on Telegram ( archived), Oct. 24, 2022

Russian Foreign Ministry on Telegram (archived), April 3, 2022

Twitter post ( archived), April 1, 2022

Russian Embassy in Canada on Twitter (archived), March 1, 2022

Nisos, " Russian's RT Leads a Global "Information Militia" on Social Media to Bypass Censorship on Ukraine-Related Disinformation," Oct. 5, 2022

Gizmodo, " Russian Embassy Accounts Are Skirting Twitter's Disinformation Policies," April 21 2022

Bloomberg News, " Russian Propaganda Is on Social Media, But Not Where You'd Think," April 21, 2022

Washington Post, " Big Tech tried to quash Russian propaganda. Russia found loopholes," Aug. 10, 2022

Voice of America, " In Photos: Russia's Invasion of Ukraine, March 1, 2022," March 1, 2022

BBC, " Bucha killings: Satellite image of bodies site contradicts Russian claims," April 11, 2022

New York Times, " Satellite images show bodies lay in Bucha for weeks, despite Russian claims," April 4, 2022

New York Times, " How the Russian Media Spread False Claims About Ukrainian Nazis," July 2, 2022

ADL, " ADL Statement on Russian Invasion of Ukraine," Feb. 24, 2022

U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, " Museum Condemns Russia's Invasion of Ukraine," Feb. 24, 2022 ​

The Wrap, " Russian Officials Endorse Lara Logan's Comments Linking Ukrainian Soldiers to Nazis and Occultism" March 21, 2022

Associated Press, " Pregnant woman, baby die after Russian bombing in Mariupol," March 14, 2022

Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, " Russian War Report: Russia promotes misleading video accusing Ukraine of using mannequins as casualties," April 3, 2022

Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, " What Russia reads on Telegram: Nine out of the top ten political Telegram channels in Russia spread Kremlin pro-war propaganda," Oct. 21, 2022

Verify This, " Russian TV claimed Ukraine used mannequins to fake war casualties. That video is actually from a TV show set," April 11, 2022

Newsweek, " Fact Check: Did Putin Suggest Russia Would Use Ukrainians as Human Shields?" Oct. 21, 2022

Aljazeera, " Opinion: Why we need to challenge Russia's human shields narrative," April 3, 2022

NPR, " Russia's at war with Ukraine. Here's how we got here," Feb. 24, 2022

BBC News, " Soviet Union timeline," Oct. 31, 2013

Email interview with Eugene Finkel, associate professor with Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, Feb. 23, 2022

Email interview with Courtney Hillebrecht, director of the Forsythe Family Program on Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Nov. 23, 2022

Email interview with Anthony Clark Arend, professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Stuart Ford, law professor at the University of Illinois-Chicago, Nov. 22, 2022

Email interview with Nina Eichacker, economist at the University of Rhode Island, Nov. 21, 2022

Email interview with Clark Williams-Derry, energy finance analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis, Nov. 21, 2022

Email interview with Hugh Daigle, associate professor of petroleum and geosystems engineering at the University of Texas-Austin, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Gary Burtless, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Michael O'Hanlon, foreign policy specialist at the Brookings Institution, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Lance Janda, military historian at Cameron University, Nov. 18, 2022 and Dec. 8, 2022

Email interview with Mark Finley, fellow in energy and global oil at Rice University, Nov. 21, 2022

Email interview with Brendan Green, professor at the University of Cincinnati, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Hannibal Travis, law professor at Florida International University, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Mai'a K. Davis Cross, director of the Center for International Affairs and World Cultures at Northeastern University, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Alexander K. A. Greenawalt, law professor at Pace University, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Kyle Rapp, postdoctoral student in political science and international relations at the University of Southern California, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Paul Robinson, professor of public and international affairs at the University of Ottawa, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Milena Sterio, Cleveland State University law professor, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Alexander Motyl, political scientist at Rutgers University-Newark, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Steven Pifer, scholar at the Brookings Institution, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Erik Herron, West Virginia University political scientist, Nov. 22, 2022

Email interview with Richard Arnold, political scientist at Muskingum University, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with Yoshiko Herrera, University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist, Nov. 18, 2022

Email interview with David Silbey, historian at Cornell University, Dec. 8, 2022

Interview with Frank Sysyn, professor at the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies at the University of Alberta, Nov. 18, 2022

Interview with Matt Skibinski, general manager NewsGuard, Nov. 23, 2022

Interview with Madeline Roache, managing editor, UK, at NewsGuard, Nov. 23, 2022

Email interview with Eto Buziashvili, research associate, Caucasus, at the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, Nov. 30, 2022

Telegram interview with Nadezhda Kolobaeva, Nov. 22-23, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PolitiFact - Lie of the Year 2022: Putin's lies to wage war and conceal horror in Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It was 6 a.m. Moscow time on Feb. 24 when Russian President Vladimir Putin announced his "special military operation" in Ukraine. "The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime," Putin said in a televised address, employing the Russian spelling of Ukraine's capital city.

# data[].attributes.body
https://countercurrents.org/2022/12/militarism-of-the-united-states/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The U.S. government aims at global hegemony through military force

https://popularresistance.org/john-pilger-the-us-is-escalating-war-tensions-with-china-in-desperate-bid-to-maintain-global-power/

https://www.transcend.org/tms/2022/11/see-867-us-military-bases-on-new-online-tool/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine

The military-industrial complex, against which President Dwight D. Eisenhiwer warned in his famous farewell address, has bipartisan support in the United States Congress and Senate. The amount of money involved is enormous. The world, as a whole, spends roughly two trillion dollars each year on armaments, and a very large share of this, more than 800 billion dollars, is spent by the United States. A vast river of money flows from the huge arms manufacturing corporations into the campaign funds and pockets of politicians, and into the pockets of those who control the mass media. The politicians then vote for obscenely enormous military budgets, to meet various self-created dangers and enemies, and the mass media support the politicians. This circular flow of money has been called "The Devil's Dynamo".

The United States was once an isolationist nation, whose citizens and government wished to keep aloof from the wars and quarrels of Europe. However, at the end of World War II, the large industrial countries of the world, except for the United States, lay in ruins, but industries in the U.S. were still intact. Thus the United States was, in spite of itself, thrown onto the world stage.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, hesitancy was replaced by triumphalism, and the "Project for a New American Century", proclaimed that the United States was the world's only superpower. The U.S. ruled the world, and could do as it liked.

Paul Wolfowitz, the Undersecretary of Defence for Policy, produced his infamous "Wolfowitz Doctrine" paper.

Here is a quotations from the first draft of the document:

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."

The United States is the world's largest exporter of armaments

https://www.transcend.org/tms/2022/11/corporate-weapons-heaven-is-a-hell-on-earth/

The arms exported by the United States often go to countries such as Saudi Arabia, where they contribute to the continuation of wars, for example against Yemen, and enormous human suffering. Arms exported by the U.S. find their way to Africa, where they deepen and prolong conflicts.

Ukraine: NATO's proxy war with Russia

https://mate.substack.com/p/russia-says-us-wrecked-ukraine-talks#:~:text=As%20the%20Ukraine,a%20%E2%80%9Cnon%2Dissue.%E2%80%9D

https://www.transcend.org/tms/2022/11/lets-be-clear-if-ww3-happens-it-will-be-the-result-of-choices-made-by-the-us-empire/

The current war between Russia and Ukraine is really a proxy war between Russia and the United States. One cannot excuse Putin's criminal invasion of Ukraine. However, it was not unprovoked. Russia fears the eastward expansion of NATO, and was promised that this would never take place, "not one inch", a promise that was almost immediately broken. There are plans to make Ukraine a NATO member, confirming Russia's worst fears. Furthermore, the United States is sending many billions of dollars worth of sophistocated weapons to Ukraine. And finally, attempts to reach a diplomaticly negotiated peace settlement have been blocked by the United States, because Washington stratigists want to weaken Russia.

Secrecy versus democracy

If the people of a country do not know what their government is doing, how can they vote to correct the misconduct of their government? Almost by definition, secrecy and democracy are incompatible. What shall we then think of the efforts of the United States to extradite Julian Assange and prosecute him, when all that he did was to expose secrets through honest journalism? What shall we think of the vast secret surveillance network exposed by Edward Snowden? Most governmental secrets are military secrets.

Many of my freely downloadable books can be found at the following web address:

https://www.johnavery.info/

John Scales Avery is a theoretical chemist at the University of Copenhagen. He is noted for his books and research publications in quantum chemistry, thermodynamics, evolution, and history of science. His 2003 book Information Theory and Evolution set forth the view that the phenomenon of life, including its origin, evolution, as well as human cultural evolution, has its background situated in the fields of thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, and information theory. Since 1990 he has been the Chairman of the Danish National Group of Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs. Between 2004 and 2015 he also served as Chairman of the Danish Peace Academy. He founded the Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, and was for many years its Managing Editor. He also served as Technical Advisor to the World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe (19881997).
http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/ordbog/aord/a220.htm. He can be reached at avery.john.s@gmail.com. To know more about his works and download his books visit this link. https://www.johnavery.info/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Militarism Of The United States| Countercurrents

# data[].attributes.body
https://news.yahoo.com/report-analyzes-racial-profiling-california-183535068.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LOS ANGELES (AP) - California law enforcement searched teenagers whom officers perceived to be Black at nearly six times the rate of teens believed to be white during vehicle and pedestrian stops in 2021, according to a state report released Tuesday.

The annual report by California's Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board - part of a law that initially took effect in 2018 - is among several reforms taken by the state in recent years amid increased focus on police brutality and racial injustice nationwide.

The board's report includes data on vehicle and pedestrian stops by officers from 58 law enforcement agencies in 2021. The data includes what officers perceived to be the race, ethnicity, gender and disability status of people they stop so that the state can better identify and analyze bias in policing.

The 58 agencies - which include the 23 largest departments in the state - collectively made more than 3.1 million vehicle and pedestrian stops in 2021. By April, all of California's more than 500 law enforcement agencies must submit their data.

The data includes how officers perceive an individual's race or gender, even if it's different than how the person identifies, because the officer's perception is what drives bias. The board's work informs agencies, the state's police office training board and state lawmakers as they change policies and seek to decrease racial disparities and bias in policing.

In more than 42% of the 3.1 million stops by those agencies in 2021, the individual was perceived to be Hispanic or Latino, according to the report. More than 30% were perceived to be white and 15% were believed to be Black.

Statewide, however, 2021 Census estimates say Black or African American people made up only 6.5% of California's population, while white people were about 35%. Hispanic or Latino people made up roughly 40% of the state's population that year.

"The data show that racial and identity disparities persist year after year," the report said. "The Board remains committed to analyzing and highlighting these disparities to compel evidence-driven strategies for reforming policing and eliminating racial and identity profiling in California."

For example: Police handcuffed, searched or detained - either curbside or in a patrol car - individuals whom they believed to be Black youths between 15 and 17 years old during a higher percentage of traffic stops than any other combination of perceived race or ethnicity and age groups.

Law enforcement also searched people who were perceived to be Black at 2.2 times the rate of people thought to be white, the report said. And police were more than twice as likely to use force against people they thought were Black, as compared to people whom officers believed to be white.

Yet law enforcement officials reported taking no action most frequently after making stops of people they believed to be Black individuals, as compared to other racial and ethnic groups, "indicating those stopped Black individuals were not engaged in criminal activity," the report said.

"Based on the research, the Board believes that public health officials and policymakers should treat racial and identity profiling and adverse policing as significant public health issues," according to the report. "It is imperative to recognize that police interactions can negatively affect the mental and physical health of individuals who are Black, Hispanic/Latine(x), Indigenous, and people of color."

This year's report includes data from 40 more agencies than the 2020 report, meaning it analyzed an additional 246,000 stops. Of the 18 agencies that collected data in both years, 13 made fewer stops in 2021. The report said the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted those figures.

The 2021 findings were consistent with previous reports by the board that similarly showed law enforcement's racial and identity profiling through the traffic stops.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
California police more likely to stop, search Black teens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
California law enforcement searched teenagers whom officers perceived to be Black at nearly six times the rate of teens believed to be white during vehicle and pedestrian stops in 2021, according to a state report released Tuesday.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The Taliban took our last hope': College education is banned for women in Afghanistan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Tuesday morning, a woman called Zahra was preparing to take final exams to complete her arts degree at a university in the Afghan capital, Kabul. By evening, she was effectively expelled because of her gender, like every other female university student in Afghanistan.

# data[].attributes.headline
Frank Hurt - Rothschild Family Controlling Banking and Major World Events

# data[].attributes.subject
Frank Hurt - Rothschild Family Controlling Banking and Major World Events

# data[].attributes.body
https://fee.org/articles/totalitarian-collectivism-in-america/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. DougIas is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at San Diego, though his studies of human action range beyond the usual professional or academic bounds of any one discipline. He has written and edited twenty-five books on various aspects of the social sciences and his articles have appeared In many professional Journals and other publications.
This article Is from the preface of his book,The Myth of the Welfare State, forthcoming.
"Nothing is more striking to a European traveller in the United States than the absence of what we term . . . government." So wrote Alexis de Tocqueville of American society in the 1830s. What American in 1980 could possibly think of our society as one characterized by an "absence of government"?

Government at all levels now directly controls nearly forty percent of our wealth through direct taxation, yet anyone with a smattering of economic knowledge knows that the indirect taxation mandated by government regulation is also huge. American society today is a government-controlled society, a society in which all of us are controlled in innumerable ways by a vast number of proliferating government bureaucracies, agencies, committees, police powers, legislative bodies, judicial decisions.

Tocqueville recognized that government powers might someday grow in America into the huge bureaucratic administration of life that had earlier characterized the mercantilist monarchies of Europe. He realized that the welfare of any nation necessitated the legislation of general principles for the whole society by the central government. But he had forebodings that the American government would go far beyond that and turn mass democracy into democratic tyranny. If the central power, he argued, "after having established the general principles of government . . . descended to the details of their application; and if, having regulated the great interests of the country, it could descend to the circle of individual interests, freedom would soon be banished from the New World." Any educated American in 1980 knows that our huge government bureaucracies now dictate minute details of our everyday lives and enforce their dictates with vast police powers.

America Today an Imperial Bureaucracy

America today is ruled by an Imperial State Bureaucracy headed by an Imperial President. Certainly there are significant differences in the forms of our imperial government; but any historian of the ancient imperial states or of those of the sixteenth-century mercantilist monarchies will easily recognize that the differences are only surface phenomena, while the basic realities of power and its administration are very much the same.

It is only political rhetoric and the ignorance of history now almost universal even among our so-called educated people that makes it possible for people to pretend that "America is still the land of liberty." Certainly America is still more free by far than those nations now ruled over by the terrible socialist state bureaucracies. Indeed, we are still significantly more free than the cowed peoples of the democratic socialist nations of Scandinavia, once-Great Britain and elsewhere. But anyone who has studied the trends of recent decades knows that we are closing the political gap between ourselves and their state tyrannies at a terrifying rate.

We scholars who several years ago hoped selfishly that we might at least be spared in our lifetime the terrors of pseudo-democratic state tyrannies must now recognize that our hopes are fading rapidly. We social scientists know that in the past few years alone the federal bureaucracy has moved relentlessly to establish committees at all our universities to review our research and, thereby, to control what we can know and say about our society. What greater power can any government possibly wield than the power to determine what can be known and how it can or cannot be known?

And yet there has been no great outcry, no widespread screams of outrage or anguish from our people. The reason for that is that they are firmly in the grip of the myth of the welfare state, the myth that their individual welfare depends upon and is served by the ineluctable ratchet-up in state powers. They believe this myth for many irrational non- reasons. The politicians are paying them off with their own tax-monies and erstwhile liberties: the politicians use police powers to take from them their wealth and their individual liberties to determine how they will live, and then return part of this to them under government constraints-but only on the proviso that they support the politicians who use police powers to take away their wealth and their liberties. It is not too difficult to see how our peoples, in the grip of the great temptation of greed and mystified by the pseudo- science theories that tell them it is all necessary to surrender their liberties in order to have liberties, can be so easily deceived.

Even more ominous than the relative lack of outcry from our people has been the lack of serious outcry from our intellectuals and scientists. Most ominous of all, it is they who have been clamoring the loudest for ever greater imperial state controls. It is even the academics who administer the thought control programs of the federal bureaucracies now trying to dictate how we shall do research. Those who remember that it was the intellectuals and social scientists in Germany who clamored for more state power over German life, and they who repressed any opposition to Nazi thought controls once they came to power, will recognize that the seeds of mass-democratic tyranny are already firmly planted in our society.

The most effective tyranny, and thus the most terrible tyranny, is always imposed by the people upon themselves, at least in the beginning, and they have almost always done such an irrational thing only when their intellectual leaders have convinced them that such tyranny is necessary and good-that it will serve the greatest welfare of the people themselves.

Political Deceptions

Mass democratic tyranny will probably always be built upon the two great political deceptions of mass equality and mass welfare. Those deceptions will take many specific forms, always conforming to the particular political rhetoric already widely shared in a particular society, but the general message will be the same and so will the result.

In a mass democracy that has triumphed over all traditional values there is no truth, no justice, no social welfare beyond that of the voice of the people. The people determine what is just and good they determine everything by their votes. One man, one vote. One vote, one unit of truth and morality. Majority rules. More votes, more truth, more morality. As our "liberal" intellectuals today would say, what could be more conducive to the general welfare than for all individuals to have an equal voice (vote) in deciding what is to their welfare? Even when they do not say so, most of our intellectuals have now so completely absorbed this tenet of mass democracy that they have nothing but contempt for those who try to remind them of the ancient truth that direct rule by collective ignorance-by mobocracy-always leads in time to tyranny, first to the tyranny of the majority and then to the tyranny of the few when the ignorance of the majority has produced its inevitable social catastrophes.

In America today the same nuclear physicist who would laugh uproariously at the thought that the average businessman should have a vote on whether to allow physicists to study the atom would immediately turn around and insist that he as a citizen and nothing more should have the right to vote on whether the owners of Texas gas wells should have the right to set their own prices for their gas, whether the Federal Reserve should increase the money supply at a faster rate, or whether the federal government should "stimulate" the international economy by running budget deficits and "talking down" the dollar in exchange markets.

The same sociologist who asserts with contempt that the average politician knows nothing about the realities of drug use and their effects would assert with aplomb, and without thinking to consult a single study or learning economic theory, that the government should "solve" the problem of inflation by imposing wage and price controls upon all those businessmen who "set their prices to rip-off obscene profits."

And the average citizen voter, who can barely read at the so-called tenth grade level, asserts blandly that his votes justify the politicians' use of police powers to dictate to doctors the standards of medical care and the maximum charges they can ask for their services.

Confusing the Issue

Why? Why does the physicist think he should have a vote to determine what price Texas gas owners can ask for their gas, whereas it is ludicrous for the Texan to vote on whether the physicist be allowed to investigate the atom? Because, says the physicist, the price of gas is a "political question" that affects us all, not a question of scientific fact. But our physicists have forgotten that there are few things in a world of interdependent markets that do not affect almost everything else in some way. What could be more important in determining the future-or lack of future-of all human beings than nuclear re search? By our physicist's own standards, what, then, could be more "political," and thus more subject to decision by mass vote, than nuclear physics?

And, if our sociologist can use his vote to dictate the asking price for gas in Texas, why cannot the gas owner use his vote to dictate the grading standards of the sociologist, or his hiring standards, or his subject of research?

And is it not totally logical for the same politician who dictates medical standards and prices of doctors to dictate for our Mr. and Mrs. Every person the standards of their work, the prices of their labor, and ultimately the standards of their most intimate acts and thoughts?

The logic of totalitarian collectivism is simple, brutal and entirely consistent. Once a people has decided, whether actively or more commonly, by default, to allow politicians to decide by legislation, and without severe constraints of custom or law, what is right and wrong in a basic realm of life like property rights, then there can be no logical constraint upon their exercise of power in other realms of life.

As John Locke saw, even in the vastly more simple and self-contained society of the seventeenth century, without property rights no other rights can long be sustained. The government that controls all of my property controls my right to the pursuit of happiness, my right to free speech and to the publication of that speech, my right to take a spouse or have children, my right to life itself for all things of life are totally dependent upon the material goods and the subjective controls of those goods we call property and property rights. The government that has the right to legislate gas prices in Texas, or income distribution nationwide, has every logical right to dictate research standards in physics, hiring standards in sociology, wage rates for black teenagers in New York, parental care standards for all parents, and-everything else in life.

Totalitarian Logic

When the American people used the power of their votes to give the politicians the power to legislate away our ancient economic rights they unknowingly gave them power to legislate away all our ancient rights. The American Imperial State Bureaucracy is now pursuing that relentless logic of totalitarian collectivism at an astounding rate. Once our people had accepted that totalitarian logic, there was nothing left to protect us but our isolated individual sense of outrage and our underground resistance movements. Each sector of the economy, each corporation, each besieged individual is now left alone to fight his rearguard resistance against the unconstrained might of the Common Welfare, the Welfare State.

The welfare state is built on the totalitarian logic: when the goal of the state becomes that of pursuing, without basic constraints of custom or law, the common welfare of all, then the welfare of any individual or sub-group becomes irrelevant. Thus we eventually arrive at the logical conclusion of the Egalitarian Welfare State, the conclusion Rousseau reached two centuries ago: the equal welfare of all demands that the individual welfares of everyone be totally sacrificed. And so the modern juggernaut of the Welfare State trundles onward, crushing beneath its bureaucratic powers the ancient freedoms of one group after another-to serve the Welfare of All, of course. Today the businessmen, the gas producers and the steel makers; tomorrow the doctors; then the parents; and someday the Whole World.

The opposite of the logic of totalitarian collectivism is, of course, the logic of individualist freedom. The logic of collectivism computes the individual welfare, if at all, in terms of the collective welfare, that is, in terms of "aggregates" like gross national welfare, income distributions, and distributive justice. The logic of individualist freedom does the opposite, that is, it computes the social welfare, if at all, in terms of the individuals' welfares as defined and experienced by the individuals.

The American Constitution was built upon the logic of individualist freedom. The American government was founded to promote the common welfare, but to the eighteenth-century liberal minds of our constitutionalists that meant the exact opposite of what it means to the average American today.

Because they assumed that welfare could only be defined individually, the American constitutionalists intended the government to promote the common welfare by remaining as small and weak as it could while serving the one and only collective form of welfare, that of the common defense against foreign powers which wanted to impose Big and Powerful Government on Americans. Thus it is that they discovered that revolutionary American idea of individual freedom: minimizing the power of government will maximize the welfare of all. Thus it is that when Tocqueville visited America in the 1830s he found a remarkable "absence" of government and an equally remarkable high level of individual welfare-a land of freedom and of peace and plenty.

Unhappy Nation

The government-dominated America of 1980 is a deeply unhappy nation, a nation torn by deep dissension as never before since the civil war. Each American today is fighting his own desperate guerrilla warfare against the relentless growth of government power. Worst of all, the massive use of government power to tax and control each of us "for the common welfare," has logically turned each of us into the enemy of all the others.

Our collectivist Marxists tell us that the free market capitalism of Tocqueville's era was evil because it turned each man against his neighbor in economic competition. But the truth is the exact opposite. America under the free market was a land of pervasive friendliness and cooperation, of neighborly feeling and public interest politics, of self- sacrificing parents and children and charitable citizens. Now that we are all fighting desperately against each other for our shrinking piece of the welfare-state pie, we have become a surly and terribly conflictive society, a society dominated by selfish pressure- group politics, a society of sniveling self-pity in which each person blames "the society" or, more appropriately, "the Government" for all of his problems and demands that the Government solve his problems for him, a society in which parents have little control over their children and parents are deserted to the cold treatment of the state-financed nursing home, a society in which charity has been taxed away, a society in which love itself is poisoned by the political conflict for a collectivist "Equality."

Self-reliance was once the iron string to which all American hearts beat, but it was a self-reliance buttressed by all the strength of family love and cooperation, by neighborly cooperation, and by a spirit of public interest. The hearts of Welfare-state Americans beat to the totalitarian tunes of bureaucratic regulations and state-dependency. A free America was a land in which the average man and woman believed that their nation was like a shining city on a hill toward which all human beings could look longingly and hopefully. Welfare-state America is a land without pride, a nation in which the best have replaced a sense of public interest with a sense of public shame.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Totalitarian Collectivism in America | Jack D. Douglas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. DougIas is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at San Diego, though his studies of human action range beyond the usual professional or academic bounds of any one discipline. He has written and edited twenty-five books on various aspects of the social sciences and his articles have appeared In many professional Journals and other publications.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/06/us-police-killings-record-number-2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
‘It never stops’: killings by US police reach record high in 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Law enforcement killed at least 1,176 people or about 100 people a month last year, making it the deadliest for police violence

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/24/the-new-propaganda-how-the-american-government-is-trying-to-control-what-you-think/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Obama, accompanied by Alaska Gov. Bill Walker, steps off Air Force One. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

NASA tweeting that Congress should give it more money so our astronauts won't have to ride on Russian rockets. Recovery.gov reporting overly optimistic statistics on jobs saved and created by stimulus funds.The Department of Health and Human Service Web site encouraging the public to "state your support for health care reform" during the congressional debate over Obamacare.

These are just some recent examples of the executive branch using our tax dollars to shape our opinions. Unlike the National Security Agency's personal data collection or the overuse of "secret" stamps to withhold information, this government-produced propaganda receives almost no attention. But that doesn't mean this "third dimension" of government information is not a problem. America becomes less democratic when the $3 trillion executive branch uses its resources to tilt the debate in its favor.

Of course, a democratic government has an obligation to inform and be transparent. Citizens need to know the government's policies and plans. We have a right to know which companies receive government contracts, how to collect insurance benefits and social security payments and what public school educational reform will look like. But too often, the government uses its information machinery to do more than simply inform us about a policy. Sometimes, it tries to persuade us to adopt a particular position, regardless of its efficacy.

Consider, for example, the Department of Labor's campaign to raise the minimum wage, a topic on which there is considerable debate. Raising the minimum wage, the Congressional Budget Office points out, will eliminate some jobs. Still, the government devotes a Web page to the topic that proclaims, "See how raising the national minimum wage will benefit America's workers." Americans are invited to tell the Labor Department why they "support raising the federal minimum wage." Twitter users can see a video of a squiggle of mustard spelling out "#RaiseTheWage" on a hot dog, a reference to the recent interest group advocacy to pay fast-food employers more money. The Labor Department's Web page treats raising the minimum wage as an unalloyed good and labels possible job losses a "myth."

Such aggressive communications are neither novel nor exceptional. Government agencies historically have made a habit of crossing the blurry line between informing the public and propagandizing.

Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton's 1791 report on manufacturing promoted policies to grow the nation into a commercial republic. President Woodrow Wilson's Committee on Public Information recruited 75,000 members of the public to give speeches in favor of such World War I measures as Liberty Bonds and the draft, blanketed the nation with pamphlets and posters, and generally set in motion the modern publicity apparatus that exists today

A decade ago, the Government Accountability Office faulted the second Bush administration's Department of Health and Human Services for overselling the benefits of the new Medicare law. Several years before, in 1997, the GAO caught the State Department paying a consultant to write op-ed pieces in support of the Clinton administration's policy on Central America.

As these revelations dribble out, they sometimes become fodder for vitriolic partisan political battles, and occasionally prompt congressional hearings. Just three years ago, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Republicans issued a report detailing various propagandizing efforts by the Obama administration. Democrat Rep. Henry A. Waxman leveled similar accusations during the second Bush administration. But the issue then gets forgotten until the next propaganda scandal erupts.

This cycle has been occurring for at least a century, and it repeats itself because no corrective mechanisms are in place. There is no systematic monitoring of government information. Inspectors general and the GAO do not regularly report on agency communications. No congressional committee has jurisdiction over government information.

The scope of the third dimension is difficult to assess. In 2014, the government spent $760 million to hire private advertising firms, according to USASpending.gov. The contracts purchased advertising space on all forms of media, marketing research and opinion polling, message-crafting assistance and more.

That figure does not include the salaries of the innumerable federal employees who promote their agencies' work in print, on air and online. It does not include the anti-drug media campaigns, or the cost of printing and publishing reports and government journals, such as the Federal Highway Administration's Public Roads magazine. Speaking of publishing, the Government Publishing Office, which costs $110 million to operate, has more than a million publications online.

The Internet has only exacerbated this problem by making it so easy to communicate with the public. Not long after President Obama arrived in office, his administration carried out an audit of federal government Web sites. They found 24,000 of them.

The Obama administration has made heavy use of social media, which was so successful during his run for president. The Department of Commerce has a YouTube channel. The Environmental Protection Agency - to name just one of the 120 government agencies - has about two dozen Twitter accounts. It uses a social media tool called Thunderclap, which spreads messages so widely that an agency communications official calls it a " virtual flash mob."

EPA communications to the public include both factual updates on the agency's response to the Gold King Mine spill and aggressive advocacy in favor of the EPA's Clean Power Plan. Presidential appointees spinning for an administration is unobjectionable. But using agencies as presidential messaging machines sullies the civil service, which is supposed to be nonpartisan.

Congress has tried to curb this behavior. In 1913 it passed legislation forbidding, without its expressed approval, the expenditure of appropriated funds on "publicity experts." Several years later, it enacted its grass-roots lobbying ban, which forbids the executive branch from using tax dollars to whip up public pressure to influence law-making.

Each year appropriations bills forbid agencies from spending funds for "publicity or propaganda purposes." But this has done little good. As noted by Mordecai Lee, one of the few scholars to pay any attention to this issue, agencies have given their communications staff different titles, such as "public affairs specialist," and renamed their communications "outreach" and "public education."

The GAO defines "propaganda" very narrowly as government information that is not labeled as such. Unfortunately, it otherwise has proven all but impossible to write a law that absolutely differentiates information from advocacy.

Congress again is trying to do something about government information in a modest way. The Taxpayer Transparency Act of 2015 would force agencies to label their ads and media as government-produced, which agencies do not always do.

But this reform would be even more helpful if it required agencies to cite and share the sources for their "facts." Where, for example, are the Department of Labor data that prove hot dog venders earn less than $9 an hour?

Congress should direct agencies to annually inventory the number of public communications they produce, the number of staff who assist in communications, and the approximate cost. These reports should additionally reference whatever laws authorize agencies to communicate with the public and for what purposes.

All these data should be submitted to the Government Accountability Office, which can audit the data, and then publish publicly an overall inventory of government public communications.

This is only a start, of course. But it would be a big step ahead of where we are now. Just as setting the federal minimum wage is a ripe subject for energetic political debate and decision-making, so too is the third dimension.

Today's Headlines The most important news stories of the day, curated by Post editors and delivered every morning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the American government is trying to control what you think

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NASA tweeting that Congress should give it more money so our astronauts won't have to ride on Russian rockets. Recovery.gov reporting overly optimistic statistics on jobs saved and created by stimulus funds.The Department of Health and Human Service Web site encouraging the public to "state your support for health care reform" during the congressional debate over Obamacare.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/privacy-threat-always-microphones-amazon-echo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A warrant from police in Arkansas seeking audio records of a man's Amazon Echo has sparked an overdue conversation about the privacy implications of "always-on" recording devices. This story should serve as a giant wakeup call about the potential surveillance devices that many people are starting to allow into their own homes.

The Amazon echo is not the only such device; others include personal assistants like Google Home, Google Now, Apple's Siri, Windows Cortana, as well as other devices including televisions, game consoles, cars and toys. We can safely assume that the number of live microphones scattered throughout American homes will only increase to cover a wide range of "Internet of Things" (IoT) devices. (I will focus on microphones in this post, but these devices can include not just audio recorders but video as well, and the same considerations apply.)

The insecurity of a nearby mic

I was at a dinner party recently with close friends where the conversation turned to some entirely theoretical, screenplay-writing-type speculations about presidential assassinations-speculations that would be pretty dicey should certain outside parties who did not know us and where we were coming from be listening in. Realizing this as we spoke, the group thought of our host's Amazon Echo, sitting on a side table with its little light on. The group's conversation became self-conscious as we began joking about the Echo listening in. Joking or not, in short order our host walked over and unplugged it.

It is exactly this kind of self-consciousness and chilling effects that surveillance-or even the most remote threat of surveillance-casts over otherwise freewheeling private conversations, and is the reason people need ironclad assurance that their devices will not-cannot-betray them.

Overall, digital assistants and other IoT devices create a triple threat to privacy: from government, corporations, and hackers.

It is a significant thing to allow a live microphone in your private space (just as it is to allow them in our public spaces). Once the hardware is in place, and receiving electricity, and connected to the Internet, then you're reduced to placing your trust in the hands of two things that unfortunately are less than reliable these days: 1) software, and 2) policy.

Software, once a mic is in place, governs when that microphone is live, when the audio it captures is transmitted over the Internet, and to whom it goes. Many devices are programmed to keep their microphones on at all times but only record and transmit audio after hearing a trigger phrase-in the case of the Echo, for example, "Alexa." Any device that is to be activated by voice alone must work this way. There are a range of other systems. Samsung, after a privacy dust-up, assured the public that its smart televisions (like others) only record and transmit audio after the user presses a button on its remote control. The Hello Barbie toy only picks up and transmits audio when its user presses a button on the doll.

Software is invisible, however. Most companies do not make their code available for public inspection, and it can be hacked, or unscrupulous executives can lie about what it does (think Volkswagen), or government agencies might try to order companies to activate them as a surveillance device.

The dumber and more straightforward a user's control, the better. Depriving a microphone of electricity by unplugging it and/or removing any batteries provides ironclad assurance that it's not recording. A hardware switch is nearly as good, provided there's no software mediation that could be overcome by hackers. (Switches can be bought for just that purpose.) A verbal command is far less certain, and devices like Echo will sometimes misinterpret sounds as their "wake word" and record random snippets of conversation. It's easy to see how a sentence such as "He was driving a Lexus in a way she said was dangerous" could be heard by an Echo as "Alexa: Sin away she said-was dangerous." The constant potential for accidental recording means that users do not necessarily have complete control over what audio gets transmitted to the cloud.

Once their audio is recorded and transmitted to a company, users depend for their privacy on good policies-how it is analyzed; how long and by whom it is stored, and in what form; how it is secured; who else it may be shared with; and any other purposes it may be used for. This includes corporate policies (caveat emptor), but also our nation's laws and Constitution.

Access to recordings by law enforcement

We fear that some government agencies will try to argue that they do not need a warrant to access this kind of data. We believe the Constitution is clear, and that, at a minimum, law enforcement needs a warrant based on probable cause to access conversations recorded in the home using such devices. But more protections are needed. Congress, recognizing the extremely invasive nature of traditional wiretaps, enacted safeguards that go beyond what the courts had ruled the Constitution requires. These include requirements that wiretaps be used only for serious crimes, or be permitted only when other investigative procedures have failed or are unlikely to succeed. We think that these additional privacy protections should also apply to invasive digital devices in the home.

Unfortunately the existing statutes governing the interceptions of voice communications are ridiculously tangled and confused and it's not clear whether or how data recorded by devices in the home are covered by them. (CDT's Joe Jerome has written a good roundup of that law and how it might apply to always-on devices.)

When it comes to law enforcement access, the key issues for us as a legal matter are:

Breadth. Access needs to be no broader than necessary. Any warrant authorizing access to stored conversations should particularly and narrowly describe the data that law enforcement has probable cause to believe is related to a crime-for example a specific time period, subject matter, and/or type of activity.

Minimization. There need to be protections in place to limit the collection of information that is ultimately irrelevant. In the wiretap context these include rules requiring the police to stop listening when a conversation is irrelevant, and analagous rules should be developed for IoT device data.

Notice. Historically, citizens served with search warrants have always received notice that their property is being searched-especially when that property is one's home-and that practice should not be ended just because it is moving into the electronic realm. (We discussed this issue in greater depth last year.) Notice of IoT searches should always be served on all affected parties.

In the Arkansas case, the police did serve Amazon with a warrant-but Amazon has fought it, apparently because of overbreadth. Our only information is what the company has said in a statement: that "Amazon objects to overbroad or otherwise inappropriate demands as a matter of course."

A legal contradiction

Digital assistants, like smart meters and many other IoT devices, split open a contradiction between two legal doctrines that both sit at the core of privacy law:

1. The sanctity of the home. The inside of the home has for centuries been sacred when it comes to privacy. The Supreme Court has refused to let police use thermal scanners on private homes, for example, despite government protests that it was only measuring the heat leaving the home. And although the Court has ruled that dog sniffs for drugs are not a search in cars or in public spaces, it refused to allow them near the home. As Justice Antonin Scalia pointed out in the thermal scanner case, "the Fourth Amendment draws a firm line at the entrance to the house."

2. The third-party doctrine. As strong as privacy jurisprudence has been in protecting the home, it has been very weak in another area. Under the court's so-called "third party doctrine," the Constitution does not require police to get a warrant to get people's records from their bank, telephone company, internet service provider, Google, Amazon, or any other third party. As a result, law enforcement agencies have argued in recent years that they should be able to obtain information such as individuals' cell phone records, location history, even emails from companies without a warrant.

The contradiction arises when devices inside the home stream data about activities in that home to the servers of a third-party corporation. Because of the third party doctrine, to give just one example, police have been obtaining home energy-use data from utilities without a warrant. In a home with a "smart meter," that kind of data can be so minutely detailed that it can reveal all kinds of details about what people are doing inside their homes-which appliances they use, and when they use them-and even what television shows they watch (based on the patterns of light and dark in a show, which changes a television set's electricity draw). In fact, in the very same Arkansas murder case in which the police are seeking data from the suspect's Amazon Echo, they built their case against him using warrantlessly obtained data from his smart water meter, which prosecutors say shows he used 140 gallons of water between 1 and 3 a.m. They allege he was trying to hose blood stains off his patio. (He says the AM/PM setting on the meter's clock was wrong and he used that water in the afternoon in order to fill his hot tub.)

The solution to the contradiction between the sanctity of the home and the third-party doctrine is clear: the third party doctrine must go. It is increasingly untenable in an era where much of the data created about people's lives sits on the servers of international corporations-and the growth of IoT devices like digital assistants will make its inadequacy in the information age even clearer.

Recommendations

In addition to rigorously applying constitutional privacy protections as outlined above, the following steps should be applied to IoT microphones:

Speech fragments transmitted to companies should be retained for the minimal necessary period, should not be shared absent a warrant, and should not be used for other purposes.

Companies should do whatever necessary to ensure their users have a clear understanding about what data is kept and for how long. That means fine print buried in a click-through agreement is not enough.

Users should have access to any of their audio recordings that a company retains, and the option to delete them. Commendably, some companies (Google and Amazon, for example) already do this. It needs to become at minimum an expected, standard best practice.

It should become standard for microphones to feature a hardwired, non-software-modifiable LED indicator light that turns on whenever a mic is on (defined as transmitting electrical signals to anywhere else). It might make sense for there to be another, separate indicator when software is recording and/or transmitting signals to the Internet. The more transparency to the consumer, the better.

It should also become standard to build in a hardware power switch that physically cuts off electricity to a microphone so that consumers can stop a microphone from recording. As much as possible, the power interruption that that switch effects should be tangible or even visible, so that customers can feel complete certainty that the microphone cannot record, akin to the certainty that comes from putting a bandage (or ACLU sticker) over the camera on one's laptop.

To the greatest extent possible, the code governing the operation of microphones should be public. When people depend on software to protect their privacy, transparent code is the only way to give people assurance a device is doing what it's supposed to and no more.

Special attention should be paid to any capability for remote activation of recording. Best for privacy is for no such activation to be possible. If there is a strong case to be made that such capability may be desired by consumers, then it should be to the greatest extent possible designed to be something that only consumers themselves can activate, and that consumers can permanently disable if they wish. Consumers must also be given explicit warning where any such capabilities exist.

Companies and policymakers need to address the raft of issues around the stability of IoT devices, especially in-home devices with microphones or cameras. When not regularly updated, for example, such devices quickly become security threats. And what happens when the company providing those updates goes out of business or is acquired-or just changes its privacy policy? Devices that start out as private and secure can become a toxic presence inside the home as a result of things happening in the outside world, and right now, consumers are on their own in a Wild West.

One of the best things that can be done for privacy is for speech recognition capabilities to be embedded locally in a device, so there's no need to send audio clips to servers across the Internet. While that can work now for some simple commands, experts say that good recognition of a broader array of speech still requires processing in the cloud.

Legislative privacy protections are also needed. In addition to broad privacy rules governing corporate use of private data, which would help in this area as in so many others, Congress should lay out strong and precise standards for when the government can access data from these new devices. As with wiretaps, the privacy and public interests at stake may require protections beyond a warrant and notice requirement.

Again, all of these principles should also apply to video that in-home devices may capture and potentially stream to the cloud, which carries the same threats and problems.

It is a healthy thing that this Arkansas story has sparked a public conversation about always-on devices. We and other privacy advocates have been watching this technology for some time-our allies at the privacy group EPIC wrote a letter to the FTC in 2015 requesting an investigation of always-on devices and their privacy implications. And the Future of Privacy Forum, a DC think tank, produced a helpful report on the issue last year.

But if microphones are going to be part of our daily lives in our intimate spaces, we need broader awareness of the issues they raise, and to settle on strong protections and best practices as soon as possible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Privacy Threat From Always-On Microphones Like the Amazon Echo | News & Commentary | American Civil Liberties Union

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A warrant from police in Arkansas seeking audio records of a man's Amazon Echo has sparked an overdue conversation about the privacy implications of "always-on" recording devices. This story should serve as a giant wakeup call about the potential surveillance devices that many people are starting to allow into their own homes.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/20/technology/tiktok-ban-government-issued-devices.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bans on TikTok Gain Momentum in Washington and States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At least 14 states have passed bans on the service on government-issued devices in recent weeks. And Congress appears poised to pass a similar prohibition for federal workers.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/vietnam-human-rights-letter-12072022234451.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Local and international groups issued a letter calling on the government to honor its commitment to freedoms.

The Vietnam Interfaith Council has joined forces with four organizations representing overseas Vietnamese in a renewed call on Hanoi to respect its commitment to improving its human rights record.

The civil society organization fights for religious freedom in the country but is not recognized by the government.

It issued an open letter with the international groups on Tuesday, ahead of Saturday's 74 th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

"According to domestic and international NGOs the human rights situation in Vietnam continues to deteriorate," the letter said.

"Politically, the country remains a one-party system under the communist party, and the Vietnamese leadership has no intention of considering nor accepting any change to its authoritarian model.

"This situation leads to clear and concrete consequences for the people, specifically arbitrary detention, non-transparent and arbitrary death sentences, and measures that impede civil society's activities."

Vietnam Interfaith Council member Le Quang Hien is a senior official of the Pure Hoa Hao Buddhist Church. He told RFA the government needs to do more to uphold religious freedoms.

Pure Hoa Hao is not under State control, unlike the Hoa Hao Buddhist Church, which is permitted to hold religious ceremonies. As a result, he said the government of An Giang province - where the religion was founded - always prevents followers from attending Church events.

"The situation of human rights, as in previous years, is not respected, particularly for my religion. The Pure Hoa Hao Buddhist Church is always harassed," he said.

As well as criticizing Vietnam's failure to uphold freedom of religion the letter's signatories called on the government to respect workers' rights, saying the country has shown "great reluctance to facilitate the establishment of an independent union." It called on authorities to ratify the International Labor Organization convention on Freedom of Association and the Protection of the Right to Organize.

A session of the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, February 24, 2020. CREDIT: Reuters/Denis Balibouse

The five organizations said Vietnam needs to do more to justify its admission to the United Nations Human Rights Council for its 2023-2025 term, ending their letter by calling on the government to:

"Fully respect and implement the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

"Immediately and unconditionally release all prisoners held or convicted solely for peacefully expressing their views and positions; immediately end all repressive measures against individuals and organizations that exercise and protect fundamental freedoms such as speech, assembly, belief, association, etc.

"Accept the essential role of independent civil society organizations in areas such as religion, environment - ​​climate change, union activism, and media; create conditions for civil society organizations to contribute to the development process of the country without being hindered or repressed.

Truong Minh Tri is chairman of the Canadian Association of Vietnamese People, one of the four overseas organizations that signed the statement. He said the international signatories represent the largest Vietnamese communities in the world and have the power to influence Hanoi.

"The overseas community wants to speak out to remind the public at home and abroad that Vietnam still commits serious human rights violations. We demand that Vietnam improves its human rights situation," he told RFA.

"We also raise the issue of human rights to remind the world that Vietnam needs to be more deserving of being a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council."

Tri said, in order for the Vietnamese government to improve its record, the overseas Vietnamese community needs to closely monitor the situation and lobby the government and politicians when it sees rights violations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vietnam's human rights situation 'continues to deteriorate,' civil society groups say

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Local and international groups issued a letter calling on the government to honor its commitment to freedoms. The Vietnam Interfaith Council has joined forces with four organizations representing overseas Vietnamese in a renewed call on Hanoi to respect its commitment to improving its human rights record.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kashmir: Why India and Pakistan fight over it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They fought two wars over it and are now nuclear armed - but what’s at the root of the dispute?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.amnestyusa.org/human-rights-activists-in-china-locked-up-for-speaking-out/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
China expressed outrage over the Nobel committee's decision to award its prestigious Peace Prize to incarcerated Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo. But the real outrage is China's treatment of those who dare to speak truth to power.

Liu is just one of many Chinese human rights activists who currently languish in jail in the country (you can take action for Liu ). They are prisoners of conscience, jailed solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression.

The human rights movement in China is growing, but those who attempt to report on human rights violations or challenge government policies face serious risk of abuse. The authorities make frequent use of vaguely-worded charges to silence and imprison peaceful activists, such as "subversion of state power" (the charge which gave Liu a 11-year sentence), "endangering state security" and "separatism".

Liu Xiaobo's wife, Liu Xia, became another victim of this crackdown when she was placed under house arrest after she returned home from visiting Liu in prison after he had won the Nobel prize. She joins other prominent Chinese activists who have been targeted for daring to criticize the government. Below we profile five human rights defenders currently locked up in China for speaking out.

Liu Xianbin, 43
Detained since 28 June in Suining Province, Sichuan
Liu XianbinThe prominent Sichuan democracy activist has been held on suspicion of "inciting subversion of state power" since being seized by security officers at his home four months ago. Local human rights activists believe he is being punished for his activism and defence of human rights. Liu was first imprisoned in 1992 for his participation in the 1989 pro-democracy movement. In 1998, he co-founded the Sichuan branch of the China Democracy Party. The following year, he was sentenced to 13 years in jail for "subversion of state power". After his release in November 2008 he continued to speak out against the Chinese government. He was a prominent supporter, together with Liu Xiaobo, of Charter 08, a proposal for fundamental legal and political reform in China that aims to achieve a democratic system that respects human rights. He has also published articles on human rights and democracy and worked to increase public awareness of other persecuted activists. Liu is currently awaiting trial.

Gao Zhisheng, 46
Currently "missing"
Gao ZhishengIn 2001, Gao Zhisheng was named one of China's "top 10 lawyers" by the Ministry of Justice. But since his human rights advocacy angered the authorities, he and his family have seen their lives torn apart. After Gao Zhisheng wrote a series of "Open letters for Justice" in late 2005 calling on China's leaders to stop the persecution of the spiritual group Falun Gong, he lost his lawyer's licence and he and his family faced constant harrassment by security forces.

In early 2006, he organized a hunger strike to draw attention to human rights abuses and later that year received a suspended three-year prison sentence for "inciting subversion", with one year deprivation of political rights. The authorities have kept Gao Zhisheng and his family under constant surveillance ever since.

On 13 September 2007, Gao Zhisheng wrote an open letter to the US Congress saying he did not support the country's staging of the 2008 Olympics. Nine days later, plainclothes police officers came to his home, stripped him naked and beat him unconscious. He was held incommunicado for nearly six weeks and subjected to beatings and repeated electric shocks to his genitals. After he was released his acquaintances described him as "a broken man".
Gao's children have been prevented from attending school and his family's bank accounts have been frozen. His daughter attempted suicide as a result of the pressure and his family were forced to flee China in March. Gao was taken from his home in Shaanxi Province by police on 4 February 2009 and his current whereabouts are unknown.

Tan Zuoren, 56
Serving a five-year prison sentence
Tan ZuorenAn environmental activist who was arrested after he tried to publicize the number of children that died during the Sichuan earthquake and the corruption behind substandard construction that contributed to their deaths. Tan has been repeatedly questioned by the police about his human rights work. He was also harassed by unidentified men who twice stole his computer and also stabbed and injured his dog.

He was arrested in March 2009 after he declared his intention to release an independent report on the collapse of school buildings during the quake. Although the initial indictment focused on his work on the earthquake, Tan was ultimately convicted for his commemoration of the crackdown on 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protesters in Beijing, on charges of "inciting subversion of state power".

Acclaimed artist Ai Weiwei was prevented from giving evidence at Tan's trial when he was detained and severely beaten by security officials just before he was due to testify. Amnesty International described the trial as "grossly unfair" and "politically motivated". In June, Tan's appeal against his five-year sentence was rejected after a court session lasting just 10 minutes.

Hairat Niyaz
Serving a 15-year prison sentence in an unknown location, held incommunicado
Hairat Niyaz The Uighur journalist and website editor was convicted on charges of "endandering state security" in the wake of riots in Urumqi, capital of Xinjiang province, in July 2009, for essays he had written prior to the protests and for interviews he gave to Hong Kong journalists. His warning to the Chinese authorities of the threat of ethnic violence in the region the day prior to the protests in Urumqi, which claimed the lives of at least 197 people, went unheeded.

Prior to his imprisonment Hairat Niyaz was an administrator of Uighurbiz, one of the websites accused of promoting the Urumqi unrest. He had also worked as a senior journalist with several leading newspapers in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region in north-west China (where the Uighur ethnic group largely reside). He deliberately uses the Chinese language to report on Uighur issues to better reach Chinese-speaking domestic and overseas audiences.
Niyaz was arrested in October 2009 after police said he had "given too many interviews". In these interviews, he criticised the authorities' "bilingual" education" policy that he claimed had led to many Uighur teachers being laid off. He argued that the disturbances in the region were caused by 20 years of discriminatory ethnic policies. Niyaz was sentenced to 15 years in jail in July. It is not known where he is imprisoned.

Dhondup Wangchen, 36
Serving a six-year sentence in Xining, Qinghai province
Dhondup WangchenThe Tibetan filmmaker picked up a video camera for the first time in his life when he began making the documentary Leaving Fear Behind. The film, shot in the wake of the 2008 unrest in Tibet, featured interviews with more than 100 Tibetans about human rights problems in the region.

In March 2008, footage from the film was smuggled out of China and soon afterwards, Dhondup Wangchen was detained. He was tortured and held without charge for over a year before being sentenced in a secret trial to six years imprisonment for "inciting separatism". Dhondup Wangchen suffers from Hepatitis B, for which he is not being treated.

An edited version of Leaving Fear Behind was shown to foreign journalists in Beijing just days before the Olympic Games in August 2008. Chinese security forces interrupted the screening.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Human Rights Activists in China Locked Up For Speaking Out - Amnesty International USA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
China expressed outrage over the Nobel committee's decision to award its prestigious Peace Prize to incarcerated Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo . But the real outrage is China's treatment of those who dare to speak truth to power.

# data[].attributes.body
https://china-journal.org/2019/03/10/brainwashing-the-people-mao-zedong-the-chinese-communist-party-and-the-politics-of-thought-control/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the evening of 17 May 1966 Deng Tuo, one of China's most prominent Communist propagandists, committed suicide by overdose of sleeping tablets as an act of protest against charges levelled against him during the Cultural Revolution.

Following the tradition of Chinese political suicides, which dated back to the loyal minister Qu Yuan in the third century BC, Deng wrote two letters: one addressed to his family, and one to his work unit, stating his loyalty to the Party and Chairman Mao, and denouncing his detractors (Cheek, 1997, p. 283).

Deng Tuo was a staunch believer in Communism and Marxism-Leninism. He had joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the 1930s and had served in the Communist-controlled areas during World War II and the Chinese Civil War (ibid., p. 8).

Born in Fujian province in 1912, Deng belonged to a family of Qing Dynasty scholar-officials. His education reflected that of the Chinese imperial elite, and he spent his early years studying traditional Confucian texts and practicing calligraphy (Hamrin & Cheek, 1986, p. 95).

In the 1920s, however, after the fall of the Qing Dynasty and the founding of the Republic of China (ROC), he was influenced by the radical leftist thought that became popular among a section of the Chinese intelligentsia following the Communist Revolution in Russia and the May 4th movement.

In 1930 Deng joined the CCP. Because of his pro-Communist activities he spent time in jail in Shanghai, Fuzhou and Kaifeng. As a fervent Communist, his works were based on his belief in Marxism and historical materialism, as evidenced by his 1937 treatise "A History of Famine Relief in China" (ibid., p. 95).

Deng Tuo served in the Jin Cha Ji (Shanxi-Chahar-Hebei) Border Region under prominent CCP leaders like Nie Rongzhen and Peng Zhen (Cheek, 1997, p. 9). In 1944 Deng edited the first Selected Works of Mao Zedong. "The thought (sixiang) of Comrade Mao Zedong represents the Chinese proletariat and their political party," Deng wrote in his introduction. "Historical practice has fully demonstrated that Comrade Mao Zedong's thought is the only correct thought" (Hamrin & Cheek, 1986, p. 96).

Deng was appointed chief editor of the Jin Cha Ji Daily, and after the victory of the Communists in the Civil War he became the chief editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the CCP (ibid.). He authored numerous essays, many of which appeared in the collections "Evening Chats at Yanshan" and "Notes from a Three-Family Village".

Throughout his career, Deng proclaimed his faith in Marxism-Leninism and Mao's leadership. As late as 1961, he told students that under the socialist system "the interests of the nation, of the collective, and of the individual are unified." However, in 1956 the relationship between Mao and Deng began to deteriorate (ibid., pp. 96, 103).

In the late 1950s Mao launched the Great Leap Forward (1958-1962), an economic programme aimed at overtaking the West, but which resulted in a famine that killed an estimated 45 million people. The abject failure of Mao's ideological vision weakened his leadership position.

At the Cadres' Work Conference in January 1962 Mao made an unprecedented self-criticism. The erosion of Mao's power allowed party members to debate economic and social policies more freely. Deng Tuo, too, criticized the Great Leap Forward. This exacerbated Mao's dissatisfaction with Deng (ibid., p. 106).

In 1963 Mao's radical faction, led by his wife Jiang Qing, was striking back against the critics. Deng soon became a target of Maoist attacks (ibid., p. 108).

In 1966, during the Cultural Revolution, newspapers such as the Beijing Daily and People's Daily began to publish "criticisms" of Deng Tuo. Having been himself an editor for regime publications for decades, he knew that if Party newspapers had received official approval to print such articles, his downfall was near. The same year Deng was purged and his ideas were branded 'anti- socialist' and 'anti-Party' (Cheek, 1997, pp. 282-283).

Deng Tuo was a CCP loyalist, a regime supporter, and a Marxist-Leninist. Despite his criticism of the Great Leap Forward, he never publicly questioned Mao Zedong's thought or leadership. Nevertheless, even he could not escape the fate of so many Chinese intellectuals who were persecuted by the state.

In this article, we shall briefly examine the policies and methods of "brainwashing" during the early years of the People's Republic of China (PRC).

The Origins of Communist Thought Control

After the end of the Long March in 1936 the faction of the Communist Party led by Mao Zedong established its headquarters in the city of Yan'an, in Shaanxi province. Yan'an remained the capital of the Communist-controlled area until 18 March 1947, when Guomindang troops occupied it during the Civil War (Dillon 2010, chapter 10).

As a forerunner of the People's Republic, Yan'an is interesting not only with regard to social and economic policies, but also to the attitude of the Communist leadership, and in particular of Mao himself, towards culture (see Teiwes, 1979, p. 15).

Since Mao's philosophy was based on Marxism-Leninism, he regarded the world as being made up of different classes with opposing interests, with the minority classes - the feudal landlords and the bourgeoisie - being the exploiters that had to be eliminated, and the majority class, that of the workers and peasants, being the revolutionary classes. From this ideological premise Mao derived his belief that culture reflected the class consciousness of those who produced it: there was the "bad" culture of feudalism and the bourgeoisie, and the "good" culture of the "masses".

In a speech from 7 September 1937, Mao stated:
"We stand for active ideological struggle because it is the weapon for ensuring unity within the Party and the revolutionary organizations in the interest of our fight. Every Communist and revolutionary should take up this weapon. "A Communist should have largeness of mind and he should be staunch and active, looking upon the interests of the revolution as his very life and subordinating his personal interests to those of the revolution; always and everywhere he should adhere to principle and wage a tireless struggle against all incorrect ideas and actions, so as to consolidate the collective life of the Party and strengthen the ties between the Party and the masses; he should be more concerned about the Party and the masses than about any private person, and more concerned about others than about himself. Only thus can he be considered a Communist.
(Mao Zedong. Combat Liberalism, 1937).

Mao's bellicose language exemplifies his radical vision of Communism as a relentless struggle not only for economic and social reforms, but also for the very minds of the people. Consequently, Mao rejected the idea of the intellectual as an independent creator of art or knowledge for their own sake. In his famous speech at the Yan'an forum on literature and art, Mao explained:
"[D]oes not Marxism destroy the creative mood? Yes, it does. It definitely "Intellectuals who want to integrate themselves with the masses, who want to serve the masses, must go through a process in which they and the masses come to know each other well. This process may, and certainly will, involve much pain and friction, but if you have the determination, you will be able to fulfil these requirements ... destroys creative moods that are feudal, bourgeois, petty-bourgeois, liberalistic, individualist, nihilist, art-for-art's sake, aristocratic, decadent or pessimistic, and every other creative mood that is alien to the masses of the people and to the proletariat. So far as proletarian writers and artists are concerned, should not these kinds of creative moods be destroyed? I think they should; they should be utterly destroyed. And while they are being destroyed, something new can be constructed ...
"I believe that in the course of the rectification movement and in the long period of study and work to come, you will surely be able to bring about a transformation in yourselves and in your works, to create many fine works which will be warmly welcomed by the masses of the people, and to advance the literature and art movement in the revolutionary base areas and throughout China to a glorious new stage" (Mao Zedong. Talks at the Yan'an Forum on Literature and Art, 1942).

Mao's cultural policies in the Yan'an era already contained all the elements that would determine China's "thought reform" campaigns after 1949, and which would lead to insurmountable conflicts between the Communist regime and the intelligentsia.

Rectification, Thought Reform, Brainwashing

The CCP had an ambivalent and contradictory attitude towards the Chinese intelligentsia, especially regarding individuals who had studied abroad and had been exposed to "capitalist" society. On the one hand, the Communists realized that the support of intellectuals was necessary and beneficial for the regime. On the other hand, they viewed them with suspicion, as vehicles of ideas that could challenge Communist orthodoxy.

On 1 December 1939 the CCP Central Committee issued a "Decision on the Absorption of Intellectual Elements". Section 3. iii stated:

"Intellectuals and semi-intellectuals who are useful in various degrees and who are basically loyal should be given appropriate work, trained adequately and led gradually to correct their weaknesses in the course of our sustained struggle, in order to enable them to remould themselves to adopt truly the point of view of the people and to get along harmoniously with the veteran Party members and other members of the cadre as well as with the Party members of worker and peasant stock" (Mu, 1963, p. 213).

Nearly a decade later, on 18 December 1948, the Central Plain Bureau of the CCP issued a special directive urging Party members to "win over, unite with, reform and cultivate the intelligentzia" (Chen, 1960, p. 7).

This directive was more critical of Chinese intellectuals, highlighting the difficulty of incorporating people who had a landlord or bourgeois background.

"Most of the intellectuals come from families of landlords, rich peasants, and the bourgeois and petty bourgeois classes, and have long been contaminated by bourgeois education. Though the possibility exists that the majority of them may lean towards the revolution, they generally look down on the workers and peasants and stay away from the masses. Therefore, to enable them 'to serve the people', and 'to identify themselves with the workers and peasants' . . . it is incumbent upon us to carry on propaganda among them and to return them ideologically" (Chen, 1960, p. 8).

It must be remarked that despite the CCP's claim to represent a scientific and "correct" theory, one would struggle to find any objective criteria to define what Communist truth actually was. Ultimately, CCP orthodoxy was solely and arbitrarily determined by those in power, chiefly by Mao. Anyone could be accused of incorrect and reactionary viewpoints, which included vague concepts such as "ultra-democratism, absolute equalitarianism, idealism and individualism" (Chen, 1960, p. 10).

The Communist regime did not look upon the intelligentsia with the respect typical of traditional Chinese society. In Communist China, intellectuals were expected to follow the Party, embrace its ideology, and use their talent to propagate it (Cheek, 1997, p. 3; Chen, 1960, p. 8).

Consequently, the Communist regime was not satisfied with leaving intellectuals alone as long as they did not oppose the government. Nor did the CCP accept the notion that intellectuals could devote themselves to their field of expertise and remain "apolitical". Rather, the CCP placed great importance on popular support, mass mobilization and thought control. Intellectuals could not be neutral, they had to speak and act as one with the Party. They needed to have the correct "political consciousness" (Chen, 1960, p. 9).

The vocabulary of propaganda developed by the Communists shows their determination to dominate the minds of men and engineer a new type of human being according to Party ideology. The regime talked about "thought struggle" (思想鬥爭) and "thought reform", or "thought remoulding" (思想改造) (Chen, 1960, p. 10; Lifton, 1961, p. 4).

It was clear that in Communist China there was no place not only for dissidents, but also for people who were non-political, or had no class consciousness. Shortly after they seized power in 1949, the Communists launched their first "thought reform" campaign. A nationwide "study" (學習) movement was launched to make the people familiar with the new state ideology, Marxism-Leninism, with the purpose of promoting the "self-education and ideological remoulding of the liberated people".

In this unprecedented propaganda drive all sections of society, from intellectuals to housewives, from workers to peasants, were required to attend an extensive system of schools and newly-founded institutes where Communist ideology was taught (Chen, 1960, p. 10).

Legalist-Confucian and Communist Elements of China's Brainwashing

During the Mao era, "thought reform" in China was carried out on a scale never before seen in the world. The extent of Chinese Communist propaganda methods was so unprecedented that the Western world coined a neologism to express it: "brainwashing".

The term brainwashing was first used in 1951 by US foreign correspondent Edward Hunter in his book Brainwashing in Red China as a translation of the colloquial Chinese expression xinao (洗腦, literally: "wash brain").

Hunter was the first Westerner to write about the phenomenon of Chinese "thought reform" during the early phase of CCP rule. He interviewed both Chinese and non-Chinese victims of brainwashing who came across the border from China into the British colony of Hong Kong (Lifton, 1961, p. 3; Singer & Lifton, 2003, p. 55).
"Everyone, not just workers and peasants, had their part to play in the plan. Even creative writers were to be, in Stalin's phrase, 'engineers of human souls' and a new literary/ political formula called 'Socialist Realism' was introduced as a yardstick against which all kinds of artistic endeavour were to be measured.
According to Lifton (1961) thought reform was so effective that Western missionaries who had been forced to confess to being spies were confused about what they believed even after they had left Communist China and had arrived in Hong Kong. One of the most shocking and, from a Chinese point of view, egregious feature of thought refom methods was the practice of persuading young Chinese students to publicly denounce their parents, an act that violated the most sacred precept of traditional Chinese society: filial piety (Lifton, 1961, p. 6).

Totalitarian propaganda was by no means unique to Chinese Communism, quite the contrary. The Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin had paved the way for totalitarian practices that would later spread throughout the Communist bloc. As Alan Wood wrote in 2005:

"Not only literature, but all other forms of artistic, intellectual and even scientific activity were subject to ideological requirements ... [E]ven well-known photographs and official paintings were doctored by Stalin's censors to brush out or paint over representations of disgraced or condemned public figures" (Wood, 2005, pp. 36-37).
"The purpose of Communist propaganda in East Germany, as, indeed, in every Communist country, is clear: to change the very consciousness of man. The purpose is to atomize the individual thinking of 17,000,000 East Germans and to grind them into one species-homo sovieticus - 'The New Man.'
In the book To Win the Minds of Men: The Story of the Communist Propaganda War in East Germany (1958), Pete Grothe wrote about propaganda in the Soviet satellite state of East Germany:

"Not only are all events, past and present, led down the Party line, but every conceivable means of communication is utilized to publicize these events. The press, radio, television, movies, literature, drama; the school system, rallies, person-to-person agitation, justice system, and even art, architecture, and music - all are used to express the Communist viewpoint. No sphere of intellectual activity or organized endeavor which might influence public opinion is overlooked by the SED [=Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, the Communist Party of East Germany] ...

'The New Man' will parrot slogans when they should be parroted; he will do what should be done; he will say what should be said; he will think what should be thought; and he will feel what should be felt" (Grothe, 1958, p. 38).

In China, thought reform was even more pernicious and far-reaching than in other Communist countries.

This might in part be explained by what Timothy Cheek (1997) has described as the "structural similarities between the Leninist and Confucian-Legalist state" (Cheek, 1997, p. 3).

Confucianism stressed self-cultivation and morality based on family ideology and social hierarchies. In "The Great Learning", a chapter from the Confucian classic "The Book of Rites", we read:

"The ancients who wished clearly to exemplify illustrious virtue throughout the world would first set up good government in their states. Wishing to govern well their states, they would first regulate their families. Wishing to regulate their families, they would first cultivate their persons. Wishing to cultivate their persons, they would first rectify their minds(quoted in: De Bary, Chan, & Watson, 1960, p. 115).

Although Mao Zedong was in many respects an anti-Confucian, his notion of Communist propaganda echoes the Confucian emphasis on sincerity, knowledge, and self-cultivation. Mao replaced the Confucian "truth" of filial piety with the new truth of Marxism-Leninism, but he demanded the same sincerity, self-cultivation and individual commitment.

Yet while Confucianism regarded self-cultivation as a voluntary act, Mao's regime used tools of cruel coercion to compel people to "remould themselves", and thus followed in the footsteps of China's autocratic Legalist tradition, which he admired and publicly praised.

The Chinese Intelligentsia and Thought Reform

What was the attitude of Chinese intellectuals towards the Communists on the eve of their victory in the Chinese Civil War?

Throughout the 1930s and 1940s there were pro-Communist and pro-Guomindang intellectuals, but there were also many who supported neither Party.

According to Theodore Chen, prior to the Communist takeover a group of college professors were asked about their opinion on the regime change. One of them said:

"We intellectuals have gone through three phases in out thinking. At first, most of us supported the government, recognizing its many faults, but hoping it would reform. Then we became increasingly discouraged with reform prospects, but saw no feasible alternatives. Though the present government, we felt, was bad, what might take its place would be even worse. During this second phase intellectuals were uncertain and bewildered. Then came the present, third phase. We have become so completely convinced of the hopelessness of the existing government that we feel that the sooner it is removed the better. Since the Chinese Communists are obviously the only force capable of making this change, we are now willing to support them as the lesser of two evils. We ourselves would prefer a middle course, but that is no longer possible" (Chen, 1960, p. 1).

It is not possible to know how many intellectuals shared this view, but it is certainly consistent with the well-documented, widespread dissatisfaction of many Chinese with the Guomindang regime.

As we have already remarked, such "non-ideological" standpoint was considered unacceptable by the Communists. Unaware of what would soon happen, and driven by their growing discontent with the existing government, a section of the intelligentsia was willing to give the Communists a chance (Lifton, 1961, p. 245).

Upon seizing power, the Communists began setting up special schools and "revolutionary universities" aimed at reforming the thought of intellectuals. Students of these propaganda centres included former Guomindang members, professors, and people who had studied and lived in the West. (Lifton, 1961, p. 247).

The "study movement" and "revolutionary" schools were only a prelude to the massive thought reform campaign that swept the Chinese intelligentsia in 1951. "Ideological reform," Mao said, "first of all the ideological reform of the intellectuals, is one of the most important conditions for a country's all-out complete democratic reform and industrialization". The Ministry of Education summoned three thousand university professors and personnel of the Beijing and Tianjin area to launch a "study campaign" aimed at "the reform of the teachers" ideology and of higher education (Lifton, 1961, pp. 245-246).

Premier Zhou Enlai delivered a five-hour-long speech to the assembled academics, setting an example by performing a self-criticism of his own "social relations" - self-criticism was an integral part of what intellectuals were expected to do to reform themselves.

All university members throughout the country, from college presidents to freshman students, were required to study Marxism-Leninism, examine their own past from the standpoint of their new "class consciousness", and criticize themselves as well as others during public sessions. In an attempt to openly defy and subvert traditional Confucian thought, young students were encouraged to publicly denounce their elderly professors for their ideological mistakes.

Individuals' self-criticism followed a pattern that, though in theory voluntary, was carefully crafted by the Communist Party: first, one had to denounce one's past, including one's own family; second, one had to lay out the path towards personal improvement under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism; third, one had to pledge to work hard to overcome one's remaining ideological errors. Prepared "confessions" were an essential component of the Communist brainwashing strategy (Lifton, 1961, p. 246).

It is important to emphasize the fact that Communist thought reform campaigns went beyond anything previous Chinese regimes had ever attempted.

In imperial China, there was a clear separation between the rulers and the ruled. Emperors governed behind closed doors, with scholar-officials acting as a link between the monarch and the majority of the population. The masses of the peasants were not affected by imperial power in the tyrannical way that some may assume. Quite the contrary.

Between the Tang and the Qing dynasties China's population increased fivefold, while the number of government officials remained largely unchanged. Imperial China was an agrarian state which did not have the means nor the incentive to control the population through a vast modern bureaucratic apparatus (Chow, 1994, p. 71).

Chinese dynasties rather ruled through a combination of state coercion and self-policing through Confucian ethics and the family system.

Direct coercive action was largely confined to the suppression of anti-dynastic rebellions and of popular organizations deemed potentially dangerous.

On a day-to-day basis, however, rural communities were supposed to police themselves through the so-called baojia system. The following document issued in 1708 explains how the baojia system worked:

" Each household is given a placard on which the official seal is affixed.The names and number of adult males are written on it. In case anyof them go away, their destination is recorded; in case any come intothe households, the places from which they come are ascertained.It is forbidden to take in strangers and suspicious characters, unlessa thorough questioning of them has been made. Every ten householdsset up a p'ai-t'ou [placard-head], every ten p'ai a chia-t'ou, and everyten chia a pao-chang.... Hostels keep registers for the purposeof checking [the guests] and paper placards are also given to templesand shrines. At the end of each month, the pao-chang submits a kan "chieh [willing bond], giving assurance that everything has been wellin the neighborhoods, which [kan-chiek] is sent to the official con-cerned for inspection. Whoever fails to comply will be punished " (Hsiao, 1960, pp. 44-45).

During the Qing Dynasty, the baojia system was placed under the authority of the Board of Revenue for purposes of taxation and surveillance. One of the most important functions of the baojia was law-enforcement. Each member of a baojia was required to report to the baojia head any person guilty of a crime, and the baojia head would then report the crime to local authorities. Failure to do so would bring punishment on the entire 10-household unit, thus increasing the pressure on individuals to comply with the law (Hsiao, 1960, p. 45).

The pervasiveness of the Confucian family system and the requirement for self-policing of rural communities were two of the most unique characteristics of traditional Chinese society. Imperial rule was ideologically omnipresent, yet at the same time laissez-faire, as local communities were largely left to themselves as long as they did not cause trouble.

As the Chinese revolutionary leader Sun Yat-sen remarked in the 1920s:

"Since the Ch'in dynasty [Qin Dynasty, 221 - 206 BC.], the aim of China's emperors has been first to protect their own throne that they might continue to keep the empire in their own family and that their heirs might reign in peace forever. So any activities of the people which seemed to endanger the throne were repressed as strongly as possible; if anyone started a rebellion, not only he himself but his nine degrees of kindred were punished, the sternest measures being employed to prevent a popular revolution. These absolute monarchs simply wanted to keep their thrones forever. In other words, as long as the people did not offend against the throne, they could do anything else without any interference on the part of the government ...

"During the Manchu dynasty each province had a viceroy or governor at the top, below him taotai and prefects, and in the lowest rank various assistant magistrates and subordinates. The people had little direct relation to the emperor beyond paying him the annual grain tax- nothing more. Consequently, the political consciousness of the people has been very weak. The people did not care who was emperor. As soon as they had paid their grain tax they considered their duty as citizens done. The emperors wanted only the grain tax from the people and were not interested in anything else they did" (Sun, 1927, pp. 197-198).

The Guomindang regime that followed the Qing Dynasty tried to establish a more pervasive form of state control and even launched mass campaigns such as the "New Life Movement". Yet those campaigns and propaganda were limited in scope, and intellectuals were, just like in the Qing era, left alone as long as they did not openly challenge the state. There is no indication that the Guomindang ever attempted to "reform the thought" of non-political writers such as Mu Shiying or Lin Yutang.
"Chi Hsien-lin, another intellectual, said: "Before liberation, the professors were free to teach anything they liked, in any way they liked. They were university professors and respected figures in society. . . . Things are different today. Intellectuals, like other labourers, all work for the collective well-being of the people. They must have plans and organization. They teach according to outlines of instruction. If anything wrong is found in their work, they have to face criticism and self-criticism. "Wu Ching-ch'ao, wrote about his experience as follows: "After I joined the ranks of the peasants, I came to realize that the land reform is a bitter struggle which heightens my consciousness. The first step of the agrarian reform is to organize a broad anti-feudal united front to wage a class struggle against the landlords. . . . Between the two battle fronts, where do you stand? . . . Whom do you support? Whom do you oppose? . . . Every person must make an unequivocal answer. "Huang Chia-te, an editor who had studied in the United States, found it wise to state his position as follows: "I had blindly worshipped the 'material civilization' of European and American imperialism and especially the 'science' and 'culture' of American imperialism. . . . Not until the 'Resist-America, Aid-Korea' campaign was underway did I awaken . . . to realize the decadent nature of American imperialism and the ugliness of American cultural aggression. . . . The criminal use of bacteriological weapons in Korea and the Northeast further proves that the American imperialists are the deadly enemy of the Chinese and of all the peace-loving peoples of the world. "Another, T'eng Ta-ch'un, wrote: "I now understand that to hate America and to love the Soviet Union are two sides of the same coin. After I began to hate America, I naturally came to see that the Soviet Union is lovable and worthy of respect and admiration. As a matter of fact the Soviet Union is giving us unreserved guidance with its own revolutionary and constructive experience, Soviet specialists are selflessly helping us, and the Soviet Union is unconditionally lending us support in world affairs. I feel ashamed that I have in the past stood on the same ground with the reactionary elements. "This is how Yü Te-yüan expressed himself on May 19, 1952.
The Communists, by contrast, wished to "mobilize the entire Chinese population in support of Communist policy", and the intellectuals played a decisive role in Beijing's propaganda. Most intellectuals, faced with indoctrination and intimidation, caved, wrote confessions and pledged unconditional loyalty to the regime (Houn & Hou, 1961, p. 2).

The effects of the thought reform campaign were devastating. The following excerpts from Theodore Chen's work on thought reform may provide a sense of the personal ordeal intellectuals had to go through:
"Criticisms gave rise to countercriticisms, and group harmony gave way to tense antagonisms. The descriptions of past and present attitudes which students had so freely offered each other during the first days now came back to haunt them. Previously quiet students suddenly became 'activists,' stepping up the pace of criticism and intensifying the emotional tone within the group. "Some of these activists identified themselves as members of the Communist Youth Corps or of the Communist Party itself, thus emerging from an underground status. Their regular attendance at Party and Youth Corps meetings gave them a channel to the school hierarchy which, in terms of real power, superseded Hu's authority as group leader. "When Hu realized this, he became increasingly uncomfortable - aware that he was being informed on, but never quite sure just when and by whom. He also noted that the authorities had begun to shift students about from one group to another in order to make most effective use of activists, always keeping in his group one or two who could exert strong influence. And his experience with his own thought summary increased his apprehension. Although it was fully orthodox in form and content, he had made it somewhat terse. He was strongly criticized by an activist who accused him of concealing details, and the interested presence of all three cadres convinced him that the faculty was showing special concern about his personal progress. "From this point on, pressures steadily mounted, and Hu lived in an atmosphere of criticism, self-criticism, and confession much like the prison environment of the Western subjects. Not only ideas, but underlying motivations were carefully scrutinized. Students were taken to task for failure to achieve the correct 'materialistic viewpoint,' 'proletarian (or 'people's') standpoint,' and 'dialectical methodology' - and the reasons for these failures were analyzed even more carefully than in prison reform ...
"I feel extremely grieved to realize how much harm has been done to the people because of my failure to use faithfully the ideology of the proletariat as a yard-stick in my work. . . . Henceforth I will redouble my efforts to study Marxism-Leninism and the thought of Chairman Mao, with the hope of reforming fundamentally. I will steadfastly hold to my position with the working class in order to serve the people better" (Chen, 1960, pp. 1-3).

Hu Weihan, one of the graduates of North China University, a large "revolutionary university" near Beijing, was interviewed by Robert Jay Lifton in the mid-1950s. Hu recalled that initially the atmosphere at the university was relaxed. Students made friends and opened up to each other, and they were enthusiastic about giving their contribution to the new regime. However, as time went by, the university authorities intensified their propaganda efforts, pushed students to confess their past "crimes" and to criticize other students. Friendship and comradeship gave way to suspicion and fear:

Hu began to sense that the cadres were antagonistic to him, and he feared that, should he make one false move, they might well label him a 'reactionary' - dangerous accusation for anyone. He found himself in the paradoxical position of still retaining his general faith in the Chinese Communist movement, while feeling increasingly trapped in his personal thought reform experience" (Lifton, 1961, pp. 259-261).

The treatment reserved to intellectuals was so oppressive that in 1956 Zhou Enlai publicly admitted that the regime had been too harsh and pledged a more conciliatory policy as long as nothing was said or done against the "interests of the people" (Houn & Hou, 1961, p. 5).

This new policy was first announced on 26 May 1956 by Lu Dingyi, the director of the Propaganda Department of the CCP's Central Committee, at a meeting of members of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the All-China Federation of Literary and Art Circles. Lu proposed the famous slogan: "let a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend", a classical reference to the proliferation of religious and philosophical schools during the Zhou dynasty (circa 1045-221 BC).

Mao publicly supported the policy in speeches that he made to the Supreme State Conference on 2 May 1956 and on 27 February 1957. The speech was later published with the title "On the Correct Handling of Contradictions among the People".

In the spring of 1957 articles denouncing government policies, bureaucracy, maladministration and corruption began to appear on Chinese newspapers. Students and intellectuals started to vent their frustration and resentment by criticizing the Communist regime and even Mao Zedong himself.

The Communist leadership was shocked by the vehemence and extent of criticism, which exposed how the apparent popular consensus of the previous years had been extorted by terror.

The regime reacted with the usual brutality, accusing its critics of being ideological enemies who were attempting to stage a reactionary coup. The Party struck back by launching the "Anti-Rightist Campaign". Those who had dared criticize the government were subjected to public vilification, thought reform or reform through labour. According to estimates, between 400,000 and 700,000 intellectuals lost their jobs and were sent to the countryside or factories during the campaign (Dillon, 2010, chapter 11).

Conclusion

The first decade of the People's Republic of China established a pattern of thought control through coercive measures or the threat thereof. Drawing upon Stalinist methods and Confucian-Legalist traditions, Mao launched a series of campaigns aimed at "remoulding" people's minds. More than anything, the thought reform process was a policy of submission of the individual to the absolute personal leadership of Mao, who arbitrarily set the criteria of "correct" thought.
If you enjoyed this content, please consider supporting me with a donation on Ko-fi. I couldn't do this without your support. Thank you! Alternatively, you can check out some of my books and affiliate links below:
Bibliography

Cheek, Timothy. Propaganda and Culture in Mao's China: Deng Tuo and the Intelligentsia. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.

Chen, Theodore. Thought Reform of the Chinese Intellectuals. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960.

Chow, Kai-Wing. The Rise of Confucian Ritualism in Late Imperial China: Ethics, Classics, and Lineage Discourse. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 1994.

De Bary, Wm. Theodore, Wing-Tsit Chan, and Burton Watson, comps. Sources of Chinese Tradition. Vol. 1. New York: Columbia University Press, 1960.

Dillon, Michael. China. A Modern History. I.B. London, New York: Tauris & Co Ltd, 2010.

Grothe, Pete. To Win the Minds of Men: The Story of the Communist Propaganda War in East Germany. Palo Alto, CA: Pacific Books, 1958.

Hamrin, Carol Lee, and Timothy Cheek, eds. China's Establishment Intellectuals. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1986.

Houn, Franklin W., and Fu-Wu Hou. To Change a Nation: Propaganda and Indoctrination in Communist China. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1961.

Hsiao, Kung-Chuan. Rural China: Imperial Control in the Nineteenth Century. University of Washington Publications on Asia. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1960.

Lifton, Robert Jay. Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of 'Brainwashing' in China. New York: W. W. Norton, 1961.

Mu, Fu-Sheng. The Wilting of the Hundred Flowers: The Chinese Intelligentsia under Mao. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1963.

Paloczi-Horvath, George. Mao Tse-Tung: Emperor of the Blue Ants. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1963.

Singer, Margaret Thaler, and Robert Jay Lifton. Cults in Our Midst. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.

Spence, Jonathan D. The Search for Modern China. 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.

Sun, Yat-Sen. San Min Chu I: The Three Principles of the People. Edited by L. T. Chen. Translated by Frank W. Price. Shanghai: China Committee, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1927

Teiwes, Frederick C. Politics & Purges in China: Rectification and the Decline of Party Norms, 1950-1965. New York: M. E. Sharpe, 1979.

Wood, Alan. Stalin and Stalinism. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2005.

Breeze of a Spring Evening and Other Stories, by Yu Dafu.

Rags or Riches. A Hong Kong Novel, by Aris Teon.

Chinese Civilization: A Sourcebook, by Patricia Buckley Ebrey.

The Age of Confucian Rule: The Song Transformation of China, by Dieter Kuhn.

The World Turned Upside Down: A History of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, by Jisheng Yang.

Craven A and other Stories, by Mu Shiying.

The Adventure of Urashima Taro , by Aris Teon

We Have Been Harmonized: Life in China's Surveillance State, by Kai Strittmatter.

How to Be a Dictator: The Cult of Personality in the Twentieth Century, by Frank Dikötter.

The Emperor's New Road: China and the Project of the Century, by Jonathan E. Hillman.

The Oil Vendor and the Queen of Flowers, by Feng Menglong.

The Invention of China, by Bill Hayton.

Making China Modern: From the Great Qing to Xi Jinping, by Klaus Mühlhahn.

The Third Revolution: Xi Jinping and the New Chinese State, by Elizabeth C. Economy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brainwashing the people - Mao Zedong, the Chinese Communist Party and the politics of thought control

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the evening of 17 May 1966 Deng Tuo, one of China's most prominent Communist propagandists, committed suicide by overdose of sleeping tablets as an act of protest against charges levelled against him during the Cultural Revolution. Following the tradition of Chinese political suicides, which dated back to the loyal minister Qu Yuan in the...

# data[].attributes.body
https://fee.org/articles/totalitarian-collectivism-in-america/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. DougIas is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at San Diego, though his studies of human action range beyond the usual professional or academic bounds of any one discipline. He has written and edited twenty-five books on various aspects of the social sciences and his articles have appeared In many professional Journals and other publications.
This article Is from the preface of his book,The Myth of the Welfare State, forthcoming.
"Nothing is more striking to a European traveller in the United States than the absence of what we term . . . government." So wrote Alexis de Tocqueville of American society in the 1830s. What American in 1980 could possibly think of our society as one characterized by an "absence of government"?

Government at all levels now directly controls nearly forty percent of our wealth through direct taxation, yet anyone with a smattering of economic knowledge knows that the indirect taxation mandated by government regulation is also huge. American society today is a government-controlled society, a society in which all of us are controlled in innumerable ways by a vast number of proliferating government bureaucracies, agencies, committees, police powers, legislative bodies, judicial decisions.

Tocqueville recognized that government powers might someday grow in America into the huge bureaucratic administration of life that had earlier characterized the mercantilist monarchies of Europe. He realized that the welfare of any nation necessitated the legislation of general principles for the whole society by the central government. But he had forebodings that the American government would go far beyond that and turn mass democracy into democratic tyranny. If the central power, he argued, "after having established the general principles of government . . . descended to the details of their application; and if, having regulated the great interests of the country, it could descend to the circle of individual interests, freedom would soon be banished from the New World." Any educated American in 1980 knows that our huge government bureaucracies now dictate minute details of our everyday lives and enforce their dictates with vast police powers.

America Today an Imperial Bureaucracy

America today is ruled by an Imperial State Bureaucracy headed by an Imperial President. Certainly there are significant differences in the forms of our imperial government; but any historian of the ancient imperial states or of those of the sixteenth-century mercantilist monarchies will easily recognize that the differences are only surface phenomena, while the basic realities of power and its administration are very much the same.

It is only political rhetoric and the ignorance of history now almost universal even among our so-called educated people that makes it possible for people to pretend that "America is still the land of liberty." Certainly America is still more free by far than those nations now ruled over by the terrible socialist state bureaucracies. Indeed, we are still significantly more free than the cowed peoples of the democratic socialist nations of Scandinavia, once-Great Britain and elsewhere. But anyone who has studied the trends of recent decades knows that we are closing the political gap between ourselves and their state tyrannies at a terrifying rate.

We scholars who several years ago hoped selfishly that we might at least be spared in our lifetime the terrors of pseudo-democratic state tyrannies must now recognize that our hopes are fading rapidly. We social scientists know that in the past few years alone the federal bureaucracy has moved relentlessly to establish committees at all our universities to review our research and, thereby, to control what we can know and say about our society. What greater power can any government possibly wield than the power to determine what can be known and how it can or cannot be known?

And yet there has been no great outcry, no widespread screams of outrage or anguish from our people. The reason for that is that they are firmly in the grip of the myth of the welfare state, the myth that their individual welfare depends upon and is served by the ineluctable ratchet-up in state powers. They believe this myth for many irrational non- reasons. The politicians are paying them off with their own tax-monies and erstwhile liberties: the politicians use police powers to take from them their wealth and their individual liberties to determine how they will live, and then return part of this to them under government constraints-but only on the proviso that they support the politicians who use police powers to take away their wealth and their liberties. It is not too difficult to see how our peoples, in the grip of the great temptation of greed and mystified by the pseudo- science theories that tell them it is all necessary to surrender their liberties in order to have liberties, can be so easily deceived.

Even more ominous than the relative lack of outcry from our people has been the lack of serious outcry from our intellectuals and scientists. Most ominous of all, it is they who have been clamoring the loudest for ever greater imperial state controls. It is even the academics who administer the thought control programs of the federal bureaucracies now trying to dictate how we shall do research. Those who remember that it was the intellectuals and social scientists in Germany who clamored for more state power over German life, and they who repressed any opposition to Nazi thought controls once they came to power, will recognize that the seeds of mass-democratic tyranny are already firmly planted in our society.

The most effective tyranny, and thus the most terrible tyranny, is always imposed by the people upon themselves, at least in the beginning, and they have almost always done such an irrational thing only when their intellectual leaders have convinced them that such tyranny is necessary and good-that it will serve the greatest welfare of the people themselves.

Political Deceptions

Mass democratic tyranny will probably always be built upon the two great political deceptions of mass equality and mass welfare. Those deceptions will take many specific forms, always conforming to the particular political rhetoric already widely shared in a particular society, but the general message will be the same and so will the result.

In a mass democracy that has triumphed over all traditional values there is no truth, no justice, no social welfare beyond that of the voice of the people. The people determine what is just and good they determine everything by their votes. One man, one vote. One vote, one unit of truth and morality. Majority rules. More votes, more truth, more morality. As our "liberal" intellectuals today would say, what could be more conducive to the general welfare than for all individuals to have an equal voice (vote) in deciding what is to their welfare? Even when they do not say so, most of our intellectuals have now so completely absorbed this tenet of mass democracy that they have nothing but contempt for those who try to remind them of the ancient truth that direct rule by collective ignorance-by mobocracy-always leads in time to tyranny, first to the tyranny of the majority and then to the tyranny of the few when the ignorance of the majority has produced its inevitable social catastrophes.

In America today the same nuclear physicist who would laugh uproariously at the thought that the average businessman should have a vote on whether to allow physicists to study the atom would immediately turn around and insist that he as a citizen and nothing more should have the right to vote on whether the owners of Texas gas wells should have the right to set their own prices for their gas, whether the Federal Reserve should increase the money supply at a faster rate, or whether the federal government should "stimulate" the international economy by running budget deficits and "talking down" the dollar in exchange markets.

The same sociologist who asserts with contempt that the average politician knows nothing about the realities of drug use and their effects would assert with aplomb, and without thinking to consult a single study or learning economic theory, that the government should "solve" the problem of inflation by imposing wage and price controls upon all those businessmen who "set their prices to rip-off obscene profits."

And the average citizen voter, who can barely read at the so-called tenth grade level, asserts blandly that his votes justify the politicians' use of police powers to dictate to doctors the standards of medical care and the maximum charges they can ask for their services.

Confusing the Issue

Why? Why does the physicist think he should have a vote to determine what price Texas gas owners can ask for their gas, whereas it is ludicrous for the Texan to vote on whether the physicist be allowed to investigate the atom? Because, says the physicist, the price of gas is a "political question" that affects us all, not a question of scientific fact. But our physicists have forgotten that there are few things in a world of interdependent markets that do not affect almost everything else in some way. What could be more important in determining the future-or lack of future-of all human beings than nuclear re search? By our physicist's own standards, what, then, could be more "political," and thus more subject to decision by mass vote, than nuclear physics?

And, if our sociologist can use his vote to dictate the asking price for gas in Texas, why cannot the gas owner use his vote to dictate the grading standards of the sociologist, or his hiring standards, or his subject of research?

And is it not totally logical for the same politician who dictates medical standards and prices of doctors to dictate for our Mr. and Mrs. Every person the standards of their work, the prices of their labor, and ultimately the standards of their most intimate acts and thoughts?

The logic of totalitarian collectivism is simple, brutal and entirely consistent. Once a people has decided, whether actively or more commonly, by default, to allow politicians to decide by legislation, and without severe constraints of custom or law, what is right and wrong in a basic realm of life like property rights, then there can be no logical constraint upon their exercise of power in other realms of life.

As John Locke saw, even in the vastly more simple and self-contained society of the seventeenth century, without property rights no other rights can long be sustained. The government that controls all of my property controls my right to the pursuit of happiness, my right to free speech and to the publication of that speech, my right to take a spouse or have children, my right to life itself for all things of life are totally dependent upon the material goods and the subjective controls of those goods we call property and property rights. The government that has the right to legislate gas prices in Texas, or income distribution nationwide, has every logical right to dictate research standards in physics, hiring standards in sociology, wage rates for black teenagers in New York, parental care standards for all parents, and-everything else in life.

Totalitarian Logic

When the American people used the power of their votes to give the politicians the power to legislate away our ancient economic rights they unknowingly gave them power to legislate away all our ancient rights. The American Imperial State Bureaucracy is now pursuing that relentless logic of totalitarian collectivism at an astounding rate. Once our people had accepted that totalitarian logic, there was nothing left to protect us but our isolated individual sense of outrage and our underground resistance movements. Each sector of the economy, each corporation, each besieged individual is now left alone to fight his rearguard resistance against the unconstrained might of the Common Welfare, the Welfare State.

The welfare state is built on the totalitarian logic: when the goal of the state becomes that of pursuing, without basic constraints of custom or law, the common welfare of all, then the welfare of any individual or sub-group becomes irrelevant. Thus we eventually arrive at the logical conclusion of the Egalitarian Welfare State, the conclusion Rousseau reached two centuries ago: the equal welfare of all demands that the individual welfares of everyone be totally sacrificed. And so the modern juggernaut of the Welfare State trundles onward, crushing beneath its bureaucratic powers the ancient freedoms of one group after another-to serve the Welfare of All, of course. Today the businessmen, the gas producers and the steel makers; tomorrow the doctors; then the parents; and someday the Whole World.

The opposite of the logic of totalitarian collectivism is, of course, the logic of individualist freedom. The logic of collectivism computes the individual welfare, if at all, in terms of the collective welfare, that is, in terms of "aggregates" like gross national welfare, income distributions, and distributive justice. The logic of individualist freedom does the opposite, that is, it computes the social welfare, if at all, in terms of the individuals' welfares as defined and experienced by the individuals.

The American Constitution was built upon the logic of individualist freedom. The American government was founded to promote the common welfare, but to the eighteenth-century liberal minds of our constitutionalists that meant the exact opposite of what it means to the average American today.

Because they assumed that welfare could only be defined individually, the American constitutionalists intended the government to promote the common welfare by remaining as small and weak as it could while serving the one and only collective form of welfare, that of the common defense against foreign powers which wanted to impose Big and Powerful Government on Americans. Thus it is that they discovered that revolutionary American idea of individual freedom: minimizing the power of government will maximize the welfare of all. Thus it is that when Tocqueville visited America in the 1830s he found a remarkable "absence" of government and an equally remarkable high level of individual welfare-a land of freedom and of peace and plenty.

Unhappy Nation

The government-dominated America of 1980 is a deeply unhappy nation, a nation torn by deep dissension as never before since the civil war. Each American today is fighting his own desperate guerrilla warfare against the relentless growth of government power. Worst of all, the massive use of government power to tax and control each of us "for the common welfare," has logically turned each of us into the enemy of all the others.

Our collectivist Marxists tell us that the free market capitalism of Tocqueville's era was evil because it turned each man against his neighbor in economic competition. But the truth is the exact opposite. America under the free market was a land of pervasive friendliness and cooperation, of neighborly feeling and public interest politics, of self- sacrificing parents and children and charitable citizens. Now that we are all fighting desperately against each other for our shrinking piece of the welfare-state pie, we have become a surly and terribly conflictive society, a society dominated by selfish pressure- group politics, a society of sniveling self-pity in which each person blames "the society" or, more appropriately, "the Government" for all of his problems and demands that the Government solve his problems for him, a society in which parents have little control over their children and parents are deserted to the cold treatment of the state-financed nursing home, a society in which charity has been taxed away, a society in which love itself is poisoned by the political conflict for a collectivist "Equality."

Self-reliance was once the iron string to which all American hearts beat, but it was a self-reliance buttressed by all the strength of family love and cooperation, by neighborly cooperation, and by a spirit of public interest. The hearts of Welfare-state Americans beat to the totalitarian tunes of bureaucratic regulations and state-dependency. A free America was a land in which the average man and woman believed that their nation was like a shining city on a hill toward which all human beings could look longingly and hopefully. Welfare-state America is a land without pride, a nation in which the best have replaced a sense of public interest with a sense of public shame.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Totalitarian Collectivism in America | Jack D. Douglas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. DougIas is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at San Diego, though his studies of human action range beyond the usual professional or academic bounds of any one discipline. He has written and edited twenty-five books on various aspects of the social sciences and his articles have appeared In many professional Journals and other publications.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/6375

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Vladimir Putin ordered his government on Tuesday, Jan.3, to ensure by February the screening in cinemas of documentary films dedicated to his assault on Ukraine and the fight against "neo-Nazi" ideology.

The Kremlin said in a statement that the culture ministry had until Feb. 1 to implement the order.

Putin shocked the world by sending troops to Ukraine on Feb. 24 last year, saying the pro-Western country needed to be "demilitarized" and "de-Nazified".

Putin ordered the defense ministry to render assistance to Russian filmmakers who will produce documentaries dedicated to "the heroism of the participants of the special military operation", the Kremlin said, using the official term for the offensive.

Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has been ordered to report to the president on those efforts by March 1.

Since the start of Moscow's military campaign, state television channels have ramped up propaganda lauding Russian troops fighting in Ukraine as heroes.

Independent media outlets have been suspended or shut down in Russia, with many journalists leaving the country.

Criticism of the offensive in Ukraine is now punishable with jail time, while words such as "war" and "invasion" are banned.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Putin orders screening of Ukraine assault documentaries | KyivPost

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Vladimir Putin ordered his government on Tuesday, Jan.3, to ensure by February the screening in cinemas of documentary films dedicated to his assault on Ukraine and the fight against "neo-Nazi" ideology. The Kremlin said in a statement that the culture ministry had until Feb. 1 to implement the order.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/china-subjected-covid-protesters-to-intense-surveillance-interrogation-3668244

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Chinese protesters who demonstrated against the zero-Covid policy were subjected to intense surveillance measures and aggressive interrogations in police custody, reported Cate Cadell and Christian Shepherd in The Washington Post.

Even though China revoked its Zero Covid Policy following the protests, China unleashed its police equipped with the latest technology to go after people who had participated in the protests. Dozens of people who took part in the protests have paid heavily for the dissent.

Some protesters from Beijing and Shanghai had mentioned that they had to face heightened digital surveillance, strip searches, threats to their families and physical duress during these interrogations by the Chinese police for participating in the protests, said Cadell and Shepherd.

It is not exactly clear how the exact tracing of the protestors was possible for the protests but insights from lawyers, analysts, protesters and police purchasing documents offer some hints at the types of tools used. The Washington Post report mentions one theory although it is difficult to prove that the police used cell signal towers to pull all phone numbers from locations where crowds gathered and then deployed officers en masse to work through the list.

"[The police] seem to have used some modern technology, network technology, and they have collected a data pool of phone numbers of all the people involved in the incident," the Washing Post quoted a lawyer having direct knowledge of protestors' case.

In the same report Washington Post claims that a month before the protests began in Beijing, the city's Ministry of Public Security issued a procurement for a 580,000-yuan (USD 84,000) data surveillance project combining human analysts and automated scraping tools to undertake 24-hour screening of domestic and overseas news and social media accounts discussing issues that could snowball into dissent in China.

Doa, a 28-year-old tech worker from Beijing, detained after a protest against Zero covid said "The virus is no longer the enemy, the health officials and quarantine are not the enemy ... now only the people who protest are the enemy,". The Washington Post report further mentions that the people who had offered their statements about the police interactions used nicknames or spoke on the clause of anonymity because of the sensitive matter.

In the Washington Post report by Cadell and Shepherd, Doa said that she and a friend were at a protest held on November 28 at midnight near a Liangmahe bridge in Chaoyang district for just half an hour keeping a low profile and avoiding being filed and any interactions with the police. Two days later, her mother was contacted, telling her that Doa had participated in "illegal riots" and would soon be detained. Further, the police called Doa summoning them to a police station in Northern Beijing. She was further exposed to a nine-hour interrogation.

There is no official figure on the number of people detained following the protests, and the Chinese government has not directly acknowledged arrests even occurred, according to the Cadell and Shepherd report.

The report further mentions about a 2018 policy that was designed by the administration requiring internet companies to make regular detailed reports on trends that "mobilize" public sentiment or cause "major changes in public opinion." Under the rule, companies must provide detailed information on individual users, including their real names, location and chat logs.

Supporting such a technology-influenced system of tracing is a system of cities filled with hundreds of millions of surveillance cameras under an ambitious program called Sharp Eyes that set a goal of covering the entire population by 2020. It includes facial recognition cameras designed to automatically identify pedestrians and drivers and compare them against national ID registries and blacklists.

In a different incident related six people were similarly arrested and exposed to stressful and physically demanding interrogations. "We were only allowed to stand and could not talk to each other. They didn't let us sleep, and if I did, they would knock on the door to wake me up," said one Shanghai man, 25, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of further repercussions.

The man said he saw others detained who were handcuffed and forced into a squatting position for around an hour after failing to comply. He said officers punished them in the station by making them do squat exercises and copy hand pages of political documents from the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party.

"The purpose [of questioning] was to find out who planned it; they thought it was the separatists or foreign forces," he said. The officers taunted men in the group with long hair, calling them gay, he added. "They would also call us traitors and running dogs and tell us to get the hell out of China.".
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Featured Video Of The Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China Subjected Covid Protesters To Intense Surveillance, Interrogation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Chinese protesters who demonstrated against the zero-Covid policy were subjected to intense surveillance measures and aggressive interrogations in police custody, reported Cate Cadell and Christian Shepherd in The Washington Post. Even though China revoked its Zero Covid Policy following the protests, China unleashed its police equipped with the latest technology to go after people who had participated in the protests.

# data[].attributes.body
https://reason.com/2022/12/30/new-york-city-mayor-eric-adams-wants-you-to-love-big-brother/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New York City

A surveillance state is no less tyrannical when the snoops really believe it's for your own protection.

There's a common type of government official who sincerely believes the world would be better and their suffering subjects much happier if the restraints were removed and politicians were free to act as they wish. That their sincere belief in their goodness is exactly why we need those restraints always escapes them. The latest example of the breed is New York City Mayor Eric Adams who, unironically, urges his constituents to embrace the surveillance state because "Big Brother is protecting you."

Adams, a former police officer who took office at the beginning of 2022, has made an issue of crime in the city, which is rising following pandemic-era disruptions to society after decades of decline. He returned to crime last week in an interview with Politico's Sally Goldenberg and Joe Anuta:

Adams promised an expansion of technology-assisted policing to detect weapons. Over the past year, he has promoted the use of cameras and lauded divisive facial recognition devices.

"It blows my mind how much we have not embraced technology, and part of that is because many of our electeds are afraid. Anything technology they think, 'Oh it's a boogeyman. It's Big Brother watching you,'" Adams said. "No, Big Brother is protecting you."

This isn't the first time that Adams has invoked surveillance as the cure for crime concerns. Last January, his office issued a " Blueprint to End Gun Violence," and the mayor vowed that "from facial recognition technology to new tools that can spot those carrying weapons, we will use every available method to keep our people safe." But now Mayor Adams is openly belittling concerns about the surveillance state and urging city residents to learn to love Big Brother. At no time has he acknowledged that Big Brother might be a sketchy character, or that his former colleagues at the NYPD have an unfortunate history of abusing surveillance powers-a history that the city's own government acknowledges.

"The NYPD's surveillance of individuals and organizations perceived as enemies of the status quo dates back to early 1900s," notes a 2019 article published by the New York City Department of Records & Information Services. "At different periods, the focus was on anarchists, labor leaders, Nazi supporters, white supremacists, socialists, and communists."

Controversy over decades of surveillance led to litigation and the 1985 Handschu Guidelines, which created a mixed panel of civilians and police to oversee future surveillance.

In the post-9/11 period, those guidelines were relaxed as much mass surveillance focused on Muslims, coming to an end (supposedly) only in 2014 with the resolution of a lawsuit against the city. Still, in 2016, Senior United States District Judge Charles S. Haight Jr. disapproved the settlement in the case pending stronger safeguards after the revelation of "repeated, near-systemic violations by the NYPD Intelligence Bureau of a pertinent Handschu Guideline."

"It must be acknowledged that the history of the NYPD's adherence has been problematic at times," added Haight about years of continuous violations. "In the 2003 opinion reported at 288 F. Supp. 2d 411, the court had to deal with NYPD detention and questioning of anti-war demonstrators inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the newly enacted Modified Handschu Guidelines."

So, if Eric Adams wonders why people embrace George Orwell's warnings and fret, "Oh it's a boogeyman. It's Big Brother watching you," it's because the police have been watching all sorts of people for over a century, often in violation of even rules loosened for their convenience.

The surveillance technology championed by Adams offers new opportunities for abuse. For example, ShotSpotter, a gunshot detection system, relies on microphones scattered around the city to detect loud noises which its technology then identifies as either harmless or shooting-related, with various degrees of accuracy. You see where this is going, right? Microphones scattered around the city... .

"Though the microphones are as high as 100 feet above the ground, they have the ability to pick up intelligible conversations, which have been deemed admissible in court as part of several criminal cases around the country," Anthony Fisher wrote for Reason in 2015.

Earlier this month, emails obtained by Bloomberg revealed that ShotSpotter has been sharing the locations of its microphones with NYPD officials -something it said it wouldn't do. Police then have the potential to tap into those systems to listen in on "conversations in hushed tones and normal conversation inside a home through an open window or door if they occur close enough to a sensor."

The NYPD says it's not doing that, but it also said it would abide by the Handschu Guidelines.

The facial recognition technology also touted by Eric Adams was used in November to bar a woman from Madison Square Garden in New York City after the technology identified her as an attorney for a law firm that represents an opponent in a lawsuit. While that incident involved little more than pettiness by a private party, you don't have to wonder how the technology could be abused by a government; just contemplate its use by Chinese authorities in their ongoing experiments in high-tech dystopia.

"China's facial recognition system logs nearly every single citizen in the country, with a vast network of cameras across the country," Alfred Ng noted in a 2020 CNet article. "China's aggressive development and use of facial recognition offers a window into how a technology that can be both benign and beneficial-think your iPhone's Face ID-can also be twisted to enable a crackdown on actions that the average person may not even consider a crime."

Chinese officials may also believe, like Mayor Adams, that "Big Brother is protecting you." But Big Brother is "protecting" against things that upset Big Brother. Big Brother is certainly not prioritizing the concerns of people who don't want to be tracked, scrutinized, overheard, disarmed, judged, and penalized by intrusive officials whose standards differ from their own.

Adams may assume his own goodness, but "of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive," as C.S. Lewis warned us. "It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Ultimately, the very fact that Eric Adams, in the guise of Big Brother, wants to protect New Yorkers is all the more reason to tell him to get lost. A surveillance state is no less tyrannical, and perhaps even worse, when the snoops really believe in what they're doing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New York City Mayor Eric Adams Wants You to Love Big Brother

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New York City There's a common type of government official who sincerely believes the world would be better and their suffering subjects much happier if the restraints were removed and politicians were free to act as they wish. That their sincere belief in their goodness is exactly why we need those restraints always escapes them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Corruption in Ecuador. October 13th, 2020

# data[].attributes.subject
Corruption in Ecuador. October 13th, 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
October 13, 2020

Ecuador is fast approaching the end of the President Lenin Moreno's administration. The general elections, scheduled for February 2021, come while the country reels from overlapping crises. Moreno came into office with admittedly outsized reformist hopes, particularly to end the political instability and dispel the perceptions of pervasive government corruption under his predecessor, populist Rafael Correa, under whom he had served as vice president.

Moreno broke with Correa and made some progress toward less-polarized governance and achieved more positive international relations for the country-mainly by ending its participation in the Bolivarian movement started by Venezuela's Hugo Chávez. But Moreno now is struggling with the coronavirus pandemic, the related GDP and employment collapse, and a plummeting approval rating, down from 77 percent when he took office to 8 percent in August.

Nevertheless, there were modest steps forward on the corruption front, including corruption cases against high officials and against Correa himself (resulting in an eight-year sentence for campaign financing corruption ratified by the Supreme Court in September, thus blocking Correa's plan to run for the vice presidency). Moreno started out by naming a respected international corruption commission with the blessing of both the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and Organization of American States (OAS), but with no support in the National Congress, he essentially let it lapse.

In the most recent 2019 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, Ecuador received its best score since being included in the index, 38 out of 100 points, but still ranked 18th out of 30 countries in the region. These data, civil society research reports (64 percent of the population recently surveyed believed that more than half of the country's politicians are corrupt, up 8 percent from 2016), and a series of criminal investigations of officials involved in fraud underscored the need for greater efforts in preventing and punishing corruption.

With that perspective, the CSIS Americas Program joined the Pan American Development Foundation (PADF) and Fundación Ciudadanía y Desarrollo (FCD), which has just been accredited as Ecuador's local chapter of Transparency International, to spotlight the existing dynamic of corruption, examine vulnerabilities, and suggest reforms. Similar diagnostics were conducted in 2018-19 by the CSIS Americas Program with local civil society in the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. The hope is that the detailed review and recommendations in the Ecuador diagnostic can be debated during the current political campaigns, be useful to incoming administration and the Congress after the February 2021 elections, and offer avenues for both South-South and international financial and technical cooperation.

The diagnostic concentrated on five critical areas of governance:

1. Transparency in political campaign financing;

2. Fiscal and budget transparency;

3. Transparency in public procurement;

4. Civil service reform and public administration; and

5. The fight against corruption and impunity and for judicial independence.

Each chapter includes sections covering the status, the existing legal framework, pending and desirable actions, and reforms and possible strategies, and the relevant actors to carry out those strategies.

Some may ask whether, given the threat from the Covid-19 pandemic and its economic consequences, how much attention should be placed on rooting out corruption. In fact, it is now more urgent than ever. Recent raids and investigations by the attorney general's office into dozens of cases of questionable purchases related to overpricing of masks, gloves, medical equipment, and even body bags show the danger of corruption in emergency purchases. Diversion of funds or fraudulent state contracts produce unacceptable and criminal consequences, not only in misuse of funds but in unnecessary deaths.

Among the main conclusions stemming from the diagnostic was the importance of the active participation of civil society. In each thematic area studied, the roles of civil society and an independent press are key in identifying the dangers of corruption, necessary political and institutional reforms, and in monitoring the authorities to comply with their obligation to implement the laws, adopt the policies, and run programs honestly for the common good.

First with respect to transparency in party and campaign financing, the diagnostic showed the same results found in other country studies: campaign or party financing is often the "quid pro quo" to obtain covert benefits-from being allowed to evade taxes, obtain overpriced or inappropriate state contracts, or avoid judicial investigation.

While the study found that recent reforms to the Democracy Code, which will enter into full implementation by the 2021 general elections, would improve transparency and accountability, including a ban on campaign financing by corporations, it also noted institutional weakness of the National Electoral Council (CNE) due to the lack of sufficient economic and human resources. In addition, there have been virtually no sanctions in the past against political parties and candidates for contravening electoral regulations. That may be changing with several parties losing their standing in the upcoming elections for failure to comply with the new norms.

The diagnostic focused on steps to meet the basic goal of letting citizens know who is financing which parties and candidates, how much they are receiving, and how the recipients spent what they received. For that, the report urges that parties and candidates be required to publish all of the details on their website and that the CNE also publish the information on its website in a timely manner-ideally before the election.

Coordination of auditing and oversight by the CNE, comptroller general, Finance Ministry, and Internal Revenue Service, and linked to the attorney general's office, also can and should be strengthened.

The second thematic area was fiscal and budgetary transparency. While the Covid-19 pandemic has complicated Ecuador's macroeconomic and fiscal condition enormously, even earlier, the report had recommended regulatory reform and Ecuador's incorporation into the Global Initiative for Fiscal Reform (GIFT). Now the drop in economic output, lower revenues, and far greater health and social demands underscore the fiscal crisis facing the country.

The report also cites the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean's (ECLAC) " Fiscal Panorama of Latin America and the Caribbean 2019," which estimated that Ecuador loses close to $4 billion annually due to tax evasion. Last week, ECLAC's executive secretary Alicia Bárcena, in a presentation at the OAS, declared that tax evasion in the region reaches 6.1 percent of GDP, yet investment in health is just 2.3 percent of GDP. The impact in terms of lives lost from this poor fit is obvious.

With the economic crisis and its impact on workers, the diagnostic also clearly concluded that there is a need to expand the coverage of the social security system within a comprehensive reform that encompasses its liquidity and protects it from threats of politicization and fraud.

The third area studied was transparency in public procurement. Here, the evidence of fraud in infrastructure contracts reached millions of dollars even considering only those where indictments and convictions occurred. They demonstrated inadequate project planning, technical specifications, abuse of emergency, and post-approval contracts with direct linkage of bribery and inadequate inspection and oversight. Using the average corruption estimates in United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime studies, fraudulent contracts in 2019 alone because of overpricing, kickbacks, failure to perform could translate into losses of between $600 million and $1.5 billion. The diagnostic pointed to key reforms, beyond those which would result from Ecuador's joining the Open Contracting Partnership and Transparency in Infrastructure. They include further significant strengthening of efficiency, transparency, accountability, and control nationally but also at decentralized levels of government, which in 2019 represented 37 percent of public contracting.

Specific measures needed include:

Comprehensive regulatory reform of the National Public Procurement System in accord with international transparent, competitive standards;

Institutional strengthening through technological innovation, greater support and protection for whistleblowers, and adopting and implementing the kind of web-based dashboards that Colombia and Chile use to assure greater transparency, higher quality, and lower costs; and

Online public access to contract information, more effective internal oversight mechanisms, and closer auditing by the comptroller general.

The fourth area of study focused on transparency in civil service reform and public administration. Despite the existence of adequate norms in the Constitution and the organic law related to the management of the civil service, the report found gaps. For example, it is unclear if anyone knows the total number of public officials at the different levels of government. Perhaps, the biggest problems are related to the processes of naming high government officials, where the study concluded that making public the requirements for those positions and adopting a more open competition process could reduce the current subjectivity.

Two priority measures were identified. First, an amendment to the Law on Asset Declarations to incorporate OAS standards and require that all the information contained in the declarations be public, with the limited exception of personal data.

The second would be the approval of the Organic Law for the Prevention of Conflicts of Interest to ensure effective control of lobbying, maintain registries to avoid conflicts of interest, and regulate the figure of "revolving doors" with full access for civil society monitoring.

The fifth and final chapter addresses the fight against corruption, the fight against impunity, and judicial independence with special emphasis on the justice sector, including courts, law enforcement, prosecutors, an activist civil society, and investigative journalism. All play fundamental roles in the fight against corruption but also in guaranteeing citizens' rights. The analysis cited some transcendental actions, including criminal proceedings in corruption cases against high officials from various administrations, and even former presidents.

The study recommended updating the regulations on transparency and access to public information in line with new standards and technologies; the evaluation, redesign, and implementation of public policies on transparency; judicial independence; and the prevention of corruption and the fight against impunity. Some specific reforms include:

Updating the Organic Law of Transparency and Access to Public Information to include OAS-approved standards contained in the Model Inter-American Law for Access to Information, such as the anonymity of the applicant, the digitization of access, the use of open data, the independence of the guarantor entity, and effective judicial recourse;

Strengthening oversight to prevent conflicts of interest in the justice system, ensuring access for competent authorities to bank records in corruption investigations, and approving legislation to recover stolen funds and assets;

Incorporating international standards for the prevention of money laundering, forensic and technological methods to prevent and investigate acts of corruption, and legal measures to penalize individual or corporate interference in the suppression of whistleblowers or witnesses; and

Modifying the Organic Code of the Judicial Function to eliminate discretionary elements and incorporate international standards on disciplinary processes covering judges and other justice sector officials.

The diagnostic report was conducted by the Fundación Ciudadanía y Desarrollo (FCD) with the support of the Pan American Development Foundation (PADF) and Mark L. Schneider, CSIS senior adviser, and complements previous work done by the CSIS Americas Program on anti-corruption. The full report is available, in Spanish only, Mark L. Schneider is a senior adviser (non-resident) with the Americas Program and the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. Commentary © 2020 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).. An English language executive summary is available .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Diagnostic on Corruption in Ecuador: The Way Forward

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ecuador is fast approaching the end of the President Lenin Moreno's administration. The general elections, scheduled for February 2021, come while the country reels from overlapping crises. Moreno came into office with admittedly outsized reformist hopes, particularly to end the political instability and dispel the perceptions of pervasive government corruption under his predecessor, populist Rafael Correa, under whom he had served as vice president.

# data[].attributes.headline
Melbourne City, VIC, Australia Dec 17, 2022

# data[].attributes.subject
Melbourne City, VIC, Australia Dec 17, 2022

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.espn.com/soccer/australian-a-league-men/story/4833373/australian-a-league-melbourne-derby-abandoned-after-violent-pitch-invasion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Joey LynchAustralia Correspondent

Close
Joey Lynch is a Melbourne-based sports journalist, AYA Cancer advocate, cynical centre-half and Zack Ryder mark. Primarily working on football, he has covered the Socceroos, Matildas, A-League, W-League, Y-League, the Australian grassroots and beyond.

Australian A-Leagues club Melbourne Victory has said that it is "devastated" and issued a formal apology after its fans forced the abandonment of a clash with local rivals Melbourne City by staging a violent pitch invasion, an incident which Football Australia has promised will lead to "strong sanctions."

Planning on staging a joint-walkout in the 20th minute to protest league administrators the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) decision to sell hosting rights to the leagues' men's and women's grand finals to Sydney for the next three years, both City and Victory fans began throwing flares onto the AAMI Park playing surface before they made their exits, with one appearing to hit a camera operator for broadcaster Network Ten.
- Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (U.S.)
Fans had already ignited flares and small fireworks throughout the preceding 20 minutes, with City fans hurling a number of projectiles onto the pitch in celebration of Aiden O'Neill's 11th-minute opener.

The missiles hurled in the 20th minute, however, kick-started a spiralling series of events that saw City goalkeeper Tom Glover, attempting to clear a projectile that had landed near him off the field, throw a flare off the pitch and back into the Victory supporters. This then led to a host of fans storming onto the pitch in scenes reminiscent of the violence between Nice and Marseille in 2021.

As fans converged on his position, Glover was hit in the head by a metal bucket filled with sand designed to extinguish flares hurled in his direction. He was rushed from the pitch by teammates with blood coming from the side of his head.

Referee Alex King also suffered a gash to the head from the thrown bucket, while the game's referee coach was pushed into the fence. A Football Australia spokesperson described King as being more shaken than hurt, and he and his fellow officials were escorted to their cars by security to exit the stadium.

City officials said that Glover needed stitches and had a suspected concussion after the incident.

In a statement, Victory said that it was devastated by the incident and that it unequivocally condemned the actions of its supporters that invaded the pitch.

"The club would like to formally apologise to Tom Glover, match official, Alex King and the camera operator as well as all players, officials and those who witnessed the appalling behaviour," it said.

Both sets of players and coaching staffs, as well as the match officials, quickly made their way off the field as the pitch invasion continued; the fans who remained on the surface turning their focus to attacking the sponsor boards and goals before being marshalled off the field by members of Victoria Police's Public Order Response Team.

After a lengthy delay, the match was abandoned to ensure player safety, the first time that an A-Leagues fixture has been called off for such a reason.

In a statement, Victoria Police said that approximately 150-200 Victory supporters stormed the field, and confirmed the injuries to Glover and King, as well as the injuries suffered by the Network Ten cameraman when he was hit by a flare.

Police said that at this stage no arrests had been made, but investigations were ongoing.

"The Melbourne Victory fans who stormed the pitch, resulting in the assault of a player, a referee and a member of match day broadcast staff, should be subjected to the strongest possible sanctions," a statement from player's union Professional Footballers Australia said.

"We acknowledge the courage of players, club staff and referees who came to the aid of each other in circumstances that no one should ever be exposed to."

Demonstrations against the APL's decision had already occurred at the A-League Men and A-League Women games that had already taken place across the weekend, but all were of a peaceful nature.

Socceroo goalkeeper Danny Vukovic, who was a member of the squad in Qatar that made it to the World Cup round of 16, said on social media that Australian football was experiencing its "darkest day" in light of the events.

The A-Leagues are run independently from Football Australia, but the national federation remains the game's regulator and enforced a national code of conduct and referees; meaning that they will lead the investigation into and resulting sanctions from the pitch invasion. Its CEO James Johnson is set to address the media on Sunday morning.

"Such behaviour has no place in Australian Football, with a full Football Australia investigation to commence immediately, where strong sanctions to be handed down," a statement from the Federation read.

Speaking to ESPN, a Football Australia official confirmed that the organisation would use the "full force" of its regulatory and disciplinary powers regarding the incident and that members of the public had already come forward to assist them and Victoria Police with their investigation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fans storm Aussie soccer match, attack goalie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Joey LynchAustralia Correspondent Close Joey Lynch is a Melbourne-based sports journalist, AYA Cancer advocate, cynical centre-half and Zack Ryder mark. Primarily working on football, he has covered the Socceroos, Matildas, A-League, W-League, Y-League, the Australian grassroots and beyond.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/china-party-congress-10-16-22-intl-hnk/index.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What we covered here

The Chinese Communist Party's National Congress, a week-long gathering of the country's political elites, kicked off today in Beijing.

All eyes are on Xi Jinping, who is expected to break with tradition and take on a third term as party chief, paving the way for potential lifelong rule.

During his speech on Sunday, Xi defended zero-Covid, pledged to renew economic growth, praised the role of "patriots" in Hong Kong, warned China would not rule out the use of force with Taiwan, and said its military should improve its "ability to win."

Delegates will also select new party leaders - but it's more a formality than a true election, with the real decisions hashed out by top leaders in a secretive process long before the congress.

3:49 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Our live coverage of the start of China's Communist Party Congress has ended. Read more about the event, key takeaways, and what to expect in the coming week, here:

3:33 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Beijing must abandon "acts of coercion and aggression," Taiwan says

From CNN's Eric Cheung in Taipei, Taiwan

Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, a government agency responsible for handling cross-strait affairs, responded to Xi Jinping's speech on Sunday by saying Beijing should "abandon its acts of coercion and aggression."

"While the Chinese Communist Party is facing drastic changes in international relations and rising social and economic challenges, its policy towards Taiwan still does not have a new line of thinking or correct judgement," the council said in a statement.
"Beijing must abandon the imposed political framework and acts of coercion and aggression, and respect Taiwanese people's insistence on sovereignty, democratic and freedom."
"Only by addressing differences peacefully and pragmatically with rationality, equality and mutual respect can we form the basis for resuming positive cross-strait interactions."

The council added that while the Chinese Communist Party has emphasized Xi's longtime key goal of "national rejuvenation," it has never undertaken true democratic reforms, built a free civil society, or faced cross-strait relations with a new perspective.

3:27 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Here are the main takeaways from Xi Jinping's opening speech to China's Party Congress today

Chinese leader Xi Jinping kicked off the Communist Party Congress on Sunday with a nearly two-hour speech, which highlighted several key domestic and international priorities - and offered hints into Xi's vision for the country's future.
Here are the main takeaways:
The Covid strategy: China is one of the world's last major economies adhering to zero-Covid, which aims to stamp out chains of transmission using border controls, snap lockdowns, mass testing and mandatory quarantine. Despite the heavy toll on the economy and growing public frustration, Xi defended this policy on Sunday, indicating it may not be going anywhere soon.

"We prioritized the people and their lives above all else, and tenaciously pursued the (zero-Covid) policy in launching an all-out people's war against the virus," Xi said.

On Hong Kong: The semi-autonomous city has seen significant social, political and economic upheaval for the last few years, with massive protests in 2019 followed by a sweeping crackdown - and its own Covid crisis. On Sunday, Xi claimed that Beijing's measures in the city - including imposing a national security law and overhauling the electoral system - had turned Hong Kong "from chaos to governance."

On Taiwan: Xi took a strong stance on the self-governing island, which the Communist Party claims as its territory despite never having controlled it.

China has the "resolve and ability" to maintain its "territorial integrity," including its claim to Taiwan, said Xi - and offered a stern warning.

"We will continue to strive for peaceful reunification with the greatest of sincerity and the upmost effort, but we will never promise to renounce the use of force and we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary," he said.

Economic growth: Facing an economy in crisis after years of isolation on the world stage and internal regulatory crackdowns, Xi said on Sunday that China would focus on education and innovation to "renew growth."

China will ���speed up efforts to achieve greater self-reliance in science and technology," he said, in comments that come just months after his recent crackdown on the country's private sector and major tech companies.

Bulking up the military: Xi also vowed to speed up efforts to build the People's Liberation Army (PLA) into a "world-class military," pledging to improve the PLA's ability to safeguard national sovereignty.

He urged the PLA to strengthen its training "under combat conditions" and improve its "ability to win."

Socialism and repression: Xi emphasized the need to build "cultural confidence" and develop China's socialist culture.

China must "firmly grasp the party's leadership over ideological work," he said - which appeared to signal tightening controls on Chinese society, which has already seen a ramping up of online censorship and a sharp crackdown on civil society and dissent under Xi's 10-year rule.
A few other notable highlights:

Nearly the whole hall was masked - with just the 25-member Politburo, including Xi, and some party elders in the front row going bare-faced.

The Peng Shuai official: Zhang Gaoli, a former Party official accused of sexually assaulting tennis star Peng Shuai, sat in a prominent position behind Xi during the speech - the first time he's been spotted at a live event since the allegation.

The speech was shorter: It ran at just under two hours, compared to Xi's previous speech at the 2017 Party Congress, which stretched more than three hours.

Eyes on the tea: Xi paused several times to clear his throat and sip tea - raising some eyebrows among observers online. The attention paid to such a small gesture speaks volumes about the scrutiny on Xi, the amount of power he wields and his outsized role in China's governance, said CNN Beijing Bureau Chief Steven Jiang.

3:27 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
"Security," "development," and other buzzwords in Xi's two-hour speech

From CNN's Yong Xiong in New York and Simone McCarthy in Hong Kong

Xi Jinping's address on Sunday clocked in at just under two hours, significantly shorter than his last Party Congress address in 2017 which stretched to more than three hours.

Sunday's speech was peppered with several highly repeated terms, shining a light on some of Xi's areas of emphasis.

Xi repeated the Chinese term for security around 50 times, at one point calling national security the "foundation of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation."

He also urged enhancing security in military, economy and "all aspects," both at home and abroad.

Xi also emphasized "development," both of the nation and its ideology, as well in tangible sectors like the economy, rule of law and technological prowess. The term appeared more than 100 times in the report.

Both of those terms were also widely used in the last speech he delivered five years ago - which was more than 27,000 Chinese characters, compared to over 14,000 characters this year.

"Security" appeared in the 2017 document only a handful of times more than it did in this year's, despite the difference in character count.

2:54 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
If you're just joining us, here's what you need to know

From CNN's Simone McCarthy

For those just joining us, here's what has happened so far with China's Communist Party Congress.

What it is: The congress is a week-long conclave that meets once every five years to choose new leaders, discuss changes to the party constitution and lay out a policy agenda for the country. It's attended by nearly 2,300 carefully selected Communist Party members, called delegates, from around the country.

Xi's speech: Chinese leader Xi Jinping formally opened the meeting on Sunday with a nearly two-hour speech about the party's achievements in the past five years, as well as its priorities for the next five.

He highlighted several geopolitical hotspots including Hong Kong and Taiwan; and laid out domestic goals for China's troubled economy, looming demographic crisis, developing socialist culture and strengthening of the military.

Who attends the meeting: Party delegates range from top provincial officials and military officers to professionals across sectors, and so-called grassroots representatives like farmers and industrial workers.

This cohort also includes the hierarchy of the Chinese Communist Party, which is among the world's largest political parties with more than 96 million members.

The levels of power: There are three distinct rings in that hierarchy. Around 400 of the National Congress delegates are members of the Party's elite Central Committee, which in turn includes the members of the upper echelon: the 25-member Politburo and its Standing Committee - China's most powerful decision-making body, typically composed of five to nine men and led by the general secretary.

Focus on the Party: The meeting is all about the Communist Party - the overarching source of power in China - and will ultimately guide who fills government positions.

In recent decades these meetings - which take place almost entirely behind closed doors - have seen a streamlined transfer of power: the convention is for the top party leader, having completed two five-year terms, to pass the baton to a carefully chosen successor who is revealed at the end of the congress.

But this time around, Xi is expected to upend that precedent, pitching China into a new era of strongman rule and uncertainty over when or how the country would see another leader.
Read more here:

2:37 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Hong Kong, once China's city of dissent, will be watching the Party Congress as crackdown continues

Chinese leader Xi Jinping launched into his nearly two-hour speech on Sunday with several key priorities - one of which is an international financial hub in the country's south, long known as China's city of dissent.

Hong Kong, a semi-autonomous metropolis and former British colony, has long stood apart from other Chinese cities with its own judicial system, currency, global trade relationships, and civil liberties - a model of governance called "One Country, Two Systems."

But many in Hong Kong have long feared China's encroachment on those rare freedoms, prompting numerous protests and calls for greater democracy over the years - including the massive 2019 pro-democracy anti-government protests.

Crackdown in Hong Kong: The protests posed an unprecedented open challenge to Xi and the central government - which swiftly imposed a sweeping national security law in Hong Kong in 2020. The law has since been used to jail protesters and activists, shut down independent newsrooms, target former elected lawmakers, and impose new forms of censorship.

The crackdown is still ongoing, with frequent arrests and prison sentences. Hong Kong authorities have repeatedly claimed that the city's freedoms remain intact, and that the security law has restored order and stability.

A triumphant Xi: On Sunday, Xi claimed Beijing had turned the city "from chaos to governance," and praised the "patriots administering Hong Kong."

The 2019 protests had been a "turbulent" and "volatile" time, he said, adding that Beijing had "effectively exercised comprehensive jurisdiction" over Hong Kong. "Thanks to these moves, order has been restored in Hong Kong, marking a major turn for the better in the region," he said.

City leader's response: John Lee, Hong Kong's leader and the former security chief who oversaw much of the crackdown, posted a photo of himself standing close to a television broadcasting the Party Congress on Sunday.

Lee, who was appointed to the role in May this year, wrote in his caption that Hong Kong has faced numerous challenges in the past five years, from the "social turmoil of 2019" to the Covid-19 pandemic. Beijing's measures have "pushed Hong Kong into a new stage of progress," and the city now is ready to "open a new chapter," he wrote.
Read more here:

2:28 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
China is navigating "grim and complex international situation," says Xi without naming any countries

From CNN's Yong Xiong in New York

During his speech at the start of the Party Congress, Xi Jinping said China was working to navigate a "grim and complex international situation" and "huge risks and challenges that came one after another" - possibly referencing the global pandemic and Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, though he did not identify any countries by name.

China's stance on the war: China has offered rhetorical support to Russia throughout its invasion of Ukraine, but Xi did not overtly mention the war in his address on Sunday.

"China firmly pursues an independent and peaceful foreign policy, always decides its own position and policy according to the merits of the matter itself," Xi said, adding that China "upholds the basic norms of international relations, upholds international fairness and justice."

On the West: Xi did not name the US or other Western countries - but repeated phrases that Beijing has previously used often to hit out at Washington.

China "firmly opposes all forms of hegemonism and power politics, opposes the Cold War mentality, and opposes interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and oppose double standards," Xi said.

On Taiwan: Xi also spoke about Taiwan, a self-governing island that the Communist Party claims as its territory - despite never having controlled it.

Because of this claim, Beijing does not consider the future of Taiwan as a foreign policy matter. "Solving the Taiwan issue is the Chinese people's own business, and it is up to the Chinese people to decide," Xi said on Sunday.

2:30 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Taiwan says it will never compromise on sovereignty in response to Xi's speech

From CNN's Eric Cheung in Taipei, Taiwan

Taiwan will never compromise on values of sovereignty, democracy and freedom, the island's presidential office said on Sunday in response to comments made by Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

"The national security team is closely monitoring the situation and will continue to pay close attention to subsequent developments," presidential office spokesman Chang Tun-han said.
"Taiwan's mainstream opinion has clearly expressed that we firmly reject 'One Country, Two Systems'," he said referencing the policy under which Hong Kong is governed. "It is the consensus of the Taiwanese public that territorial sovereignty, democracy and freedom cannot be compromised, and military confrontation must not be the option for both sides of the Taiwan Strait."

Chang also referenced a speech given by Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen on National Day last week that Taipei is willing to work with Beijing to find "mutually acceptable ways" to maintain peace and stability on the Taiwan Strait.

What Xi said on Taiwan: Xi delivered a stern warning on Sunday regarding Taiwan, saying it would "never promise to renounce the use of force and we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary."

"Complete reunification of our country must be realized," he said.

China's ruling Communist Party claims Taiwan as its territory, despite never having controlled the self-governing democratic island of 23 million people.

2:19 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
In photos: China's top officials gathered to hear Xi Jinping's two-hour speech

China's Communist Party Congress kicked off Sunday, with leader Xi Jinping delivering an almost two-hour speech at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, where nearly 2,300 delegates from around the country had gathered.

Nearly all of them wore face masks - except the 25-member Politburo, including Xi, and a number of party elders sitting in the front row on stage.

Masks are still ubiquitous across China, in stark contrast to much of the Western world, which has reopened and relaxed measures in public spaces.

Security had ramped up ahead of the event, with personnel stationed across Beijing - including on many bridges, after a rare and swiftly silenced protest on Thursday saw banners opposing Xi and his Covid restrictions hung on an overpass in the capital.

What we covered here

The Chinese Communist Party's National Congress, a week-long gathering of the country's political elites, kicked off today in Beijing.

All eyes are on Xi Jinping, who is expected to break with tradition and take on a third term as party chief, paving the way for potential lifelong rule.

During his speech on Sunday, Xi defended zero-Covid, pledged to renew economic growth, praised the role of "patriots" in Hong Kong, warned China would not rule out the use of force with Taiwan, and said its military should improve its "ability to win."

Delegates will also select new party leaders - but it's more a formality than a true election, with the real decisions hashed out by top leaders in a secretive process long before the congress.

3:49 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Our live coverage of the start of China's Communist Party Congress has ended. Read more about the event, key takeaways, and what to expect in the coming week, here:

3:33 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Beijing must abandon "acts of coercion and aggression," Taiwan says

From CNN's Eric Cheung in Taipei, Taiwan

Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, a government agency responsible for handling cross-strait affairs, responded to Xi Jinping's speech on Sunday by saying Beijing should "abandon its acts of coercion and aggression."

"While the Chinese Communist Party is facing drastic changes in international relations and rising social and economic challenges, its policy towards Taiwan still does not have a new line of thinking or correct judgement," the council said in a statement.
"Beijing must abandon the imposed political framework and acts of coercion and aggression, and respect Taiwanese people's insistence on sovereignty, democratic and freedom."
"Only by addressing differences peacefully and pragmatically with rationality, equality and mutual respect can we form the basis for resuming positive cross-strait interactions."

The council added that while the Chinese Communist Party has emphasized Xi's longtime key goal of "national rejuvenation," it has never undertaken true democratic reforms, built a free civil society, or faced cross-strait relations with a new perspective.

3:27 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Here are the main takeaways from Xi Jinping's opening speech to China's Party Congress today

Chinese leader Xi Jinping kicked off the Communist Party Congress on Sunday with a nearly two-hour speech, which highlighted several key domestic and international priorities - and offered hints into Xi's vision for the country's future.
Here are the main takeaways:
The Covid strategy: China is one of the world's last major economies adhering to zero-Covid, which aims to stamp out chains of transmission using border controls, snap lockdowns, mass testing and mandatory quarantine. Despite the heavy toll on the economy and growing public frustration, Xi defended this policy on Sunday, indicating it may not be going anywhere soon.

"We prioritized the people and their lives above all else, and tenaciously pursued the (zero-Covid) policy in launching an all-out people's war against the virus," Xi said.

On Hong Kong: The semi-autonomous city has seen significant social, political and economic upheaval for the last few years, with massive protests in 2019 followed by a sweeping crackdown - and its own Covid crisis. On Sunday, Xi claimed that Beijing's measures in the city - including imposing a national security law and overhauling the electoral system - had turned Hong Kong "from chaos to governance."

On Taiwan: Xi took a strong stance on the self-governing island, which the Communist Party claims as its territory despite never having controlled it.

China has the "resolve and ability" to maintain its "territorial integrity," including its claim to Taiwan, said Xi - and offered a stern warning.

"We will continue to strive for peaceful reunification with the greatest of sincerity and the upmost effort, but we will never promise to renounce the use of force and we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary," he said.

Economic growth: Facing an economy in crisis after years of isolation on the world stage and internal regulatory crackdowns, Xi said on Sunday that China would focus on education and innovation to "renew growth."

China will ���speed up efforts to achieve greater self-reliance in science and technology," he said, in comments that come just months after his recent crackdown on the country's private sector and major tech companies.

Bulking up the military: Xi also vowed to speed up efforts to build the People's Liberation Army (PLA) into a "world-class military," pledging to improve the PLA's ability to safeguard national sovereignty.

He urged the PLA to strengthen its training "under combat conditions" and improve its "ability to win."

Socialism and repression: Xi emphasized the need to build "cultural confidence" and develop China's socialist culture.

China must "firmly grasp the party's leadership over ideological work," he said - which appeared to signal tightening controls on Chinese society, which has already seen a ramping up of online censorship and a sharp crackdown on civil society and dissent under Xi's 10-year rule.
A few other notable highlights:

Nearly the whole hall was masked - with just the 25-member Politburo, including Xi, and some party elders in the front row going bare-faced.

The Peng Shuai official: Zhang Gaoli, a former Party official accused of sexually assaulting tennis star Peng Shuai, sat in a prominent position behind Xi during the speech - the first time he's been spotted at a live event since the allegation.

The speech was shorter: It ran at just under two hours, compared to Xi's previous speech at the 2017 Party Congress, which stretched more than three hours.

Eyes on the tea: Xi paused several times to clear his throat and sip tea - raising some eyebrows among observers online. The attention paid to such a small gesture speaks volumes about the scrutiny on Xi, the amount of power he wields and his outsized role in China's governance, said CNN Beijing Bureau Chief Steven Jiang.

3:27 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
"Security," "development," and other buzzwords in Xi's two-hour speech

From CNN's Yong Xiong in New York and Simone McCarthy in Hong Kong

Xi Jinping's address on Sunday clocked in at just under two hours, significantly shorter than his last Party Congress address in 2017 which stretched to more than three hours.

Sunday's speech was peppered with several highly repeated terms, shining a light on some of Xi's areas of emphasis.

Xi repeated the Chinese term for security around 50 times, at one point calling national security the "foundation of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation."

He also urged enhancing security in military, economy and "all aspects," both at home and abroad.

Xi also emphasized "development," both of the nation and its ideology, as well in tangible sectors like the economy, rule of law and technological prowess. The term appeared more than 100 times in the report.

Both of those terms were also widely used in the last speech he delivered five years ago - which was more than 27,000 Chinese characters, compared to over 14,000 characters this year.

"Security" appeared in the 2017 document only a handful of times more than it did in this year's, despite the difference in character count.

2:54 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
If you're just joining us, here's what you need to know

From CNN's Simone McCarthy

For those just joining us, here's what has happened so far with China's Communist Party Congress.

What it is: The congress is a week-long conclave that meets once every five years to choose new leaders, discuss changes to the party constitution and lay out a policy agenda for the country. It's attended by nearly 2,300 carefully selected Communist Party members, called delegates, from around the country.

Xi's speech: Chinese leader Xi Jinping formally opened the meeting on Sunday with a nearly two-hour speech about the party's achievements in the past five years, as well as its priorities for the next five.

He highlighted several geopolitical hotspots including Hong Kong and Taiwan; and laid out domestic goals for China's troubled economy, looming demographic crisis, developing socialist culture and strengthening of the military.

Who attends the meeting: Party delegates range from top provincial officials and military officers to professionals across sectors, and so-called grassroots representatives like farmers and industrial workers.

This cohort also includes the hierarchy of the Chinese Communist Party, which is among the world's largest political parties with more than 96 million members.

The levels of power: There are three distinct rings in that hierarchy. Around 400 of the National Congress delegates are members of the Party's elite Central Committee, which in turn includes the members of the upper echelon: the 25-member Politburo and its Standing Committee - China's most powerful decision-making body, typically composed of five to nine men and led by the general secretary.

Focus on the Party: The meeting is all about the Communist Party - the overarching source of power in China - and will ultimately guide who fills government positions.

In recent decades these meetings - which take place almost entirely behind closed doors - have seen a streamlined transfer of power: the convention is for the top party leader, having completed two five-year terms, to pass the baton to a carefully chosen successor who is revealed at the end of the congress.

But this time around, Xi is expected to upend that precedent, pitching China into a new era of strongman rule and uncertainty over when or how the country would see another leader.
Read more here:

2:37 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Hong Kong, once China's city of dissent, will be watching the Party Congress as crackdown continues

Chinese leader Xi Jinping launched into his nearly two-hour speech on Sunday with several key priorities - one of which is an international financial hub in the country's south, long known as China's city of dissent.

Hong Kong, a semi-autonomous metropolis and former British colony, has long stood apart from other Chinese cities with its own judicial system, currency, global trade relationships, and civil liberties - a model of governance called "One Country, Two Systems."

But many in Hong Kong have long feared China's encroachment on those rare freedoms, prompting numerous protests and calls for greater democracy over the years - including the massive 2019 pro-democracy anti-government protests.

Crackdown in Hong Kong: The protests posed an unprecedented open challenge to Xi and the central government - which swiftly imposed a sweeping national security law in Hong Kong in 2020. The law has since been used to jail protesters and activists, shut down independent newsrooms, target former elected lawmakers, and impose new forms of censorship.

The crackdown is still ongoing, with frequent arrests and prison sentences. Hong Kong authorities have repeatedly claimed that the city's freedoms remain intact, and that the security law has restored order and stability.

A triumphant Xi: On Sunday, Xi claimed Beijing had turned the city "from chaos to governance," and praised the "patriots administering Hong Kong."

The 2019 protests had been a "turbulent" and "volatile" time, he said, adding that Beijing had "effectively exercised comprehensive jurisdiction" over Hong Kong. "Thanks to these moves, order has been restored in Hong Kong, marking a major turn for the better in the region," he said.

City leader's response: John Lee, Hong Kong's leader and the former security chief who oversaw much of the crackdown, posted a photo of himself standing close to a television broadcasting the Party Congress on Sunday.

Lee, who was appointed to the role in May this year, wrote in his caption that Hong Kong has faced numerous challenges in the past five years, from the "social turmoil of 2019" to the Covid-19 pandemic. Beijing's measures have "pushed Hong Kong into a new stage of progress," and the city now is ready to "open a new chapter," he wrote.
Read more here:

2:28 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
China is navigating "grim and complex international situation," says Xi without naming any countries

From CNN's Yong Xiong in New York

During his speech at the start of the Party Congress, Xi Jinping said China was working to navigate a "grim and complex international situation" and "huge risks and challenges that came one after another" - possibly referencing the global pandemic and Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, though he did not identify any countries by name.

China's stance on the war: China has offered rhetorical support to Russia throughout its invasion of Ukraine, but Xi did not overtly mention the war in his address on Sunday.

"China firmly pursues an independent and peaceful foreign policy, always decides its own position and policy according to the merits of the matter itself," Xi said, adding that China "upholds the basic norms of international relations, upholds international fairness and justice."

On the West: Xi did not name the US or other Western countries - but repeated phrases that Beijing has previously used often to hit out at Washington.

China "firmly opposes all forms of hegemonism and power politics, opposes the Cold War mentality, and opposes interfere in the internal affairs of other countries and oppose double standards," Xi said.

On Taiwan: Xi also spoke about Taiwan, a self-governing island that the Communist Party claims as its territory - despite never having controlled it.

Because of this claim, Beijing does not consider the future of Taiwan as a foreign policy matter. "Solving the Taiwan issue is the Chinese people's own business, and it is up to the Chinese people to decide," Xi said on Sunday.

2:30 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
Taiwan says it will never compromise on sovereignty in response to Xi's speech

From CNN's Eric Cheung in Taipei, Taiwan

Taiwan will never compromise on values of sovereignty, democracy and freedom, the island's presidential office said on Sunday in response to comments made by Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

"The national security team is closely monitoring the situation and will continue to pay close attention to subsequent developments," presidential office spokesman Chang Tun-han said.
"Taiwan's mainstream opinion has clearly expressed that we firmly reject 'One Country, Two Systems'," he said referencing the policy under which Hong Kong is governed. "It is the consensus of the Taiwanese public that territorial sovereignty, democracy and freedom cannot be compromised, and military confrontation must not be the option for both sides of the Taiwan Strait."

Chang also referenced a speech given by Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen on National Day last week that Taipei is willing to work with Beijing to find "mutually acceptable ways" to maintain peace and stability on the Taiwan Strait.

What Xi said on Taiwan: Xi delivered a stern warning on Sunday regarding Taiwan, saying it would "never promise to renounce the use of force and we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary."

"Complete reunification of our country must be realized," he said.

China's ruling Communist Party claims Taiwan as its territory, despite never having controlled the self-governing democratic island of 23 million people.

2:19 a.m. ET, October 16, 2022
In photos: China's top officials gathered to hear Xi Jinping's two-hour speech

China's Communist Party Congress kicked off Sunday, with leader Xi Jinping delivering an almost two-hour speech at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, where nearly 2,300 delegates from around the country had gathered.

Nearly all of them wore face masks - except the 25-member Politburo, including Xi, and a number of party elders sitting in the front row on stage.

Masks are still ubiquitous across China, in stark contrast to much of the Western world, which has reopened and relaxed measures in public spaces.

Security had ramped up ahead of the event, with personnel stationed across Beijing - including on many bridges, after a rare and swiftly silenced protest on Thursday saw banners opposing Xi and his Covid restrictions hung on an overpass in the capital.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
live updates: china kicks off 20th communist party congress as xi jinping prepares to expand power

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
By Jessie Yeung and Simone McCarthy, CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Live updates: China kicks off 20th Communist Party Congress as Xi Jinping prepares to expand power

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What we covered here The Chinese Communist Party's National Congress, a week-long gathering of the country's political elites, kicked off today in Beijing. All eyes are on Xi Jinping, who is expected to break with tradition and take on a third term as party chief, paving the way for potential lifelong rule.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/woman-sues-man-allegedly-spying-hidden-cams-article-1.2263432

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Creep charged with spying on women with hidden cameras sued by victim for $1 million

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A creep already facing criminal charges for allegedly spying on 2 women with hidden cameras was hit with a $1 million civil suit.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections-government/ny-nyc-mayor-adams-twitter-hate-speech-platform-20221121-kxuqfvudzfb25etxykg6ubm7l4-story.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It was a series of tweets that sent the NYPD and FBI on the trail of two Nazis looking to shoot up a synagogue, and it's Twitter and other social media that Mayor Adams pointed to Monday as having to clean up their acts after the arrest of the suspects.

Adams and other top officials lauded the role that law enforcement and community groups played in the arrest of Christopher Brown and Matthew Mahrer, but they also laid part of the blame for the life-threatening situation they posed at the feet of social media - for not only giving them, but many others a platform to sow hate-fueled rhetoric and plans.

"Intentionally or unintentionally, social media has become a platform that has assisted with the organizing and the growth of hate in our country - and on the globe. And they need to become more responsible," Adams said during a press conference in the City Hall rotunda. "They must reckon with the fact that their platforms are being used to spread hate and violence. It has left the point of just spreading hate. It is now being used as a tool to spread violence."

Adams' criticisms come as Twitter and its new CEO Elon Musk have taken fire for gutting the company of employees and reinstating former President Donald Trump to the platform. Trump was banned from Twitter last year for his tweets about the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol insurrection - tweets that the company deemed a violation of its policy against inciting violence. Musk reinstated Trump after posting a poll for tweeters on whether he should be allowed back.

[ Cyber sleuths from Jewish nonprofit were first to uncover violent antisemitic NYC synagogue threats ]

Hip-hop star Kanye West was also recently reinstated to Twitter after being banned for anti-Semitic tweets. And Brooklyn Nets point guard Kyrie Irving was suspended from the NBA after tweeting a link to an anti-Semitic film. He resumed playing ball at the Barclay's Center over the weekend.

When asked about West and Irving - and Twitter's decision to reinstate Trump - Adams declined to directly address those specific situations.

Law enforcement officials learned of Brown and Mahrer's alleged plot after the Community Security Initiative, which monitors anti-Jewish hate speech online, alerted them to alarming chatter emitting from a now-defunct Twitter account allegedly controlled by Brown.

Mitchell Silber, the executive director of the security initiative, which is overseen by the UJA (United Jewish Appeal) Federation of New York and the Jewish Community Relations Council, said his group monitors sites like 4chan, Gab.com and 8chan, which now operates under the name 8kun, for hate speech and other indications that someone is planning to carry out violence.

"On Friday morning at about 10 o'clock, they identified through their analysis of the internet some alarming text from this individual talking about attacking a synagogue, talking about 10 o'clock at night, talking about potentially dying by the police," he said. "We sent it to two places. We sent it to FBI New York, and we sent it to the NYPD intel division."

The information Silber's group culled from Twitter proved instrumental in capturing the two suspects.

Silber noted that in recent weeks, with Musk's takeover, Twitter has come to resemble more fringe platform's like 4chan and 8chan, which helped launch the debunked QAnon conspiracy theory. He blamed this on mass Twitter layoffs and the fact that many of the site's content regulators no longer work there.

"There's a lot of hate talk on Twitter that's not being taken down. And so we have to treat Twitter in some ways like a 4chan, 8chan or Gab - that you might see some venomous, hateful commentary there that could lead to violence," he said. "No one seems to be overseeing what content is being allowed on Twitter. So it is a serious problem that you hear manifest itself in a potential deadly attack."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NYC Mayor Adams slams Twitter as platform for hate speech and violence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Adams and other top officials lauded the role that law enforcement and community groups played in the arrest of Christopher Brown and Matthew Mahrer, but they also laid part of the blame for the life-threatening situation at the feet of social media - for not only giving them, but many others a platform to sow hate-fueled rhetoric and plans.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ppic.org/publication/police-use-of-force-and-misconduct-in-california/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police Use of Force and Misconduct in California

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nearly 200 Californians die each year in police encounters. Amid growing concern over civilian deaths and racial injustice, we examine what the existing data can—and cannot—tell us about police use of force and misconduct. We also offer recommendations for strengthening the state’s ongoing efforts t…

# data[].attributes.body
https://globalinvestigationsreview.com/guide/the-practitioners-guide-global-investigations/2023/article/china

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
General context, key principles and hot topics

1 Identify the highest-profile corporate investigation under way in your country, describing and commenting on its most noteworthy aspects.

As widely reported in the international press, Chinese authorities have been heavily focused during the past two years on regulation and enforcement within the country's growing technology industry. For the most part, this has consisted of the introduction of sweeping regulations aimed at curbing the reach and influence of China's technology giants. There have also been a number of enforcement actions and penalties levied against Chinese technology companies. The Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) and the State Administration of Market Regulation (SAMR), for example, have imposed fines on a number of e-commerce companies and consumer technology service providers for a range of infringements, including offences relating to unfair competition, data security, data privacy and monopoly.

In one particularly high-profile regulatory intervention that commenced in June 2021, the CAC initially barred ride-hailing company Didi from registering new users within days of its initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange, and eventually fined Didi Inc 8.026 billion yuan in July 2022, citing breaches of China's cybersecurity law, data security laws and data protection laws. There is also a crackdown against monopolistic behaviour in the past two years. For example, e-commerce company Alibaba and retail platform Meituan were fined by the SAMR in 2021 for abusing their market dominance (respectively, 18.228 billion yuan and 3.442 billion yuan).

Activity in China continues to be a strong focus for international, and particularly US, enforcement agencies. China has been the focus of more US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement actions than any other country since the enactment of the Act in 1977. Around one-quarter of the FCPA enforcement actions by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2021 and in 2022 to date have involved conduct taking place in China. In many cases, these US-driven investigations trigger concurrent or follow-on investigations by China's law enforcement authorities and regulators.

2 Outline the legal framework for corporate liability in your country.

Corporate entities can be held criminally liable for giving bribes to state personnel (and persons closely associated with state personnel), non-state personnel, foreign officials, and state entities and enterprises. Corporate criminal liability generally attaches where the relevant misconduct is an exercise of 'corporate will' (i.e., the decision to engage in misconduct was a group decision or was made by the personnel in charge). For example, in the high-profile prosecution, GlaxoSmithKline was found guilty on the basis that its management encouraged bribery of doctors, hospitals and other institutions for the benefit of the corporate entity.

Amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (AUCL), which came into force in January 2018, revised the legal framework for civil bribery. Business operators, which includes corporates, can be found liable for civil bribery offences if they bribe individuals or entities to seek transaction opportunities or a competitive edge. Vicarious liability is expressly presumed.

3 Which law enforcement authorities regulate corporations? How is jurisdiction between the authorities allocated? Do the authorities have policies or protocols relating to the prosecution of corporations?

By virtue of its control over state-owned enterprises (SOEs), the Communist Party of China (CPC) is an omnipresent participant in the corporate enforcement arena. The CPC established the National Supervision Commission (NSC) in March 2018 under the Supervision Law of 2018 (the Supervision Law). The NSC is China's new 'super anti-graft agency' and enjoys a status close to the cabinet. It has absorbed and extended the investigative and enforcement powers of the CPC's Central Commission for Discipline Inspection. The NSC may detain individuals, interrogate them for up to six months, freeze assets, search premises with a warrant and seize evidence. Moreover, detainees are not entitled to legal advice as the NSC operates outside the purview of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended) (the Criminal Procedure Law).

The NSC's jurisdiction focuses on corruption and bribery by individuals but it is likely that both SOEs and multinational corporations will get caught up in investigations initiated by the NSC, particularly given its ability to call on the services of other law enforcement agencies.

The NSC carries out investigations of suspected bribery by SOEs and state personnel before referring cases for further review and prosecution by people's procuratorates and the Supreme People's Procuratorate. Public security bureaux (PSBs) may assist with the NSC's investigation if the suspected offences include other crimes that fall outside the NSC's investigatory scope but within that of the relevant PSB.

PSBs investigate, via the economic crime investigation units set up within the bureaux, criminal bribery offences that fall outside the investigatory remit of the NSC, fraud, other financial crimes, and crimes relating to food and drug safety. People's procuratorates, as prosecuting bodies, enjoy their own investigatory powers in relation to certain types of crimes (e.g., crimes committed by law enforcement officers that relate to obstruction of justice) but are primarily responsible for prosecutions. According to the Criminal Procedure Law and the Supervision Law, people's procuratorates will prosecute if they are of the view that the facts of a crime have been ascertained, and that the evidence is concrete and sufficient. The authorities have published no policies specifically relating to the prosecution of corporations, although there are thresholds for the investigation of corporates.

Distinct from law enforcement, other bodies exercise investigative, disciplinary and regulatory powers over corporates. For example, the SAMR investigates potential violations of the AUCL and sanctions civil bribery. It is not unusual for multiple agencies to be involved in a single matter. If relevant and within their jurisdiction, authorities do not generally refrain from pursuing matters simply because the corporate is under investigation by another domestic body.

4 What grounds must the authorities have to initiate an investigation? Is a certain threshold of suspicion necessary to trigger an investigation?

In practice, the authorities have considerable leeway in initiating investigations, both procedurally and substantively. The NSC in particular enjoys broad investigative powers, with no particular suspicion threshold stipulated in the Supervision Law.

The Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security have issued guidelines that prescribe minimum monetary thresholds for commencing investigations for certain financial crimes, product quality crimes and others, including minimum thresholds for investigations of corporations.

The Criminal Procedure Law contains a general provision that investigative authorities should 'promptly examine the materials provided by a reporter, complainant or informant, or any voluntary confessions by any suspect'. After initial examination and preliminary investigation, if they consider there are facts indicating criminal liability, they should initiate a formal criminal investigation. The Criminal Procedure Law contains no other details on the threshold of suspicion required to trigger a formal investigation.

5 How can the lawfulness or scope of a notice or subpoena from an authority be challenged in your country?

Assuming that the investigating authority is properly authorised to issue the notice, it is unlikely that a person will have a valid ground to challenge a notice, given that the concept of privilege is not recognised under Chinese law. Challenges to procedural issues may be raised but they can usually be resolved through government actions (e.g., issuance of an amended notice with proper authorisation). In addition, even if a person refuses to produce documents, the investigating authority has broad power to search and seize evidence during an investigation.

6 Does your country make use of co-operative agreements giving immunity or leniency to individuals who assist or co-operate with authorities?

Whether an individual is granted any leniency or immunity for assisting with authorities is generally a matter left to the discretion of the authority. However, both the Law on Administrative Penalty and the Supervision Law (enacted in March 2018) contain provisions for more lenient penalties to be available when an individual has assisted or co-operated with authorities.

Article 32 of the Law on Administrative Penalty (updated in 2021) provides that lenient or reduced administrative punishments will be provided to those who have gained credit in helping administrative organs to investigate unlawful acts.

Similarly, Article 31 of the Supervision Law provides that the supervision organs may issue a recommendation for lenient punishment when a person actively co-operates with the authorities, takes active measures or otherwise renders significant assistance in cases involving matters of major national interest.

7 What are the top priorities for your country's law enforcement authorities?

Corruption, fraud, product safety, tax evasion, money laundering and terrorism financing remain the key areas of focus. Recent cases against corporations also highlight enforcement action relating to cybersecurity, data security, data privacy and anticompetitive conduct. There has been an increased focus on investigating potential economic crimes in certain sectors, such as pharmaceutical, technology, financial and construction.

8 To what extent do law enforcement authorities in your jurisdiction place importance on a corporation having an effective compliance programme? What guidance exists (in the form of official guidance, speeches or case law) on what makes an effective compliance programme?

Under the amended AUCL, vicarious liability is expressly presumed for civil bribery committed by employees of business operators. The law places the burden on the employer to prove that an employee's actions were unrelated to seeking transactional opportunities or competitive advantage for the employer.

When the amended AUCL came into effect, the head of the Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Enforcement Bureau at the State Administration for Industry and Commerce provided an explanation of what might be required for such a rebuttal. His explanation appeared to suggest that vicarious liability can be refuted if a company has evidence to prove that it had taken reasonable steps to comply with laws and regulations, had adopted effective supervisory and monitoring measures, and had not conspired or connived in an employee's misconduct. The Shanghai Regulation against Unfair Competition (effective from 1 January 2021) encourages business operators to establish an anti-commercial bribery programme and specifies that the implementation of the programme would be reviewed in any commercial bribery investigations conducted by the local SAMR.

In recent years, the government has urged Chinese companies to enhance their compliance procedures in light of the increasingly strict enforcement environment and, since 2017, has issued multiple regulatory documents setting out compliance guidelines and codes of conduct for Chinese companies and foreign companies operating in China.

A compliance monitoring mechanism in criminal cases was formally introduced by guidance issued on 3 June 2021 by the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Finance, the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the SAMR and other authorities. The guidance provides that the local people's procuratorates may decide whether to go through a compliance monitoring process in a case involving economic crimes or duty-related crimes. This monitoring process involves independent third-party reviews of a company's compliance programme and reports to the local people's procuratorates, which would be taken into account in prosecution and sentencing decisions. In April 2022, the Supreme People's Procuratorate announced that the compliance monitoring mechanism would be launched nationwide. In the same month, detailed measures (Measures for the Compliance Establishment, Evaluation and Examination of Enterprises Involved in Criminal Cases (for Trial Implementation)) were issued, which provide guidance for establishing and enhancing a company's compliance programme and for conducting monitorship.

Cyber-related issues

9 Does your country regulate cybersecurity? Describe the approach of local law enforcement authorities to cybersecurity-related failings.

The Cybersecurity Law (CSL) is the key legislation regulating cybersecurity. It contains a set of cybersecurity obligations and requires the authorities to take action against companies and management in relation to cybersecurity-related failings. A key regime under the CSL is the Multi-Level Protection Scheme (MLPS), which requires each network operator to be assessed and designated a particular level of security obligations. The MLPS is implemented through several national standards and could be subject to a regulation that is currently being drafted by the Ministry of Public Security.

The penalties applicable in the case of a violation of the CSL include an order for rectification, a warning, forfeiture of illegal income, fines, suspension of business, closure of website, withdrawal of operation permit or revocation of business licence. To date, we have seen enforcement actions that focus on warnings, orders for rectification and fines. With the MLPS regime now being established, more enforcement actions are expected.

10 Does your country regulate cybercrime? What is the approach of law enforcement authorities in your country to cybercrime?

Cybercrime is regulated under the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended in 1997) (the Criminal Law), which punishes:

illegal invasion or control of computer systems (or providing programs or tools for such);

destruction of computer systems causing serious consequences;

refusal to discharge cybersecurity protection obligations despite administrative orders, resulting in serious consequences;

using information networks to commit certain crimes, such as fraud and the sale of drugs; and

abetting others in committing cyber-related crimes.

These crimes are punishable by fines and imprisonment. In terms of specific offences, China's law enforcement authorities have focused on infringement of personal data laws, cyberattacks, cyber fraud, online gambling, online pornography and online exam cheating. Law enforcement authorities receive many requests for assistance in cybercrime investigations from international agencies, such as Interpol, and counterparts overseas.

Cross-border issues and foreign authorities

11 Does local criminal law have general extraterritorial effect? To the extent that extraterritorial effect is limited to specific offences, give details.

In general, the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended in 1997) (the Criminal Law) applies when either the act or the consequence of a crime occurs within China. Individuals who commit a criminal act are subject to the Criminal Law if they are located in China, regardless of their nationality, and Chinese nationals who commit crimes outside China are subject to the Criminal Law provided the punishment is more than three years' imprisonment. The Criminal Law applies to companies organised under Chinese law, including joint ventures, representative offices of non-Chinese enterprises and wholly foreign-owned enterprises.

In late 2018, China passed an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended) (the Criminal Procedure Law) to allow judgment to be delivered in corruption cases when the defendant is absent. The amendment is designed to tackle cases in which suspects escape justice by hiding overseas. The amendment allows prosecutors to proceed with a case if evidence against the suspect is ample and the crime is clear.

The bribery of foreign public officials by individuals and entities was criminalised in 2011 through an amendment to the Criminal Law. This has not been prosecuted in practice.

12 Describe the principal challenges that arise in your country in cross-border investigations, and explain whether and how such challenges depend on the other countries involved.

In practice, cross-border investigations involving conduct in China are typically triggered by the US enforcement authorities (the Department of Justice or the Securities and Exchange Commission). The principal challenge is how to deal with Chinese laws on issues such as data privacy, state secrets, trade secrets and the absence of privilege, while seeking to co-operate with US enforcement authorities. The movement of evidence from China is particularly problematic. The divergence in both procedural and substantive law in these areas means that what the US authorities expect from a corporate investigation, and what the corporate can do and provide within the purview of Chinese law, are often at odds. This in turn leads to tension between complying with Chinese law and demonstrating co-operation, which is necessary for leniency, deferred prosecution or a declination in the United States.

Although challenges are most often encountered in the context of US cross-border investigations, similar tensions may be encountered in relation to other jurisdictions that may be investigating corporate conduct in China.

13 Does double jeopardy, or a similar concept, apply to prevent a corporation from facing criminal exposure in your country after it resolves charges on the same core set of facts in another? Is there anything analogous in your jurisdiction to the 'anti-piling on' policy as exists in the United States (the Policy on Coordination of Corporate Resolution Penalties) to prevent multiple authorities seeking to penalise companies for the same conduct?

Chinese law does not expressly recognise the concept of double jeopardy or anything similar, even for domestic criminal proceedings. In fact, under the Criminal Procedure Law, even if a case has been closed, it can be retried if there is new evidence suggesting that the facts relied on in the original judgment or sentencing were incorrect. In practice, it is not uncommon for a defendant to become a suspect again in respect of the same allegations after a court has delivered a not-guilty verdict.

China is also unlikely to recognise the double jeopardy concept in international criminal enforcement actions. Under the Criminal Law, a person may be investigated and prosecuted in China even if he or she has already been tried in a foreign country. Those who have received criminal punishment overseas may be exempted from punishment or receive a mitigated penalty. However, we are not aware of informal negotiation or co-operation to afford corporate defendants relief in the face of enforcement actions in multiple jurisdictions.

There is no system analogous to the US 'anti-piling on' policy.

14 Are 'global' settlements common in your country? What are the practical considerations?

We are not aware of any concluded global settlement involving China.

15 What bearing do the decisions of foreign authorities have on an investigation of the same matter in your country?

Decisions made by foreign authorities may be influential for a number of reasons. They may draw the attention of the Chinese authorities to the matter. They may also serve to make the issue newsworthy and therefore exert political pressure on the Chinese authorities to proceed with the matter themselves.

Economic sanctions enforcement

16 Describe your country's sanctions programme and any recent sanctions imposed by your jurisdiction.

China does not have a comprehensive sanctions programme in the same way as other jurisdictions, such as the United States. Rather, the legal basis for its sanctions programme is found in a patchwork of laws and regulations, including the Foreign Trade Law, the Customs Law and the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Import and Export Duties (through which China imposes customs duties). The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issues circulars that serve as the legal basis for other organs at ministerial level to implement United Nations sanctions. Through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China also unilaterally threatens or imposes sanctions based on its foreign policy needs. For instance, following China's statement of its intention to sanction US companies involved in selling arms to Taiwan in October 2020, China cut the supply of rare earth to Lockheed Martin and reduced orders from Boeing in August 2021.

The Export Control Law, which came into force in December 2020, seeks to bring China's export control rules and enforcement in line with other jurisdictions that have more comprehensive controls. This Law introduces four categories of controlled items - dual-use goods, military items, nuclear items, and other goods, technologies, services and items relating to national security - and any data relating to the aforementioned items, including technical materials. The Export Control Law also provides for the maintenance of a control list of foreign importers and end users that have been found to violate the law, are likely to endanger national security or interests, or use control items for terrorism purposes. As at August 2022, we are not aware of any entity being designated to this list.

On 1 June 2019, the Ministry of Commerce announced the establishment of an Unreliable Entities List, which has been compared to the United States' Entity List. On 19 September 2020, the Provisions on the Unreliable Entities List were approved by the China State Council and immediately came into effect. The Unreliable Entities List restricts the business of foreign entities in China that endanger the sovereignty, security and development interests of China, or suspend normal transactions with or apply discriminatory measures against an enterprise, other organisation or individual of China, in a way that violates normal market transaction principles and causes serious damage to their legitimate rights and interests. Enforcement mechanisms are not yet established but the Provisions provide for these to be set up. The possible measures against foreign entities may include restricting or prohibiting engaging in China-related import or export activities, investing in China, entry into the territory of China, work and stay permits and imposing a fine, among other things. As at August 2022, we are not aware of any entity being designated to the Unreliable Entity List.

On 10 June 2021, China enacted the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law, which took effect on the same date. It appears primarily to target sanctions imposed by foreign states on China's government officials, although the Law also provides flexibility for a much broader scope of application. Notably, the Law provides that the government may issue an anti-foreign sanctions Counter List, and impose countermeasures on individuals and organisations included in the Counter List and their related persons. We have seen at least two enforcement cases under this Law, including (1) sanctions imposed against certain US individuals and a US entity in July 2021 in response to a prior financial sanction imposed by the US government targeting seven Chinese officials in Hong Kong and (2) sanctions imposed in February 2022 on Lockheed Martin Corporation and Raytheon Technologies Corporation over their arms transactions with Taiwan.

17 What is your country's approach to sanctions enforcement? Has there been an increase in sanctions enforcement activity in recent years, for example?

China's approach to sanctions enforcement should be viewed in the context of the broader geopolitical situation, particularly the ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China. Enforcement could increase in light of the Export Control Law, the Unreliable Entities List and the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law.

As described above, the Export Control Law, the Provisions on the Unreliable Entities List and the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law provide a high-level framework for an export control and sanctions programme in China, which may lead to an increase in enforcement activity. How these rules are implemented in practice remains to be seen and is likely to depend, to a significant degree, on the prevailing geopolitical climate.

18 Do the authorities responsible for sanctions compliance and enforcement in your country co-operate with their counterparts in other countries for the purposes of enforcement?

Generally no, unless this would be mutually beneficial.

19 Has your country enacted any blocking legislation in relation to the sanctions measures of third countries? Describe how such legislation operates.

In January 2021, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) issued its Order No. 1 of 2021: Rules on Counteracting Unjustified Extra-territorial Application of Foreign Legislation and Other Measures (the PRC Blocking Statute). It applies where the extraterritorial application of foreign laws or other measures prohibits or restricts Chinese entities from engaging in normal economic, trade and related activities with foreign entities. The Blocking Statute introduces several measures, including a reporting obligation and a prohibition order. Chinese nationals, legal persons and other organisations are required to make an accurate report to MOFCOM within 30 days of any instance where they face prohibition or restriction by foreign laws or measures from engaging in normal commercial activities with third-country entities. A prohibition order may be issued by the Chinese government to the effect that the relevant foreign laws and other measures (not specified in the statute) should not be recognised, enforced or complied with, if the extraterritorial application of those laws is deemed unjustifiable. Exemptions from compliance with a prohibition order may be possible upon written application. It also grants parties the right to bring a civil claim before a Chinese court and seek compensation for losses caused by the extraterritorial application of the foreign laws and measures that are subject to China's prohibition orders.

The PRC Blocking Statute is similar in nature to legislation in other jurisdictions. Unlike the current EU Blocking Statute, which is specifically drafted to prohibit EU operators (broadly defined) from complying with specific US sanctions, the PRC Blocking Statute establishes only a general framework by setting out a non-exhaustive list of factors to consider in determining which foreign laws should be subject to prohibition. In response to questions regarding which foreign laws will be targeted initially, MOFCOM has stated that the PRC Blocking Statute does not target any specific countries or specific transactions in specific areas, and that the working panel will keep a close eye on the extraterritorial application of relevant foreign laws and measures.

Notwithstanding these comments from MOFCOM, and although the PRC Blocking Statute does not provide for the publication of a list of specific sanctions regimes or foreign laws, prohibition orders issued in due course will be made publicly available, effectively creating a de facto list of 'unjustifiable' foreign laws. It is not clear from the PRC Blocking Statute whether exemptions will be made publicly available. As at August 2022, we are not aware of any prohibition order being publicly released by the Chinese government.

20 To the extent that your country has enacted any sanctions blocking legislation, how is compliance enforced by local authorities in practice?

In the absence of specific guidance on the applicability or any cases, it remains to be seen whether, and to what extent, the compliance will be enforced in practice.

Before an internal investigation

21 How do allegations of misconduct most often come to light in companies in your country?

Whistleblower reports (either internally to a compliance officer or colleague, or externally to a regulatory or enforcement agency) often trigger allegations of corporate misconduct. Internal audits may also identify misconduct. To a lesser extent, complaints by competitors, which may be channelled through media reports, can also cause allegations of misconduct to surface. Inspections by external bodies such as the State Administration for Market Regulation or regulatory authorities may also flag issues.

Information gathering

22 Does your country have a data protection regime?

China's data privacy regime has been evolving quickly, conferring broader rights on data subjects and imposing ever more regulation on companies operating in China. The primary laws regarding data protection consists of the Cybersecurity Law (CSL), the PRC Data Security Law and the PRC Personal Information Protection Law. Prior to the CSL (effective from June 2017), data privacy rights had been arranged in a patchwork of legislation (including Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended in 1997), General Rules of the Civil Law and Tort Law) and in industry-specific regulations (e.g., the banking, healthcare and securities sectors).

The CSL's data protection provisions cover any data that is generated, collected or processed in China by network operators - this covers both domestic companies and multinational corporations. Data collection must comply with relevant laws and regulations and be for a legitimate and necessary purpose. Consent of the data subject to data processing is generally required. The Personal Information Security Standards (of which the latest version is effective from 1 October 2020) provide best practice guidelines on data protection, which serve as a reference for both users and the authorities. The PRC Civil Code, which came into force on 1 January 2021, contains additional personal information protection requirements. In particular, the Code requires that the collection and processing of personal information follow the principles of legitimacy, justifiability, necessity and proportionality. The Code also introduces grounds for exemption of liability for those who handle other people's personal information.

The PRC Data Security Law, which came into force on 1 September 2021, is a further step in enhancing protection of data security. Among other requirements (such as national security review and requirements on cross-border transfer of important data), the new law requires government approval before companies or individuals can provide data stored within the territory of China to foreign judicial or law enforcement authorities, and further provides that companies providing data to foreign judicial or enforcement authorities without obtaining approval may face fines of up to 5 million yuan, orders to suspend business or revocation of operating permits or business licences.

The PRC Personal Information Protection Law came into effect on 1 November 2021, becoming China's comprehensive law that regulates the collection, processing and transfer of personal information. The Law also applies to activities conducted overseas that deal with the personal information of individuals who are located in China for certain purposes, such as analysing and evaluating the activities of the individuals to which the personal information belongs. The Law sets out requirements with respect to consent and the lawful basis for dealing with personal information, as well as additional requirements for cross-border transfers of personal data.

During 2022, there has been further legislation, and rules being issued or drafted, with respect to cross-border data transfer.

23 To the extent not dealt with above at question 9, how is the data protection regime enforced?

The PRC Civil Code protects the privacy rights and personal data of individuals who can bring a civil law claim against the infringer in court. A breach of the CSL may trigger administrative penalties, including a fine, suspension of the business, closure of a website and revocation of an operation permit or business licence. Penalties for violations of the Data Security Law can include an order for rectification, a warning, fines on the entities and their personnel, and, in serious cases, an order for suspension of operations, cessation of business or revocation of operating permits or business licences. A serious violation of core data protection obligation or data export obligation can result in a fine of up to 10 million yuan. Under the Personal Information Protection Law, a company in violation of the rules on the handling of personal information may face a fine of up to 50 million yuan or 5 per cent of the turnover of the previous year, and suspension of business or revocation of operation permits or business licences. An illegal breach of personal data privacy rights could, in serious cases, give rise to criminal prosecution.

24 Are there any data protection issues that cause particular concern in internal investigations in your country?

Investigations should always be conducted in compliance with applicable data privacy legislation. In recent years, the Chinese authorities have taken an aggressive approach to data privacy violations in the context of internal investigations. For example, as part of an internal investigation, China Auto Logistics collected data about its employees, which the employees subsequently reported to the police. A number of executives of the company resigned following the investigation and the company announced that its securities would be delisted from the NASDAQ stock market in August 2018. Data privacy laws should therefore be borne in mind in the context of investigations and companies should handle relevant data with the utmost care when conducting or responding to an investigation.

25 Does your country regulate or otherwise restrict the interception of employees' communications? What are its features and how is the regime enforced?

Interception of employees' communications by an employer is restricted and must be conducted in accordance with the law.

Interception by employers of employees' communications on employees' personal property is generally prohibited unless explicitly permitted by the employees. It is important for an employer to make clear to employees that they should not have work-related communications on their personal devices, to avoid potential risks of leaks of confidential work-related information.

Interception of employees' communications on employers' devices or systems is possible, subject to compliance with cybersecurity and data protection laws and regulations. Employees need to be made aware that communications on their employer's devices or systems could be intercepted by their employer. This is usually dealt with at the onboarding stage for each new employee. Additionally, prior consent from employees should be obtained for the collection, review, search, holding, processing and transfer of information and communications on the employer's devices or systems for employment-related reasons.

Dawn raids and search warrants

26 Are search warrants or dawn raids on companies a feature of law enforcement in your country? Describe any legal limitations on authorities executing search warrants or dawn raids, and what redress a company has if those limits are exceeded.

Search warrants and dawn raids are a common feature of law enforcement in China. Pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended) (the Criminal Procedure Law), a search warrant issued by a chief prosecutor of a people's procuratorate or the head of a public security bureau (PSB) is normally required before conducting a search in a criminal investigation. However, in emergency situations, including when the person under investigation may conceal, destroy or transfer evidence of a crime, a search may be conducted without a search warrant.

The Supervision Law of 2018 empowers the National Supervision Commission to conduct broad searches and seizure with a warrant. The Criminal Procedural Law authorises investigators from people's procuratorates and PSBs to conduct wide searches and to seize property and documents found during a search to prove a crime. Other authorities (e.g., the State Administration for Market Regulation and antitrust law enforcement authorities) may also conduct searches within the scope of their competence and functions.

Chinese law imposes few limitations on authorities executing search warrants other than the requirement that the search should be witnessed and recorded. Corporations subject to investigation may challenge the authorities' decisions or actions during a search (e.g., restriction of personal freedom, or the sealing up, seizing or freezing of property) before the courts.

27 How can privileged material be lawfully protected from seizure during a dawn raid or in response to a search warrant in your country?

Privilege in the common law sense is not recognised under Chinese law. Authorities therefore have wide powers to seize documents and, in practice, may demand documents that would be protected from disclosure in other jurisdictions. There is no right to resist the disclosure of legal advice or other categories of evidence.

Although lawyers owe their clients a duty of confidentiality, this does not assist if documents are sought directly from a client or a third party rather than the lawyer. Moreover, under the Lawyer's Law of the People's Republic of China, this duty of confidentiality does not apply to communications aimed at or involving criminal acts causing harm to state security or public security, or serious harm to personal safety. Additionally, this duty may be overridden in the context of investigations. The authorities have a general power to collect or obtain evidence from relevant entities and individuals concerned with a case pursuant to a search warrant or court order.

28 Under what circumstances may an individual's testimony be compelled in your country? What consequences flow from such compelled testimony? Are there any privileges that would prevent an individual or company from providing testimony?

There is no right to privilege over documents. Article 52 of the Criminal Procedure Law explicitly prohibits a suspect from being compelled to give evidence to prove his or her own guilt. This protection was introduced in 2012. However, it is ambiguous as Article 52 only limits the measures that interrogators can use to force interviewees to talk. They still have an obligation under the Criminal Procedure Law to answer truthfully all relevant questions put to them. Owing to its imprecise scope and an apparent continued enforcement of the previous law, which afforded no such protection, this right is likely to be of limited use in practice.

Whistleblowing and employee rights

29 Describe the whistleblowing framework in your country. What financial incentive schemes exist for whistleblowers? What legal protections are in place for whistleblowers?

Under the Provisions of the People's Procuratorates on Reporting of Crimes 2009 (strengthened in 2014), whistleblowers who report crimes to the enforcement authorities are entitled to protection, anonymity and a right of appeal in the face of refusals to investigate. There is also a reward mechanism for whistleblowers who report crimes to people's procuratorates, and various other financial reward schemes are scattered in sector-specific regulations. The Criminal Procedure Law also contains several measures that protect the personal safety of witnesses giving evidence in legal proceedings and their families, including keeping personal information about witnesses confidential, and adopting protective measures so that the witnesses' appearances or voices are not made public.

An employee who is dismissed for whistleblowing would need to commence an action for wrongful dismissal against the employer, claiming either reinstatement or compensation. Retaliation by employers against whistleblowers in certain circumstances may constitute an offence under the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended in 1997) and Chinese labour laws. In such cases, the employee should report the matter to the people's procuratorate and the labour authority, as applicable.

30 What rights does local employment law confer on employees whose conduct is within the scope of an investigation? Is there any distinction between officers and directors of the company for these purposes?

Chinese labour laws are generally employee-friendly. In the course of an internal investigation, an employee must generally continue to be paid in accordance with his or her contract (salary and position are key terms that generally may only be altered with the mutual consent of the employer and the employee).

During an internal investigation, an employee may submit a dispute to the Labour Dispute Arbitration Commission for resolution. If the employee does not accept the arbitral award, the employee may generally institute court proceedings.

Officers and directors enjoy the same rights as employees. However, an employer may sue officers and directors in a civil action for breach of fiduciary duty separate from an employment claim. Nevertheless, the employer cannot be compensated twice for the same damage.

31 Do employees' rights under local employment law differ if a person is deemed to have engaged in misconduct? Are there disciplinary or other steps that a company must take when an employee is implicated or suspected of misconduct, such as suspension or in relation to compensation?

If an employee is subject to a criminal investigation by a prosecutor of a people's procuratorate, the employer may suspend the employment contract. If the employee is not convicted of a crime, he or she may ask for state compensation for lost salary and may request reinstatement. If the employee is convicted and sentenced for a crime, the employer may unilaterally terminate the employment on the sentencing date.

In general, as long as an employee continues to be paid his or her basic salary, the company can suspend the employee pending an investigation. As regards dismissal for refusing to participate in an internal investigation, an employee's contract cannot be terminated at will. An employer must have permissible legal grounds, such as a serious violation of company policy by the employee, or if his or her misconduct has caused material damage to the company.

32 Can an employee be dismissed for refusing to participate in an internal investigation?

Generally, if an employee refuses to participate in an internal investigation, this is not of itself a sufficient ground for summary dismissal. In practice, terminations are generally agreed privately on the basis of a payment to the employee. Liability for wrongful dismissal is twice the statutory severance.

Commencing an internal investigation

33 Is it common practice in your country to prepare a document setting out terms of reference or investigatory scope before commencing an internal investigation? What issues would it cover?

This is likely to depend on the nature of the company. Although investigations are not unusual, the management of a Chinese company is unlikely to conduct its investigation in such a structured fashion. Being a domestic company, management and the company's lawyers are also likely to be less concerned about issues such as protecting privilege or procedures for transferring data and state secrets overseas: these matters are likely to be of far less relevance. If, on the other hand, the company is a multinational corporation, the China branch or its lawyers will generally prepare a document setting out the scope of the investigation, which is likely to include such issues.

The scope of any investigation plan will depend on the type and complexity of the issues being investigated, the level of detail needed to brief members of the board or management about the investigation, and the preferences of the company and professionals running the investigation. Generally, it will address who comprises the investigation team, the external lawyers or third-party experts (if any), and the objectives and scope of the investigation. The latter would cover who needs to be interviewed and the document types and date ranges to be searched (addressing privilege and dealing with state secrets and data transfers as appropriate).

34 If an issue comes to light prior to the authorities in your country becoming aware or engaged, what internal steps should a company take? Are there internal steps that a company is legally or ethically required to take?

China's culture is largely a collective, hierarchical one and it is likely that those within the company will report up internally. However, reporting externally is a different matter.

As part of a company's internal investigation, any duty to report the matter to law enforcement authorities or regulators (but see below regarding the case of a regulated entity) should be kept under review.

There is a general duty on individuals and entities under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended) (the Criminal Procedure Law) to report suspected crimes to the public security bureau, the people's procuratorate or the court; however, there is no specific penalty for a failure to do so. Therefore, the provision lacks teeth and the obligation does not tend to be observed in practice, although there have been a number of reported instances of misconduct by employees in the technology sector being reported to Chinese authorities in recent years.

If the company is a regulated entity, for example a financial institution, trading house, insurer or food and drug company, notification requirements are very likely to apply. If it is a domestic, non-regulated entity, it is not common practice that the company will report the issue externally.

In respect of multinational corporations operating in China, there may be more structured processes in place for reporting internally, as well as an awareness and culture of reporting externally. This may also be influenced by the approach of the lawyers representing the entity.

35 What internal steps should a company in your country take if it receives a notice or subpoena from a law enforcement authority seeking the production or preservation of documents or data?

Under Article 54 of the Criminal Procedure Law, an investigating authority may request evidence from relevant entities or individuals. In practice, evidence collection might be accomplished by broad document seizure authorised under a seizure permit. However, it is also possible for an enforcement authority to issue notices for the provision of certain documents or data (especially when the person receiving the notice is not the direct target of the criminal investigation).

There are no strict rules regarding the preservation of documents or electronic data, or the issuing of litigation holds. However, intentional destruction or tampering with evidence is prohibited. Given that a domestic enforcement action could easily attract the attention of enforcement authorities in other countries, it is preferable that a proper litigation hold notification is issued and implemented.

The government is unlikely to allow an entity being investigated to propose its own custodians or search terms. Instead, it might ask the defendant to freeze all electronic data on the system and then conduct its own review of the data collected.

36 At what point must a company in your country publicly disclose the existence of an internal investigation or contact from a law enforcement authority?

Privately owned companies and unlisted state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are generally not required to make public the existence of an internal investigation or contact from a law enforcement authority.

Under applicable securities laws, issuers and listed companies (including relevant SOEs) must observe their respective information disclosure obligations pursuant to applicable laws. In general, major investigations and litigation must be disclosed in annual and interim reports of listed companies. In addition, listed companies must generally immediately disclose any major event that may have a significant effect on the trading price of its securities.

37 How are internal investigations viewed by local enforcement bodies in your country?

Internal corporate investigations, particularly SOE audits, are common in China. What is quite unusual is self-reporting to local enforcement bodies on the back of an internal investigation. Usually, internal investigations identify remediation steps that are actioned by the company and this concludes the matter. The notion of self-reporting does not generally arise unless it is in the context of foreign enforcement bodies, and parallel reporting to Chinese law enforcement may then be considered.

Attorney-client privilege

38 Can the attorney-client privilege be claimed over any aspects of internal investigations in your country? What steps should a company take in your country to protect the privilege or confidentiality of an internal investigation?

No. However, if the conduct in question is, or is likely to be, investigated in a common law jurisdiction, the company and its lawyers should conduct themselves in such a way as to maximise privilege.

39 Set out the key principles or elements of the attorney-client privilege in your country as it relates to corporations. Who is the holder of the privilege? Are there any differences when the client is an individual?

No concept of the attorney-client privilege exists in China. A lawyer owes a duty of confidentiality to his or her client, but this is not akin to legal privilege in the common law sense. In any event, this duty of confidentiality does not apply to communications aimed at or involving criminal acts causing harm to state security, public security or persons and property. This is widely interpreted, rendering the scope of confidentiality protection limited in practice.

40 Does the attorney-client privilege apply equally to in-house and external counsel in your country?

Not applicable.

41 Does the attorney-client privilege apply equally to advice sought from foreign lawyers in relation to investigations in your country?

Not applicable.

42 To what extent is waiver of the attorney-client privilege regarded as a co-operative step in your country? Are there any contexts where privilege waiver is mandatory or required?

Not applicable.

43 Does the concept of limited waiver of privilege exist as a concept in your jurisdiction? What is its scope?

No concept of the limited waiver of privilege exists in China.

44 If privilege has been waived on a limited basis in another country, can privilege be maintained in your own country?

Not applicable.

45 Do common interest privileges exist as concepts in your country? What are the requirements and scope?

No concept of common interest privileges exists in China.

46 Can privilege be claimed over the assistance given by third parties to lawyers?

Not applicable.

Witness interviews

47 Does your country permit the interviewing of witnesses as part of an internal investigation?

Yes, this is common practice.

48 Can a company claim the attorney-client privilege over internal witness interviews or attorney reports?

No concept of the attorney-client privilege exists in China.

49 When conducting a witness interview of an employee in your country, what legal or ethical requirements or guidance must be adhered to? Are there different requirements when interviewing third parties?

There are no strict rules in China relating to the conduct of interviews (such as the requirement to give an Upjohn warning). However, the interviewer could be criticised for not explaining the situation or not being transparent (e.g., if the investigation is likely to involve contentious labour law issues). Therefore, from a practical perspective, it is advisable to give something similar to an Upjohn warning.

50 How is an internal interview typically conducted in your country? Are documents put to the witness? May or must employees in your country have their own legal representation at the interview?

Interviews will usually be conducted at the company's offices, with in-house counsel and external lawyers present. The interview usually involves a chronology covering employment history, the alleged events and the employee's recollections of the events. Assuming they are available, documents will be shown to the employee.

In general, the question of the employee's legal representation will turn on whether the investigation relates to a multinational corporation or a domestic company. A multinational corporation is likely to allow employees to have their own representation, from cultural and risk perspectives (potential exposure in another jurisdiction would militate in favour of allowing separate legal representation for the employee).

Reporting to the authorities

51 Are there circumstances under which reporting misconduct to law enforcement authorities is mandatory in your country?

Yes. Under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended), crimes should be reported, but this is not commonly observed in practice. Reporting misconduct to regulators and to law enforcement authorities, as appropriate, is mandatory in most regulated sectors in China.

52 In what circumstances might you advise a company to self-report to law enforcement even if it has no legal obligation to do so? In what circumstances would that advice to self-report extend to countries beyond your country?

Self-reporting in China is often regarded as a confession; indeed, the terms are regularly used interchangeably in a way they are not in the West. The assessment of whether to self-report is generally driven by the risk that a third party may disclose the matter to the authorities. Usually, the risk of an individual disclosing the matter to Chinese law enforcement authorities is lower than in the West.

In practice, and when the matter raises potential liability overseas, a report is usually made to the relevant law enforcement authority in that jurisdiction before anything similar is done in China (e.g., for the purposes of leniency or co-operation credit). Disclosure to foreign law enforcement authorities generally raises the concern that the matter will become public. This in turn may prompt disclosure by the company to the Chinese authorities. Self-reporting is viewed by the Chinese authorities as being highly unusual.

53 What are the practical steps needed to self-report to law enforcement in your country?

Self-reporting can be challenging in practice. Finding the right person to report to and documenting the report (e.g., for mitigation purposes) is not straightforward. Law enforcement officials may approach the concept of self-reporting with some doubt, and may in turn be reluctant to sign documents or officiate the process. Moreover, it is very unusual in China to involve external lawyers when dealing with regulatory or criminal authorities before charges are laid, partly for reasons of face.

Responding to the authorities

54 In practice, how does a company in your country respond to a notice or subpoena from a law enforcement authority? Is it possible to enter into dialogue with the authorities to address their concerns before or even after charges are brought? How?

It is possible to enter into a dialogue with the investigating authority to clarify the scope of evidence sought, or even to further limit the evidence. This dialogue can be conducted through formal or informal channels, with or without lawyers. However, the investigating authority may choose not to accommodate any such request.

55 Are ongoing authority investigations subject to challenge before the courts?

A person or company subject to investigation may bring administrative proceedings against an authority's decision or actions. Pending litigation, the authority's action (e.g., seizing or freezing property) is not usually suspended. In exceptional cases, where non-suspension would result in irretrievable damage or if the relevant administrative authority deems it necessary to suspend the action, the court may, on request, order suspension of the alleged action. The amended Administrative Procedure Law lowered the threshold for bringing an administrative proceeding. However, from a practical perspective, the courts may lack sufficient muscle to deliver judgments without interference from government departments.

Aside from recourse before the courts, an individual may file a petition or complaint to public security bureaux (PSBs) and people's procuratorates against the unlawful exercise of certain powers in an investigation. These do not tend to be reviewed rigorously. In addition, Article 60 of the Supervision Law of 2018 (the Supervision Law) provides for certain acts of the National Supervision Commission (NSC) to be forwarded to a supervisory body for review within a month. Implementing Regulations of the Supervision Law (effective as of September 2021) stipulate that the supervisory body shall review the case materials and may conduct an investigation if necessary. The original action made by the NSC will be altered or revoked if proved to be inappropriate but will not be suspended during the review period.

56 In the event that authorities in your country and one or more other countries issue separate notices or subpoenas regarding the same facts or allegations, how should the company approach this?

The Chinese authorities are unlikely to limit the scope of their review in consideration of foreign laws. Indeed, since China does not recognise the concept of privilege, the potential scope of disclosure to the Chinese authorities is far broader than under a notice issued by the authorities of common law countries.

The company should seek to comply with each notice, ring-fencing and curtailing disclosure pursuant to applicable laws by asserting legal rights. Issues may arise in China in relation to the transfer of personal data, state secrets and trade secrets overseas. Any appraisal of notices received from another country should ensure that any data and documents are transferred out of the country only in accordance with the limited exceptions provided under Chinese law.

57 If a notice or subpoena from the authorities in your country seeks production of material relating to a particular matter that crosses borders, must the company search for and produce material in other countries to satisfy the request? What are the difficulties in that regard?

In practice, when a search is conducted and the information sought is located overseas, Chinese authorities have not generally expected companies to search outside mainland China and its Hong Kong and Macau special administrative regions (SARs). The authors are aware of a limited number of circumstances in which material on servers in Singapore has been sought and provided, but this is rare.

Technically, although investigating authorities may seek to impose such a requirement, in general, they may not directly search and seize data overseas. Treaties on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters have been signed by China with 65 jurisdictions as of July 2021 but these are of limited practical assistance in requiring a company to produce documents located overseas. In practice, the investigating authority might use other means (e.g., an administrative penalty) to seek to force a company to comply if the data located overseas is regarded as highly important.

58 Does law enforcement in your country routinely share information or investigative materials with law enforcement in other countries? What framework is in place in your country for co-operation with foreign authorities?

Criminal judicial assistance is carried out in accordance with bilateral judicial assistance agreements and, in the absence of any such agreements, through diplomatic channels. The scope of assistance under bilateral legal assistance agreements includes mutual assistance in taking evidence, executing search and seizure warrants, and producing documents. In this regard, people's procuratorates and PSBs do conduct inquiries into corruption-related matters in response to requests from overseas law enforcement organisations and judicial authorities, or vice versa. Most bilateral agreements on legal assistance contain provisions for tracing, restraining, confiscating, sharing or repatriating the proceeds of crime.

Currently, China's authorities co-operate with SAR enforcement authorities (Hong Kong's Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Macau Public Prosecution Office) in tackling cross-border corruption mainly through a mutual case assistance scheme and practice between the enforcement authorities on the mainland and in the Hong Kong and Macau SARs. In addition, the Supervision Law expressly encourages international co-operation and states that the NSC will coordinate anti-corruption co-operation with relevant countries, regions and international organisations, and implement anti-corruption international treaties.

59 Do law enforcement authorities in your country have any confidentiality obligations in relation to information received during an investigation or onward disclosure and use of that information by third parties?

People's procuratorates or PSB investigators must keep the following information confidential: the identity of the person who makes the complaint; the identity of any suspects; the identity of any witnesses; and any state secrets, trade secrets and matters of personal privacy or personal information. These provisions are intended to contain dissemination of information to third parties. The Supervision Law expressly requires the NSC to keep state secrets, trade secrets and personal privacy confidential. Given the NSC's power to involve other authorities in its investigations, sharing other information with third parties should be expected.

In general terms, an investigation should be kept confidential. By disclosing matters about an investigation to a third party, a person may fall foul of Article 50 of the Law on Penalties for Administration of Public Security. Article 50 punishes those who obstruct a functionary of a state organ (which includes the various investigating bodies) from performing their duties.

60 How would you advise a company that has received a request from a law enforcement authority in your country seeking documents from another country, where production would violate the laws of that other country?

It is not typical for Chinese law enforcement authorities to request documents located overseas from a Chinese company. If they do, and to comply would violate the laws of the other country, this should be explained. The Chinese authorities will generally respect this. Though this should not be necessary, the company could seek a legal opinion setting out how disclosure would violate those laws.

61 Does your country have secrecy or blocking statutes? What related issues arise from compliance with a notice or subpoena?

At the end of 2018, China enacted the International Criminal Judicial Assistance Law, which governs how assistance is provided to foreign authorities and other bodies in criminal investigations. This Law may serve as a blocking statute and restrict cross-border discovery of evidence. Institutions, organisations and individuals within China may not provide assistance to foreign countries without the consent of a competent authority, which may refuse on several grounds. In addition, the Cybersecurity Law (CSL), the Data Security Law and the Personal Information Protection Law and regulations being issued and drafted under these three laws, attempt to harmonise rules on cross-border transfers of personal data.

A related point concerns state secrets in the context of foreign notices or subpoenas. State secrets are defined very broadly. Therefore, the content of documents may be classified as a state secret under Chinese national security legislation. There is a risk that an investigation of Chinese documents may implicate state secrecy matters. This will also affect the ability to transfer documents overseas in response to a notice or subpoena.

62 What are the risks in voluntary production versus compelled production of material to authorities in your country? Is this material discoverable by third parties? Is there any confidentiality attached to productions to law enforcement in your country?

Disclosure to the Chinese authorities is generally compelled in an investigation. Although a producing party can assert that confidentiality attaches to the investigation conducted by the Chinese authority, whether that assertion will create an effective shield from disclosure will depend on the relevant Chinese and foreign laws. For example, pursuant to Chinese law, documents containing state secrets should not be disclosed to a third party.

Confidentiality requirements in China are very general and are unlikely to prevent the sharing of documents provided that disclosure is within the purview of Chinese law. Once documents have been shared with law enforcement authorities, a company cannot guarantee that they will not be shared with third parties. It is important for the company to assert its legal rights pursuant to the laws of the relevant jurisdictions so as to limit contagion issues.

Prosecution and penalties

63 What types of penalties may companies or their directors, officers or employees face for misconduct in your country?

A corporate entity found guilty of misconduct will generally be sanctioned by a fine. The personnel in charge of the company and other personnel responsible for the crime may also face criminal liability (imprisonment, fines and confiscation of assets). In addition, individuals who have been convicted of corruption or bribery offences may also be disqualified from being directors or in senior management for five years. Further, an individual who has committed crimes by taking advantage of his or her profession or violating his or her duties may be prohibited from engaging in relevant professions for between three and five years.

As regards bribery offences, the April 2016 Judicial Interpretation to the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended in 1997) (the Criminal Law) introduced monetary thresholds for sentencing linked to the severity of the offence. For those in the private sector, individuals can be sentenced to up to 10 years' imprisonment for an offence of giving or offering a bribe and up to life imprisonment for receiving a bribe. Corporates committing bribery offences are liable on conviction to fines ranging from 100,000 yuan to twice the amount of the bribe.

For civil bribery offences under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, a corporate entity may face administrative fines of up to 3 million yuan, revocation of business licences and confiscation of illegal gains.

The Supervision Law of 2018 (the Supervision Law) expressly empowers the National Supervision Commission to confiscate, recover or order restitution of ill-gotten gains. It should transfer those assets to the people's procuratorate to then prosecute in the usual way.

64 Where there is a risk of a corporate's suspension, debarment or other restrictions on continuing business in your country, what options or restrictions apply to a corporate wanting to settle in another country?

Chinese law does not restrict a corporate that is facing the risk of suspension, debarment or other restrictions on continuing business in China, from settling in another country. However, serious illegal conduct (i.e., any conduct that results in criminal liability, revocation of business licence or large civil fines) within the previous three years should disqualify an entity from participating in government procurement under Article 22 of the Government Procurement Law. In addition, misconduct during government procurement (e.g., corrupt acts that result in a fine ranging from 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent of the procurement value) will also disqualify an entity from participating in future government procurement for between one and three years under Article 77 of the Government Procurement Law. Although there is no national registry of qualified government contractors, the government has maintained a publicly available list of suppliers subject to debarment under Article 77 of the Government Procurement Law, and information regarding serious illegal conduct under Article 22 is generally accessible via company searches on the websites of relevant Chinese authorities.

65 What do the authorities in your country take into account when fixing penalties?

Under the Criminal Law, the Chinese courts should take into account factors including the nature of the crime, circumstances relating to the criminal conduct and the damage caused to society. Circumstances relating to the criminal conduct include aggregating or mitigating factors, such as whether it is a first or repeat offence, or self-reporting. Additionally, the courts may exercise discretion in considering other circumstances, such as motive, the surrounding circumstances and whether there was any confession.

Regarding criminal bribery offences, both the ninth amendment to the Criminal Law (November 2015) and the April 2016 Judicial Interpretation provide clarification on the effects of self-reporting and co-operation. Generally, if the crimes are relatively minor or the offender has 'played a key role in investigating or solving a major case', self-reporting may mitigate or even exempt the offender from liability. Otherwise, offenders who self-report should be entitled to lenient treatment, but cannot expect to be exempted from liability. The Supervision Law also proposes leniency when a person surrenders or voluntarily confesses, actively co-operates with the authorities, takes active measures to disgorge ill-gotten gains or otherwise renders significant assistance in cases involving major national interests.

Resolution and settlements short of trial

66 Are non-prosecution agreements or deferred prosecution agreements available in your jurisdiction for corporations?

No such settlement scheme exists in China.

67 Does your jurisdiction provide for reporting restrictions or anonymity for corporates that have entered into non-prosecution agreements or deferred prosecution agreements until the conclusion of criminal proceedings in relation to connected individuals to ensure fairness in those proceedings?

No such settlement scheme exists in China.

68 Prior to any settlement with a law enforcement authority in your country, what considerations should companies be aware of?

No such settlement scheme exists in China.

69 To what extent do law enforcement authorities in your country use external corporate compliance monitors as an enforcement tool?

Historically, it was not typical for Chinese law enforcement authorities to use external corporate compliance monitors as an enforcement tool. However, since the Supreme People's Procuratorate's launch of the pilot programme of 'Corporate compliance non-prosecution reform' in March 2020, the Supreme People's Procuratorate has issued a few model cases in which local people's procuratorates entered into compliance monitor agreements or used corporate compliance monitors. Further to the expanded scope of the programme nationwide and the introduction of the guidance and measures on compliance monitoring in recent years, we anticipate seeing more cases that would involve external corporate compliance monitors as an enforcement tool going forward.

70 Are parallel private actions allowed? May private plaintiffs gain access to the authorities' files?

Yes. However, this is rarely encountered given the domestic litigation environment, and the documents and files of the authorities would not be made available for a civil action. Also, authorities cannot share information classified as a state secret under the Chinese national security legislation.

Publicity and reputational issues

71 Outline the law in your country surrounding publicity of criminal cases at the investigatory stage and once a case is before a court.

At the investigatory stage, a confidentiality requirement is imposed through a general provision in the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China of 1979 (as amended). By disclosing confidential matters about an investigation, a person may fall foul of Article 50 of the Law on Penalties for Administration of Public Security.

Once a case is before a court, the trial should technically be conducted with full public access unless state secrets, trade secrets or issues attracting privacy rights are implicated. Judges often take a very conservative approach, and access to the court by journalists and the general public is limited in practice. Although there is no general restriction on publicising a case during the trial process, this is rare in practice and parties to litigation are generally advised not to make public statements during trials.

Chinese media outlets are controlled by the state, for the most part. As such, investigations and trials involving state-owned enterprises (SOEs), or broader public industry issues, are not fully reported in China (in contrast to overseas or Hong Kong media). On the other hand, the major private sector criminal investigation into GlaxoSmithKline was reported in both China and overseas.

72 What steps do you take to manage corporate communications in your country? Is it common for companies to use a public relations firm to manage a corporate crisis in your country?

The way in which corporate communications are managed will depend on the nature of the company (whether an SOE, a privately owned Chinese company, a listed company or a multinational corporation with operations in China). For the most part, it would be unusual for a public relations firm to be retained. However, this has occasionally been seen in high-profile matters involving multinational corporations or large multi-jurisdictional investigations involving the US authorities.

73 How is publicity managed when there are ongoing related proceedings?

Related proceedings may be in the public domain and, therefore, could attract more publicity. Generally, statements to the press about current litigation should be limited, and contagion issues should be managed carefully throughout. Leaks to the press are not advisable; the parties should focus on the issues within the public court arena.

Duty to the market

74 Is disclosure to the market in circumstances where a settlement has been agreed but not yet made public mandatory?

There is generally no such mandatory disclosure requirement under corporate laws.

Under the PRC Security Law and related regulations, publicly listed companies are required to issue a market announcement of any major events that may materially affect the trading price of their shares. Although not specifically stated, settlement of criminal proceedings could constitute a major event, provided it materially affects the share price.

Environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG)

75 Does your country regulate ESG matters?

ESG matters are regulated by various Chinese administrative authorities at national, provincial and municipal levels. In the environmental field in particular, China has one of the most comprehensive frameworks of environmental protection laws. Key statutes include the Environmental Protection Law, the Environmental Impact Assessment Law and the Energy Conservation Law. The main government authority responsible for regulation and enforcement of environmental matters is the Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE, formerly the Ministry of Environmental Protection and, prior to 2018, the State Environmental Protection Administration). Environmental compliance has been an area of focus during the past decade.

Information disclosure, especially in relation to environmental and, more widely, ESG information, has been an area of rapid development in the past two years, as demonstrated by the following examples:

In May 2021, MEE issued an Environmental Information Statutory Disclosure Regime Reform Plan, which calls for reforms to improve the mandatory environmental information disclosure by enterprises and establishes the aim to set up a mandatory environmental information disclosure regime by 2025.

In June 2021, the China Securities Regulatory Commission published updated disclosure rules relating to annual reports and half-yearly reports for listed companies. The revised rules require 'key polluting entities' (as defined by environmental authorities) to disclose certain information in their annual reports, including detailed pollutant discharge information, details of pollution prevention and control facilities, an environmental impact assessment of planned and current projects, environmental emergency response plans and self-monitoring plans. The revised rules also require all listed companies to disclose any administrative penalties incurred during the reporting period arising from environmental issues.

In December 2021, MEE issued its Measures for the Management of Legal Disclosure of Enterprise Environmental Information, which provide detailed rules about environmental information disclosure, including the types of companies that are required to make a disclosure, the types of information required to be disclosed and the consequences for failure to make a disclosure.

In 2022, both Shanghai Stock Exchange and Shenzhen Stock Exchange released their own rules and guidelines in relation to an issuer's disclosure regarding ESG issues.

In addition, the importance of ESG as a separate emerging concept is gaining increasing acceptance. New rules and guidance have been issued recently in respect of promoting ESG investment, ESG compliance and ESG management, among other things. For example, in June 2022, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission issued a guideline on green finance for the banking and insurance sector, which requires banks and insurance agencies to effectively incorporate the concept of ESG into their business, including, among other things, to identify, monitor and prevent ESG risks in their business, to conduct ESG due diligence as part of their investment decision-making and to improve ESG risk management in relation to outbound projects (including compliance by main contractors and suppliers of projects).

76 Do you expect to see any key regulatory or legislative changes emerge in the next year or so designed to address ESG matters?

Although we are not aware currently of any specific developments on the horizon, ESG matters (particularly environmental concerns) are a significant area of focus for Chinese authorities and we expect to see further developments in this area in the coming years, especially in the area of ESG disclosure. Businesses operating or investing in China should ensure they stay abreast of the latest regulations in order to remain compliant.

77 Has there been an increase in ESG-related litigation, investigations or enforcement activity in recent years in your country?

China has set up more than 2,000 specialist environmental courts for hearing environment-related litigation, and the number of cases being heard by these courts is on the rise. The types of cases being heard include civil litigation between private parties as well as criminal prosecutions and litigation brought by private parties against government authorities. In recent years, non-governmental organisations that satisfy certain conditions have been able to bring public interest litigation against companies who cause damage to the environment.

As part of China's determination to curb air pollution, there has been a significant increase in environmental enforcement activities since 2015, including a large number of inspection teams from the central government and MEE being sent to companies (including large state-owned enterprises) to review the status of environmental compliance within their operations.

Enforcement in relation to ESG investment or shareholder activism has been rare in China. Following recent revisions to disclosure rules for listed companies, it remains to be seen whether this will lead to an increase in enforcement action, in response either to disclosure of non-compliant actions or to suspected false or incomplete disclosures.

Anticipated developments

78 Do you expect to see any key regulatory or legislative changes emerge in the next year or so designed to address corporate misconduct?

There have been a number of changes that are designed to address both corporate and public misconduct. These include amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (AUCL) and the introduction of both the Supervision Law of 2018 and the International Criminal Judicial Assistance Law. Most recently, revisions to the Anti-Monopoly Law came into force in August 2022. There have also been administrative and structural changes to the enforcement of key legislation in this area, including the introduction of the National Supervision Commission and the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR). The SAMR administers the AUCL and other antitrust legislation. We anticipate that the regulators and authorities will continue to focus on enforcement under these new laws. In fact, a significant number of investigations have already been commenced by these bodies.

With the introduction of the Data Security Law, the Personal Information Protection Law, the Export Control Law and the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law, we anticipate a shift by regulators towards issuing more detailed guidance and enforcement.

That said, the recent focus on investigations in specific sectors may result in changes to the regulations or the publication of additional guidance to allow authorities to more closely monitor and regulate activities in the pharmaceutical and technology sectors.

Footnotes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As widely reported in the international press, Chinese authorities have been heavily focused during the past two years on regulation and enforcement within the country's growing technology industry. For the most part, this has consisted of the introduction of sweeping regulations aimed at curbing the reach and influence of China's technology giants.

# data[].attributes.body
https://brownpoliticalreview.org/2023/01/iran-at-a-tipping-point/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran is at a tipping point, but it’s about much more than modesty laws - Brown Political Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Economic instability and political frustration compound issues over Masha Amini’s death and have given today’s protests a momentum that has not been seen in Iran for decades.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/how-an-obscure-cellphone-tracking-tool-provides-police-mass-surveillance-on-a-budget

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Local law enforcement agencies from suburban Southern California to rural North Carolina have been using an obscure cellphone tracking tool, at times without search warrants, that gives them the power to follow people's movements months back in time, according to public records and internal emails obtained by The Associated Press.

Police have used "Fog Reveal" to search hundreds of billions of records from 250 million mobile devices, and harnessed the data to create location analyses known among law enforcement as "patterns of life," according to thousands of pages of records about the company.

Sold by Virginia-based Fog Data Science LLC, Fog Reveal has been used since at least 2018 in criminal investigations ranging from the murder of a nurse in Arkansas to tracing the movements of a potential participant in the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol. The tool is rarely, if ever, mentioned in court records, something that defense attorneys say makes it harder for them to properly defend their clients in cases in which the technology was used.

The company was developed by two former high-ranking Department of Homeland Security officials under former President George W. Bush. It relies on advertising identification numbers, which Fog officials say are culled from popular cellphone apps such as Waze, Starbucks and hundreds of others that target ads based on a person's movements and interests, according to police emails. That information is then sold to companies like Fog.

"It's sort of a mass surveillance program on a budget," said Bennett Cyphers, a special adviser at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital privacy rights advocacy group.
WATCH: What to know about tech surveillance and abortion access
The documents and emails were obtained by EFF through Freedom of Information Act requests. The group shared the files with The AP, which independently found that Fog sold its software in about 40 contracts to nearly two dozen agencies, according to GovSpend, a company that keeps tabs on government spending. The records and AP's reporting provide the first public account of the extensive use of Fog Reveal by local police, according to analysts and legal experts who scrutinize such technologies.

Federal oversight of companies like Fog is an evolving legal landscape. On Monday, the Federal Trade Commission sued a data broker called Kochava that, like Fog, provides its clients with advertising IDs that authorities say can easily be used to find where a mobile device user lives, which violates rules the commission enforces. And there are bills before Congress now that, if passed, would regulate the industry.

"Local law enforcement is at the front lines of trafficking and missing persons cases, yet these departments are often behind in technology adoption," Matthew Broderick, a Fog managing partner, said in an email. "We fill a gap for underfunded and understaffed departments."

Because of the secrecy surrounding Fog, however, there are scant details about its use and most law enforcement agencies won't discuss it, raising concerns among privacy advocates that it violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure.

What distinguishes Fog Reveal from other cellphone location technologies used by police is that it follows the devices through their advertising IDs, unique numbers assigned to each device. These numbers do not contain the name of the phone's user, but can be traced to homes and workplaces to help police establish pattern-of-life analyses.

"The capability that it had for bringing up just anybody in an area whether they were in public or at home seemed to me to be a very clear violation of the Fourth Amendment," said Davin Hall, a former crime data analysis supervisor for the Greensboro, North Carolina, Police Department. "I just feel angry and betrayed and lied to."

Hall resigned in late 2020 after months of voicing concerns about the department's use of Fog to police attorneys and the city council.

While Greensboro officials acknowledged Fog's use and initially defended it, the police department said it allowed its subscription to expire earlier this year because it didn't "independently benefit investigations."

But federal, state and local police agencies around the U.S. continue to use Fog with very little public accountability. Local police agencies have been enticed by Fog's affordable price: It can start as low as $7,500 a year. And some departments that license it have shared access with other nearby law enforcement agencies, the emails show.

Police departments also like how quickly they can access detailed location information from Fog. Geofence warrants, which tap into GPS and other sources to track a device, are accessed by obtaining such data from companies, like Google or Apple. This requires police to obtain a warrant and ask the tech companies for the specific data they want, which can take days or weeks.

Using Fog's data, which the company claims is anonymized, police can geofence an area or search by a specific device's ad ID numbers, according to a user agreement obtained by AP. But, Fog maintains that "we have no way of linking signals back to a specific device or owner," according to a sales representative who emailed the California Highway Patrol in 2018, after a lieutenant asked whether the tool could be legally used.

Despite such privacy assurances, the records show that law enforcement can use Fog's data as a clue to find identifying information. "There is no (personal information) linked to the (ad ID)," wrote a Missouri official about Fog in 2019. "But if we are good at what we do, we should be able to figure out the owner."

Fog's Broderick said in an email that the company does not have access to people's personal information, and draws from "commercially available data without restrictions to use," from data brokers "that legitimately purchase data from apps in accordance with their legal agreements." The company refused to share information about how many police agencies it works with.

"We are confident Law Enforcement has the responsible leadership, constraints, and political guidance at the municipal, state, and federal level to ensure that any law enforcement tool and method is appropriately used in accordance with the laws in their respective jurisdictions," Broderick said.
READ MORE: Americans warier of U.S. government surveillance, AP-NORC poll finds
Kevin Metcalf, a prosecutor in Washington County, Arkansas, said he has used Fog Reveal without a warrant, especially in "exigent circumstances." In these cases, the law provides a warrant exemption when a crime-in-process endangers people or an officer.

Metcalf also leads the National Child Protection Task Force, a nonprofit that combats child exploitation and trafficking. Fog is listed on its website as a task force sponsor and a company executive chairs the nonprofit's board. Metcalf said Fog has been invaluable to cracking missing children cases and homicides.

"We push the limits, but we do them in a way that we target the bad guys," he said. "Time is of the essence in those situations. We can't wait on the traditional search warrant route."

Fog was used successfully in the murder case of 25-year-old nurse Sydney Sutherland, who had last been seen jogging near Newport, Arkansas, before she disappeared, Metcalf said.

Police had little evidence to go on when they found her phone in a ditch, so Metcalf said he shared his agency's access to Fog with the U.S. Marshals Service to figure out which other devices had been nearby at the time she was killed. He said Fog helped lead authorities to arrest a farmer in Sutherland's rape and murder in August 2020, but its use was not documented in court records reviewed by AP.

Cyphers, who led EFF's public records work, said there hasn't been any previous record of companies selling this kind of granular data directly to local law enforcement.

"We're seeing counties with less than 100,000 people where the sheriff is using this extremely high tech, extremely invasive, secretive surveillance tool to chase down local crime," Cyphers said.

One such customer is the sheriff's office in rural Rockingham County, North Carolina, population 91,000 and just north of Greensboro, where Hall still lives. The county bought a one-year license for $9,000 last year and recently renewed it.

"Rockingham County is tiny in terms of population. It never ceases to amaze me how small agencies will scoop up tools that they just absolutely don't need, and nobody needs this one," Hall said.

Sheriff's spokesman Lt. Kevin Suthard confirmed the department recently renewed its license but declined to offer specifics about the use of Fog Reveal or how the office protects individuals' rights.

"Because it would then be less effective as criminals could be cognizant that we have the device and adjust their commission of the crimes accordingly. Make sense?" Suthard said.

Fog has aggressively marketed its tool to police, even beta testing it with law enforcement, records show. The Dallas Police Department bought a Fog license in February after getting a free trial and "seeing a demonstration and hearing of success stories from the company," Senior Cpl. Melinda Gutierrez, a department spokeswoman, said in an email.

Fog's tool is accessed through a web portal. Investigators can enter a crime scene's coordinates into the database, which brings back search results showing a device's Fog ID, which is based on its unique ad ID number.

Police can see which device IDs were found near the location of the crime. Detectives or other officers can also search the location for IDs going forward from the time of the crime and back at least 180 days, according to the company's user license agreement. But, Fog's data can go back as far as June 2017, according to emails from a Fog representative to Florida and California law enforcement agencies.

While the data does not directly identify who owns a device, the company often gives law enforcement information it needs to connect it to addresses and other clues that help detectives figure out people's identities, according to company representatives' emails.

It is unclear how Fog makes these connections, but a company it refers to as its "data partner" called Venntel, Inc. has access to an even greater trove of users' mobile data.

Venntel is a large broker that has supplied location data to agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the FBI. The Department of Homeland Security's watchdog is auditing how the offices under its control have used commercial data. That comes after some Democratic lawmakers asked it to investigate U.S. Customs and Border Protection's use of Venntel data to track people without a search warrant in 2020. The company also has faced congressional inquiries about privacy concerns tied to federal law enforcement agencies' use of its data.

Venntel and Fog work closely together to aid police detectives during investigations, emails show. Their marketing brochures are nearly identical, too, and Venntel staff has recommended Fog to law enforcement, according to the emails. Venntel said "the confidential nature of our business relationships" prevented it from responding to AP's specific questions, and Fog would not comment on the relationship.

While Fog says in its marketing materials that it collects data from thousands of apps, like Starbucks and Waze, companies are not always aware of who is using their data. Venntel and Fog can collect billions of data points filled with detailed information because many apps embed invisible tracking software that follows users' behavior. This software also lets the apps sell customized ads that are targeted to a person's current location. In turn, data brokers' software can hoover up personal data that can be used for other purposes. Fog did not specifically say how it got the data from Starbucks and Waze.

For their part, Starbucks and Waze denied any relationship to Fog. Starbucks said it had not given permission to its business partners to share customer information with Fog.

"Starbucks has not approved Ad ID data generated by our app to be used in this way by Fog Data Science LLC. In our review to date, we have no relationship with this company," said Megan Adams, a Starbucks spokesperson.

"We have never had a relationship with Fog Data Science, have not worked with them in any capacity, and have not shared information with them," a Waze spokesperson said.
WATCH: A humble opinion on how digital surveillance by parents can put kids at risk
Fog Data Science LLC is headquartered in a nondescript brick building in Leesburg, Virginia. It also has related entities in New Jersey, Ohio and Texas.

It was founded in 2016 by Robert Liscouski, who led the Department of Homeland Security's National Cyber Security Division in the George W. Bush adminstration. His colleague, Broderick, is a former U.S. Marine brigadier general who ran DHS' tech hub, the Homeland Security Operations Center, during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. A House bipartisan committee report cited Broderick among others for failing to coordinate a swift federal response to the deadly hurricane. Broderick resigned from DHS shortly thereafter.

In marketing materials, Fog also has touted its ability to offer police "predictive analytics," a buzzword often used to describe high-tech policing tools that purport to predict crime hotspots. Liscouski and another Fog official have worked at companies focused on predictive analytics, machine learning and software platforms supporting artificial intelligence.

"It is capable of delivering both forensic and predictive analytics and near real-time insights on the daily movements of the people identified with those mobile devices," reads an email announcing a Fog training last year for members of the National Fusion Center Association, which represents a network of intelligence-sharing partnerships created after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Fog's Broderick said the company had not invested in predictive applications, and provided no details about any uses the tool had for predicting crime.

Despite privacy advocates' concerns about warrantless surveillance, Fog Reveal has caught on with local and state police forces. It's been used in a number of high-profile criminal cases, including one that was the subject of the television program "48 Hours."

In 2017, a world-renowned exotic snake breeder was found dead, lying in a pool of blood in his reptile breeding facility in rural Missouri. Police initially thought the breeder, Ben Renick, might have died from a poisonous snake bite. But the evidence soon pointed to murder.

During its investigation, emails show the Missouri State Highway Patrol used Fog's portal to search for cellphones at Renick's home and breeding facility and zeroed in on a mobile device. Working with Fog, investigators used the data to identify the phone owner's identity: it was the Renicks' babysitter.

Police were able to log the babysitter's whereabouts over time to create a pattern of life analysis.

It turned out to be a dead-end lead. Renick's wife, Lynlee, later was charged and convicted of the murder.

Prosecutors did not cite Fog in a list of other tools they used in the investigation, according to trial exhibits examined by the AP.

But Missouri officials seemed pleased with Fog's capabilities, even though it didn't directly lead to an arrest. "It was interesting to see that the system did pick up a device that was absolutely in the area that day. Too bad it did not belong to a suspect!" a Missouri State Highway Patrol analyst wrote in an email to Fog.

In another high-profile criminal probe, records show the FBI asked state intelligence officials in Iowa for help with Fog as it investigated potential participants in the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

"Not definitive but still waiting to talk things over with a FOG rep," wrote Justin Parker, deputy director of the Iowa Department of Public Safety, in an email to an FBI official in September 2021. It was unclear from the emails if Fog's data factored into an arrest. Iowa officials did not respond and the FBI declined to comment.
READ MORE: Pentagon says use of surveillance planes in protests was legal
Metcalf, the Arkansas prosecutor, has argued against congressional efforts to require search warrants when using technologies like Fog Reveal.

He believes Americans have given up any reasonable expectation of privacy when they use free apps and likens EFF's objections to tech like Fog to a "cult of privacy."

"I think people are going to have to make a decision on whether we want all this free technology, we want all this free stuff, we want all the selfies," he said. "But we can't have that and at the same time say, 'I'm a private person, so you can't look at any of that.' That just seems crazy."

Although he is not an official Fog employee, Metcalf said he would step in to lead training sessions including the tool for federal prosecutors, federal agencies and police, including the Chicago Police Department, the emails show.

That kind of hands-on service and word-of-mouth marketing in tight-knit law enforcement circles seems to have helped increase Fog's popularity.

The Maryland State Police is among the many agencies that have had contracts for Fog Reveal, and records show investigators believed it had a lot of potential.

"Companies have receptors all over. Malls, shopping centers, etc. They're all around you," wrote Sgt. John Bedell of the Criminal Enforcement Division, in an email to a colleague. The agency purchased a year of access to Fog in 2018.

"Picture getting a suspect's phone then in the extraction being able to see everyplace they'd been in the last 18 months plotted on a map you filter by date ranges," wrote Bedell. "The success lies in the secrecy."

Elena Russo, a spokesperson for the agency, confirmed it had a Fog license previously but that it had lapsed. "Unfortunately, it was not helpful in solving any crimes," she wrote in an email.

Still, as more local policing agencies sign up for Fog, some elected officials said they have been left in the dark. Several officials said there wasn't enough information to grasp what services Fog actually provides.

"Who is this company? What are the track records? What are the privacy protections?" asked Anaheim council member Jose Moreno, remembering his confusion about Fog during a 2020 council meeting. "That night our chief had very little information for us."

In Anaheim, the Fog license was paid for by a federal "Urban Area Security Initiative," DHS grants that help localities fund efforts to prevent terrorism. A police spokesman said the department has not used it.

Defense attorneys worry there are few legal restrictions on law enforcement's use of location data.

It's a gap police agencies exploit, and often don't disclose in court, said Michael Price, litigation director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers' Fourth Amendment Center.

"(Fog) is exceedingly rare to see in the wild because the cops often don't get warrants," said Price.

"Even if you do ask for (information) sometimes they say 'We don't know what you are talking about.'"

Privacy advocates worry Fog's location tracking could be put to other novel uses, like keeping tabs on people who seek abortions in states where it is now illegal. These concerns were heightened when a Nebraska woman was charged in August with helping her teenage daughter end a pregnancy after investigators got hold of their Facebook messages.

Government's use of location data is still being weighed by the courts, too. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that police generally need a warrant to look at records that reveal where cellphone users have been.

Nearly two years after walking off the crime data supervisor job with the Greensboro police force, Hall still worries about police surveillance in neighboring communities.

"Anyone with that login information can do as many searches as they want," Hall said. "I don't believe the police have earned the trust to use that, and I don't believe it should be legal."
AP National Writer Allen G. Breed contributed from Greensboro, North Carolina. Dearen reported from New York and Burke reported from San Francisco. This reporting was produced in collaboration with researchers Janine Graham, Nicole Waddick and Jane Yang as well as the University of California, Berkeley's Human Rights Center Investigations Lab and School of Law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How an obscure cellphone tracking tool provides police 'mass surveillance on a budget'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Local law enforcement agencies from suburban Southern California to rural North Carolina have been using an obscure cellphone tracking tool, at times without search warrants, that gives them the power to follow people's movements months back in time, according to public records and internal emails obtained by The Associated Press.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25634202-900-the-green-tech-that-could-help-iceland-become-carbon-neutral-by-2040/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The green tech that could help Iceland become carbon neutral by 2040

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Iceland is developing a suite of technologies to help it reach carbon neutrality by 2040 – and its research could help other countries go green too

# data[].attributes.headline
Roe v Wade Overturned: What It Means, What’s Next June 29, 2022

# data[].attributes.subject
Roe v Wade Overturned: What It Means, What’s Next June 29, 2022

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Friday, June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark piece of legislation that made access to an abortion a federal right in the United States. The decision dismantled 50 years of legal protection and paved the way for individual states to curtail or outright ban abortion rights.

Already, because of trigger laws put in place before the ruling, abortion is now outlawed in many states automatically or through state action following the decision. In addition, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that certain other landmark rulings should be reconsidered, including established rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.

Incoming Professor of Sociology Tracy Weitz is a national expert on abortion care, policy, culture, and politics. She is the co-founder and former director of the University of California San Francisco's Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health research program.

We asked Weitz to share her opinions on the outcomes of the overturning of Roe and what it will mean for people across the United States.

Q. Roe v Wade has been overturned. What will happen now across the country?

A. Nine states have already implemented their abortion bans. Another dozen states are in the process. Legal chaos is occurring as injunctions against individual state laws are being lifted and pre- Roe bans are being interpreted. In a few states, new injunctions are being issued before laws can go into effect. Governors who are hostile to abortion, but whose states have not yet fully banned abortion, are contemplating whether to call special sessions of the legislature to consider new abortion bans.

Abortion providers in all the banned and several of the in-process states have stopped providing abortion care or reduced the type of care they offer. People with previously scheduled appointments are scrambling to find new appointments in states where some abortion is still available. These include abortion-safe states as well as states like Florida, Ohio, and Georgia where there are new gestational limits for abortion but not yet complete bans.

Abortion clinics in states where abortion remains legal, including Illinois and Kansas, are working hard to expand appointment availability by hiring new staff, increasing the physical plant of their facilities, and adding additional clinic appointments. Clinics in the in-process states are doing their best to manage immediate increased patient demand even as they are preparing for a future in which they may not be able to continue offering abortions.

Q. Who will be most impacted by this decision? What will happen if people can't access abortions?

A. The only alternative to abortion is childbirth, which has a 14 times higher risk of death than that abortion. So, in denying a person access to a wanted abortion, states are forcing people to assume significant medical risk against their will. A recent study out of Colorado ominously predicts a significant rise in the maternal mortality rate, especially among Black women who already experience an unacceptably high rate of death in childbearing.

Research from the Turn Away study demonstrated other deleterious impacts of being denied a wanted abortion. This study followed ~1000 self-identified women for five years after receiving or being denied a wanted abortion. They found that denying these women an abortion creates economic hardship and insecurity that lasts for years. Compared with women who obtained their desired abortion, women denied the abortion had lowered credit scores as well as increased debt, bankruptcies, and evictions. Women turned away from getting an abortion were also more likely to stay in contact with a violent partner. The financial well-being and development of prior and subsequent children was also negatively impacted. Finally, giving birth was connected to more serious long-term health problems than having an abortion.

Q. Can you tell us a bit about the people who choose to get an abortion - and the reasons why?

A. Abortion is a health care option most frequently needed by people affected by the structural inequalities of poverty, racism, and xenophobia. Almost 75 percent of US abortion patients live at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. More than 50 percent of abortion patients are women of color, and 60 percent of all patients already have children.

People's reasons for abortion are as complex as their individual lives, and I fundamentally believe no one should have to justify their reason for abortion; simply wanting to no longer be pregnant, or needing an abortion to save their own life, is enough.

Q, What does this mean for doctors who perform abortions in states where it will be curtailed or outlawed?

A. In all the states where abortion is being banned, physicians stopped providing abortion care immediately after the decision, or will do so after their state law takes effect.

In some states where abortion is now banned, significant medical care was provided by physicians who traveled from outside the state. These physicians will likely start providing care in one of the places where abortions remain legal, and demand is increasing. However, there are other skilled and dedicated physicians who have provided abortion care for decades to women in their communities. Some of these physicians offer other types of health care and will continue to do so, without offering the abortion care their patients need. Those physicians who only provided abortions will need to decide whether to retire or relocate.

Other clinical staff including nurses, social workers, patient counselors, and medical assistants are also losing their jobs and their ability to provide economically for their families. Women in communities across the abortion-banned states have relied on these teams of health care providers to care for them during an important time in their lives. It is cruel what is happening to pregnant people, and it is cruel what is happening to the dedicated staff that make up the abortion providers of this country.

Q. What is the difference between emergency contraception and medication abortion?

A. Emergency contraception (EC) and medication abortion are not the same thing: they use different drugs that work differently on the body. EC stops pregnancy from happening. Medication abortion ends an already existing pregnancy. One brand of EC, Plan B, is available over the counter without a prescription. Medication abortion requires a clinical consultation (either via a telehealth visit or a visit to a clinic). EC can be used up to 72 hours after unprotected sex, while medication abortion is used between the time of a missed period (usually four weeks) and 11 weeks after the first day of the last normal menstrual period.

Q. How will this ruling affect women's access to each?

A. At this time, abortion bans include bans of medication abortion. Emergency contraception is not included in abortion bans. However, many politicians who are hostile to abortion also disagree with emergency contraception, and we may see efforts to restrict access to EC in the future. The FDA could help expand access to EC by approving the second EC option, Ella, as an over-the-counter drug. Plan B is less effective for people of higher body weight, and Ella helps ensure these people also have access to an EC option.

At this time, clinicians who provide medication abortion via telehealth can only provide it in states where abortion remains legal. Abortion-supportive states that wish to ensure access to abortion in states where it is banned could protect clinicians in their state who provide abortion care to people in banned states. The Federal government could explore ways to protect this practice. Until then, people who need medication abortion in states where abortion is banned can self-source these medications from international telehealth providers or international pharmacies.

Q. Almost 90 percent of abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Can you tell us some of the reasons why women need to have abortions later in pregnancy?

A. Many people do not know they are pregnant until after the 12th week: some are still bleeding, others are on medications that caused cycle changes, and still other people do not have pregnancy symptoms.

Another reason people pass the 12th week of pregnancy is that gathering the money to pay for the abortion is extremely hard. Currently, the Federal government and 33 states prohibit people from using Medicaid to pay for abortions. Yet the majority of people who need abortion live at or below poverty. In order to gather the money, they forgo paying rent or food bills, and all of this delays their ability to obtain an abortion when they first want one. And after they pass the 12 weeks mark, the cycle perpetuates itself. The cost of the abortion begins to increase as the clinical care becomes more complex, thus requiring more money and causing more delays.

For still other people, the abortion decision is made following learning something about their own health status or the health status of the fetus. Medical complications in pregnancy increase as people become more pregnant, and some do not onset until later in pregnancy. Issues with the growth of the fetus occur as the fetus develops and are not diagnosable until later in pregnancy.

Q. Then what will happen now if a mother's life is in danger?

A. We do not have data on how often a pregnancy threatens a person's life because this care has often occurred in hospital settings, which do not routinely advertise that they do abortions. Physicians who treat these pregnancies, including maternal fetal medicine and complex family planning physicians, rarely discuss these cases publicly, in part because of the social discomfort with abortions later in pregnancies. Limited research on hospital policies regarding abortion care demonstrates significant barriers to obtaining institutional support for abortions, regardless of the reason.

Now that abortion is banned in some states, it is likely that access to abortion care in life- threatening circumstances will be even harder to provide. The media is already reporting cases in which life-saving care was denied to pregnant patients. We can expect to see more of this since the penalty for violating an abortion ban is criminal jail time for the physician and other legal consequences for the institution. The Federal government can help ensure that needed care is provided by identifying and prosecuting denials of care under the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act and covering such life-saving care under the exceptions to the federal Hyde amendment.

Q. Are you concerned about the fate of other rights that are not explicitly outlined in the Constitution, including the right to access contraception? Do you think this is a real possibility, and what would this mean for our society?

A. I am not a legal scholar, so I cannot predict what the Court will do to other legal rights based in the constitutional right to privacy. What I can speak to is that most social conservatives do not draw a hard-line distinction between abortion and contraception.

The Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision allowed a corporation to not cover contraceptive methods that its owners believed were abortifacients, namely emergency contraception and intrauterine devices (IUDs). So, it is likely that some state legislatures will seek to limit access to some contraceptive methods or to further limit contraceptive access to people whose sexual lives they disagree with. Too frequently, people see abortion as the exception in law and policy. I would suggest that it is exemplar. The 50-year effort to overturn Roe is part of a larger effort to reverse the wider progressive gains in social, economic, gender, and racial advancement.

Q. What is the bottom line? As someone who has focused on abortion care and policy for your entire career, what do you think American should know right now?

A. I have heard a lot of people concerned about the risk of people dying from unsafe abortion. One positive advancement since the pre- Roe days is the availability of abortion pills that people can use to end a pregnancy safely with minimal clinical involvement. Today in the United States, these pills are dispensed by abortion clinics as part of a health care visit, increasing through telehealth. As abortion providers become unavailable in many places, people will turn to the Internet to order these pills directly, either through an international telehealth service like Aid Access or from an online pharmacy operating outside the United States.

Data from studies around the world show us that such self-sourcing of abortion pills is safe, effective, and acceptable for people. So even as the public expresses their anger about the elimination of the fundamental rights of people to bodily autonomy, they should not exaggerate the medical risk of self-managed abortions. Deaths will happen, but likely resulting from people carrying pregnancies to term against their will. Self-managed abortion with pills is safe - that is what I want people to know. What is so wrong is that people who would prefer to receive this care from a trusted health care provider will instead have to shop for drugs online, potentially putting themselves at criminal risk for breaking the law.
The opinions in this interview represent the views of the interviewee and do not necessarily reflect the views of American University or the American University College of Arts and Sciences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Roe v Wade Overturned: What It Means, What's Next

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An interview with incoming Professor of Sociology Tracy Weitz, national expert on abortion care and policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For nearly three months, protests have gripped Iran - protests that have not only been surprisingly durable, but also led primarily by women.

On Thursday, the Islamic Republic, headed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, executed 23-year-old Mohsen Shekari for the crime of "waging war against God," or moharebeh in Farsi.

Shekari was the first prisoner to be executed due to the recent unrest, in what Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, head of the Norway-based organization Iran Human Rights, characterized as a "show trial without any due process."

With Shekari's execution - likely the first of dozens - the Iranian regime is reverting to a tried and tested playbook of executing political opponents and dissidents. But it's not clear that the mass imprisonment, extrajudicial killings, and further possible state-sanctioned executions will deter the protesters who have for more than two months now defied crackdowns and curfews to call for an end to Khamenei's regime.

It's also not clear what success looks like for the protesters should they somehow manage to topple the regime that's had an iron grip on the nation since the 1979 revolution - or how they would manage to do so in the first place.

The inciting spark for the now 11-week-long protests was the death of Mahsa Amini on September 16 while in the custody of Iran's morality police. Amini, a 21-year old Kurdish woman, was arrested while in Tehran for allegedly wearing her hijab improperly; since her death, she has become a potent symbol of many Iranians' contempt for the country's oppressive theocracy.

The protests have gained momentum since they began in Amini's hometown of Saqez, in Iranian Kurdistan, appearing in dozens of cities throughout the Islamic Republic despite the government's efforts - including internet and mobile network disruptions, mass arrests, and civilian killings - to quash them.

There are some ways this protest echoes past movements, but there are also key differences - not just the longevity, but the degree of societal cohesion and solidarity, too. Women have led and become the public face of this movement - aparticularly notable fact in 2022, given the ways that women have been repressed under the current regime.

All of that, however, doesn't mean that this movement will bring down the Islamic Republic; decades of repression, a poor economic outlook, extremely limited opposition in the political establishment, plus the fact that the military and security service as well as the economic elite continue to throw their lot in with the regime make it difficult to imagine an alternative vision for the future of Iran.

Why the protests are happening now

The protests began with one young woman's death in police custody, but quickly grew into a call to change the future of Iranian society.

Amini, who was also known by her Kurdish name Jina or Zhina, was taken into custody by the Guidance Patrol - Iran's so-called morality police - on September 13 at a Tehran metro station. Police alleged she was wearing her hijab incorrectly, and they were taking her into custody to "educate" her, as Reuters reported in October. Sometime between her arrest and September 16, when she died at Tehran's Kasra hospital, she fell into a coma. Police said it was due to a heart condition, but Amini's family denied any heart problems, and her father claimed he saw bruises on Mahsa's legs.

"There was nothing wrong with what she was wearing," Azadeh Moaveni, an Iranian-American journalist and former head of the Gender and Conflict Program at the International Crisis Group, said on a November episode of the London Review of Books podcast. "She was completely covered and she died, so I think that's what's shaking about it. Any mother, from any religious background, from whatever type of family - and I think that's why so many religious families are with the protesters - that could have been anyone's daughter."

News of Amini's death spread quickly via social media, and her funeral erupted into protests; according to Reuters, security forces fired tear gas at the demonstrators as protests quickly spread to Sanandaj, the regional capital. Already protesters were shouting "death to the dictator," and women were removing their headscarves. By September 18, protesters at the University of Iran were shouting what is now the protest's slogan: "Woman, life, freedom," in short, calling for the end of the regime.

"This corrupt regime will do anything to stay where they are," a female protester told BBC News Hour on December 4. "We the protesters don't care about 'no hijab' no more [sic]. We've been going out without it for the past 70 days. A revolution is what we care [about] - hijab was the start of it, and we don't want anything, anything less than death for the dictator, and regime change."

Amini's death became the catalyzing event to unleash pent-up fury at the government; political opposition is basically nonexistent, with Iran's Reform Party suggesting gradual fixes in the face of protesters' demands for radical change. Ordinary Iranians have little political representation, particularly after the election of the hard-line current President Ebrahim Raisi, Khamenei's preferred candidate in the 2021 elections who has a record of grievous human rights abuses. Many Iranians refused to vote in those most recent elections, both as the only feasible way to show disgust with the system, and because many understood the vote to be rigged in Raisi's favor.

One of the main sources of people's dissatisfaction is Iran's miserable economy - the result of brutal sanctions on the part of the US and its allies, as well as the regime's determination to exert its influence in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and now Russia by funding proxy groups and exporting weapons. With unemployment running at about 11.5 percent, people have both the incentive and the time to protest, and little to lose.

However, the country's elite seem to be surviving the economic free-fall and maintaining their support for and ties to the regime, too. "We have seen no serious defections so far," among the country's well-connected and powerful upper class, Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Group's Iran project director, told Vox in a November 18 email interview.Despite "the abject failures of the regime to improve the country's economic well-being," the highest echelons of society have, at least publicly, refused to stand up to those in power.

These protests pose a unique challenge to the Iranian government

Protest has been an important, and fairly consistent, part of Iranian political life since even before the 1979 revolution. But this year's uprising differs from recent mass movements, like the 2009 Green Movement that called for the annulment of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election and 2019 economic protests which spiraled into a call for regime change.

This time, the protests are demanding a reimagining of Iranian society; so far, the protests have seen remarkably diverse groups with their own unique sources of frustration, coming together to demand change.

As with the 2019 protests, the dire economic circumstances of 2022 - the result of the US's aggressive sanctions, a corrupt and inefficient government concerned primarily with maintaining power, and lingering effects of the Covid-19 pandemic - set the stage for the nationwide eruption.

In a significant show of solidarity, somebusinesses across the nation - including Tehran's Grand Bazaar - closed for a three-day general strike this week.

"Historically, protest movements in Iran, going back to the 19th century, have involved workers, shopkeepers, bazaars, and the like to succeed," Firoozeh Kashani-Sabet, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania focusing on modern Iran and the Middle East, said. "Although the economic and social landscape of today's Iran is very different from 1890, 1906, 1953, or 1979, today's strikes and boycotts nonetheless show the widespread nature of dissent and the willing participation of important commercial sectors of society."

Kashani-Sabet called the current movement an "extraordinary departure" in that "women are its symbol and became the initial propellors of change."

"Through these uprisings, it has become apparent that gender issues can no longer be relegated globally to tertiary political preoccupations, but rather gender concerns have become the driving force and motivators of social change," Kashani-Sabet told Vox in an email. "For Iranian dissenters, gender issues are not their only grievances, but this fight has enabled them to connect gender violence and inequality to the regime's other authoritarian behaviors."

Iran is "a country whose identity is shaped around ethnic diversity," Kashani-Sabet said, and many of those ethnic groups, like Balochs and Kurds, are subject to additional violence based on their identity. Whether that's physical violence enacted by the state in the border regions many minorities call home, or the denial of their right to speak their own languages, such minority groups have even less of a voice in Iranian governance than ethnic Persians who speak Farsi and practice Shia Islam.

"These protests are primarily driven by a broadly shared sense of nationalism, not separatism," Vaez told Vox in a previous email interview.

As Kashani-Sabet pointed out, there are a number of "deep-rooted frustrations that many Iranian dissenters share," primary among them, "this sense of being deprived of human rights and of the ability to participate effectively in shaping the political outlook of their country."

How the Iranian government has responded, briefly explained

The government's response to the protests has been somewhat inconsistent, but primarily quite harsh. Raisi claimed in a recent speech that Iran "has the most progressive constitution in the world" and has blamed the unrest on outside influences, primarily Iran's adversaries, Israel and the US.

Guidance Patrol forces have been scarce during the protests, and women and girls are out on the streets every day without head coverings despite the laws. But the government hasn't made any official concessions or policy changes. While comments from Attorney General Mohammad-Jafar Montazeri were initially reported by the international press as an announcement that the government would be disbanding the Guidance Patrol and changing hijab laws, it later appeared his remarks were either misunderstood or overblown.

Moaveni did indicate in her piece that some politicians would be willing to loosen hijab laws - and clothing laws have been less strict under previous presidents, even the notorious Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But, Moaveni pointed out, at this point, for Raisi to allow such a change would be tantamount to "admitting that revolution secularized Iran, and [...] that's a very humiliating thing for the authorities."

Meanwhile, physical violence against protesters has escalated andcould get worse.

To date, more than 300 people have been killed during the protests, though the actual number is likely higher, as rights groups indicate. That number includes roughly 50 children under 18, the New York Times' Farnaz Fassihi previously reported. But casualties and arrests - the latter of which the HRANA activist news agency puts at around 18,000 - are difficult to track; social media and internet access are severely curtailed, and foreign reporters can't access the country. Thus far, at least 12 people are set to be executed for participating in the uprising, the Washington Post reported Thursday; Shekari's death marks the first.

Borzou Daragahi, a senior international correspondent for the Independent and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told Vox in a previous phone interview, "In the mind of the regime, nothing is off limits because 'we're doing God's work.'"

Could regime change happen?

Regardless of the strength of the protests, regime change remains a very distant possibility. Authoritarian governments can have impressive longevity, as Syria, China, North Korea, and Russia show.

Still, the memory of the Arab Spring invites comparison; Moaveni likened Amini 's death to Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian fruit vendor who died by self-immolation in 2010 after suffering humiliation at the hands of the police and the local government, setting off the Arab Spring. That multi-nation protest movement did see regime change in places like Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt. In some cases, however, the alternatives that replaced the dictatorships were perhaps not what protesters had hoped for or imagined.

For Ali Khamenei's theocracy to collapse would most likely require "pressure from below and divisions at the top," Karim Sadjadpour wrote for Foreign Affairs this spring. The pressure from below is certainly there, despite the increasingly high costs.

There's not so much pressure from the top, and while there are cracks in the regime's façade, Daragahi said, they're small and easy to miss.

"It appears that the difference is between those who support the crackdown and those who want more crackdown," Vaez told Vox. The political fractures aren't as extreme as they have been in past protest movements, likely due to the fact that "the system purged the most pragmatic forces of Iranian politics and is now left with either ultra-hardliners or sycophants," he said.

Looming over Iran's political future is the fact that the Supreme Leader is 83 years old. In the running to replace him when he dies are his second son Mojtaba and a familiar figure - Ebrahim Raisi.

Though there are vocal opposition groups formed by the diaspora, "any viable government for a post-Islamic Republic Iran cannot come from exile, but must emerge from the ground up," Kashani-Sabet said. "Some individuals or groups in exile will undoubtedly be stakeholders, but it is hard to know whether the majority of the people in Iran, who are living under dire conditions every day, will want someone from the outside."

In the present, the three-day general strikes show that the protests have real support from workers, who are a critical part of any political struggle in Iran and whose decision to close their businesses in a time of economic precariousness shows great solidarity with the protesters. But as of yet, the protest movement hasn't defined a specific vision of Iranian society - which it will need to do in order to maintain momentum and work toward a political future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Iran's months-long protest movement, explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For nearly three months, protests have gripped Iran - protests that have not only been surprisingly durable, but also led primarily by women. On Thursday, the Islamic Republic, headed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, executed 23-year-old Mohsen Shekari for the crime of "waging war against God," or moharebeh in Farsi.

# data[].attributes.location_name
Daily News, East 42nd Street, New York, NY

# data[].attributes.headline
Daily News, East 42nd Street, New York, NY

# data[].attributes.subject
Daily News, East 42nd Street, New York, NY

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ways-george-orwell-1984-true-article-1.2662813

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When George Orwell penned his now-famous dystopian novel, "1984" - released 67 years ago in June 1949 - it was intended as fiction. The futuristic setting is more than three decades in our rearview mirror, but many aspects of the book have come eerily true today.

The novel tells of a socially stratified post-nuclear war world ruled by three superstates - Oceania, Eastasia and Eurasia.

Fortunately, there's been no global nuclear war - mostly because Donald Trump hasn't won the election yet - and Russia hasn't annexed all of Europe, but here's a look at some parts of the novel that have come to pass:

In Orwell's masterpiece, the world is always at war. The enemy changes, but the war never ends. At one point, during a "Hate Week" rally, the nation's alliances abruptly change and the speaker seamlessly shifts mid-sentence from denouncing one enemy to denouncing another. The battleground is never clear - it's always someplace far away - but the supposed fighting keeps the country in a permanent wartime economy and creates a common enemy, other than the repressive government of Big Brother.

Today, we have the War on Terror, a battle with an unclear battleground and no end in sight.

One of the most defining characteristics of Orwell's novel is the extent of Big Brother's surveillance state. In fact, the entire concept of Big Brother has become so synonymous with omnipresent surveillance that it sparked a reality show of the same name in which the contestants are under constant surveillance.

The book features telescreens that are dual-purpose devices - they both play a steady stream of televised propaganda and record everything going on. Telescreens are present in upper- and middle-class homes, but not in the "prole" homes, because the government doesn't really care what the poor people are doing anyway.

Today, we have our own little two-way devices we carry around everywhere - cell phones. They've created a world where it's safest to assume everything is recorded, always. Like telescreens, they can even be used for government surveillance - as the FBI proved in 2006 when they used an alleged mobster's phone as a "roving bug," hacking in to turn the mic on and record.

Aside from roving bugs, though, there are spy programs for phone metadata collection, internet use monitoring and warrantless wiretapping controversies. Maybe 1984 isn't such a thing of the past.

Created by the crazy totalitarian state, Newspeak is a truncated version of English, where words are strung together and abbreviated to create new words. In other words, it's basically how we text, amirite?

True, Newspeak is far more sinister in its purpose than text slang - although presumably grammar nerds may find them similarly deplorable. In "1984," Newspeak is a deliberately limiting language, intended to make revolutionary thought impossible by scrubbing the words for it from the common vocabulary. Text slang, on the other hand, is more about convenience and autocorrect. The net results of the two have a lot of similarities, though.

Doublethink is an inherently contradictory part of Newspeak and 1984 Party politics. According to the novel, doublethink is, "To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it."

In other words, it's pretty much the basis of Donald Trump's campaign.

The Proles - the lower-class people who make up the majority of Oceania's population - are largely ignored by the government. They don't face the same kind of indoctrination that the Inner and Outer Party members do and for the most part they're kept under control by rumors spread by the Thought Police and easy access to various vices.

"Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbours, films, football, beer, and above all, gambling, filled up the horizon of their minds," Orwell wrote. They're also placated with easy access to Party-produced porn and certain crimes - including prostitution, drug-dealing and racketeering - go pretty much unchecked in the prole portions of town. Basically, the idea is to keep the proles placated and distracted, so that they don't pay any attention to the political machinations moving the world around them.

Today, in a world where a naked Kardashian selfie can attract more attention than the State of the Union, it's not hard to see some parallels.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A look at some of the ways George Orwell's '1984' has come true today

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When George Orwell penned his now-famous dystopian novel, "1984" - released 67 years ago in June 1949 - it was intended as fiction. The futuristic setting is more than three decades in our rearview mirror, but many aspects of the book have come eerily true today.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.vox.com/22370629/ethiopia-tigray-eritrea-amhara-war-ethnic-cleansing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The bodies of the two brothers were left for more than a day. Their families knew they were there, but the soldiers wouldn't let them collect the bodies. The soldiers left behind witnesses, though: two boys, barely teens, tied to a tree nearby, after the soldiers forced them to spend the night on the ground, between the bodies of the murdered men.

The brothers were Kahsay and Tesfay, who both cared for young children and elderly parents in a small village in the northeastern corner of Ethiopia's Tigray region, in an area home to the Irob, a small ethnic minority.

Their homeland, on the border with Eritrea, has known unrest for decades, from the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea in 1998 and the years of tension that followed until a shaky peace deal was finally reached in 2018.

Nothing compares to what they're seeing now.

"It was never like this," said Fissuh Hailu of the Irob Advocacy Association. Before, he said, "We had places to run away."

Hailu now lives abroad, but many members of his family are still in Tigray. He and his colleagues are relying on witness accounts to document the atrocities happening in their part of the region, including the story he told me of the two brothers, which they largely attribute to the Eritrean army. (The incident has not been independently verified by Vox.)

It's one of many chilling reports that have emerged in recent months from Tigray, a region in northern Ethiopia that has been engulfed in war since November.

Tensions churned for months between the Ethiopian government and the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), the political party that represents the Tigray region. That erupted into violence after the TPLF attacked a federal military facility in Tigray in what it said was "preemptive self-defense." The Ethiopian government launched what it called a "law enforcement operation" in response, a justification for a full-scale invasion.

The situation has since turned into a protracted conflict with disturbing humanitarian implications. Tigrayan defense forces are fighting against the Ethiopian National Defense Force, who have partnered with troops from neighboring Eritrea and other militias within Ethiopia, specifically Amhara forces.

Telecommunications blackouts and limited access to parts of Tigray have made it difficult to fully assess what is unfolding there. But in recent months, credible reports of war crimes and crimes against humanity have started to trickle out, including evidence of ethnic cleansing against Tigrayans.

An internal United States government report, which the New York Times reviewed in February, assessed that the Ethiopian military and their allies were "deliberately and efficiently rendering Western Tigray ethnically homogeneous through the organized use of force and intimidation."

"This is ongoing," Nyssen told me earlier this month. "In the last month, we recorded 20 massacres, and it continues almost at the same speed." There is a common pattern, he said: When the Eritrean or Ethiopian forces lose a battle, "they take revenge on civilians in the surrounding areas."

Rape has been used as a weapon of war; a USAID report includes testimony from a woman who recalled her rapist saying he was "cleansing the blood lines" of Tigrayan women. Eritrean forces have been accused of mass looting, pillaging, and wanton destruction of everything from banks to crops to hospitals.

Most of the alleged atrocities point to Eritrean, Ethiopian, and Amhara forces, though Tigray People's Liberation Front-linked groups have also been linked to at least one mass killing. The Eritrean government has denied involvement, and only just last week admitted to its presence in Tigray.

In March, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed acknowledged that reports "indicate that atrocities have been committed in Tigray region." He said those responsible should be held accountable, though he also blamed the " propaganda of exaggeration."

The security situation is fueling other crises. More than 60,000 refugees have fled to neighboring Sudan since the fighting began in November, and humanitarian groups - many of which remain cut off from parts of Tigray - say the security situation has likely displaced thousands of people internally.

The United Nations estimates that of Tigray's 6 million people, 4.5 million are in need of food aid. A recent report from the World Peace Foundation warns of the risk of famine and mass starvation as people are displaced and crops, livestock, and the tools needed to make and collect food are destroyed.

One witness in Tigray, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears for his safety, told me that Eritrean soldiers will kill an ox and eat just one leg, leaving the rest of the carcass to rot. "The people are either dying by blood or by hunger," he said by phone from Mekele, Tigray's capital, earlier this month.

Prime Minister Abiy, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient who was once seen as the country's peacemaker and a democratic liberalizer, is now leading a country that is beginning to turn on itself.

The war in Tigray has no clear end, and the reports of killing and rape and looting are still happening. "Everybody is just waiting, just waiting - not to live, but waiting for what will happen tomorrow, or in the night," the man in Mekele said.

"We never know what will happen," he added. "You never know what will happen to anybody."

A conflict that had been brewing finally breaks out

Tensions between Abiy's government and the Tigray People's Liberation Front had been coursing for some time, and experts say anyone paying attention was warning of the possibility of war before it happened.

In 2018, Ethiopia's government got a major shake-up. The Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), a Marxist-Leninist party, had ruled the country for nearly three decades, having emerged victorious from a brutal civil war in 1991.

The party was a coalition representing four different regions or nationalities: the TPLF (made up of Tigrayans); the Amhara Democratic Party (representing the Amhara ethnic group); the Oromo Democratic Party (representing the Oromo ethnic group); and the Southern Ethiopian People's Democratic Movement, which represented a few ethnic groups.

But the Tigrayan wing of the party dominated.

The Tigrayan-led government presided over rapid economic growth, but not all of it was equal, and many Ethiopians felt left behind. In 2015 and 2016, after decades in power, the government faced popular protests over human rights abuses, corruption, and inequality.

Some,including members of the Amhara and Oromo ethnic groups, were particularly angry about the TPLF's control of the most important positions in politics and the military, despite representing just 6 percent of the country's population.

In 2018, Ethiopia's prime minister resigned, and other members of the ruling EPRDF coalition united against the Tigrayan wing. They elected Abiy Ahmed, a relative newcomer from the Oromo, as the leader.

All of this made Abiy a star in Africa and around the world. In 2019, he won the Nobel Peace Prize for resolving the border war and "for his efforts to achieve peace and international cooperation."

At home, things were a bit more complicated. Abiy had promised to reform the EPRDF, but in late 2019 he created a new Prosperity Party (PP) meant to deemphasize the role of ethnic groups in the name of unity.

The Tigray People's Liberation Front opposed this move and what it saw as Abiy's attempt toconsolidate federal power at the expense of regional and ethnic autonomy. The TPLF declined to join the PP, and though the party still retained control of Tigray's regional government, members generally saw Abiy as taking steps detrimental to their interests and their region - and to the vision of Ethiopia that the TPLF had championed since the 1990s.

"At the root of the war in Tigray is this ideological difference between TPLF and Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed for the future of the country," Tsega Etefa, an associate professor of history and Africana and Latin American studies at Colgate University, wrote in an email.

Experts said Abiy rode the wave of anti-TPLF grievance to try to consolidate his own power, especially as it became a lot harder to deliver on some of the political promises he'd made when he took over.

"In a bid to deflect the growing criticism of him, now that he was formally in charge, he began increasingly confronting Tigrayans and blaming them for everything that had gone wrong," Harry Verhoeven, of the Oxford University China-Africa Network, told me.

Abiy portrayed Tigrayans as "the Ethiopian equivalent of the 'deep state,' if you like," Verhoeven added.

Experts noted this kind of rhetoric had the effect of blurring the lines between the TPLF leadership - which had earned legitimate criticisms after decades in power - and the Tigrayan people themselves.

The Tigray region held elections anyway in September in an act of defiance. Abiy's government deemed those elections illegal.

Ethiopia's Parliament then voted to cut funds from the regional Tigrayan government, a move the TPLF said violated the law and was " tantamount to a declaration of war." In late October, the TPLF blocked an Ethiopian general from taking up a post in Tigray. The International Crisis Group warned that this standoff "could trigger a damaging conflict that may even rip the Ethiopian state asunder."

Just a few days later, Abiy accused the TPLF of attacking its military base. " The last red line had been crossed," he said, as Ethiopian troops entered Tigray and he declared a six-month state of emergency. Reports of airstrikes accompanied the federal government's push into the region.

The federal government's communications blackout, combined with competing accounts from both the government and Tigray officials, made it hard to fully account for the situation.

By the end of the month, Abiy had declared the Ethiopian government " fully in control " of the region's capital, Mekele.

Six months later, the war grinds on.

Why Eritrea is embroiled in Ethiopia's war

Tigrayan defense forces have since regrouped and are now fighting a guerrilla insurgency against Ethiopian federal troops and those backing them up - namely, Eritrean troops and Amhara militia fighters from the region south of Tigray.

The Eritrean government - led by President Isaias Afwerki, the country's longtime brutal dictator - and Abiy repeatedly denied the presence of Eritrean troops in Tigray, despite mounting evidence of their involvement.

A top United Nations officials also said last week that there was no sign Eritrea was leaving. In response, Eritrea did, officially, confirm its presence in Tigray in an April 16 letter to the UN Security Council. In it, Eritrea said it had "agreed - at the highest levels - to embark on the withdrawal of the Eritrean forces and the simultaneous redeployment of Ethiopian contingents along the international boundary."

But both advocates and experts are skeptical that Eritrea will exit quietly, or quickly.

"There is no sign that the Eritrean forces are withdrawing," Alex de Waal, a research professor and executive director of the World Peace Foundation at Tufts University, told me earlier this month. "If anything, they are inserting themselves more deeply into the Ethiopian military and intelligence structure."

But Abiy's pact with Eritrea is forged from a common goal: the desire to crush the Tigray People's Liberation Front.

Ethiopia and Eritrea have a long and tangled history, but to understand it, ithelps to start after World War II, when world powers decided the fate of Eritrea after its previous colonizer, Italy, lost control of its territory in East Africa.

In 1952, the UN General Assembly voted to make Eritrea a federal component of Ethiopia. Ten years later, Ethiopia annexed Eritrea, leading to a protracted battle for independence that culminated in an Eritrean independence referendum in the early 1990s.

During that struggle, Ethiopia's TPLF cooperated with members of the Eritrean People's Liberation Front (EPLF), the latter of whom were fighting for Eritrean independence from Ethiopia. They were both opposed to rule in Addis Ababa and had cultural and linguistic ties, but the two movements had ideological differences. It was, in some ways, a relationship of necessity, and tensions simmered - and sometimes spilled out into the open - even when they were partners.

After Eritrea gained independence in 1993, relations between the country and the TPLF-dominated Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front began to deteriorate.

At first, the disputes were minor. But in 1998, Eritrea and Ethiopia went to war over a disputed border town. The two signed a peace agreement in 2000, allowing an independent commission would settle the status of the area. That commission, however, ruled in favor of Eritrea, and the TPLF-led government in Ethiopia objected to the ruling. That led to two decades of tension and sporadic fighting.

When Abiy took over, he moved to make peace with Eritrea, agreeing to accept the commission's decision. Meanwhile, the TPLF continued to try to thwart Abiy's overtures to Eritrea.

Still, President Isaias of Eritrea accepted those Abiy's olive branch. But in doing so, he didn't exactly bury old grudges, and continued to criticizethe TPLF as " vultures " for undermining Eritrea's and Ethiopia's normalization of relations.

"Today is payback time for a number of deeply felt historical injustices, real or perceived - but certainly deeply felt," Verhoeven said of Eritrea's involvement.

Isaias rules a repressive state on a constant war footing, and he sees an opportunity to finally vanquish his political rival and settle political scores. It's also a chance to assert himself as the Horn of Africa's most consequential leader, which Verhoeven said "is very much something he's always aspired to." And he may believe he can't achieve that as long as a politically influential TPLF still resides on his border.

Isaias wanted freedom from the TPLF. So did Abiy, who saw the TPLF as a challenge to his agenda. Abiy fed that animosity by attacking the TPLF and blaming it for trying to destabilize Ethiopia.

Experts told me the TPLF also made miscalculations, such as trying to frustrate Abiy's ability to implement the peace deal on the ground, which may have helped to push Abiy closer to Isaias. The Tigray elections provoked even more acrimony with Abiy, though the momentum toward conflict had already been set in motion.

"All the sides really wanted to go to war, and all the sides were making the wrong moves that made war possible," Awet Weldemichael, a Horn of Africa expert at Queen's University in Ontario, said.

Ethiopia's civil war is exacerbating deep-seated ethnic tensions

Just as Abiy forged a political pact with an outsider, Eritrea, his reliance on ethnic Amhara militias to help fight his war in Tigray is accelerating Ethiopia's internal strife.

Amhara militias have reportedly taken control of parts of western Tigray. Amhara officials say the TPLF annexed this territory when it came to power in 1991, and say it rightfully belongs to them and they are re-seizing it.

This piece of land has been a longstanding source of tension between Amhara leaders and the TPLF, which fits into a broader history of grievances between the two.

Each held power at some point - Amhara's elites before the rise of the EPRDF, the TPLF after that. The Tigray People's Liberation Front considered the Amhara to be " oppressors " during their revolutionary campaign, and Amhara elites were marginalized during the TPLF's reign.

"At the root of the war in Tigray is this ideological difference between TPLF and Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed for the future of the country"

Amhara's elites also tend to interpret the TPLF's vision of a federal Ethiopia - where each nationality has a degree of autonomy and power - as antithetical to their own. Theirs is one of a more unified Ethiopia with one national identity, albeit with them in control.

Abiy, too, has adopted that more unified vision, so the Amhara and Abiy found a politically beneficial partnership. But in aligning with the Amhara, just as with the Eritreans, Abiy is also putting his political survival in their hands.

Asafa Jalata, a professor of Africana studies at the University of Tennessee, said that Abiy didn't care what the consequences were; he was focused on the TPLF and hadn't planned beyond that. He, as other experts I spoke to did, thought Abiy showed his ineptitude and inexperience.

All of this has put Abiy in a very perilous position. "It makes very little sense," Verhoeven said. "But it's the course that he's chosen to pursue, and Ethiopia is paying its price."

"The hallmarks of ethnic cleansing are there"

The bullet that killed the 14-year-old boy brought his father down with it. The father stayed still beneath his boy's bleeding body until the soldiers departed, leaving him and more than a dozen others rounded up from their homes for dead.

The father escaped. "They saw him from afar," the source from Tigray told me, recounting what the man, a farmer from the Gulomakeda district of Tigray, had told him about an incident at the end of November.

"When the soldiers saw that some were escaping, they came back to the bodies to check whether they'd died or not." The soldiers, whom the farmer believed were Eritrean, went one by one, cutting the throats of the bodies that remained to make sure they were dead.

Researchers and human rights groups have slowly begun to compile accounts like this, piecing together a troubling picture of cruelty and violence happening inside Tigray.

Communications and electricity blackouts, especially outside the major cities, have made it difficult to get information. Witnesses and victims also fear speaking out will provoke reprisal; their attackers are still lurking, still a threat.

"We never know who is there, who's listening to what," Fissuh, of the Irob Advocacy Association, said.

Eritrean, Ethiopian, and Amhara forces have been linked to most of the attacks on Tigrayan civilians, though the Tigrayan People's Liberation Front are also implicated in mass killings during the conflict.The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said in March that "credible information also continues to emerge about serious violations of international human rights law and humanitarian law by all parties to the conflict in Tigray in November last year."

Among those violations are extrajudicial killings, sexual violence, and widespread destruction of property. The UN and the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, an NGO affiliated with the government, have agreed to launch an investigation.

"There is active looting and destruction of public infrastructure and private businesses, there is weaponized rape, there is weaponized hunger happening everywhere," Meaza Gebremedhin, a US-based international researcher with Omna Tigray, a Tigrayan advocacy group, told me. "And there are massacres happening in different pockets of Tigray."

Those with connections on the ground have reported Eritrean soldiers rampaging through houses and destroying food sources. "They take everything from your house," the witness from Tigray told me. "What they can't carry, they burn."

At least 500 women have self-reported rape to five clinics in Tigray, which the United Nations says is likely a low-range estimate given the stigma and general lack of functioning health services.

"Women say they have been raped by armed actors, they also told stories of gang rape, rape in front of family members, and men being forced to rape their own family members under the threat of violence," Wafaa Said, deputy UN aid coordinator, said last month.

A USAID report included testimony from one woman who said she and five others were gang-raped by 30 Eritrean troops, as the soldiers laughed and took pictures.

It coincides with reports of Tigrayans being driven from their homes in western Tigray by Amhara forces. "They said, 'You guys don't belong here,'" Ababu Negash, a 70-year-old woman fleeing Tigray, told Reuters in March. "They said if we stay, they will kill us."

"The hallmarks of ethnic cleansing are there," said Queen's University's Weldemichael, "and they're not just allegations. They are a serious smoking gun to that charge."

A top United Nations humanitarian official, Mark Lowcock, said in a closed-door meeting last week that the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate and that "the conflict is not over and things are not improving."

More than 1 million people are believed to be internally displaced in Tigray, in addition to the 60,000 who have fled across the border to Sudan.

People are often fleeing from one place to another as violence erupts, taking shelter in schools and other overcrowded facilities - creating conditions that are especially worrisome amid the pandemic. In Tigray, just 13 out of 38 hospitals are functioning, and 41 out of 224 primary health facilities, according to Michele Servadei, UNICEF's deputy representative in Ethiopia.

The region was already in a precarious position to begin with because of climate change and locusts. Ethiopia is approaching its rainy season - the traditional time for planting, to harvest food for the following year - but the destruction of property and the displacement of people from their lands may make this nearly impossible. Aid groups are trying to do what they can but are still unable to reach all parts of the region.

All of this has increased the very real possibility of famine in Tigray.

What happens now?

Ethiopian federal troops and their partners handed the Tigrayan Defense Forces early defeats. But the Tigrayan forces are now waging a war of attrition, and they have popular support. No one side really has the edge, so the prospects of a ceasefire look grim.

The longer the conflict goes on, the more dire the humanitarian consequences will become - and the more unpredictable Ethiopia's future will be. As Ethiopian forces are bogged down in Tigray, long-simmering unrest is brewing in other regions of Ethiopia. Tigray is "unfortunately serving as a bit of a domino effect throughout the country," Sarah Miller, a senior fellow at Refugees International covering the Great Lakes and the Horn of Africa, said. These multiple frontiers of conflict put Abiy in an even more uncertain position, both at home and abroad.

The international community has also started to be more vocal about what's happening.

Earlier this month, foreign ministers from the G7 group of nations (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) issued a joint statement demanding the "swift, unconditional and verifiable" withdrawal of Eritrean troops.

International pressure is critical, experts told me, especially as Abiy's sheen as a peacemaker wears off. "He's playing for time and trying to deal with the international community, which has become slowly but surely ever more critical, and salvaging what remains of his influence in international affairs," Verhoeven said.

Indeed, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) met with Abiy in March. But after the visit, Abiy confirmed the presence of Eritrean troops, admitted to possible violations, and said Eritrean troops were withdrawing. Again, there's reason to be skeptical about these statements, but experts said it certainly is a sign that Abiy is sensitive to how the rest of the world, particularly the West, sees him.

Which is why experts told me they think the US and allies in Europe may be able to use this leverage and influence with Abiy. Economic pressure, many said, was particularly important, including the possibility of sanctions.

Stopping the carnage is the immediate concern, but finding a political solution looks precarious, as the status quo was already untenable. The war has pushed Tigray to embrace the possibility of independence, for example.

"Ethiopia may not survive as a country," Verhoeven said.

All of this has troubling implications for the wider region as well. Ethiopia was seen as the steadying force in the Horn of Africa, something that Weldemichael said perhaps was a bit of wishful thinking - a reputation gained mostly because of the chaos around it.

"Think of a ship exploding, right? And you find yourself on a flat plank or a piece of wood that's sailing smoothly in this messy water. That's Ethiopia," Weldemichael said.

But an Ethiopia in a protracted civil war could drag even more neighbors into the conflict - and generate even deeper humanitarian and refugee crises.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"Dying by blood or by hunger": The war in Ethiopia's Tigray region, explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The bodies of the two brothers were left for more than a day. Their families knew they were there, but the soldiers wouldn't let them collect the bodies. The soldiers left behind witnesses, though: two boys, barely teens, tied to a tree nearby, after the soldiers forced them to spend the night on the ground, between the bodies of the murdered men.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-63467268

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"If [Washington] does not want any serious developments not suited to its security interests, it should stop the useless and ineffective war exercises at once. If not, it will have to totally take the blame for all the consequences."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North Korea threatens US with 'powerful measures' as joint drills begin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This follows intelligence reports that Pyongyang is preparing for its first nuclear test in five years.

# data[].attributes.headline
Marseille-Saint-Charles, France June 13 2022

# data[].attributes.subject
Marseille-Saint-Charles, France June 13 2022

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/06/13/1053650/marseille-fight-surveillance-state/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to Content

The boisterous, rebellious port city is trying to fight the growing ubiquity of policing cameras.

Heading toward Marseille's central train station, Eda Nano points out what looks like a streetlamp on the Rue des Abeilles. Its long stand curves upward to a white dome shading a dark bulb. But this sleek piece of urban furniture is not a lamp. It's a video camera, with a 360-degree view of the narrow street.

Nano, a 39-year-old developer, wants to make residents of Marseille more aware that they are being watched. She is part of a group called Technopolice that has been organizing efforts to map the rise of video surveillance. With some 1,600 cameras in the city, there is plenty to find. Mixed in among them, Nano says, are 50 smart cameras designed to detect and flag up suspicious behavior, though she is unsure where they are or how they are being used.

Across the world, video cameras have become an accepted feature of urban life. Many cities in China now have dense networks of them. London and New Delhi aren't far behind.

Now France is playing catch-up. Since 2015, the year of the Bataclan terrorist attacks, the number of cameras in Paris has increased fourfold. The police have used such cameras to enforce pandemic lockdown measures and monitor protests like those of the Gilets Jaunes. And a new nationwide security law, adopted last year, allows for video surveillance by police drones during events like protests and marches.

For Nano the creep of increased surveillance has personal resonance. She grew up in Albania as it lurched between different political regimes in the 1990s. Her father, a politician, opposed the party that was in power for part of that time. "It was a very difficult period for us, because we were all being watched," she says. Her family suspected that the authorities had installed bugs in the walls of their home. But even in France, freedoms are fragile. "These past five years France has lived for much of the time in a state of emergency," she says. "I've seen more and more constraints put on our liberty."

Concerns have been raised throughout the country. But the surveillance rollout has met special resistance in Marseille, France's second-biggest city. The boisterous, rebellious Mediterranean town sits on some of the fault lines that run through modern France. Known for hip bars, artist studios, and startup hubs, it is also notorious for drugs, poverty, and criminal activity. It has one of the most ethnically diverse populations in Europe but is stranded in Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, a region that leans far right. The city pushes back. Its attitude could be summed up by graffiti you might pass as you drive in on the A7 motorway: " La vie est (re)belle."

That all makes Marseille a curious testing ground for surveillance tech. When President Emmanuel Macron visited the city in September 2021, he announced that 500 more security cameras would be given to the city council. They would be placed in an area of the city that is home to high numbers of immigrants and has become synonymous with violence and gang activity. He struck a law-and-order tone: "If we can't succeed in Marseille, we can't make a success out of France."

The announcement was just the latest in a string of developments in Marseille that show an increased reliance on cameras in public spaces.

Activists are fighting back, highlighting the existing surveillance system's overreach and underperformance. Their message seems to resonate. In 2020, the city elected a new administration, one that had pledged a moratorium on video surveillance devices. But have the residents of Marseille succeeded, or are they simply fighting a rising tide?

Technopolice, a campaign and activist network launched by the digital rights advocacy group La Quadrature du Net in collaboration with other groups, got its start in 2019. Félix Tréguer, an associate researcher at the CNRS Center for Internet and Society, was one of those behind the campaign. He had been seeing increasing numbers of articles in the French media about new surveillance projects and was shocked at how uncritical they were. "[One] simply rehashed the press release from the Marseille council," he says.

What spurred him into action was an article in Le Monde in 2017 announcing the Big Data of Public Tranquillity Project, funded by a €1.5 million investment from the European Union, the city of Marseille, and the Bouches-du-Rhône region. It would crunch data from local police, firefighters, hospitals, and video cameras, using artificial intelligence in an attempt to better understand and predict security risks.

There was little focus in the Le Monde article on privacy protection, the possibility of data breaches, or the risk of bias-a special concern given Marseille's considerable North African population. Tréguer wrote to the newspaper, and the article was subsequently amended. But he became convinced that what was happening in Marseille was symptomatic of a wider phenomenon. "Many of these projects were starting to be implemented on a local level," he says. "No one in civil society really realized-even those belonging to activist circles and those who defended the right to privacy."

In February 2019, La Quadrature du Net and the League of Human Rights successfully fought a plan to roll out facial recognition to monitor entries and exits in two high schools, one in Marseille and another in Nice. Technopolice launched the same year, with the aim of documenting and resisting the spread across France of "safe city" projects, a bit of (often corporate) branding that is used to describe efforts to use data, AI, and surveillance to reduce crime.

In Marseille, Technopolice built a live map on which volunteers can mark the locations of cameras. The group also began tracking surveillance projects in various cities that use artificial intelligence. There is now a Technopolice group in Montpellier and one in Belgium, and there will soon be one in Paris. Volunteers find and scrutinize records of surveillance initiatives in press releases, newspaper reports, and trade publications. The aim is to form "a record of these projects, which are very opaque," says Tréguer. "There is really a problem of democratic transparency."

The group thinks its activism has helped increase awareness of the issue. In 2019, it publicized and campaigned with a local group against plans in Sainte-Étienne, a town near Lyon, for AI-assisted microphones that would detect suspicious sounds in the town center. These plans were eventually abandoned. And winning candidates in the 2020 local elections in Marseille ran on a platform that included putting a moratorium on video surveillance and establishing "citizens councils" to evaluate policing practices. But the team has had little luck getting to the bottom of the Big Data of Public Tranquillity Project despite numerous freedom of information requests. The description of the project on the council's website remains in the future tense-almost as if it had never been launched. Meanwhile, the number of surveillance cameras in the city has increased to the current 1,600-plus from just under 900 in 2016. As for the smart cameras, they are still scattered around Marseille even though, according to local councilor Christophe Hugon, they were used only in tests and have now been disabled. Despite repeated efforts, the Marseille council did not answer questions posed via telephone and email.

Jean-Jaurès Square in Marseille is a new model of ubiquitous surveillance. The once grotty square reopened last year after more than two years of redevelopment work. It now has seating areas and a playground. Trees have been geometrically arranged. And more than 20 cameras preside over the open-plan design.

"They can see into almost all the areas of the square, because visibility is part of the design," says Myrtille Picaud, a researcher on cities and surveillance at Sciences-Po, who is based in Marseille.

The cameras, however discreet, are troubling to some. "It is infantilizing," says one longtime resident, likening the system to watch towers around a prison. But the inmates of this panopticon don't necessarily play along. When night falls, it can get so rowdy some cafés close their outdoor spaces. Anticapitalist, feminist, antiracist, or simply funny graffiti covers the pavement. During the wild Festival de la Plaine, which was held illegally in spite of covid restrictions this year, spray paint cans were mounted on poles and used to coat camera lenses.

No official statistics have been made public about the impact that Marseille's cameras have had on crime. But there is reason to suspect it is not as much as officials might like. When the sociologist Laurent Mucchielli looked at the effect of video surveillance on an anonymous port city that bears telling similarities to Marseille, he found that in 2015 cameras were useful in the investigation of 2.2% of crimes where image searches had been requested. Other studies seem to back these kinds of figures; in 2020, a study by the research body attached to the French college of policing also estimated that just 1% of crimes were solved with the help of video images.

It's often suggested these cameras work to deter crime. Studies are inconclusive on this point. There does seem to be an effect on closed public spaces like parking garages and subways, but in some cases crime seems to be merely displaced, increasing in areas with fewer cameras.

In general, city surveillance prioritizes the capture of a certain class of criminal, says Picaud-those that commit crimes in public, even if their infractions are often minor. "One can see the overinvestment in these devices which target public space rather than other technologies which could target other crimes instead-like, for example, anything to do with tax evasion," she says.

Not long after the 2020 elections, the new mayor of Marseille called for an audit of video surveillance in the city. The council is still sitting on the study, which was delivered in October, but preliminary findings were published in the local newspaper The Provence. There are 42 dedicated agents; at any given time, fewer than five are on duty, and each is responsible for 35 screens. The system is not cheap; the newspaper highlighted the cost of installing each camera (over €20,000 per device), renting the optical fiber (€6.5 million a year), and maintaining the cameras, including cleaning and replacing bulbs (€2.8 million a year). Many of the images are not of good enough quality to use. And 272 cameras-over 15% of the total-are rarely consulted.

"It's techno-solutionism. There's a political problem, and they promise to find a technology-an app-to bring it under control," says Tréguer. "It is very expensive, and it uses a chunk of taxpayers' money to implement solutions that are dangerous for freedoms, increase control, and are in part ineffective."

The situation in Marseille doesn't seem to be unusual. In February, for example, the Cour de Comptes, an administrative body that audits public finances, highlighted similar issues, in a report on the video surveillance network in Paris. The auditors called its financing "unsuitable and expensive" and charged that no one had evaluated the cameras' impact on crime.

Marseille's government does seem to have cooled on the idea of video surveillance. The Big Data of Public Tranquillity Project, whose test period ran from 2018 to 2020, had been the pet scheme of the previous, right-wing mayor. The coalition of socialists, ecologists, and activists that rose to power in the 2020 city elections promised to pause video surveillance. This has been more difficult than initially anticipated, says Hugon, because of the difficulty of terminating contracts early.

At the same time, city officials have expressed some interest in making the system more efficient. Artificial intelligence is perhaps the only way of doing this on a large scale without adding significantly more personnel. Tréguer does not look forward to this possibility as technology becomes more advanced: "We are re-creating in some way a tentacular, bureaucratic police state without having to recruit dozens or hundreds of people."

The available technology is advancing quickly. The French startup Two-i, for example, offers an investigation function, which allows a surveillance team to use AI to search images for specific objects, like a man wearing a backpack or even sport shoes.

"A certain shouty part of the press is waging a battle, and they write false things to frighten people." Guillaume Cazenave

Press articles have alleged that the company has deployed face recognition in the city of Metz and was trialing it to read people's expressions on Nice's trams. Two-i cofounder Guillaume Cazenave says such reports are inaccurate. "In France, a certain shouty part of the press is waging a battle, and they write false things to frighten people," he says.

But there are signs that lawmakers and public bodies in France are looking at ways to facilitate the use of artificial intelligence in the surveillance of public spaces. A parliamentary paper in 2019 advocated establishing a framework for testing facial recognition, which is currently illegal. In the Paris Metro system in 2020, security cameras were AI-enabled to monitor whether passengers were wearing face masks (the technology is not meant to identity those not wearing masks but simply to provide anonymous statistics). The European Union is working on a set of laws called the AI Act that could limit the application of AI surveillance technology. But Technopolice suspects it could create loopholes if it does not ban the use of facial recognition outright.

It is CNIL, France's data protection agency, that is tasked with ensuring that surveillance technology complies with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR. In 2017, for example, the town of Valenciennes accepted 240 cameras equipped with facial recognition technology from the Chinese company Huawei. The town insisted that the technology was not being used. Nevertheless, CNIL gave the local authorities a warning in 2021, and the project was quietly disbanded. But earlier this year CNIL launched a public consultation on the use of smart cameras in public places in order to clarify the legal framework for their use. Members of Technopolice see this move as a tacit acceptance of the need for such cameras.

The fight still continues for Technopolice. In the summer, they are planning to set up a series of meetings in the northern towns of Roubaix and Calais; the latter's council is considering devoting an extra half-million euros to video surveillance. La Quadrature du Net is working on a class action lawsuit against the government for the use of smart cameras in contravention of European law. In Marseille, the group continues working to drum up support; this summer there will be a conference and documentary screenings. There will also be more freedom of information requests to the Marseille council. Five of them, made in the last 12 months, are still pending. Meanwhile, the cameras roll on.

Fleur Macdonald is a writer based near Avignon, France.

Stay connected

Illustration by Rose Wong

Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review

Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marseille's battle against the surveillance state

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Skip to Content The boisterous, rebellious port city is trying to fight the growing ubiquity of policing cameras. Heading toward Marseille's central train station, Eda Nano points out what looks like a streetlamp on the Rue des Abeilles. Its long stand curves upward to a white dome shading a dark bulb.