The U.S. Has Ramped Up Airstrikes Against ISIS in Raqqa, and Syrian Civilians Are Paying the Price

Thanks to camera phones and social media, the deadly consequences of U.S. military operations are indeed being recorded, shared, and watched around the world on an unprecedented scale. But while civilian deaths are regularly reported in local media outlets in the Middle East, they are seldom reported in detail by international media.

Fuente: The U.S. Has Ramped Up Airstrikes Against ISIS in Raqqa, and Syrian Civilians Are Paying the Price


Preocupa la propuesta del diputado Brugge para la creación de un defensor de las Redes Sociales « Fundación Vía Libre

La queja del diputado tiene que ver con la supuesta lentitud de los procesos de habeas data, por lo que propone la creación de un habeas data administrativo que avance directamente sobre las publicaciones consideradas inapropiadas – con una definición muy vaga de lo que es inapropiado – y los emisores de las mismas. Para esto, propone la creación de una figura novedosa: el defensor público en Redes Sociales y medios electrónicos, incluidos allí los servicios como Facebook, Twitter, entre otros así como Whatsapp, Telegram y cualquier otro medio electrónico a crearse en el futuro.Lo más preocupante de la iniciativa tiene que ver con las atribuciones del mentado defensor, ya que se le dará la posibilidad de bloquear tanto contenidos como usuarios de forma inmediata e inaudita parte, es decir, sin derecho a réplica alguno

Fuente: Preocupa la propuesta del diputado Brugge para la creación de un defensor de las Redes Sociales « Fundación Vía Libre


California single mother faces jail time for selling homemade food on Facebook | US news | The Guardian

The Facebook group, which she doesn’t use any more, was designed to build community, Ruelas added.“It helped a lot of people in a lot of ways. The purpose wasn’t to get rich.”

Fuente: California single mother faces jail time for selling homemade food on Facebook | US news | The Guardian


Las detenciones irregulares en São Paulo que empezaron con un militar infiltrado en Tinder | Internacional | EL PAÍS

EL PAÍS reconstruye la detención de 21 personas antes de una marcha contra el presidente Temer el pasado día 4Los manifestantes sospechan que un militar se infiltró en varias redes sociales, entre ellos una de ligue, para identificarlos

Fuente: Las detenciones irregulares en São Paulo que empezaron con un militar infiltrado en Tinder | Internacional | EL PAÍS


What does a feminist internet look like? | Chitra Nagarajan | Opinion | The Guardian

Feminist activists from around the world were in a conference room in Brazil, discussing what a feminist internet might look like. How did we get here?

Fuente: What does a feminist internet look like? | Chitra Nagarajan | Opinion | The Guardian


German proposals could see refugees’ phones searched by police | World news | The Guardian

Checking smartphones of those without passports among measures announced by the interior minister, Thomas de Maizière

Fuente: German proposals could see refugees’ phones searched by police | World news | The Guardian


The new way police are surveilling you: Calculating your threat ‘score’ – The Washington Post

Some local police departments scan social media, send drones aloft and monitor surveillance cameras.

Fuente: The new way police are surveilling you: Calculating your threat ‘score’ – The Washington Post


Is the online surveillance of black teenagers the new stop-and-frisk? | US news | The Guardian

Is the online surveillance of black teenagers the new stop-and-frisk? | US news | The Guardian.

police gangs surveillance Stop-and-frisk was found unconstitutional in 2013. Illustration: Rob Dobi

Taylonn Murphy is sitting in a Harlem beauty salon after hours. Leaning back in his chair and with a calm demeanor, he is talking about keeping young local people out of harm’s way.

Every now and then though, as he speaks, his voice breaks.

In September 2011, his daughter Tayshana, 18, a local basketball superstar and resident of West Harlem’s Grant Houses, was shot dead by two residents of Manhattanville Houses. The killing was described as the result of a rivalry between the two housing projects that dates back decades.

Almost three years after his daughter’s death, on 4 June 2014, helicopters hovered overhead as the first rays of sunlight hit the concrete. At least 400 New York police officers in military gear raided both housing projects, with indictments for the arrest of 103 people.

Starting in January 2010, the community’s children and young adults had been closely watched by police officers – both online and off. The investigation had involved listening in to 40,000 calls from correctional facilities, watching hours of surveillance video, and reviewing over 1m online social media pages.

For Murphy, the revelation of these details was choking: the NYPD had been attentively surveilling both communities for over one and a half years before his daughter was murdered, patiently waiting and observing as the rivalry between crew members escalated.

Online surveillance: the new stop-and-frisk?

In 2013, stop-and-frisk was found unconstitutional by a federal judge for its use of racial profiling. Since then, logged instances have dropped from an astonishing 685,000 in 2011 to just 46,000 in 2014. But celebrations may be premature, with local policing increasingly moving off the streets and migrating online.

In 2012, the NYPD declared a war on gangs across the city with Operation Crew Cut. The linchpin of the operation’s activities is the sweeping online surveillance of individuals as young as 10 years old deemed to be members of crews and gangs.

This move is being criticized by an increasing number of community members and legal scholars, who see it as an insidious way of justifying the monitoring of young men and boys of color in low-income communities.


Saudi blogger receives first 50 lashes of sentence for 'insulting Islam' | World news | The Guardian

Saudi blogger receives first 50 lashes of sentence for ‘insulting Islam’ | World news | The Guardian.

Raif Badawi has been given 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes to be carried out over 20 weeks

  • The Guardian
Raif Badawi with his children in a picture supplied to Amnesty.
Raif Badawi with his children in a picture supplied to Amnesty. Photograph: Amnesty

A Saudi blogger convicted of insulting Islam was brought after Friday prayers to a public square in the port city of Jeddah and flogged 50 times before hundreds of spectators, a witness to the lashing said.

The witness said Raif Badawi’s feet and hands were shackled during the flogging but his face was visible. He remained silent and did not cry out, said the witness, who spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity fearing government reprisal.

Badawi was sentenced last May to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes. He had criticized Saudi Arabia’s powerful clerics on a liberal blog he founded. The blog has since been shut down. He was also ordered to pay a fine of 1m riyals or about $266,600.


Mil latigazos para silenciar la crítica | Internacional | EL PAÍS

Mil latigazos para silenciar la crítica | Internacional | EL PAÍS.

Las monarquías de la península Arábiga recurren a leyes antiterroristas para encarcelar a los activistas

Raef Badawi, el bloguero saudí preso desde 2012 por insultar al islam, con sus tres hijos. / ENSAF HAIDAR (BLOOMBERG)

Ensaf Haidar tiembla ante la mera perspectiva de los 1.000 latigazos que aguardan a su marido, Raef Badawi, condenado en Arabia Saudí por “faltar al respeto al islam”. Su delito fue defender la libertad de expresión y haber fundado un portal en Internet donde se podía debatir sobre religión. El brutal castigo, que se ejecutará en tandas de 50 azotes propinados en sucesivos viernes y que se suma a 10 años de privación de libertad, busca disuadir a otros activistas de los derechos civiles en el Reino del Desierto. Como en el resto de las monarquías de la península Arábiga, el temor a que la mínima apertura socave su poder absoluto se ha exacerbado desde la primavera árabe.

“En otros países se denuncia la reducción del espacio para la sociedad civil, en esta parte del mundo no hay espacio que reducir”, lamenta Khalid Ibrahim, codirector del Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR). “Los defensores de derechos humanos son tratados como criminales, les resulta imposible encontrar un trabajo y no se les permite organizarse. De Omán, donde detienen a un activista y no sabemos dónde está, a Arabia Saudí, donde encarcelan a cualquiera que discrepa, pasando por Emiratos, que no tolera la crítica, y Bahréin, donde siguen las protestas; la situación es muy mala”, resume durante una conversación telefónica.

“Raef no es un criminal. No es un asesino o un violador. Es un bloguero. Su único delito es ser una voz libre en un país que no tolera ni entiende la libertad”, repite una y otra vez la citada Haidar quien, tras la detención de su esposo en 2012 se exilió con sus tres hijos en Canadá.


Los seis intermediarios y el terrorismo – El Mostrador

Los seis intermediarios y el terrorismo – El Mostrador.

avatar

Periodista y Asesor comunicacional @nicolaswarde

La semana pasada se formalizó a tres responsables de ocasionar los atentados de Los Dominicos y Metro Escuela Militar. Un golpe a la cátedra. Pero este procedimiento no soluciona el problema que viene ocurriendo hace ya un tiempo en Santiago y que podría seguir agravándose si es que las autoridades no toman acciones concretas y efectivas para combatir estos actos.

 

 

El sentido común indica que hoy lo primordial va de la mano con el análisis y seguimiento del posible vínculo de células terroristas de nuestro país con organizaciones internacionales. Tal como planteó un político hace pocos días, los nexos pueden establecerse sin la presencia física. Y ahí las redes sociales operan como arma de doble filo.

 

Actualmente existe una serie de plataformas que permiten la segmentación de publicaciones y, por ende, situar un mensaje en un contexto negativo. Como ejemplo de esta arma de “doble filo”, se puede mencionar a Google Plus, red social que permite la orientación de mensajes de diversa especie, ya sea en comunidades virtuales en las que se puede hablar de política, economía, noticias o tecnología. Acceder a estos espacios es muy simple y ahí surge el problema: con mucha facilidad, es posible gestionar y crear comunidades para hablar y promover diferentes tipos de activismo. Aquí, el terrorismo tiene terreno fértil. Además, se sabe de antemano, que ser parte de una red social para cometer una serie de ilícitos está a un solo clic.


Violencia de género: ¿Es necesaria una ley contra la porno venganza? – ONG Derechos Digitales

Violencia de género: ¿Es necesaria una ley contra la porno venganza? – ONG Derechos Digitales.

Las diputadas UDI Andrea Molina y Claudia Nogueira anunciaron la presentación de un proyecto de ley que sanciona la publicación en Internet de imágenes de connotación sexual sin el consentimiento del involucrado, medida que plantea la pregunta sobre el modo en que los males sociales son replicados en la red y de qué manera es posible combatirlos.

lalalalaLa violencia de género se ha servido de la tecnología, adoptando modalidades que hacen muy difícil combatirla. Es el caso de la porno venganza

Pocas veces advertimos cómo los males del mundo “offline” se replican también en Internet. Clasismo, racismo, abusos empresariales y otros trastornos sociales ocurren también en la red y tienden a ser aún más impunes que fuera de ésta, adoptando modalidades donde la tecnología facilita las instancias de odio.


Should Twitter, Facebook and Google Executives be the Arbiters of What We See and Read? – The Intercept

Should Twitter, Facebook and Google Executives be the Arbiters of What We See and Read? – The Intercept.

By 246
Featured photo - Should Twitter, Facebook and Google Executives be the Arbiters of What We See and Read?DEAUVILLE, FRANCE – MAY 26: (L-R) Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Union, Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook Inc. and Eric Schmidt, chairman of Google Inc. arrive for the internet session of the G8 summit on May 26, 2011 in Deauville, France. (Photo by Chris Ratcliffe – Pool/Getty Images)

There have been increasingly vocal calls for Twitter, Facebook and other Silicon Valley corporations to more aggressively police what their users are permitted to see and read. Last month in The Washington Post, for instance, MSNBC host Ronan Farrow demanded that social media companies ban the accounts of “terrorists” who issue “direct calls” for violence.

This week, the announcement by Twitter CEO Dick Costolo that the company would prohibit the posting of the James Foley beheading video and photos from it (and suspend the accounts of anyone who links to the video) met with overwhelming approval. What made that so significant, as The Guardian‘s James Ball noted today, was that “Twitter has promoted its free speech credentials aggressively since the network’s inception.” By contrast, Facebook has long actively regulated what its users are permitted to say and read; at the end of 2013, the company reversed its prior ruling and decided that posting of beheading videos would be allowed, but only if the user did not express support for the act.

Given the savagery of the Foley video, it’s easy in isolation to cheer for its banning on Twitter. But that’s always how censorship functions: it invariably starts with the suppression of viewpoints which are so widely hated that the emotional response they produce drowns out any consideration of the principle being endorsed.

It’s tempting to support criminalization of, say, racist views as long as one focuses on one’s contempt for those views and ignores the serious dangers of vesting the state with the general power to create lists of prohibited ideas. That’s why free speech defenders such as the ACLU so often represent and defend racists and others with heinous views in free speech cases: because that’s where free speech erosions become legitimized in the first instance when endorsed or acquiesced to.

The question posed by Twitter’s announcement is not whether you think it’s a good idea for people to see the Foley video. Instead, the relevant question is whether you want Twitter, Facebook and Google executives exercising vast power over what can be seen and read.

It’s certainly true, as defenders of Twitter have already pointed out, that as a legal matter, private actors – as opposed to governments – always possess and frequently exercise the right to decide which opinions can be aired using their property. Generally speaking, the public/private dichotomy is central to any discussions of the legality or constitutionality of “censorship.”


Twitter: from free speech champion to selective censor? | Technology | theguardian.com

Twitter: from free speech champion to selective censor? | Technology | theguardian.com.

By acting on footage of James Foley’s murder, Twitter has taken responsibility in a way it hasn’t over abuse and threats. So what happens next?
Man's hands at computer

Twitter was once characterised by its general counsel as ‘the free speech wing of the free speech party’. Photograph: Alamy

Twitter has got itself into a tangle. The social network’s decision to remove all links to the horrific footage showing the apparent beheading of the photojournalist James Foley is one that most of its users, reasonably, support.

The social network went still further, suspending or banning users who shared the footage or certain stills, following public tweets from the company’s CEO, Dick Costolo, that it would take action against such users.

It is hard to think of anyone having a good reason to view or share such barbaric footage, but Twitter’s proactive approach reverses a long record of non-intervention.

Twitter has promoted its free speech credentials aggressively since the network’s inception. The company’s former general counsel once characterised the company as “the free speech wing of the free speech party”, an approach characterised by removing content only in extreme situations – when made to by governments in accordance with local law, or through various channels designed to report harassment.

The social network’s response to the Foley footage and images is clearly a break from that response: not only did the network respond to reports complaining about posts using the material, they also seem to have proactively sought it out in other instances.

And yet there is not a universal consensus on the use of the images, as was reflected by the New York Post and New York Daily News’ decision to use graphic stills from the footage as their front-page splashes. Here begin the problems for Twitter: the network decided not to ban or suspend either outlet for sharing the images – despite banning other users for doing the same.

Twitter has not been nearly as eager to enter the content policing game in other situations. Like many other major companies, Twitter has long insisted it is not a publisher but a platform.

The distinction is an important one: publishers, such as the Guardian, bear a far greater degree of responsibility for what appears on their sites. By remaining a platform, Twitter is absolved of legal responsibility for most of the content of tweets. But by making what is in essence an editorial decision not to host a certain type of content, Twitter is rapidly blurring that line.

The network has not been as quick to involve itself when its users are sharing content far beyond what is even remotely acceptable – even when the profile of the incidents is high.


James Foley and the daily horrors of the internet: think hard before clicking | James Ball | Comment is free | theguardian.com

James Foley and the daily horrors of the internet: think hard before clicking | James Ball | Comment is free | theguardian.com.

Outcry over footage of Foley’s apparent beheading raises difficult questions about editorial ethics – and our own choices

 

 

James Foley in Syria in 2012
James Foley in 2012. In a statement on his Facebook page, his mother said: ‘We have never been prouder of our son Jim. He gave his life trying to expose the world to the suffering of the Syrian people.’ Photograph: Nicole Tung/AP

 

With depressing frequency in this summer of diverse horrors, we hear tales of desperate human misery, suffering and depravity – and because we live now in an era where virtually every phone is a globally connected camera, we are confronted with graphic evidence of tragedy.

 

The footage of the apparent beheading (to refer to the atrocity as an execution serves only to lend a veneer of dignity to barbarism) of the US photojournalist James Foley at the hands of a British Isis extremist has raised particularly strong feelings.

 

Social networks are banning users who share the footage. Newspapers are facing opprobrium for the choices they make in showing stills or parts of the video. Others, of course, will seek out the video after seeing the row, or else post it around the internet in a juvenile form of the free speech argument.

 

Before considering the rights and wrongs of the position, there is one fact we should face: we are presented with images of grotesque violence on a daily basis. Last month the New York Times ran on its front page the dead and broken body of a Palestinian child.

 

Like Foley, that child was someone’s son, someone’s brother, someone’s friend, and in a connected world there is just as much chance his family saw the photo and its spread as Foley’s will see the latest awful images of their loved one.

 

That photo raised little controversy in comparison to the use of images of Foley. Photos of groups of civilian men massacred by Isis across Iraq and Syria – widely shared on social media and used by publications across the world – caused no outcry whatsoever.

 

It’s hard to look at that and not see a double standard: like many other courageous and talented people, Foley had chosen to travel to the region, and knew the risks that entailed. Others were killed simply fleeing their homes. In a strange and bitter irony, one of the duties of photographers such as Foley is documenting bloodshed in order to show the world.

 

To see an outcry for Foley’s video and not for others is to wonder whether we are disproportionately concerned over showing graphic deaths of white westerners – maybe even white journalists – and not others.


BBC News – UAE court convicts eight over 'spoof documentary video'

BBC News – UAE court convicts eight over ‘spoof documentary video’.

UAE court convicts eight over ‘spoof documentary video’

Shezanne Cassim Shezanne Cassim’s family said the video merely poked fun at teenagers

Related Stories

Six foreigners and two UAE citizens have been sentenced to up to a year in jail for making what they say is a spoof video about Dubai youth culture.

A state security court found them guilty of “defaming the UAE society’s image abroad”, according to the state-owned newspaper, The National.

The family of American Shezanne Cassim, confirmed he was one of the six jailed for a year, three of them in absentia.

The foreigners were the first to be charged under a 2012 cybercrimes law.

It provides a legal basis to prosecute people who use information technology to criticise senior officials, argue for political reform or organise unlicensed demonstrations.


Saudi digital generation takes on Twitter, YouTube … and authorities | World news | theguardian.com

Saudi digital generation takes on Twitter, YouTube … and authorities | World news | theguardian.com.

Conservative country boasts world’s highest use of sites per capita, but criticising Islam remains a clear red line
A Saudi woman films an Islamic ceremony on her phone

A Saudi woman films an Islamic ceremony on her phone. Photograph: Ahmad al-Rubaye/AFP

Turki al-Hamad paid a heavy price for a tweet. Last year the novelist told his followers that Islam as practised in Saudi Arabia was not the “message of love” preached by the Prophet Muhammad. The outcome was six months in prison without trial.

Conditions were immeasurably better than when he was detained in the 1970s, but the hazards of speaking out in the digital age were still painfully clear.

Hamad’s case was unusual though not unique. Like Hamza Kashgari, a journalist from Jeddah, he had provoked conservative religious zealots who oppose change in the kingdom – or provide the government with a handy excuse to do so. But Twitter is immensely popular and largely tolerated. According to recent research, Saudi Arabia has the world’s highest Twitter and YouTube use per capita – a staggering 90m views of the latter a day. It also has the highest Facebook use in the Gulf.

On the face of it, it may seem surprising that an absolute monarchy with no parliament or political parties, tame newspapers and TV channels, enforced gender segregation and an official morality police should have such a flourishing social media world. But Saudis tweet in their millions to swap jokes, whinge about salaries, government waste and inefficiency – and corruption.

“Twitter has raised the ceiling of our freedoms,” said Hamad. For Hatoon al-Fassi, an Islamic feminist who campaigns for womens’ right to drive, social media has created a “virtual space” that compensates for Saudi Arabians’ lack of legal freedom of assembly or association.

“Twitter helps us breathe,” said the columnist Ahmed al-Najjar. Digital media have also blurred the boundaries between what is permissible and what is not – though criticising religion remains a clear red line.


Iran's Revolutionary Guards arrest internet activists | World news | The Guardian

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards arrest internet activists | World news | The Guardian.

Contributors to pro-opposition social networking websites accused of acting against national security

 

 

Evin prison

Evin prison in Tehran, where the activists are being held. Photograph: Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

 

Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards have carried out a new wave of arrests of cyber activists and members of pro-opposition social networking websites.

Kaleme, a leading opposition website, reported on Thursday that at least five Iranians who had shared news about the situation of political prisoners on Facebook have recently been held by the security apparatus of the country’s elite forces. They were identified as Amir Golestani, Masoud Ghasemkhani, Fariborz Kardar, Seyed Masoud Seyed Talebi and Roya Irani.

According to Kaleme, some of the five Iranians were administrators of popular cultural and social pages on Facebook but had occasionally shared or published posts about the opposition Green movement and its members behind bars in Iranian prisons. The activists are being held in Tehran’s notorious Evin prison.


En China las amantes denuncian la corrupción oficial – El Mostrador

En China las amantes denuncian la corrupción oficial – El Mostrador.

Cada vez con más frecuencia, amantes de altos funcionarios del Partido Comunista deciden hablar públicamente tras descubrir que sus parejas estaban casadas, tenían hijos y además eran corruptos.

Chinaa1

Lujuria, poder y corrupción son de por sí una mezcla explosiva. Pero lo es mucho más cuando a la muy publicitada ofensiva contra la corrupción del presidente chino, Xi Jinping, se suma una fuente de filtraciones tan improbable como una amante despechada.

En las últimas semanas, los chinos se han enfurecido con unas revelaciones muy poco habituales del extravagante estilo de vida de algunos miembros de la cúpula del Partido Comunista.

INTERNET

Uno de los principales lugares en que se han hecho públicas estas revelaciones es el blog de Zhu Ruifeng, que, dedicado a denunciar la corrupción, ganó visibilidad el año pasado cuando publicó un video sexual protagonizado por un funcionario que acabó en la cárcel.

Con el poder creciente de internet, detalles que en otro tiempo hubieran permanecido ocultos, están ahora a la vista del público.


Dos millones de personas vigilan internet en China – BioBioChile

Dos millones de personas vigilan internet en China – BioBioChile.


Jakub Krechowicz (SXC)

Jakub Krechowicz (SXC)

Publicado por Denisse Charpentier | La Información es de Agencia AFP

Unos dos millones de personas trabajan en la vigilancia y en la censura de internet en China, afirmó un diario de la prensa oficial que revela aspectos de este ejército secreto.

Muchas de estas personas disponen de un programa que permite seleccionar, con palabras claves, un enorme volumen de mensajes que circulan en las redes sociales chinas, precisó el diario Noticias de Pekín, en un artículo publicado el jueves.

Los “policías de la red”, pagados por los órganos de propaganda del gobierno y del Partido Comunista, así como por los sitios comerciales, se encargan de evitar que las redes sociales sirvan de espacio para criticar el régimen comunista o perturbar el orden establecido.

Sin embargo, a pesar de su gran número, estos agentes no pueden impedir que informaciones y comentarios no deseados por las autoridades chinas sean finalmente publicados y compartidos en la red.

El trabajo consiste en “vigilar y obtener información concerniente a los clientes”, indicó al diario uno de estos trabajadores, que rechaza la imagen de “agente secreto en línea”.

Las autoridades chinas refuerzan actualmente el control de las informaciones difundidas en las redes sociales.

Según una directiva recientemente adoptada por el poder, en el caso de que un microblog considerado ofensivo sea visto por 5.000 personas, su autor puede ser encarcelado.

Asimismo, los internautas chinos autores de un mensaje difamatorio compartido al menos 500 veces se arriesgan a una pena de tres años de prisión.