More From Our Partners Florida woman allegedly crashes children’s birthday party, rapes teennypost.comRussell Wilson, AOC among many voicing support for Naomi Osakacbsnews.comNative American Tribe Gets Back Sacred Island Taken 160 Years Agogoodnewsnetwork.orgA ProPublica investigation has caused outrage in the U.S. this weekvaluewalk.comAstounding Fossil Discovery in California After Man Looks Closelygoodnewsnetwork.orgKiller drone ‘hunted down a human target’ without being told tonypost.comPolice Capture Elusive Tiger Poacher After 20 Years of Pursuing the Huntergoodnewsnetwork.orgI blew off Adam Sandler 22 years ago — and it’s my biggest regretnypost.comBrave 7-Year-old Boy Swims an Hour to Rescue His Dad and Little Sistergoodnewsnetwork.org Share Show Comments ▼ Tags: NULL BP cases to be heard near Gulf KCS-content whatsapp Lawsuits against BP following the Gulf of Mexico oil leak will be heard in New Orleans, a judicial panel said yesterday. BP had argued for the cases to be heard in Texas, a state traditionally more sympathetic to the interests of oil firms. The news comes as the oil giant suspended work on a relief well following predictions of a hurricane. Tuesday 10 August 2010 8:55 pm whatsapp
Men of the moment – Andrea Pratichetti of Italy A is tackled by Vasily ArtemyevItaly A 24Russia 19Italy A survived a second half Russian fightback to book their place in the Churchill Cup Plate final. The Azzurri led 18-6 at the break but they held on by their fingertips in the last 20 minutes to set up a showdown with Tonga at Sixways on Saturday.Senior Italian assistant coach Alessandra Troncon: “It was a very important to win because last week we lost to Canada. Russia are in our pool during the World Cup so to win is a good. The scrum saved us a few times so I think it as key for us today.”Russia face a Bowl final against their World Cup opponents USA and Bears’ boss Kingsley Jones said: “It’s a game we should have won. These lads can really play rugby but there was some naivety and not being street wise. But there are a lot of positives. A lot of the players showed what they can do in open space. The lineout improved but the scrum was an issue for us.”Italy led by nine at halftime thanks to tries from Matteo Pratichetti and Giulio Toniolatti, who went into the corner after a drive and deft offload from loosehead prop Alberto de Marchi. Russia had to rely on the boot of Yury Kushnarev, who kicked two penalties and then added a third early in the second half to close the gap to nine points.Tito Tebaldi landed a third penalty but then the tide turned as Russia scored the try of the match, a breakaway from their own 22 when Andrey Bykanov scooped up a loose ball, fed Kushnarev and when Rushan Yagudin took the ball on halfway he stepped out of the tackle and raced away. Scorers: Try: Yagudin; Pens: Kushnarev (4); Con: Kushnarev.Referee: D Pearson (England)Att: 5357 With Tebaldi in the sinbin for killing the ball after Vasily Artemyev’s break, Riccardo Bocchino stretched the lead. Kushnarev failed with two attempts that could have put Russia right back into the game and was soon replaced by Anton Ryabov. Tebaldi missed a penalty and Russia almost hit the killer button when Alexander Shakirov made the break and only a last ditch tackle from Matteo Pratichetti stopped him delivering the final pass to Yagudin.Russia had a final crack with a freekick which they ran close to the Italian line but they could not capitalise and the chance was lost.Italy A: R Trevisan; G Toniolatti, A Pratichetti, A Pratichetti, M Sepe; R Bocchino, T Tebaldi; A De Marchi, T D’Aspice, F Staibano (D Christolini 47), J Furno, V Bernabo (capt M Bortolami 45), F Minto, M Bergamasco, M Vosawai. Reps (not used): A Manici, M Aguero, D Gerber G Venditti, N Belardo.Yellow card: Tebaldi 59-69Scorers: Tries: M Pratichetti, Toniolatti; Pens: Tebaldi (3),Bocchino; Con: Tebaldi; LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS Russia: I Klyuchnikov; V Artemyev, M Babaev, S Trishin , R. Yagudin; Y. Kushnarev (A Ryabov 70), A Bykanov (A Shakirov 66); G Tsnobiladze (A Travkin 49), V Tsnobiladze (V Korshunov 66), A Chernyshev (I Prishchepenko 49), A Panasenko, D Antonov, V Gresev, M Sidorov, V Grachev (capt, A Garbuzov 59). Rep (not used): I Galinovsky. GLOUCESTER, ENGLAND – JUNE 12: Andrea Pratichetti of Italy A is tackled by Vasily Artemyev during the Churchill Cup match between Italy A and Russia at Kingsholm on June 12, 2011 in Gloucester, England. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)
12 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis Amongst other things, the report states that: 38% of charities do not submit their annual accounts on time or at all, or provide adequate information on performance;The Charity Commission should plan investigations more systematically, complete investigations more quickly and make greater use of statutory powers to expedite problem cases;One quarter of complaints against the Commission are upheld and that the Commission should give greater recognition to the lessons from feedback from these complaints;The Commission should examine the scope for publishing comparative information on the performance of charities of similar type and size;The Commission should make some sample checks on prospective new trustees; andThe Commission should reduce the time it takes to complete inquiries.CFDG Director, Shirley Scott welcomed the report and stated: “If we are to raise the quality of the financial management of charities there are responsibilities for Charities and for the Charity Commission. After previous reports found ‘serious shortcomings’ in the Commission’s performance in this area, this much welcome report has highlighted the excellent progress the Charity Commission has made. By working with them we hope to be able to further raise public confidence in the financial management of charities.” AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis CFDG backs call for tougher action by the Charity Commission to deal with financial mismanagement in charities.The Charity Finance Directors’ Group has today welcomed the publication of “Giving Confidently: The Role of the Charity Commission in Regulating Charities” by the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons.The new report urges the Charity Commission to act “quicker” and “more vigorously” to ensure that charities file their annual accounts on time. It calls on the Commission to make the most of the statutory powers it has. Advertisement Howard Lake | 2 July 2002 | News Charity Finance Directors (Welcome PAC Report About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
Howard Lake | 24 July 2014 | News Tagged with: Finance Ireland Northern Ireland Focus’ fundraising holds up in 2013 As Focus Ireland released its latest annual report showing that it supported more than 10,000 homeless people, an increase of 20% on the previous year, fundraising income remained steady in 2013.Total fundraising income for 2013 was £5,440,000 against £5,479,000 in 2012. £3 million of that figure came from Focus’s 17,900 regular donors.Community fundraising contributed £173,000.Events play a big part in Focus’s income generation, with the Four Peaks challenge raising £194,000. Trusts and foundations contributed £275,000 while a corporate partnership with Aviva raised £170,000.Total income, which includes mostly income from statutory sources, was £18.3 million in 2013 and £18 million in 2012. Costs, however, increased to £19.1 million, up from £18.2 million in 2012.Focus Ireland says it generally adheres to a principle that the costs of generating fundraising income should not exceed 20% of the amount raised. However, in 2012 the charity decided to commit £1.1 million as part of a strategic review to increase fundraising income.Focus said that for the duration of the strategic initiatives and while investment is being made to ‘grow fundraising,’the organisation will deviate from the above principle. These costs were 27% in 2013 (2012: 30%) of funds raised. 24 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
The Institute of Fundraising and online giving platform Localgiving are partnering to provide increased fundraising support to local charities and community groups across the UK.The organisations will work together to expand access to training, resources and fundraising opportunities.Local Charities DayThe partnership was announced ahead of the UK’s first Local Charities Day which takes place on 16 December.On that day Localgiving will publish its 2016 Local Charity and Community Group Sustainability Report. Its findings underpin the need for a partnership of this kind. For example, it reports that 77% of local charities do not feel they currently have the necessary skills to run a successful fundraising campaign. In addition, 83% of local groups say that they would benefit from support with online fundraising.LocalgivingFounded as an online giving platform for small and local organisations, Localgiving has developed into a membership and support network for local charities and community groups. It aims to empower grassroots organisations to fundraise online, connect with supporters and take control of their financial future. It also provides advocacy for the local voluntary sector and works to secure third party funding for its members.Through the partnership, Institute of Fundraising members will have the opportunity to claim a free one-year Localgiving membership for their local charity or community group. With this they will gain access to secure online donation processing, automated Gift Aid and regular match fund campaigns.In return, the Institute of Fundraising will provide resources and support to help Localgiving members develop their knowledge and make the most out of online fundraising.Stephen Mallinson, Chief Executive of Localgiving said: Advertisement Tagged with: institute of Localgiving small charities Training Howard Lake | 13 December 2016 | News About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. 99 total views, 1 views today IoF and Localgiving partner to boost fundraising support for local charities “It is important that Localgiving works alongside other voluntary sector organisations to bolster support for local community-based groups, so we’re thrilled to announce this partnership with the Institute of Fundraising. Its knowledge and expertise will be invaluable in helping our members to develop their fundraising capacity and diversify their sources of income over the coming years.” 100 total views, 2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5 AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5
Nicky Morgan appointed DCMS Secretary of State The Conservative Member of Parliament for Loughborough, Morgan was first elected to Parliament in 2010.Before becoming a politician, Morgan studied law at Oxford University, working as a solicitor specialising in corporate law from 1994 till her election.Prior to taking up the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport position, her positions have included Chair of the Treasury Select Committee from 2017 – 2019, Secretary of State for Education and Minister for Women and Equalities (2014 – 16), Financial Secretary to the Treasury (2014), Minister for Women (2014), and Economic Secretary to the Treasury (2013 – 14), during which time she was responsible for charity tax policy. Tagged with: politics UK Parliament official portrait of Nicky Morgan, released under an Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) licence. 410 total views, 2 views today The Right Honourable Nicky Morgan has taken up her new position of Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.Morgan was appointed by Boris Johnson late last week and replaces the sacked Jeremy Wright. Last week also saw Johnson appoint a new International Development Secretary, Alok Sharma. Sharma replaces Rory Stewart who resigned his role on Johnson’s appointment as Prime Minister, and was previously Minister of State for Employment at the Department of Work and Pensions, a role he had held since January 2018. He is also MP for Reading West. Melanie May | 29 July 2019 | News 411 total views, 3 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5 AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5 About Melanie May Melanie May is a journalist and copywriter specialising in writing both for and about the charity and marketing services sectors since 2001. She can be reached via www.thepurplepim.com.
FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this A decision by the Amazon company to block a book focused on a scientific and cooperative approach to COVID-19 amounts to corporate information control operating at a new intensity. This censorship occurs while almost every form of U.S. media permits and promotes racist, unscientific and thoroughly confusing information.The censored book is “Capitalism on a Ventilator: The Impact of COVID-19 in China & the U.S.” This anthology of 55 articles by a broad range of social justice authors discuss the importance of free health care, social distancing, testing, protective equipment, education and social mobilizations during the pandemic. The book highlights the differences in policy and state organization toward a virus that has so far caused fewer than 5,000 deaths in China, but more than 225,000 deaths in the U.S. The book also shows the glaring lack of social support infrastructure in the U.S. in contrast to U.S. trillions spent on elaborate military, police and prison infrastructure, both at home and worldwide.“Capitalism on a Ventilator” is unique in challenging the sharp rise in racist attacks on Asian people in the U.S. during the pandemic that flow from government, business and media hostility to China. Its commentaries expose the attacks on China by both Democratic and Republican parties through their endorsing and imposing sanctions, military operations, trade wars, and cancelations of cultural and academic exchanges.Censorship by monopoly controlOn Sept. 24, World View Forum, a small educational not-for-profit publishing company, received this message from Amazon: “We’re contacting you regarding the following book(s): Capitalism on a Ventilator: The Impact of COVID-19 in China & the U.S. by Sara Flounders (AUTHOR); Carlos Martinez (AUTHOR); Monica Moorehead (AUTHOR); Kevin Zeese (AUTHOR); Ajamu Baraka (AUTHOR); Deirdre Griswold (AUTHOR); Mumia Abu Jamal (AUTHOR); Vijay Prashad (AUTHOR); Margaret Kimberley (AUTHOR); Lee Siu Hin (AUTHOR). Due to the rapidly changing nature of information around coronavirus, we are referring customers to official sources for advice about the prevention or treatment of the virus. Amazon reserves the right to determine what content we offer according to our content guidelines. Your book does not comply with our guidelines. As a result, we are not offering your book for sale. To have your book reconsidered for publication, please update your book details (i.e., your title, cover image, and/or product description) and resubmit.”World View Forum immediately tried to reverse Amazon’s decision and provided layers of authentication of information. But there is no appeal or even a complaint process to Amazon decisions. The company’s emails are sent from a no-reply address.Amazon trumpets that it has the widest range of book titles, ease of placement, best order fulfillment and lack of censorship. As the world’s largest online book seller, Amazon claims that it resists calls to censor or otherwise restrict books, and that for it to pull a book is exceedingly rare. The company has been more than willing to make a profit by selling white supremacist propaganda and wild conspiracy theories that the COVID virus is human-made. During the pandemic Amazon has listed products that are dangerous quack cures for the virus.But a book that discusses how socialist countries have had great success in controlling the deadly COVID-19 virus through cooperation, free healthcare and public education – that book has information that capitalist giant Amazon has decided must be censored.Amazon allows COVID hoax bookRight-wing media darling Alex Berenson self-published “Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns” with Amazon in June 2020. Berenson is notorious for denouncing masks, quarantine measures and school closings, and for claiming the count of deaths and infections in the U.S. is a hoax and massive overcount. He appears regularly on far right media, including Breitbart, Fox News and The American Conservative.When Amazon sent Berenson a stop-publication message similar to that sent to left publisher World View Forum, Berenson simply turned to a powerful billionaire friend – Elon Musk, the fourth-richest man in the U.S., who has made more than $48 billion in profit during the pandemic. Demanding Amazon publish Berenson, Musk publicly threatened and pressured Amazon’s billionaire owner Jeff Bezos through the public venue of the Washington Post – which Bezos also owns.The result? Amazon immediately backed off from its decision to pull Berenson’s COVID-hoax book.Why? Because both Bezos and Musk are capitalist powers who have a vested interest in keeping their businesses running at top speed during the pandemic, even if this costs many lives. So promoting a book that spouts non-scientific theories that COVID is a hoax and that there is no need for protective equipment, social distancing, testing of workers or shut down of businesses is also in their economic interest.Musk, with his multi-billion-dollar Tesla auto advancing down production lines, has shared tweets like “Coronavirus panic is dumb” and “It’s the lockdown, not the virus, that causes the problems.”Bezos also has his multi-billion-dollar reason to allow COVID hoax publications: to keep Amazon’s global distribution system of warehouses operating at full capacity during the pandemic. With Walmart first, Amazon is the second-largest employer in the U.S., with 1.5 million workers.On Oct. 1 Amazon admitted that 19,816 of its workers had tested positive or been “presumed positive” for COVID. But its production lines roll on.As for Berenson’s right-wing COVID book, the Bezos-owned Washington Post gave full coverage to the Bezos-owned Amazon reversal and highlighted the agreement to print and distribute the book.Capitalist hostility to ChinaControlling the narrative on responsibility for this global pandemic is a high priority for the entire U.S. ruling class. On the surface the two U.S. imperialist political parties appear to have sharp differences in response to the pandemic. But they are united in promoting hostility to China.Nevertheless, the stunning difference in results between the U.S. and China in response to COVID-19 – and the pandemic’s impact on the two very different economies – has been impossible to ignore. The corporate media response is to suppress any mention of the positive impact that China’s free health care, guaranteed income during quarantine, coherent national planning and deep community participation has had on pandemic illness and mortality rates.Instead, the only explanation given by big business media for the sharp difference is that China is “authoritarian,” “heavy handed” and “dictatorial,” and that the population is “resentful and repressed.”The New York Times summarized this hostile approach in an Oct. 31 article: “Authoritarian Strategy: Effective, but Suffocating.” This lengthy “analysis” failed to mention a basic fact: that at this time, China’s COVID-19 deaths are under 5,000, compared to U.S. deaths of over 225,000. And the U.S. has only one-fourth the population of China!Other censorship of left communicationAmazon is not the only corporate media monopoly censoring left-leaning news and organizing. Google and other major search engines have reset their algorithms to filter and restrict almost all alternative and socialist news sites. With search traffic rerouted away from these sites, this drastically reduces the number of views by more than 50%. Google claims that this is to combat “fake news.”Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube are stepping up their blocking of antiracist organizing and anti-imperialist solidarity. This is done by their equating posts by violent white supremist organizations and neo-Nazi militias with antiracist, anti-capitalist organizing.In the current censorship sweep, YouTube has directly intervened to block a webinar featuring a Palestinian leader, Leila Khaled. Thousands of Twitter and Instagram accounts have been disabled and hash tags eliminated. Shutdowns have impacted It’s Going Down, CrimethInc and the PNW Youth Liberation Front in Portland, Ore. Plans by the Baltimore Peoples Power Assembly for a Peoples Mandate were shut down on Facebook, along with the accounts of connected organizations and accounts of the administrators of the Facebook sites. This in turn impacted a Cuba Solidarity Conference as well as a SanctionsKill Facebook account that was threatened with shutdown for posting news of the impacted Cuba Conference.A mobilized pushback forced Facebook to step back from this sweeping attack.Fighting Amazon’s ban on scientific truthThe publication of “Capitalism on a Ventilator” was organized by the anti-imperialist International Action Center, in collaboration with the China-U.S. Solidarity Committee. These organizations and the authors have affirmed their determination to get the book published as part of the ongoing political struggle against the virus and for socialism.The banned book’s table of contents and list of authors, along with four chapters, is available at https://wp.me/p4Yme1-404. Readers are urged to break the ban on “Capitalism on a Ventilator” by sharing the link and your short reviews widely on social media. Maintain pressure against Amazon banning books with a left perspective by tweeting the Washington Post @JeffBezos.Amazon has also refused to take down the unproofed version of the book, which was put up as a placeholder. Please do not buy the unauthorized, unfinished version currently listed on Amazon.
SHARE Livestock Marketing Association Encourages USDA’s Investigation of Beef Packers Facebook Twitter SHARE Facebook Twitter The Livestock Marketing Association (LMA) is encouraged to see Secretary Sonny Perdue’s announcement that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will be extending its oversight to determine the causes of divergence between boxed and live beef prices, beginning with the Holcomb, Kansas beef processing plant fire and now incorporating the COVID-19 pandemic.LMA calls for the investigation of beef packers to be comprehensive and expeditious. It should consider all potential anti-competitive and oligopolistic issues. This investigation should also include Department of Justice (DOJ) participation.From the beginning, LMA has supported USDA’s investigation into beef pricing margins, which was opened in August 2019 following a beef processing plant fire. At that time, LMA wrote to USDA encouraging the agency to conduct a thorough investigation of all facets of this issue and underlying forces. LMA urged that if unfair trade practices, price manipulation, collusion, or other violations of the Packers and Stockyards Act or antitrust laws were found, rapid enforcement actions had to follow.LMA went on to point out that the market volatility following the Holcomb plant fire was “only one illustration of long-standing concerns regarding pricing and competition.” The LMA letter urged USDA’s investigation to analyze issues related to competition in a larger context than the fire, including looking at issues experienced due to lack of competition in the entire live cattle marketing complex.Unfortunately, less than a year later, we still await the results of the initial investigation and the structural concerns are proving true once again. The cattle market in the wake of COVID-19 has responded similarly to how it did after the Holcomb plant fire. Once federal, state, and local authorities began instituting recommended and mandatory economic shutdowns in early March 2020, the cattle industry experienced a sharp decline in fed cattle and feeder cattle prices. At the same time, boxed beef prices skyrocketed. Consumers spoke volumes as evidenced by empty meat cases and high prices paid because they view our beef as essential for survival in this pandemic. The combination of these factors resulted in significant packer profit margins. All the while, livestock producers continue to receive a shrinking portion of the retail beef dollar paid by the American consumer. Additionally, a dramatically depressed futures market only worsens the pain by removing opportunities to manage price risk.LMA is the national trade organization representing more than 75 percent of the regularly selling fixed facility livestock auction markets in the U.S. LMA also represents online and video marketing entities, and professional buyers: livestock dealers and order buyers. Our more than 800 livestock marketing business members each work with hundreds and even thousands of producers to utilize competitive markets to bring them the best prices for their animals. This adds up to hundreds of thousands of cattle producers served by markets.Our industry needs producers, feeders, markets, and packers. It is critical that each of these sectors have a reasonable opportunity to make a profit during the business cycle, ensuring a healthy and sustainable industry. However, if anti-competitive practices are at play in one segment, it risks pushing participants in other segments out of business. The cattle industry needs answers regarding what is behind the dramatic spread between live cattle and boxed beef prices and if there is any illegal activity involved. LMA believes that coordination between the USDA and DOJ in conducting an investigation is one step closer to market transparency and participant confidence.Source: LMA press release Home Indiana Agriculture News Livestock Marketing Association Encourages USDA’s Investigation of Beef Packers By Hoosier Ag Today – Apr 14, 2020 Previous articleUsing Enlist E3 Soybeans as Part of a Weed Control SystemNext articleProcessing Plant Shutdowns, Slowdowns Backing Up Livestock on the Farm Hoosier Ag Today
News Read in Russian / Читать по-русски Related documents Беларусь 2012PDF – 122.31 KB Help by sharing this information RSF_en May 27, 2021 Find out more RSF at the Belarusian border: “The terrorist is the one who jails journalists and intimidates the public” News Follow the news on Belarus “We welcome opening of criminal investigation in Lithuania in response to our complaint against Lukashenko” RSF says Receive email alerts June 2, 2021 Find out more May 28, 2021 Find out more News Organisation Russian media boss drops the pretence and defends Belarus crackdown March 12, 2012 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Belarus While Belarus sinks into political isolation and an economic slump, President Lukashenko’s regime has been strenghtening its grip on the Web. The Internet – a mobilization and information platform – has received the full brunt of the authorities’ brutal crackdown on the opposition. to go further BelarusEurope – Central Asia BelarusEurope – Central Asia News The Internet has played a crucial role in a climate marked by intensified censorship and a hunt for journalists. Foreign – and particularly Russian – reporters are now personae non gratae. Some 100 Belarusian journalists were interrogated in 2011 alone, and over 30 given prison terms, as were Irina Khalip, correspondent for the independent Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and Natalia Radzina, editor of the Charter97.org website, who was forced to seek asylum in Lithuania. Pressures on netizens and the number of cyberattacks on the media have been multiplying. Surveillance has become routine.Internet filtering, provided for by Decree 60 (see the Belarus chapter of the 2011 “Enemies of the Internet” report) has increased. The blacklist of blocked websites, which has been steadily growing since the unrest of December 2010, now includes the news website Charter97.org, the opposition website belaruspartisan.org, the human rights NGO Viasna’s website, and humorist Yauhen Lipkovich’s blog on LiveJournal. Crackdown intensified in times of unrestIn December 2010, demonstrations against the re-election of Lukashenko led the regime to intensify its crackdown. A new series of destabilizing events induced it to try to impose a genuine blackout on media coverage of the Minsk metro bombing in April 2011. Journalists deemed too focused on the investigation were labeled “scoundrels” and “criminals,” and were accused of “disseminating false information” and “defamation.” The Charter97.org and belaruspartisan.org websites, known for their criticisms of government policy, were the target of cyberattacks. On 12 April 2011, Belarusian Prosecutor General Grigory Vasilevitch set the tone by openly declaring that he wanted “to restore order” on the Web.In June and July 2011, peaceful anti-regime demonstrations were harshly repressed: hundreds of people were arrested, including dozens of journalists, and the Internet was partially blocked during “silent protests” without slogans or banners, which took place throughout the country. In addition to denouncing the regime itself, participants objected to deteriorating living conditions and the devaluation of their currency. The “Revolution through Social Networks” campaign, widely circulated on Twitter via hashtag #2206v1900 and on the Russian-language version of Facebook, Vkontakte, spread like wildfire. Intimidation and “preventive conversations”In view of the mobilization’s magnitude, Belarusian authorities began to take the offensive on the Internet. The “Revolution through Social Networks” group, which boasted 216,000 members, was shut down by Vkontakte just before the 3 July 2011 protests. It reopened the next day at a new address, losing many participants in the process. The Vkontakte website was blocked for several hours on 13 July 2011 by several Internet Service Providers (ISPs), including ByFly. On 3 July, the Belarusian service website of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty was hit by a distributed denial of service attack (DDoS) that shut it down for several hours.Under pretense of a “friendly get-together,” the police invited some netizens to “preventive conversations” in order to persuade them to stop protesting and covering the protests. Despite these pressures, many blogs and online media such as euroradio.by, Babruiski Rehiyanalny Portal (in Babruisk), Silnye Novosti (in Gomel), and Ximik.info (in Novopolotsk) covered the demonstrations. Youtube actively relayed video clips of the events.Not only did the government censor online protests, but it also used the Web to intimidate demonstrators: for example, the Interior Ministry – who created its Twitter account (@mvd_by) in April 2011, later followed by the Minsk Police Department (@GUVD_Minsk) – did not hesitate to tweet warning messages during the demonstrations: “To all persons going to the city square (…): you will have to answer for it.” In addition, the Belarus ISP BelTelecom redirected netizens trying to connect to Vkontakte to sites containing malware. From early May to early June 2011, at least seven websites were shut down at the request of the police, who had been granted new prerogatives by the Law of March 1, 2011.The authorities pursued the offensive through legislation. Following Decree 60 of February 2010, Law 317-3, which took effect in Belarus on 8 January 2012, reaffirmed Internet surveillance and reinforced Net censorship in Belarus with a repressive arsenal. Already included among the main provisions of Decree 60 of February 2010 was the obligation of ISPs and cybercafés to collect Internet users’ personal data and conduct citizen surveillance, and the option for authorities to order the blocking of any site deemed “extremist” (a vague definition which regularly leads to the overblocking and closure of opposition websites). The new law provides sanctions against those who violate such provisions. Although non-commercial entities do not seem to be directly affected by the part of the law which requires Belarusian company websites to be hosted or duly registered in the country, the authorities may still draw up a list of banned sites controlled by state bodies. In January 2012, the European Union strengthened its sanctions against certain Belarusian individuals and entities by subjecting them to travel restrictions and a potential assets freeze. The regime cannot resolve the country’s problems by sinking into a repressive hysteria that would only exacerbate tensions. It is urgent for it to hear the international community’s appeals to reason and put an end to its aimless repression and war on information.
Reports Democracies need “reciprocity mechanism” to combat propaganda by authoritarian regimes ChinaAsia – Pacific China: Political commentator sentenced to eight months in prison RSF_en As the Communist Party of China prepares to inaugurate its 17th Congress on 15 October, Reporters Without Borders today publishes the first report on online censorship in China by someone inside the country. Researched and written by a Chinese technician working for an Internet company, it describes the mechanisms used to censor the Internet and how the Internet Information Administrative Bureau controls the leading news websites. News Receive email alerts Related documents Journey to the Heart of Internet CensorshipPDF – 407.55 KB April 27, 2021 Find out more In partnership with Reporters Without Borders and Chinese Human Rights Defenders, a Chinese Internet expert working in IT industry has produced an exclusive study on the key mechanism of the Chinese official system of online censorship, surveillance and propaganda. The author prefers to remain anonymous.On the eve of the 17th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which opens this week in Beijing, Reporters Without Borders and the Chinese Human Rights Defenders call on the government to allow the Chinese to exercise their rights to freedom of press, expression and information.“This system of censorship is unparalleled anywhere in the world and is an insult to the spirit of online freedom,” the two organisations said. “With less than a year to go before the Beijing Olympics, there is an urgent need for the government to stop blocking thousands of websites, censoring online news and imprisoning Internet activists.”This report shows how the CCP and the government have deployed colossal human and financial resources to obstruct online free expression. Chinese news websites and blogs have been brought under the editorial control of the propaganda apparatus at both the national and local levels.The use of the Internet keeps growing in China. The country now has more than 160 million Internet users and at least 1.3 million websites. But the Internet’s promise of free expression and information has been nipped in the bud by the Chinese government’s online censorship and surveillance system.“Journey to the Heart of Internet Censorship” explains how this control system functions and identifies its leading actors such the Internet Propaganda Administrative Bureau (an offshoot of the Information Office of the State Council, the executive office of the government), the Bureau of Information and Public Opinion (an offshoot of the party’s Publicity Department, the former Propaganda Department) and the Internet Bureau (another Publicity Department offshoot).The report also documents how the Beijing Internet Information Administrative Bureau has in practice asserted its daily editorial control over the leading news websites based in the nation’s Capital. It gives many examples of the actual instructions issued by officials in charge of this bureau.The last part of the report gives the results of a series of tests conducted with the mechanism of control through filtering keywords. These tests clearly show that, though there are still many disparities in the levels of censorship, the authorities have successfully coerced the online media into submission to censor themselves heavily on sensitive subjects.This report recommends using proxy servers, exploiting the different levels of censorship between provinces or between levels in the administration and using new Internet technologies (blogs, discussion forums, Internet telephony etc.)Download the full report June 2, 2021 Find out more China’s Cyber Censorship Figures to go further March 12, 2021 Find out more Help by sharing this information News October 10, 2007 – Updated on January 20, 2016 A “Journey to the Heart of Internet censorship” on eve of party congress ChinaAsia – Pacific Organisation Follow the news on China News