5 Filters

EU governments take a big step closer to taking control of the internet?

The EU adopted a law making tech companies delete ‘terrorist content’ within one hour

"The EU has adopted a new, controversial law that requires tech companies to delete what authorities deem “terrorist content” within an hour, or risk a fine.

The European Parliament formally adopted the law on Wednesday even as lawmakers and experts warned that it would not be practical to implement and could harm people’s privacy and free-speech rights.

Follow Tech Insider on Facebook

The law requires companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter to immediately remove content that authorities believe incites terrorism, tries to recruit terrorists, “glorifies terrorist activities,” or gives advice on how to make dangerous items like explosives and firearms.

The law calls on the tech firms to remove the content within an hour of being told to do so by authorities, or the countries could punish them with a fine.

The law is to come into force 12 months after it is published in the EU’s official journal, then adopted by each member state, The Verge reported.

Some parliament members who voted against it said the law could amount to censorship.

Reuters reported that Marcel Kolaja, the vice president of the European Parliament, said: “We really are risking censorship across Europe. Hungarian and Polish governments already demonstrated they have no issues removing content that they disagree with.”

Other parliament members said they worried that the legislation could leave governments free to define what they think terrorism is, and police online content as a result."

Groups like Brigade 77 have intimated they are instigating hostilities against online opposition. They and the CCDH have already designated some perfectly respectably online opposition figures (like groups perceived as anti-vaccination) as likely to inspire violence. This move could see control of online reporting one step from completion, enabling a legally binding order to censor based on any old BullSh*t that someone might cause someone else to commit violence.

1 Like

But outlets like these will, I’m sure, be able to operate without interference

https://twitter.com/ModernGunStore?s=09

https://twitter.com/BarrettRifles?s=09

https://twitter.com/pfizer?s=09

The whole state thing about pretending to abhor violence is so transparently hypocritical

Met PC sacked for hitting vulnerable teenage girl with baton 34 times

Sacked? He should be given a sack to wear.
Was the BBC outraged? If it was it hid it well.

"IOPC regional director Sal Naseem described the incident as “shocking”.

He added: "Immediately resorting to use of force without considering other de-escalation tactics, and particularly where the person involved has mental health issues, is of concern.

"PC Kemp’s immediate reaction when the girl exited the police car was to try and handcuff her, even though he didn’t have her under his control.

“The poor communication by this officer got the incident off to a bad start and, once he started to use the baton, he was unable to change tack.” "

It would be nice to see just a note of scepticism in the BBC reporting. Three officers present, how was “he” unable to change tack?

But the suggestion that someone might ‘commit violence’ because they’ve read Dr Mercola’s fully referenced medical diatribes is justification for Brigade 77 subverting democracy and the law.

1 Like

He just couldn’t help himself… Three dozen blows? Why no criminal charges???

I know, he just flipped the way violent criminals do.
You’d think even the servile BBC would have managed to sneak in a suggestion of criminality somehow, as it’s obvious once it’s suggested.