Free Speech Roundup: Month of September, 2018

snaves (39)in #freespeech • 6 years ago (edited)

Free Speech Roundup September

A summary of the top free speech related news and events from the past week. This week we have news on the EU Copyright Directive, a federal lawsuit, a speech on campus expression, student journalists restricted, and journalists targeted in Myanmar and Bangladesh.

Freedom of speech is the right from which all other human rights follow because it allows people to address grievances and protest for their other rights. It is therefore of the utmost importance to protect the right to express oneself freely from those who seek to restrict it.

EU Passes Copyright Directive

https://juliareda.eu/2018/09/ep-endorses-upload-filters/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45495550
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/sep/12/eu-copyright-law-may-force-tech-giants-to-pay-billions-to-publishers-facebook-google
The European Parliament voted to approve the latest version of the copyright directive including controversial Articles 11 and 13. Article 11, known as the 'Link Tax', requires online platforms to pay news organizations to use their content. The final version of the directive now clarifies that this does not include just hyperlinks to news stories. Article 13 requires platforms to create upload filters that would filter content uploaded by users. A small concession in the directive now means that content will not be automatically deleted by the upload filters. All but the smallest platforms will be liable for copyright infringements by their users. If fully adopted, these new laws would severely limit freedom of expression online, especially content that should be protected as fair use.

Lawsuit Challenges Cyberstalking Law

http://mynorthwest.com/1113238/washingtons-cyberstalking-law/
A federal lawsuit claims that Washington State’s cyberstalking law violates the First Amendment. Richard Lee Rynearson III of Bainbridge Island was accused of cyberstalking a neighbor, Clarence Moriwaki, over a political disagreement. The law broadly states that sending electronic messages “with the intent to harass, intimidate, torment or embarrass any other person,” and to anonymously or repeatedly post things online about that person constitutes cyberstalking. Rynearson’s lawyer argues that his speech after a restraining order was filed was about not to Moriwaki and therefore constitutionally protected.

Betsy DeVos Criticizes Campus Speech Policies

https://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/remarks-secretary-devos-national-constitution-centers-annual-constitution-day-celebration
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/sep/19/free-speech-espoused-at-asu-attorney-sa-1/
In a speech for Constitution Day, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos criticized the actions and policies of some colleges that restrict free speech and promoted adopting the Chicago Statement. DeVos also cited the importance of “reasoned argument” and “discovering facts” stating, "An institution of learning cannot be both a forum for all ideas and an advocate for some at the expense of others.” She specifically called out Arkansas State University for a case where a student was removed from a speech zone while recruiting for Turning Point USA. ASU designates several zones as “Free Expression Areas” and requires administrative approval to use those zones. A lawyer for ASU responded by saying that ASU “is committed to the First Amendment with policies and procedures that are designed to further that right and not restrict it,” but declined further comment due to an ongoing federal lawsuit over the incident.

Bangladesh Passes Digital Security Act

https://globalvoices.org/2018/09/28/free-speech-advocates-say-bangladeshs-new-digital-security-act-is-ripe-for-abuse/
The Bangladeshi parliament passed the Digital Security Act 2018, which was meant to replace the controversial ICT Act under which photojournalist Alam was arrested in August. However, the Digital Security Act reinforces Section 57 of the ICT Act instead of repealing it. The new law criminalizes various types of online speech including sedition, defamation, blasphemy, causing unrest, and whistleblowing. Large fines and/or lengthy prison times are the punishments for breaking the law. Human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, expressed concern that violates freedom of speech and could be used to stifle criticism in an upcoming election. The law also impedes the ability of citizens to acquire information from the government and invokes the colonial-era Offical Secrets Act.

USC Bars Student Journalists From Recording Public Forum

https://www.thefire.org/university-of-southern-california-bars-student-journalists-from-recording-public-forum-about-transparent-search-for-new-president/
The University of Southern California prohibited student journalists from recording or taking notes of a public forum with committee members considering candidates for university president. The ban goes against the university’s commitment to a transparent process. At first, the university sought to prohibit student journalists from even attending. USC is a private institution, but promises it’s students freedom of expression. The university issued a statement citing the need of contributors to “feel comfortable sharing their perspectives freely.” USC later apologized, saying “student media reporters were mistakenly told by a University Communications staff person that they were not permitted to report from inside the session.”

Reuters Journalists Sentenced To Jail In Myanmar

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/03/world/asia/myanmar-reuters-journalists-sentenced-trial.html
Reuters Journalists U Wa Lone and U Kyaw Soe Oo were sentenced to 7 years in jail for violating Myanmar’s colonial-era Official Secrets Act. They had been investigating a massacre of 10 Rohingya Muslim villagers in Rakhine State. The judge convicted them for handling state secrets. They testified that police corporal met them at a restaurant and handed them rolled-up papers as they left. They were detained by police as soon as they went outside, before they could even look at the papers. Another police official testified that the papers were ordered planted on the journalists. Their lawyers argued that all items cited in the conviction were public information, but the judge argued they intended to harm the country. The case is a part of Myanmar’s crackdown on the press as a means of covering up atrocities against the Rohingya Muslim minority.

What do you think about these stories? Leave a comment below!

Recent Free Speech Roundups:

Free Speech Roundup: Month of August, 2018
Free Speech Roundup: Month of July, 2018
Free Speech Roundup: Week of June 24th, 2018
Free Speech Roundup: Week of June 17th, 2018
Free Speech Roundup: Week of June 10th, 2018