We're launching a new review series that explores the world of independent tools that prioritize you.
No Big Tech, no smoke and mirrors.
Just straight talk on the best (and the buried) features of these tools and the downsides you need to know. We start with Proton Mail.
How private is it, really?
What traps do even the savviest users fall into?
Our comprehensive review peels back the curtain on Proton Mail's true capabilities and limitations.
Don't miss out—discover what could make or break your inbox security.
Become a supporter here.
Get the massive review here. |  | America First Legal (AFL) has announced that it has filed a formal complaint, based on new evidence, urging an investigation into the activities of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).
This UK-based group has been accused of direct involvement in online censorship, including in the US, notably in the affair around the "naming and shaming" of the supposed Covid "Disinformation Dozen" - which is why the AFL's complaint has now been submitted to the US Department of Justice (DOJ).
The key question that AFL wants to be answered is whether those behind CCDH should be treated as "agents of a foreign principal" who took on the role of stifling free speech in the US.
Such a designation of the group, if confirmed, would be in line with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
We obtained a copy of the request for you here.
AFL notes that in the UK, CCDH "shares an address with Labour Together, a UK Labour Party-associated think tank that met with Kamala Harris's campaign at the DNC in Chicago."
Those AFL wants investigated include CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed, while a press release names other key people as Chair of the CCDH Board Simon Clark, CCDH's former Head of Policy Eva Hartshorn-Sanders, board member of CCDH US and UK Thomas Conrad Brookes (US citizen who lives in Belgium), CCDH US Board members Kristy Jean McNeill, Aleen Keshishian, Zack Morgenroth, and CCDH UK Board member Damian Collins.
Simon Clark is described as colluding to censor online speech with the US government as a former resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Lab (part of Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) and Virality Project).
The Atlantic Council has already been sued by AFL in a federal class action alleging "conspiracy with the federal government to censor speech."
Eva Hartshorn-Sanders, meanwhile, is said to have "advocated for policies given to her by the CCDH UK and the UK Labour Party."
Aleen Keshishian is the founder and CEO of Lighthouse Management + Media, which represents a number of Hollywood celebrities, AFL said.
The request for a DOJ investigation cites CCDH's description of its activities as being in the service of protecting human and civil liberties on the internet - but also, the critics blasting it as engaged in "brazen smearing, attacking of dissenting views, deplatforming, censoring" dissenting voices.
AFL at the same time states that although CCDH is registered in the UK as a non-profit, there is in fact "no material separation between it and the original entity of the same name established in the United Kingdom."
"Our investigation has uncovered shocking details about a foreign organization's influence over the Biden-Harris Administration and numerous state governments," commented AFL Legal Executive Director Gene Hamilton.
According to him, this was "not just any influence - their aim and stated goals appear to be to stop Americans from exercising a fundamental right guaranteed against governmental interference by the First Amendment."
"And for nearly four years, the Biden-Harris DOJ appears to have looked the other way. The Biden-Harris DOJ is now on notice. The time to investigate is now," Hamilton said. | You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.
Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.
Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.
Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.
Thank you.
|  | House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has raised concerns about YouTube's handling of a recent interview between former President Donald Trump and podcast host Joe Rogan. Jordan's alarm centers on allegations that the platform may have deliberately downranked the visibility of the three-hour conversation, which did not appear at the top of search results when users searched for "Joe Rogan Trump" or "Joe Rogan Donald Trump."
In a letter addressed to Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, Jordan expressed his apprehensions, stating, "We write to seek an immediate briefing on (1) YouTube's decision to censor Joe Rogan's interview with President Trump, and (2) Google Search's elevation of material critical of the interview."
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
Further compounding the issue, YouTube issued a statement on X, acknowledging issues with the interview's visibility. The statement clarified, "For some searches on Monday the original 3-hour interview didn't appear prominently. Short excerpts uploaded by the Joe Rogan channel appeared, but we know it was frustrating for users looking to find the full video." The platform assured that measures were being taken to amend the search results to better feature the full podcast soon. |  | | Jordan's correspondence also reflected a broader critique of the tech giant's recent actions, suggesting a pattern of censorship. He argued, "Given the company's recent history of censorship, including at the behest of the Biden-Harris Administration, YouTube's censorship of former President Trump is particularly troubling."
Emphasizing the critical need for open political discourse, especially as elections approach, Jordan demanded that a briefing be arranged promptly, setting a deadline of no later than 10:00 am on November 14, 2024. |  | In Ireland, the controversial Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offenses) Act 2024 has become law.
President Michael Higgins on Tuesday signed the bill - as Green Party leader Roderic O'Gorman welcomed the development, and vowed that if still in power after the November election, this party would "certainly" work to get even more "hate speech legislation" adopted.
This remark has to do with a temporary removal of some of the current bill's controversial provisions, the implication being that those might make a comeback in some "new hate speech" bill.
The parts removed concern some incitement to violence and hatred and hate speech provisions; however, those on hate crime have been left in the text.
Prior to being signed into law, the amended Criminal Justice Act 2024 - known as the "Hate Crime Bill" - cleared the country's parliament in a 78-50 vote earlier in the month, despite strong criticism both from politicians and free speech groups.
The general argument used by the law's opponents is that it is criminalizing free speech in a number of ways, with the most ardent critics seeing the legislation as moving Ireland closer to oppression and the rule of tyranny.
One of the controversial parts of the law revolves around the definition of gender, which is both extensive and expansive: "(...) the gender of a person or the gender which a person expresses as the person's preferred gender or with which the person identifies and includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female."
And if the chosen gender - such as it is defined here, is found to be the reason for "hatred" expressed against someone - then from now on, this is to be treated as an aggravating factor, bringing with it a greater sentence than would have been the case had the "protected characteristics" not played a role in the consideration of an offense.
Speaking of protected characteristics, the act defines them as religion - including "absence of religious belief" - race, ethnicity, gender (as defined), sexual orientation, disability, and also, "references to sex characteristics shall be construed as references to the physical and biological features of a person relating to sex."
During the debate in parliament, the bill's sponsors made sure to note that this legislation - in the way it criminalizes certain behaviors - is the first of its kind in Europe. | | Free speech social network Gab continues to be under fire in Germany, as the government there is pressing for legal proceedings against the US company refusing to comply with censorship demands - i.e., pay fines, which has prompted German authorities to now go to court.
In an email, Gab.com CEO Andrew Torba announced this, and at the same time accused the Biden-Harris administration of being "complicit in this attack on our rights."
Torba's take on the situation is that an American company is coming under "an unprecedented attack" regarding the right to freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the US. And - only to find that the US government, specifically the current Department of Justice (DOJ), is consistently ignoring these developments, and Gab's requests for assistance. |  | | On October 25, Gab received an email from the DOJ that said this department was "simply" forwarding (German) documents and was "not otherwise involved (or) taking a position on the proceedings in Germany."
"You should review these documents carefully for instructions and deadlines," the DOJ email said, thus washing its hands of the matter, instructing Gab to contact the German court or consulate directly, "if you have any questions."
But if not for Gab, another kind of "assistance" seems more likely to succeed: namely, the controversy includes Germany turning to the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) to make sure US companies comply with its censorship rules and demands.
Gab, on the other hand, chose to adhere to the rules of its domicile, above all the First Amendment free speech protections, and Torba frames the situation in interesting terms: "European censorship codes are the very reason the First Amendment exists."
This succinctly exposes the vastly different approaches to speech that exist in Europe, where speech is criminalized, and the US, which has long since taken a very different route.
As to how all this refers to and affects Gab, Torba quotes his legal team's response to a letter where the German authorities seek to use the principle of nation-state exception - one that, Gab's lawyers say, does not apply under the US Constitution.
The response further states that the platform is a lawful business that in fact has no presence outside the US, and can therefore not have communications happening on it interfered with or restricted, as per the guarantees offered by the country's Constitution (First Amendment).
And should Germany decide to pursue the legal case, Gab is "prepared to vindicate its rights in a US court if it comes to that," the letter said. |  | | At the recent Matrix Conference, developers behind Element launched the latest iteration of their effort - Element X, a private, decentralized, open-source, and end-to-end encrypted app.
Element X is a Matrix-based (and the first Matrix 2.0) cross-platform messenger based on the classic Element mobile apps, and according to a blog post, "almost all" its users can now use Element X for messaging.
This applies both to personal and corporate scenarios. The plan is to turn Element X - a full rewrite - into Element once again - as soon as the migration has been completed for all users.
COO and co-founder Amandine Le Pape presented a demo of the new features during the conference, including that known as Element (video) Calls.
The key developers went into the technical side of things as well, explaining that the software now uses Rust SDK and SwiftUI, as well as Jetpack Compose (these are APIs and UI frameworks for various platforms.)
Users are urged to now try, and provide feedback on the new product for Android and iOS.
Some notes touching on privacy and security issues are made, such as the app being available on Google Play Store's free and open source alternative F-Droid as well - and that some metrics testing is done via Simplified Sliding Sync.
It's an opt-in, available to those who wish to help the developers understand how their app is behaving, performance-wise.
Other than providing users with "beautiful usability, performance, and productivity," some other noteworthy Element X features include instant sync, instant login, and instant launch, end-to-end-encrypted voice and video conferencing that is powered by Matrix - an open standard real-time communications protocol.
Currently not generally available, but the plan is to have that in place by the end of the year is what is known as next-generation authentication, which includes login via QR code.
Encryption is one of those features that are always desirable, but often difficult to set up or use by "the average user"; here, the team behind Element X promises "radically improved encryption UX (user experience)" which relies on matrix-rust-crypto and the Invisible Encryption Initiative.
The blog post also provides technical details on how to register an account and use Element X. | | | Thanks for reading,
Reclaim The Net
| | | |
