If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture, and restoring privacy and civil liberties, please become a supporter here. As a thank you for your support, you'll also get exclusive content multiple times per week and access to guides and tutorials. | A reputation management firm seems to have demonstrated that this type of business, too, can abuse the copyright system and censor content via bogus infringement claims.
"Reputation management" here means, getting a TV star, a company, etc. - out of trouble - in other words, it's "PR on steroids." The goal is to make sure that any negative story about a client gets buried deep in the internet's backwaters - or preferably, deleted.We explore this today.
Become a supporter here.
Get the post here. | AN IMPORTANT DAY IN INTERNET HISTORY |  | Supreme Court justices expressed concern about the potential unintended consequences of redefining the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) during their first major oral hearing of a Section 230 case.
The case, Gonzalez v. Google LLC, could change the scope of Section 230 and potentially redefine some of the immunization online platforms currently receive when they recommend content to users via their algorithms.
The case centers around Section 230 (c)(1) which prevents providers of "interactive computer services" (a term that includes apps, websites, and online platforms) from being treated as the publisher or speaker of content posted by their users. It questions whether this immunization should apply to interactive computer services when they make "targeted recommendations" to users.
The plaintiffs in this case are relatives of Nohemi Gonzalez — a 23-year-old US citizen who was killed in the November 2015 Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terror attacks in Paris, France.
The plaintiffs allege that Google, through YouTube, "aided and abetted" ISIS in various ways which include "knowingly" allowing ISIS to post "hundreds of radicalizing videos" and recommending ISIS videos to YouTube users.
The plaintiffs were the first to present their arguments to the Supreme Court and some of the justices initially pushed back against the plaintiff's assertions that Google had aided and abetted ISIS by recommending their videos.
"I don't understand how a neutral suggestion about something you've expressed an interest in is aiding and abetting," Justice Clarence Thomas said. "I just don't understand it."
Justice Elena Kagan also questioned whether the Supreme Court should be deciding whether to redefine the scope of Section 230.
"Isn't that something for Congress, not the court," Justice Kagan said.
The justices also discussed the potential economic impacts of changes to Section 230 and whether algorithms can be "neutral."
Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the court should take concerns about the harmful impact changes to Section 230 could have on the economy seriously.
Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned the idea of "neutral" algorithms and suggested that the test Is unworkable because some algorithms do "favor one point of view over another."
Several justices raised concerns that a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would create a flurry of lawsuits. However, the plaintiffs argued that the implications would be limited.
Google argued that getting rid of Section 230 could result in "The Truman Show or a horror show" because apps, websites, and online platforms would be forced to allow all content or censor content even more aggressively. But some of the justices pushed back against this assertion.
Justice Samuel Alito questioned whether Google would "collapse" and "the internet be destroyed" if "YouTube and therefore Google were liable for posting and refusing to take down videos that it knows are defamatory and false."
Google acknowledged that it may not collapse but contended that smaller websites would struggle under such a scenario.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on Gonzalez v. Google LLC in June. | If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture, and restoring privacy and civil liberties, please become a supporter. As a thank you for your support, you'll also get exclusive content multiple times per week and access to guides and tutorials. |  | The UK's Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office is funding London-based think tank the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which creates a blacklist of websites it thinks advertisers should avoid that are mostly right-of-center news websites.
GDI states that its objective is to "disrupt their advertising-funded business models by encouraging brands, suppliers and ad tech vendors to blocklist them."
The GDI is also funded by the US State Department.
Recently, the think tank published a list of 10 "least risky" and "riskiest" news websites in the US. The New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, and AP News were among the list of "least risky." Among the 10 "riskiest" websites were the New York Post, Newsmax, the American Spectator, and The Federalist.
GDI also wants anything that challenges scientific consensus on vaccines and climate change to be blocked. For instance it is disinformation to describe the COVID-19 vaccines as "experimental."
The GDI is on a mission to "defund online sources of disinformation." | | East Palestine, a small town in Ohio that has come to national prominence after a recent environmental disaster when a train carrying toxic chemicals derailed more than two weeks ago, is about to roll out a medical device equipped with a form of digital ID called MyID.
MyID is a medical information system that is supposed to help first responders when someone is unresponsive. Users have to first upload their personal medical information onto the system.
| | "It gives us that rapid information that we may need should somebody be unresponsive or having some kind of medical emergency," said East Palestine Fire Chief Keith Drabick during an announcement.
The MyID devices will be key FOBs or wearable devices with QR codes that first responders can scan with a camera to access vital medical information like allergies, underlying medical conditions, and emergency contacts. Authorities insist the system is HIPPA compliant.
| | "We're not doing this to gain anybody's information; to try and steal anybody's information. We're doing this to help the public in medical emergencies," Drabick said.
"You know, instead of us opening up a bracelet and pulling out a little piece of paper that has that information on or trying to read some kind of engraving on a bracelet, we can now scan it so that all that information pops up," Drabick said.
| | YouTube age-restricted a documentary by the Catholic League that criticizes Disney. Such restrictions massively limit a video's reach.
YouTube has not explained the reasoning behind the age restriction on the documentary "Walt's Disenchanted Kingdom."
The documentary argues that Disney has been making decisions that have compromised the family-friendly image to become a "woke" brand that is also attempting to appease the Chinese Communist Party.
|  | According to Catholic League Communications Director Mike McDonald, they received an email from YouTube claiming that the video was not appropriate for children. However, the video-sharing company did not specify what in the video was not appropriate for children.
McDonald told Just the News that he reminded YouTube it has a policy allowing for "education and documentary material," further noting that "this is what that video is."
"The documentary was vetted by lawyers ... There's nothing in this film that's objectionable. No cursing, no nudity, no gratuitous violence. Just people talking about Disney," he added.
YouTube denied the appeal.
McDonald said that the decision has accelerated their efforts to build their Rumble account.
"The documentary is still on YouTube, but we initially released it on Rumble," he noted. "So now we've been directing people there mostly. It's also available on Salem Media now and DVD as alternate options." |  | UK Finance chair Bob Wigley has predicted the development of a "super app" that would store a person's economic digital identity, including credit score ratings and know-your-customer (KYC) data.
The economic digital ID would be similar to the UK government's NHS health app, which carries an individual's health data. Launched in January 2019, the app faced opposition before it gained popularity during the pandemic.
Finance expert Wigley says that the banking sector has taken note of the NHS app and might launch a similar app for economic data.
"This will be the year that we finally persuade the banking system that we need an economic digital identity system, just like the NHS app," Wigley said at the New Digital Assets and Money Symposium in London.
"This financial app will be personal and attached to each citizen as we need a wider fully digital economic identity program."
"It would be something each person would carry with them and they could then connect it to any platform or financial institution that they operate with, such as banks and insurance firms," he explained.
Wigley added if the government does not do it, Big Tech platforms will. | | Thanks for reading,
Reclaim The Net
| | | |
