Cambodian Government Using Fake News Law To Silence Critics And Coronavirus Reporting

from the redefining-speech-protections-to-protect-the-gov't-against-speech dept

In 2018, Cambodia's government passed a "fake news" law. It was enacted shortly before a general election, allowing the government to stifle criticism of the Prime Minister. It also required all local websites to register with the government and put government employees to work scouring social media for violations.

The government's new power to decide what is or isn't "real" news allowed it to consolidate its power over the local press. One newspaper was sold to a Malaysian firm that also performed PR work for the Prime Minister, giving the PM the ability to produce news unlikely to ever be classified as "fake."

The appearance of the coronavirus in Cambodia has resulted in a spike in "fake news" arrests. A crisis like this shouldn't be allowed to go to waste and the Cambodian government is making the most of its new powers to silence critics, stifle dissent, and punish anyone who doesn't have nice things to say about the party in power.

Human Rights Watch documented 30 arbitrary arrests between late January and April 2020. Fourteen people remain in pretrial detention, apparently on baseless charges, including incitement, conspiracy, incitement of military personnel to disobedience, and spreading false information or “fake news.” Among those arrested in addition to the opposition activists was a journalist quoting a speech by Prime Minister Hun Sen, and ordinary Cambodians who criticized the government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The authorities released two on bail, one of whom was hospitalized. Their charges remain pending.

Part of this effort is apparently meant to deter citizens from reporting accurately about the spread of infection. Cambodia reported 122 positive cases but also claims there have been no new positive COVID-19 tests in the past 16 days. It appears the government wants its citizens -- and perhaps the rest of the world -- to believe the threat has passed, or is, at least, firmly under control. Many of those arrested were accused of posting "fake news" about COVID-19 to social media.

Even directly quoting the Prime Minister appears to be a crime under this law, as well as the new powers the government handed to itself by declaring a state of emergency.

On April 7, Phnom Penh police arrested an online journalist, Sovann Rithy, for allegedly “stirring chaos by quoting from a Hun Sen speech: “If motorbike-taxi drivers go bankrupt [because of the pandemic], sell your motorbikes for spending money. The government does not have the ability to help.” The authorities charged Rithy with “incitement to commit a felony” and ordered his detention at Phnom Penh’s Police Judiciare detention facility. The Information Ministry revoked the license for his online broadcasting site, TVFB, on grounds that Rithy had broadcast information “to generate an adverse effect on the security, public order and safety of society.”

This is the way "fake news" laws are used. Very rarely do these laws target anyone spreading false information. They're almost always used to silence criticism and allow governments to control the narrative. The President of the United States popularized the term "fake news," and almost every single use of the term by Trump refers to press coverage or press outlets he doesn't personally like. It has nothing to do with the accuracy of their reporting. The same goes elsewhere in the world, but the idea to treat "fake news" as a crime, rather than protected expression, is a lot easier to enact in countries where free speech protections are more minimal. And once these laws are enacted, they'll be in place forever.

Filed Under: cambodia, covid-19, fake news, free speech, politics

Iraq Joins China In Suppressing Journalism About COVID-19

from the this-is-bad dept

We've been screaming from the rooftops about the need for more transparency regarding COVID-19, and tragically so many governments are going in the opposite direction. The latest is Iraq, where the nation's media regulator revoked Reuters' "license" for three months while also fining the organization ~$21,000 for daring to claim that the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases was actually higher than the government was reporting. According to the Communications and Media Commission, this violated rules and would "have serious repercussions on societal health and safety."

Remember that we've been calling out various places -- including inside the United States -- that are saying that posting "fake news" about COVID-19 should be a criminal offense. This is what happens when you allow that kind of thinking. The arguments made by those who think they're stamping out "disinformation" are identical to those made by Iraq's media regulatory agency to silence accurate reporting.

At the very least, it appears that Iraq's President recognizes this is ridiculous and dangerous:

Asked about the Reuters suspension in an interview with Christiane Amanpour on CNN, Iraqi President Barham Salih said it was a “regrettable decision” taken by a commission which is independent of the government.

“From my vantage point you would not get me in a situation where I would defend that. I’m working with our legal team in order to revoke that and manage the situation,” Salih said.

Still, considering how many people are pushing for laws against or punishment for "fake news," please, please remember that it will absolutely be abused to stifle or chill legitimate, if confrontational, news reporting over government claims. And in a time when we need more transparency than ever, such crackdowns on reporting could mean many lives are literally put at risk.

Filed Under: covid-19, fake news, iraq, journalism

Puerto Rico Decides The 1st Amendment Doesn't Apply To Its Citizens; Criminalizes 'Fake News'

from the bad-PR-for-PR dept

Puerto Rico is a US territory and its citizens have been citizens of the United States since 1917. A little more than one hundred years later, the local government has decided the rights granted to Puerto Ricans by the US Constitution aren't really rights -- not in the middle of a pandemic.

The government is already receiving criticism (and at least one lawsuit) for its COVID-related crackdowns, which include quarantine and curfew orders that appear to violate Constitutional rights. Now, the government has added onto its Public Security law to criminalize certain kinds of speech. Here's the Committee to Protect Journalists on the island's "fake news" law. (h/t Sarah McLaughlin)

Puerto Rico Governor Wanda Vázquez signed an amendment to the island’s Public Security law on April 6 making it illegal for media outlets or social media accounts “to transmit or allow the transmission” of “false information” relating to government proclamations or executive orders concerning COVID-19 or other disasters, according to the order and news reports.

The government will apparently be the final arbiter on the truthiness of transmitted information. The law's wording covers a lot of ground -- and a lot of protected speech.

[I]t makes it illegal for media outlets or social media accounts “to transmit or allow the transmission” of “false information with the intention of creating confusion, panic, or public hysteria, with regards to any proclamation or executive order declaring an emergency, disaster or curfew.”

Yeah, that could cover a lot of things. Causing confusion is almost a given, even in official government proclamations. If someone's "fake news" mamanges to cause more than $10,000 in damage to "public-sector finances" (pretty easy to do at government rates) or leads to the "damage or injury of physical property," the previously-protected speech will be considered a fourth-degree criminal offense. That makes it a low-level felony, punishable by six months in jail and fines of up to $5,000.

As the CPJ notes, this doesn't just violate the Constitution, it makes it more difficult for journalists to cover the pandemic as it unfolds. A lack of solid information isn't the same thing as misinformation, but criminalizing speech the government feels is inaccurate (and costs money to respond to) is only going to result in less information being spread. "Fake news" laws tend to do collateral damage to non-fake news reporting as reporters in the middle of unfolding events opt to self-censor, rather than run the risk of being prosecuted. This won't withstand a Constitutional challenge, but until the law is blocked, everyone in Puerto Rico will have to make do with a little less First Amendment.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, fake news, free speech, puerto rico

Spanish Government Moves Ahead With First 'Fake News' Prosecution

from the minimum-six-months-for-being-wrong-about-stuff dept

In 2018, the Spanish government amended its Data Protection Law to align it with European regulations like GDPR. While doing so, it slipped in an amendment that targeted "fake news," adding to an already-problematic law that enshrined the "right to be forgotten" and mandated personal data deletion after a certain period of time.

The amendment made the bizarre assertion that the existence of fake news somehow harmed Spanish citizens' free speech rights.

The text of the amendment proposes making administrators of social media, digital platforms and similar services the guarantors of truthful information. To this end, “effective protocols” should be adopted to, if necessary, “eliminate content that violates the constitutional right to freely communicate or receive truthful information through any means of communication.”

The government could have limited itself to fighting questionable speech with less-questionable speech. In fact, it did do this. It hired fact checkers to debunk misinformation being spread on social media ahead of the 2019 elections. The fact-checkers performed real-time debunkings to slow the dissemination of misinformation by political groups and their allies.

Spain elected a new government last Sunday. But, on Saturday, the day when the law forbids campaigns and candidates asking for votes, social media (especially WhatsApp and Facebook) was completely flooded by misinformation.

Newtral and Maldito Bulo, the two verified members of the International Fact-checking Network, were there to work hard.

On the last week of the campaign, they both live fact-checked two TV debates in a row — each one of them with four candidates.

But that's not all the government did. It sent the cops out to literally police speech.

A team of more than 100 Spanish police officers will trawl the internet for signs of fake news and cyber attacks in the build-up to next month’s snap election, the interior ministry said on Friday.

Officials will keep a particularly close eye on Facebook, its WhatsApp messaging app, Twitter and other social media networks under a security plan to protect the vote, the ministry added.

It's unclear what the punishment is for spreading fake news. The law provides for a jail sentence of up to two years for violators, but that's tied to the publication of information that "compromises the dignity" of a protected group. It doesn't say anything specifically about fake news.

All that seems to be clear at this point is that the "effective protocols" involve government prosecutors. Fake news has been addressed successfully by government fact checkers but now this same government has decided to punish someone for saying the wrong things online.

Spanish public prosecutors said Friday they have filed the country’s first lawsuit against the spread of ‘fake news” which targets a woman who tweeted a video falsely claiming to show migrant children harassing a teacher in Spain.

The video, which shows several students overturning desks and insulting a teacher, was in fact filmed in May at a school in Brazil in Sao Paulo state, AFP’s fact-checking team established in September.

Since the government has already publicly denounced the posting as fake and published information about its true origin, it's unclear why it felt the need to move forward with a lawsuit against the person posting it. But it's doing it anyway. Right now, only a judge stands between the Spanish government and its first fake news prosecution.

A judge at a court in Sant Feliu de Llobregat near Barcelona will now have to decide whether or not to accept the lawsuit. Public prosecutors can appeal if the judge decides against hearing the case.

It seems like the same goal could be achieved with the public debunking that has already happened, which amply demonstrated this person isn't a trustworthy source of information. This prosecution needlessly adds injury to insult. Spanish citizens are going to engage in a lot more self-censorship if they believe they might be prosecuted simply for being wrong. And they'll engage in ever more self-censorship if they think anything they say might be perceived as "humiliating" to a protected group.

Filed Under: fake news, free speech, gdpr, misinformation, spain

Facebook Now Altering Users' Posts To Add Singapore Government's 'Fake News' Warnings

from the legislate-locally,-force-action-globally dept

Singapore's "fake news" law continues to pay off for the Singaporean government. It's already been used to target allegations made by political opposition leaders and now it's converted Facebook to an extension of the ruling government.

Alex Tan, the founder of "anti-establishment" news site State Times Review has been irritating the Singapore government for a few years now. Late last year, his site published an article claiming Singapore's prime minister was complicit in laundering Malaysian government funds through Singapore's banks.

This resulted in the Monetary Authority of Singapore filing a criminal complaint against Tan for "impugning its integrity." The Ministry of Law then demanded Facebook remove Tan's posts from its site. None of this worked. Tan, now a resident of Australia, was beyond the reach of the Singaporean government. Facebook refused to comply with the government's request because that was all it was: a request.

Tan's posts and Facebook's refusal to remove them were cited by the government as evidence a "fake news" law was needed.

The Ministry of Law said in a press statement: “Facebook has declined to take down a post that is clearly false, defamatory and attacks Singapore, using falsehoods.”

“This shows why we need legislation to protect us from deliberate online falsehoods.”

It's not often a government is so transparent about its self-interest. The Ministry of Law didn't seem to be suggesting the people needed to be protected from "online falsehoods." It's the government that needs to be "protected" from its mostly-powerless citizens -- or, in this case, a rabble rouser operating outside of its jurisdiction.

The new law gives the Singapore government what it wanted: protection. And Facebook's compliance. Roughly a year after the subject was first broached, Facebook is helping Singapore's government mute the effectiveness of its critics, including Alex Tan.

Facebook said on Saturday it had issued a correction notice on a user’s post at the request of the Singapore government, but called for a measured approach to the implementation of a new “fake news” law in the city-state.

“Facebook is legally required to tell you that the Singapore government says this post has false information,” said the notice, which is visible only to Singapore users.

The good news is the post stays live. The bad news is the government can force Facebook to alter users' posts by unilaterally declaring news it doesn't like "false." And if this doesn't seem to be working well enough, the government still has the option to jail people or hit them with fines of up to $1 million.

The thing is the government doesn't have to do this. Obviously, the legislation is bad and will result in censorship. But the government runs its own site for corrections, which should be all it needs to do when faced with reports and criticism it considers to be false. Instead of limiting itself to combating speech it doesn't like with its own speech, it's forcing American companies to act on its behalf and dangling the threat of prison time and fines over the heads of anyone whose criticism it feels is invalid.

Filed Under: alex tan, compelled speech, fake news, free speech, politics, singapore
Companies: facebook

Society Of Professional Journalists Makes Itself Look Foolish In Strange Attempt To Trademark 'Fake News'

from the not-how-any-of-this-works dept

You may be aware of an organization called The Society of Professional Journalists. The group has found itself in the news most recently as Trump's lawyer and all around great guy Charles Harder has attempted to suggest that this professional group's ethical guidelines for journalism somehow constitute something that legally binds newsmakers. Harder has done this so as to suggest to CNN that Trump can sue the media company for... look, I don't know, not being on the President's side enough or something? The point is that Harder's legal theory is almost certainly nonsense, will likely be laughed out of court, and ought to be embarrassing to Harder himself, should he in fact be capable of the normal human emotion of shame.

But the SPJ should embarrassed as hell as well, given that at least one chapter of the the organization has apparently hatched a ludicrous plan to trademark the phrase "fake news" as a stunt, all so it can send threat letters to the President for using the phrase as though it were trademark infringement.

Citing polling that indicates 40 percent of Republicans think the term applies to accurate reporting that casts politicians they support in a negative light, Emily Bloch of Teen Vogue writes that the application is unlikely to be approved and the move is intended to compel people to “think about what fake news is, and what it means to them.”

“So yes, this is satire. It’s a joke. But it’s a joke with a point, and as any student of public discourse will tell you, a joke sometimes hits harder than the truth,” Bloch wrote. “And if anyone accuses us of trolling the president, well, nothing else seems to work with him, so what do we have to lose?”

While the SPJ chapter waits on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Bloch writes, it intends to send letters to President Trump warning him he is infringing on a pending trademark.

What do you have to lose? Well, we can start with respect and reputation. All this does is demonstrate the SPJ's apparent total ignorance of how trademark law works. First, there is no chance this trademark gets approved. It's not being used in actual commerce. It's not a real thing. It's just a whipping post for a petulant President.

And even were the USPTO to bungle this and approve this non-trademark-able trademark, the letters threatening the President for using the phrase are without merit as well. There is this misconception with some of the public that trademarking a phrase somehow means others cannot use it in common conversation. That's obviously not how trademark law works (nor, while we're at it, the First Amendment).

Honestly, why anyone at the SPJ thought this was a good idea is beyond me. I assume they do know better and are just trying to make a point with publicity as a vehicle. But there are enough of us out here that know how dumb this all is that I'm not certain the SPJ is more making a point about Trump, or the organization itself. Indeed, considering that a key part of SPJ's history is protecting the First Amendment rights of journalists, it's a really bad look to then try to abuse trademark law (even as a "joke") to try to silence anyone, let alone the President of the United States.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, censorship, donald trump, fake news, free speech, trademark
Companies: society of professional journalists