Afghan journalists detail threat from Taliban after UK abandonment

A member of the Taliban special forces pushes a journalist, covering a demonstration by women protesters, Kabul, Afghanistan, Sept. 30, 2021. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 29 May 2022
Follow

Afghan journalists detail threat from Taliban after UK abandonment

  • Eight Afghan journalists are launching a legal challenge against the UK government
  • The journalists had worked with UK media companies; producing programs on the Taliban and efforts to rebuild Afghanistan

LONDON: A group of Afghan journalists has described the threats they face from the Taliban after working with UK media for years, accusing the British government of abandoning them during last year’s withdrawal.

Eight journalists are launching a legal challenge against the government after fighting since last year’s withdrawal for support they feel they are owed after helping UK interests in Afghanistan.

After waiting months for support for relocation to Britain, they allege that the government has only sent them the standard response emails from the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) program. 

The Foreign Affairs Committee this week issued a report on the British withdrawal from Afghanistan, alleging that the chaos was worsened by the Foreign Office not having a sufficient plan to support Afghans who aided British efforts in the country through their roles in civic society. Workers such as judges, journalists and activists were all abandoned when the rescue operation stirred into action, it claimed.

The members of the eight-person journalistic group appear to belong to that section of Afghan society. They told the Observer that they had worked with British media by producing programs on work against the Taliban and efforts to rebuild Afghanistan’s infrastructure. They also contributed to work on women’s rights and the fight against illegal narcotics. 

Now that the Taliban is in charge, they told the Observer that they have received warnings that they were being targeted.

The government offered special visas to journalists who had worked with British media, with former Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stating at the time: “We must protect those brave Afghan journalists who have worked so courageously to shine a light on what is really going on in Afghanistan.” Any cases of relocation were expected to be expedited if there was an “imminent threat to life.”

But after nine months and regular death threats, some of the group have seen no progress.

One member, who wished to remain anonymous, reported regular kidnap and assassination attempts, telling the Observer that he now regularly moves location and lives away from his family so they do not get caught up in his targeting.

“I’m in a kind of trauma,” he told the Observer. “There is a group of us that the UK government must help. I haven’t had a single night without concern at home with my family.”

He said that he was once shot at while sitting in a garden and that men jumped him from a car to beat him. “They beat me around the head — my body was full of blood,” he said. “I don’t know how they didn’t drag me in the car — I think others helped me.”

Others have messaged him threats: “They said, ‘we already have a decree to kill you’. I think I’m on the target list of those people and maybe one day they will find me.”

He told the Observer: “Unfortunately, we already are under very serious threats. We don’t want to wait until 2024 to get out. I have no sleep. Day by day, my sleep is reducing. Nowadays, it’s two hours, three hours — nothing else.”

Another journalist in the group told the newspaper that he also believes he is on a Taliban hit list, adding that he feels like he has essentially become a refugee, living a life of fear in his own country.

“The Taliban and other extremists are openly talking against those who are affiliated to the UK media,” he said. “They say we are spies. The Taliban have sent me warnings. That’s why I tried many times to convince UK officials to help me relocate. The UK government promised that those who were affiliated with the UK media would be eligible. What happened that they forgot us and don’t hear our voices?”

Erin Alcock, the Leigh Day lawyer representing the group, said: “A promise was made in August that Afghan journalists who worked for British media organizations, facing imminent threat, would be relocated to the UK. Not only has that promise not yet been fulfilled, but nine months on, our clients have had no indication of when they will even receive a response.”

A British government spokesperson said: “We cannot comment on individual ARAP applications . . . However, since the scheme began, we have relocated over 9,200 applicants and their dependents to the UK. This scheme remains open and . . . we are progressing applications as quickly as possible.”


Social media companies, UNICEF slam Australia’s under-16 ban

Updated 1 min 1 sec ago
Follow

Social media companies, UNICEF slam Australia’s under-16 ban

  • Tech companies say the measure is littered with “many unanswered questions” ut they are willing to engage with the government on shaping its implementation
  • UNICEF Australia also warned that the law was no “silver bullet” against online harm and could push kids into “covert and unregulated” spaces online

MELBOURNE: Social media giants on Friday hit out at a landmark Australian law banning them from signing up under-16s, describing it as a rush job littered with “many unanswered questions.”
The UN children’s charity UNICEF Australia joined the fray, warning the law was no “silver bullet” against online harm and could push kids into “covert and unregulated” spaces online.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the legislation may not be implemented perfectly — much like existing age restrictions on alcohol — but it was “the right thing to do.”
The crackdown on sites like Facebook, Instagram and X, approved by parliament late Thursday, will lead to “better outcomes and less harm for young Australians,” he told reporters.
Platforms have a “social responsibility” to make children’s safety a priority, the prime minister said.
“We’ve got your back, is our message to Australian parents.”
Social media firms that fail to comply with the law face fines of up to Aus$50 million ($32.5 million).
TikTok said Friday it was “disappointed” in the law, accusing the government of ignoring mental health, online safety and youth experts who had opposed the ban.
“It’s entirely likely the ban could see young people pushed to darker corners of the Internet where no community guidelines, safety tools, or protections exist,” a TikTok spokesperson said.

Tech companies said that despite the law’s perceived shortcomings, they would engage with the government on shaping how it could be implemented in the next 12 months.
The legislation offers almost no details on how the rules will be enforced — prompting concern among experts that it will simply be a symbolic, unenforceable piece of legislation.
Meta — owner of Facebook and Instagram — called for consultation on the rules to ensure a “technically feasible outcome that does not place an onerous burden on parents and teens.”
But the company added it was concerned “about the process, which rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence, what industry already does to ensure age-appropriate experiences, and the voices of young people.”
A Snapchat spokesperson said the company had raised “serious concerns” about the law and that “many unanswered questions” remained about how it would work.
But the company said it would engage closely with government to develop an approach balancing “privacy, safety and practicality.”
“As always, Snap will comply with any applicable laws and regulations in Australia,” it said.
UNICEF Australia policy chief Katie Maskiell said young people need to be protected online but also need to be included in the digital world.
“This ban risks pushing children into increasingly covert and unregulated online spaces as well as preventing them from accessing aspects of the online world essential to their wellbeing,” she said.

One of the biggest issues will be privacy — what age-verification information is used, how it is collected and by whom.
Social media companies remain adamant that age-verification should be the job of app stores, but the government believes tech platforms should be responsible.
Exemptions will likely be granted to some companies, such as WhatsApp and YouTube, which teenagers may need to use for recreation, school work or other reasons.
The legislation will be closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.
Lawmakers from Spain to Florida have proposed social media bans for young teens, although none of the measures have been implemented yet.
China has restricted access for minors since 2021, with under-14s not allowed to spend more than 40 minutes a day on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok.
Online gaming time for children is also limited in China.


Canada sues Google over alleged anticompetitive practices in online ads

Updated 29 November 2024
Follow

Canada sues Google over alleged anticompetitive practices in online ads

  • The Competition Bureau is asking a tribunal to order Google to sell its ad tech tools, which it uses "unlawfully" to maintain its dominant market position
  • Google maintains the online advertising market is a highly competitive sector and that it intends to defend itself against the allegation

TORONTO: Canada’s antitrust watchdog said Thursday it is suing Google over alleged anticompetitive conduct in the tech giant’s online advertising business and wants the company to sell off two of its ad tech services and pay a penalty.
The Competition Bureau said that such action is necessary because an investigation into Google found that the company “unlawfully” tied together its ad tech tools to maintain its dominant market position.
The matter is now headed for the Competition Tribunal, a quasi-judicial body that hears cases brought forward by the competition commissioner about non-compliance with the Competition Act.
The bureau is asking the tribunal to order Google to sell its publisher ad server, DoubleClick for Publishers, and its ad exchange, AdX. It estimates Google holds a market share of 90 percent in publisher ad servers, 70 percent in advertiser networks, 60 percent in demand-side platforms and 50 percent in ad exchanges.
This dominance, the bureau said, has discouraged competition from rivals, inhibited innovation, inflated advertising costs and reduced publisher revenues.
“Google has abused its dominant position in online advertising in Canada by engaging in conduct that locks market participants into using its own ad tech tools, excluding competitors, and distorting the competitive process,” Matthew Boswell, Commissioner of Competition, said in a statement.
Google, however, maintains the online advertising market is a highly competitive sector.
Dan Taylor, Google’s vice president of global ads, said in a statement that the bureau’s complaint “ignores the intense competition where ad buyers and sellers have plenty of choice.”
The statement added that Google intends to defend itself against the allegation.
US regulators want a federal judge to break up Google to prevent the company from continuing to squash competition through its dominant search engine after a court found it had maintained an abusive monopoly over the past decade.
The proposed breakup, floated in a 23-page document filed this month by the US Department of Justice, calls for sweeping punishments that would include a sale of Google’s industry-leading Chrome web browser and impose restrictions to prevent Android from favoring its own search engine.


Australia passes landmark social media ban for under 16s

Updated 28 November 2024
Follow

Australia passes landmark social media ban for under 16s

  • Aussie premier Anthony Albanese chapioned the bill in an effort to take young Australians “off their phones”
  • Critics say the ban would not “make social media safer for young people,” lacks details about its enforcement

MELBOURNE: Australian lawmakers passed landmark rules to ban under 16s from social media on Thursday, approving one of the world’s toughest crackdowns on popular sites like Facebook, Instagram and X.
The legislation ordering social media firms to take “reasonable steps” to prevent young teens from having accounts was passed in the Senate with 34 votes in favor and 19 against.
The firms — who face fines of up to Aus$50 million ($32.5 million) for failing to comply — have described the laws as “vague,” “problematic” and “rushed.”
The new rules will now return to the lower house — where lawmakers already backed the bill on Wednesday — for one final approval before it is all but certain to become law.
Speaking during the Senate debate, Greens politician Sarah Hanson-Young said the ban would not “make social media safer for young people.”
She said it was “devastating” that young people were “finding themselves addicted to these dangerous algorithms.”
Center-left Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, eyeing an election early next year, has enthusiastically championed the new rules and rallied Aussie parents to get behind it.
In the run up to the vote, he painted social media as “a platform for peer pressure, a driver of anxiety, a vehicle for scammers and, worst of all, a tool for online predators.”
He wanted young Australians “off their phones and onto the footy and cricket field, the tennis and netball courts, in the swimming pool.”
But young social media users, like 12-year-old Angus Lydom, are not impressed.
“I’d like to keep using it. And it’ll be a weird feeling to not have it, and be able to talk to all my friends at home,” he told AFP.
Many are likely to try to find ways around it.
“I’ll find a way. And so will all my other friends” Lydom said.
Similarly, 11-year-old Elsie Arkinstall said there was still a place for social media, particularly for children wanting to watch tutorials about baking or art.
“Kids and teens should be able to explore those techniques because you can’t learn all those things from books,” she added.

On paper, the ban is one of the strictest in the world.
But the current legislation offers almost no details on how the rules will be enforced — prompting concern among experts that it will simply be a symbolic piece of legislation that is unenforceable.
It will be at least 12 months before the details are worked out by regulators and the ban comes into effect.
Some companies will likely be granted exemptions, such as WhatsApp and YouTube, which teenagers may need to use for recreation, school work or other reasons.
Late amendments were introduced to ensure government-issued digital ID cannot be used as a means of age verification.
Social media expert Susan Grantham told AFP that digital literacy programs that teach children to think “critically” about what they see online should be adopted — similar to a model used in Finland.
The legislation will be closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.
Lawmakers from Spain to Florida have proposed social media bans for young teens, although none of the measures have been implemented yet.
China has restricted access for minors since 2021, with under-14s not allowed to spend more than 40 minutes a day on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok.
Online gaming time for children is also limited in China.


Microsoft faces wide-ranging US antitrust probe

Updated 28 November 2024
Follow

Microsoft faces wide-ranging US antitrust probe

  • Competitors complain Microsoft locks customers into its cloud service
  • FTC earlier set the stage for probe into Microsoft’s role in AI market

The US Federal Trade Commission has opened a broad antitrust investigation into Microsoft, including of its software licensing and cloud computing businesses, a source familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.
The probe was approved by FTC Chair Lina Khan ahead of her likely departure in January. The election of Donald Trump as US president, and the expectation he will appoint a fellow Republican with a softer approach toward business, leaves the outcome of the investigation up in the air.
The FTC is examining allegations the software giant is potentially abusing its market power in productivity software by imposing punitive licensing terms to prevent customers from moving their data from its Azure cloud service to other competitive platforms, sources confirmed earlier this month.
The FTC is also looking at practices related to cybersecurity and artificial intelligence products, the source said on Wednesday.
Microsoft declined to comment on Wednesday.
Competitors have criticized Microsoft’s practices they say keep customers locked into its cloud offering, Azure. The FTC fielded such complaints last year as it examined the cloud computing market.
NetChoice, a lobbying group that represents online companies including Amazon and Google, which compete with Microsoft in cloud computing, criticized Microsoft’s licensing policies, and its integration of AI tools into its Office and Outlook.
“Given that Microsoft is the world’s largest software company, dominating in productivity and operating systems software, the scale and consequences of its licensing decisions are extraordinary,” the group said.
Google in September complained to the European Commission about Microsoft’s practices, saying it made customers pay a 400 percent mark-up to keep running Windows Server on rival cloud computing operators, and gave them later and more limited security updates.
The FTC has demanded a broad range of detailed information from Microsoft, Bloomberg reported earlier on Wednesday.
The agency had already claimed jurisdiction over probes into Microsoft and OpenAI over competition in artificial intelligence, and started looking into Microsoft’s $650 million deal with AI startup Inflection AI.
Microsoft has been somewhat of an exception to US antitrust regulators’ recent campaign against allegedly anticompetitive practices at Big Tech companies.
Facebook owner Meta Platforms, Apple, and Amazon.com Inc. have all been accused by the US of unlawfully maintaining monopolies.
Alphabet’s Google is facing two lawsuits, including one where a judge found it unlawfully thwarted competition among online search engines.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified at Google’s trial, saying the search giant was using exclusive deals with publishers to lock up content used to train artificial intelligence.
It is unclear whether Trump will ease up on Big Tech, whose first administration launched several Big Tech probes. JD Vance, the incoming vice president, has expressed concern about the power the companies wield over public discourse.
Still, Microsoft has benefited from Trump policies in the past.
In 2019, the Pentagon awarded it a $10 billion cloud computing contract that Amazon had widely been expected to win. Amazon later alleged that Trump exerted improper pressure on military officials to steer the contract away from its Amazon Web Services unit.


Union chiefs urge BBC staff to wear Palestinian flag colors or keffiyeh during ‘day of action’

Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Union chiefs urge BBC staff to wear Palestinian flag colors or keffiyeh during ‘day of action’

  • Protest on Thursday is a gesture of solidarity in support of demands for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and the release of all hostages, organizers say
  • Some workers voice concerns that the action violates the broadcaster’s strict guidelines on impartiality and risks upsetting colleagues

LONDON: Britain’s Trades Union Congress has urged BBC staff and workers in other sectors to participate in a “workplace day of action” on Thursday by wearing the colors of the Palestinian flag or a keffiyeh.

Organizers said their call for action is intended as a gesture of solidarity and to support demands for a permanent ceasefire and end to the violence in Gaza, and the release of all hostages.

The TUC, an umbrella organization that represents 5.5 million members of 48 trade unions, suggested that employees “wear something red, green, black, or a Palestinian keffiyeh to visibly show solidarity” in their workplaces.

The National Union of Journalists informed its members of the protest last week and condemned the actions of the Israeli government, which it said have resulted in the deaths of at least 135 Palestinian journalists since the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas last year.

“The NUJ is urging branches and chapels to show support on the day and amplify the union’s calls,” it said.

However, The Times newspaper reported on Wednesday that the campaign has drawn criticism, particularly from Jewish staff at the BBC who raised concerns that it violates the broadcaster’s strict guidelines on impartiality and risks upsetting colleagues.

A spokesperson for the TUC emphasized the need for sensitivity while participating in the protest.

“The day of action is focused on the TUC’s call for an immediate and permanent ceasefire and the release of all hostages and political prisoners,” the organization said.

“We are advising trade union members to undertake the action respectfully and to discuss with colleagues what action is best suited to their workplace.”