SAO PAULO: Supporters of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro began flooding Sao Paulo’s main boulevard for an Independence Day rally Saturday, buoyed by the government’s blocking of tech billionaire Elon Musk’s X platform, a ban they say is proof of their political persecution.
A few thousand demonstrators, clad in the yellow-and-green colors of Brazil’s flag, poured onto Av. Paulista. References to the ban on X and images of Musk abounded.
“Thank you for defending our freedom,” read one banner praising the tech entrepreneur.
Saturday’s march is a test of Bolsonaro’s capacity to mobilize turnout ahead of the October municipal elections, even though Brazil’s electoral court has barred him from running for office until 2030. It’s also something of a referendum on X, whose suspension has raised eyebrows even among some of Bolsonaro’s opponents all the while stoking the flames of Brazil’s deep-seated political polarization.
“A country without liberty can’t celebrate anything this day,” Bolsonaro wrote on his Instagram account Sept 4., urging Brazilians to stay away from official independence day parades and instead join him in Sao Paulo.
Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered X’s nationwide ban on Aug. 30 after months of feuding with Musk over the limits of free speech. The powerful judge has spearheaded efforts to ban far-right users from spreading misinformation on social media, and he ramped up his clampdown after die-hard Bolsonaro supporters ransacked Congress and the presidential palace on Jan. 8, 2023, in an attempt to overturn Bolsonaro’s defeat in the presidential election.
The ban is red meat to Bolsonaro’s allies, who have accused the judiciary and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s government of colluding to silence their movement.
“Elon Musk has been a warrior for freedom of speech,” staunch Bolsonaro ally and lawmaker Bia Kicis said in an interview. “The right is being oppressed, massacred, because the left doesn’t want the right to exist.”
“Our liberties are in danger, we need to make our voices heard. De Moraes is a tyrant, he should be impeached, and people on the streets is the only thing that will convince politicians to do it,” added retiree Amaro Santos as he walked down the thoroughfare Saturday,
Musk, a self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist,” has also urged Brazilians to turn out in droves for the rally, resharing someone else’s post claiming that X’s ban had awakened people “to the fact that freedom isn’t free and needs to be fought for.” He’s also created an X account, named for the controversial jurist, to publish sealed court orders directing X to shut down accounts deemed unlawful.
But De Moraes’ decision to ban X was far from arbitrary, having been upheld by fellow Supreme Court justices. And while expression, online and elsewhere, is more easily censored under Brazil’s laws than it is in the US, Musk has emerged as both a cause célèbre and a mouthpiece for unrestricted free speech.
Since 2019, X has shut down 226 accounts of far-right activities accused of undermining Brazil’s democracy, including those of lawmakers affiliated with Bolsonaro’s party, according to court records.
But when it refused to take action on some accounts, de Moraes warned last month that its legal representative could be arrested, prompting X to disband its local office. The US-based company refused to name a new representative — as required in order to receive court notices — and de Moraes ordered its nationwide suspension until it did so.
A Supreme Court panel unanimously upheld de Moraes’ decision to block X days later, undermining Musk’s efforts to cast him as an authoritarian bent on censoring political speech.
The more controversial component of his ruling was the levy of a whopping $9,000 daily fine for regular Brazilians using virtual private networks (VPNs) to access X.
“Some of these measures that have been adopted by the Supreme Court appear to be quite onerous and abusive,” said Andrei Roman, CEO of Brazil-based pollster Atlas Intel.
In the lead-up to Saturday’s protest, some right-wing politicians defied de Moraes’ ban and brazenly used a VPN to publish posts on X, calling for people to partake in the protests.
The march in Sao Paulo is organized in parallel to official events to celebrate Brazil’s anniversary of independence from Portugal. Commemorations have been fraught with tension in recent years, as Bolsonaro used them while in office to rally supporters and show political strength.
Three years ago, he threatened to plunge the country into a constitutional crisis when he declared he would no longer abide de Moraes’ rulings. He has since toned down the attacks — a reflection of his own delicate legal situation.
Bolsonaro has been indicted twice since his term ended in 2022, most recently for alleged money laundering in connection with undeclared diamonds from Saudi Arabia. De Moraes is overseeing an investigation into the Jan. 8 riot, including whether Bolsonaro had a role in inciting it.
Brazil’s X ban drives outraged Bolsonaro supporters to rally for ‘free speech’
https://arab.news/8rmrd
Brazil’s X ban drives outraged Bolsonaro supporters to rally for ‘free speech’
- The former president has urged his loyalists to stay away from official independence day parades and instead join him in Sao Paulo
- X platform owner Elon Musk has also urged Brazilians to turn out in droves for the rally as he hit back against a judicial order banning X
- Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered X banned in the country for refusing to block accounts that were being used to undermine Brazilian democracy
Meta Oversight Board says wrong to remove Moscow attack posts
- Non-binding board ruling argues news value justified exemption from platform rules
- Daesh claims responsibility for Moscow concert hall attack that killed over 140 people
SAN FRANCISCO: The Meta Oversight Board on Tuesday said the social network was wrong to remove three Facebook posts showing images from a deadly attack on a Moscow concert hall in March.
The posts did violate Meta rules against showing victims during an attack, but their news value should have made them exempt from those rules, according to the independent board.
“In a country such as Russia with a closed media environment, accessibility on social media of such content is even more important,” the board said in a written decision.
“Suppressing matters of vital public concern based on unsubstantiated fears it could promote radicalization is not consistent with Meta’s responsibilities to free expression.”
Each of the posts clearly condemned the attack, expressing solidarity with or concern for victims, according to the board.
Meta should restore the posts — adding a warning that the content could be disturbing to viewers, the board ruled.
Four gunmen stormed the Crocus City venue before the start of a rock concert, opened fire on the audience and set fire to the building, in an assault claimed by the Daesh group.
The assault claimed more than 140 lives, the deadliest attack in Russia for almost 20 years.
The board is referred to as a top court for content disputes at Meta, and the social media giant has agreed to abide by its decisions.
Media watchdog condemns Israeli labelling of Gaza journalists as ‘terrorists’
- Reporters Without Borders director general says move is part of troubling trend to control narrative of the ongoing conflict
LONDON: Reporters Without Borders has condemned Israel for labeling journalists in Gaza as “terrorists,” describing the move as part of a troubling trend to control the narrative of the ongoing conflict.
Speaking in Geneva, RSF Director General Thibaut Bruttin voiced alarm over the Israeli Defense Forces’ portrayal of Palestinian journalists, calling it a blatant disregard for press freedom.
“We’re seeing Israeli defense forces trying to portray Palestinian journalists as terrorists. So we’re very worried about that trend too,” said Bruttin.
“In the past we had responses which were not satisfying … but still they were trying to pretend that they were abiding by international standards in terms of protection of the press. Today, now they’re outrageously lying and trying to portray journalists in Gaza as terrorists.”
Since the conflict began on Oct. 7 last year, Israel has been accused of waging a “retaliatory campaign” against media workers in Gaza.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least 137 journalists — mostly Palestinians — have been killed so far, though the actual toll is believed to be significantly higher.
“Not only have they not been able to protect them, but also we have good reasons to believe that a fair amount of the about 140 journalists that have been killed have been deliberately killed, have been targeted,” Bruttin said.
Bruttin, who succeeded Christophe Deloire in July, highlighted the dire conditions faced by Palestinian journalists, noting severe shortages of essential resources such as food, water and electricity.
He emphasized that Gaza remained closed to international press, forcing global news outlets to rely heavily on exhausted local journalists who faced dual risks as both civilians and potential targets.
“We’re very worried about what’s happening there,” Bruttin said, describing the circumstances as “unprecedented.”
He urged the international community to hold Israel accountable for its treatment of journalists, stressing the need for genuine pressure on Tel Aviv to change its policies.
Despite the dangers, journalists continue to report on the conflict, said Bruttin.
“In such a short period of time, I think it’s fairly unprecedented. But we have seen wars in the beginning of the 21st century which have been very violent and rough too.
“The war in Iraq has been a nightmare for journalists and hundreds of journalists have been killed there. So we are aware of the specific nature of the conflict in Gaza.”
Publisher defends prize-winning French novel after Algerian victim’s claims
- Kamel Daoud’s novel “Houris” centered on Algeria’s civil war between the government and Islamists in the 1990s
- Survivor of a massacre alleged on Algerian TV that the main character in the book is based on her experiences
PARIS: The publisher of the novel that won France’s top literary price has strongly defended its French-Algerian author after an Algerian survivor of a 1990s massacre in the North African country claimed the book is based on her story used without her consent.
French-Algerian writer Kamel Daoud this month won the Goncourt for his novel “Houris” centered on Algeria’s civil war between the government and Islamists in the 1990s.
The novel, banned in Algeria, tells the story of a young woman who loses her voice when an Islamist cuts her throat as she witnesses her family being massacred during the civil war.
However the survivor of a massacre during the period has alleged on Algerian TV that the main character in the book is based on her experiences.
The woman, Saada Arbane, said she had told her story during a course of treatment to a psychotherapist who is now Daoud’s wife. She accused Daoud of then using the details narrated during their therapy sessions in his book.
Publishers Gallimard however said Daoud and his wife were the victims of orchestrated attacks after the banning of the book in Algeria, adding that the publishing house had also been banned from Algeria’s main book fair earlier this month.
“Although Houris is inspired by tragic events that occurred in Algeria during the civil war of the 1990s, its plot, characters and heroine are purely fictional,” said publisher Antoine Gallimard who heads the Gallimard publishing house.
“Since the publication of his novel, Kamel Daoud has been the subject of violent defamatory campaigns orchestrated by certain media close to a regime whose nature is well known,” he added.
Arbane has alleged that she told the psychotherapist not to reveal her story but has found that there are details in the life of the main character in the book — Aube — that would only have been known to the doctor.
Speaking on television with a speech aid, she has described the book as a “violation of my intimacy” and accused the psychotherapist of going back on a promise that her story would not feature in Daoud’s work.
But Gallimard said: “It is now the turn of his wife — who in no way is a source for ‘Houris’ — to be attacked over her professional integrity.”
Daoud, who used to work as a journalist and columnist in Algeria, has stirred controversy with his analyzes of society in Algeria and elsewhere in the Arab world in French and international media.
Associated Press to lay off 8 percent of staff
- Move is part of efforts to modernize its operations and products
LONDON: The Associated Press said on Monday it would lay off about 8 percent of its workforce as it looks to modernize its operations and products.
The news publisher said affected employees will be notified over the next few weeks. It will offer a voluntary separation plan to a small number of eligible staff, based on department, role and tenure.
The Associated Press has reached a tentative agreement — subject to ratification — with the News Media Guild to extend this offer to some union staff in the US.
Under the agreement, a maximum of 116 people in the editorial unit and five people in the technology unit would be eligible for a voluntary buyout package, News Media Guild administrator Tony Winton said in an emailed response.
Founded in 1846 as a news cooperative, the Associated Press has journalists in nearly 100 countries and in all 50 US states, according to its website.
“We are taking proactive steps, including making some staff reductions, as we focus on meeting the evolving needs of our customers,” AP said in a statement.
The news publisher’s CEO Daisy Veerasingham said in a memo to employees that those eligible for the voluntary plan will be notified by the end of the day.
AP was among the first news organizations to sign a deal with OpenAI. It had licensed a part of its archive of news stories to the ChatGPT-maker last year, setting a precedent for similar partnerships.
US to call for Google to sell Chrome browser: report
- Determining how to address Google’s wrongs is the next stage of a landmark antitrust trial that saw the company in August ruled a monopoly by US District Court Judge Amit Mehta
SAN FRANCISCO: The US will urge a judge to make Google-parent company Alphabet sell its widely used Chrome browser in a major antitrust crackdown on the Internet giant, according to a media report Monday.
Antitrust officials with the US Department of Justice declined to comment on a Bloomberg report that they will ask for a sell-off of Chrome and a shake-up of other aspects of Google’s business in court Wednesday.
Justice officials in October said they would demand that Google make profound changes to how it does business — even considering the possibility of a breakup — after the tech juggernaut was found to be running an illegal monopoly.
The government said in a court filing that it was considering options that included “structural” changes, which could see them asking for a divestment of its smartphone Android operating system or its Chrome browser.
Calling for the breakup of Google would mark a profound change by the US government’s reglators, which have largely left tech giants alone since failing to break up Microsoft two decades ago.
Google dismissed the idea at the time as “radical.”
Adam Kovacevich, chief executive of industry trade group Chamber of Progress, released a statement arguing that what justice officials reportedly want is “fantastical” and defies legal standards, instead calling for narrowly tailored remedies.
Determining how to address Google’s wrongs is the next stage of a landmark antitrust trial that saw the company in August ruled a monopoly by US District Court Judge Amit Mehta.
Requiring Google to make its search data available to rivals was also on the table.
Regardless of Judge Mehta’s eventual decision, Google is expected to appeal the ruling, potentially prolonging the process for years and possibly reaching the US Supreme Court.
The trial, which concluded last year, scrutinized Google’s confidential agreements with smartphone manufacturers, including Apple.
These deals involve substantial payments to secure Google’s search engine as the default option on browsers, iPhones and other devices.
The judge determined that this arrangement provided Google with unparalleled access to user data, enabling it to develop its search engine into a globally dominant platform.
From this position, Google expanded its tech empire to include the Chrome browser, Maps and the Android smartphone operating system.
According to the judgment, Google controlled 90 percent of the US online search market in 2020, with an even higher share, 95 percent, on mobile devices.
Remedies being sought will include imposing measures curbing Google artificial intelligence from tapping into website data and barring the Android mobile operating system from being bundled with the company’s other offerings, according to the report.
