A mixed method study of the EU geo-block's effectiveness in limiting sharing of Russian propaganda media and content in the wake of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
News and Research articles on Censorship
After the global euphoria about the internet's potentials for empowering individuals and supporting democracy, more realistic arguments have been put forward against this optimism. 1 Indeed, we have been observing an ongoing fight between the autocratic government in Turkey and the Turkish people over using the internet for the last 10 years. It started with Law No. 5651 which was passed in 2007.
Turkey's strategy of repressing opposing voices in the aftermath of the failed coup of 15 July 2016 has transformed from surveilling perceived enemies and repressing specific digital content to arresting and silencing anyone who has been classified as a threat to Erdoğan's position of power.
The European Court of Human Rights on 1 December ruled that the blanket blocking of YouTube by Turkish authorities violated the right to freedom of information. Will Turkey comply with the court's decision?
Turkey passed an internet censorship law in 2007 with the declared objective of protecting families and minors. Since its introduction, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that this law is against the European Convention on Human Rights. This article provides an overview of internet censorship and its social background in Turkey.
Cloud-based information intermediaries curate information and distribute in a way that fundamentally challenges the right of access to information.
There are significant dangers in surveilling online communications unless the mechanisms and policies of surveillance are subject to strict and legally enforceable standards of transparency, oversight, and control.
KEYWORDS:
Surveillance, Intelligence services, Base rate fallacy, Interception, Fundamental principles, Predictive algorithms, Privacy, Security, Content data, Communications data, Bundestrojaner, National Security Agency (NSA), PRISM, Tempora, Encryption, Liability, Transparency, Cyber security, Content, Censorship, Filtering
Liberal democracies are increasingly considering internet filtering as a means to assert state control over online information exchanges. A variety of filtering techniques have been implemented in Western states to prevent access to certain content deemed harmful. This development poses a series of democratic and ethical questions, particularly when states introduce regulation mandating ISPs to block online content. A first version of this article was previously published at the FOCI'12 conference.