Quoted Text

The UN Wants To Censor The Entire Internet To Save Feminists’ Feelings



BroadbandCommissionReportLaunch_September2015_RLB_4011_400x267
UN Women/Ryan Brown

by Milo Yiannopoulos25 Sep 20153,196



In a report released yesterday, entitled “Cyber Violence Against Women And Girls: A Global Wake-up Call,” UN Women, the group behind last year’s risible “He for She” campaign, called on governments to use their “licensing prerogative” to ensure that “telecoms and search engines” are only “allowed to connect with the public” if they “supervise content and its dissemination.”

In other words, if search engines and ISPs don’t comply with a list of the UN’s censorship demands, the UN wants national governments to cut off their access to the public.

So, what sort of content does the UN want to censor? ISIS recruitment videos, perhaps, which lure women into lives of rape and servitude? Live-streamed executions from Syria? Revenge porn or snuff videos? There’s no shortage of dangerous and potentially traumatising content on the web, after all, much of it disproportionately affecting women.

Alas not. The UN is hung up on “cyber violence against women,” a Kafkaesque term that is apparently shorthand for “women being criticised on the internet.” At least, that’s how at least two attendees at the launch of the UN report, published by the United Nations Broadband Commission, explained it yesterday.

According to feminist culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, who spoke at the event, online “harassment” doesn’t simply consist of what is “legal and illegal,” but “also the day-to-day grind of ‘you’re a liar’ and ‘you suck,’ including all of these hate videos that attack us on a regular basis.”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/25/u-n-womens-group-calls-for-web-censorship/

Quoted Text

The report presents a set of Key Recommendations, proposing a global framework based around
three ‘S’s – Sensitization, Safeguards and Sanctions.
Sensitization – Preventing cyber VAWG through training, learning, campaigning and community
development to promote changes in in social attitudes and behavior.
Safeguards – Implementing oversight and maintaining a responsible Internet infrastructure through
technical solutions and more informed customer care practices
Sanctions – Develop and uphold laws, regulations and governance mechanisms to deter perpetrators
from committing these acts.

Quoted Text

AUG 9, 2012 @ 02:10 AM 22,265 VIEWS
Why is the UN Trying to Take over the Internet?




Larry Downes ,CONTRIBUTOR
FOLLOW ON FORBES (189)
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
Yet another anachronistic regulator is trying to flex its muscles over the Internet.  But this time the U.S. government is actually the one trying to stop them.

That’s right.  It’s the United Nations.  Specifically, the International Telecommunications Union, a 150 year-old bureaucracy that started life establishing telegraph standards.  The ITU has since mutated into coordinating international telephone interconnection and radio spectrum, and became part of the U.N. in 1947.  But it has never had a meaningful role in dealing with the Internet.

At least until now.

That could change dramatically later this year, when 193 member nations and hundreds of non-voting private members will meet in Dubai for the World Conference on International Telecommunications, or WCIT.  The goal of the WCIT is to finalize changes to the International Telecommunications Regulations, an international treaty on communications.

The last major revisions to the ITRs were ratified in 1988, long before the rise of the commercial Internet.  But with months to go before proposed changes to the ITR are closed, member nations and private members of the ITU have already begun lobbying for a vast expansion of Internet powers, including new network taxes, mandatory censorship technologies disguised as security measures, and efforts to undermine the Internet’s longstanding engineering-based governance processes.


Worse, Internet users who object to proposed changes may not even know what to complain about or who to complain to.  Following ITU rules, the proposals are being circulated and deliberated in secret, making it difficult to know what is being proposed and who users can hold accountable.

Fortunately, researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks.org for users, advocates, and others with a stake in the outcome of the WCIT.  Since June, WCITLeak’s creators, Jerry Brito and Eli Dourado, have published dozens of documents–many of them leaked–exposing some of the worst proposals.

Recommended by Forbes
MOST POPULAR
Photos: The 10 Best And Worst States To Make A Living In 2015
+147,297 VIEWS
On '60 Minutes,' Donald Trump Accidentally Proposes Radical Reform Of U.S....
FidelityVoice: Roth Or Traditional IRA Or 401(k) -- Two Tips For Choosing

MOST POPULAR
Photos: Forbes 20 Best Foreign Retirement Havens For 2015
Does the Internet Need a Global Regulator?
Who Really Stopped SOPA, and Why?

Caught flat-footed, the ITU’s governing Council half-heartedly agreed to publish just one of the documents already leaked, with the names of members making the proposals redacted.  ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Toure called that move a “landmark decision,” and insists in the face of the ITU’s secrecy that the agency “is as transparent as organizations are.”

That might give you some sense of just how out of touch the agency really is.  And at least within the U.S., condemnation of the ITU’s dangerously amateurish behavior has been universal.  Republicans and Democrats, Congress, the White House and the FCC, along with major industry representatives, consumer advocates, and engineering groups including the highly-respected and international Internet Society, have all raised alarms over both the content and the process of upcoming negotiations.

Last week, the U.S. delegation issued its own first round of proposals, making clear that the U.S. “will not support proposals that increase the exercise of control over Internet governance or content.”  That followed passage in the House last week of a strongly-worded anti-WCIT resolution.   The vote in favor of the resolution was unanimous.

The U.S., however, only gets one vote at the WCIT meeting.  And even if the Senate refuses to ratify a new version of the ITRs passed over U.S. objections, other countries will be able to impose new rules on U.S. companies doing business abroad, backed up by the authority of the U.N..  At the very worst, a bad result at the WCIT could lead to a splintered Internet, and the further isolation of developing nations.

Despite the calming words of some ITU apologists, the U.N. threat to the Internet, and to U.S. companies, are both very real.

Why is this Happening?
From the beginning, the Internet has been governed almost exclusively by the engineers who designed it and who continue to enhance and extend its capabilities.  The core standards and protocols are overseen by the Internet Engineering Task Force.  Website domain names and IP addresses are registered by ICANN.  And the constant redesign of the Web itself is the job of the World Wide Web Consortium.  These are all multi-stakeholder, non-governmental organizations, beholden only to the over two billion Internet users around the world.

It’s not much of a stretch to say that the Internet works as well as it does precisely because it has managed to stay largely immune from interference and oversight from traditional governments—slow-moving, expensive, secretive, jealous, partisan governments.

You know, like the U.N