Censorship Industrial Complex
US Lawmakers Condemn UK’s Secret Encryption Backdoor Order to Apple
The UK Labour government’s secret order to Apple for an iCloud encryption backdoor ignites US-UK tensions as lawmakers demand action.
|
The Labour government’s reported decision to issue a secret order to Apple to build an encryption backdoor into iCloud is turning into a major political issue between the UK and the US, just as the move is criticized by more than 100 civil society groups, companies, and security experts at home.
The fact that this serious undermining of security and privacy affects users globally, including Americans, has prompted a strong reaction from two US legislators – Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat, and Congressman Andy Biggs, a Republican.
In a letter to National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, the pair slammed the order as “effectively a foreign cyber attack waged through political means.”
Wyden and Biggs – who sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, respectively – want Gabbard to act decisively to prevent any damage to US citizens and government from what they call the UK’s “dangerous, shortsighted efforts.”
The letter urges Gabbard to issue what the US legislators themselves refer to as an ultimatum to the UK: “Back down from this dangerous attack on US cybersecurity, or face serious consequences.”
Unless this happens immediately, Wyden and Biggs want Gabbard to “reevaluate US-UK cybersecurity arrangements and programs as well as US intelligence sharing with the UK.”
They add that the relationship between the two countries must be built on trust – but, if London is moving to “secretly undermine one of the foundations of US cybersecurity, that trust has been profoundly breached.”
The letter points out that the order appears to prohibit Apple from acknowledging it has even received it, under threat of criminal penalties – meaning that the UK is forcing a US company to keep the public and Congress in the dark about this serious issue.
In the UK, well-known privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch agreed with what the group’s Advocacy Manager Matthew Feeney said were “damning comments” made by Wyden and Biggs.
Feeney said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s “draconian order” to Apple was in effect a cyber attack on that company, and that the letter penned by the US legislators is “wholly justified” – and comes amid “a shameful chapter in the history of UK-US relations.”
“Cooper’s draconian order is not only a disaster for civil liberties, it is also a globally humiliating move that threatens one of the UK’s most important relationships,” he warned, calling on the home secretary to rescind it.
The same is being asked of Cooper by over 100 civil society organizations, companies, and cybersecurity experts – an initiative led by the Global Encryption Coalition (GEC).
|
|
SPEECH CONTROL
|
 |
UK Refuses to Weaken Online Censorship Laws Despite US Pressure |
|
The UK government has firmly stated that its online censorship laws will not be softened to appease US President Donald Trump or to facilitate trade negotiations with the United States. Technology Minister Peter Kyle repeated Britain’s stance on maintaining strict digital speech regulations, shutting down any speculation of a shift in policy toward American AI firms.
During the Paris AI summit, Kyle dismissed claims that Downing Street was considering relaxing sections of the Online Safety Act in discussions with the US. Refuting a report from The Daily Telegraph, he asserted: “Safety is not up for negotiation. There are no plans to weaken any of our online safety legislation.”
The Online Safety Act, one of the strictest online speech crackdowns in a democratic nation, which is set to come into force this year.
Industry moguls such as Elon Musk have voiced hopes that a Trump-led administration might resist global regulatory pressures on US-based tech companies.
Despite these concerns, Kyle expressed confidence that Trump would not obstruct Labour’s forthcoming AI legislation, which mandates that leading AI firms undergo “safety” evaluations before rolling out new software. He confirmed that voluntary safety pledges would now be replaced with enforceable mandates, ensuring strict compliance.
|
Censorship Industrial Complex
Senate Grills Meta and Google Over Biden Administration’s Role in COVID-Era Content Censorship
By Cindy Harper
Lawmakers pressed Meta and Google to explain how far White House outreach went in shaping their censorship decisions.
|
A Senate hearing this week discussed government influence on online speech, as senior executives from Meta and Google faced questions about the Biden administration’s communications with their companies during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The session, titled “Part II of Shut Your App: How Uncle Sam Jawboned Big Tech Into Silencing Americans,” highlighted the growing concern in Washington over what lawmakers describe as government-driven pressure to suppress lawful expression.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), who led the hearing, began by declaring that “the right to speak out is the foundation of a free society” and warning that “censorship around the world is growing.”
He accused the Biden administration of pushing technology companies to restrict Americans’ speech during the pandemic, and he faulted both the companies and Democrats for failing to resist that pressure.
“Today, we pick off where the story left off,” Cruz said, pointing to Meta and Google as examples of firms that “were pressured by the Biden administration to censor the American people.”
He pledged to introduce the Jawbone Act, which he said would “provide a robust right to redress when Americans are targeted by their own government.”
Markham Erickson, Google’s Vice President of Government Affairs and Public Policy, defended the company’s approach, emphasizing that its moderation decisions are guided by long-standing internal policies, not by government direction.
“While we are a company dedicated to the goal of making the world’s information universally accessible, that doesn’t mean that we don’t have certain rules,” Erickson said, citing restrictions on “terrorist content, child sexual abuse material, hate speech, and other harmful content.”
He acknowledged that officials in the Biden administration had contacted Google during the pandemic to urge the removal of certain COVID-19 content from YouTube.
But Erickson maintained that the company “develop[ed] and enforce[d] our policies independently” and “rejected suggestions that did not align with those policies.”
Erickson also alleged that Google has a record of resisting censorship demands from foreign governments, citing its refusal to remove politically sensitive videos in Russia despite threats of imprisonment against employees and fines “that exceed more than the world’s GDP.”
Neil Potts, Meta’s Vice President of Public Policy, took a more reflective stance.
He reiterated that Meta has a “foundational commitment to free expression” and acknowledged that the company had yielded to “repeated pressure” from the Biden White House to restrict COVID-related posts, including satire and humor.
“We believe that government pressure was wrong and wish we had been more outspoken about it,” Potts said. He added that Meta “should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any administration in either direction.”
Potts pointed to policy changes the company has made since then, such as ending its third-party fact-checking program, reducing restrictions on political topics, and adopting what he described as “a more personalized approach to political content.”
These steps, he said, were intended to “return to our ideals about free expression” and “allow for more speech.”
Senator Cruz pressed both executives on whether their companies regretted complying with government demands.
Potts responded that Meta “do[es] regret our actions for not speaking out more forcefully.”
Erickson, however, declined to use similar language, saying Google regularly receives “outreach from a lot of actors” and evaluates flagged material independently.
The exchange grew more pointed as Cruz questioned Google’s removal of a YouTube video that compiled election-fraud claims made by both major parties. Erickson conceded, “Yes, that is news,” when Cruz asked whether statements by presidential candidates about election integrity should be considered newsworthy.
But Erickson defended YouTube’s policies during the 2020 election, saying that after states had certified results, the company acted against “claims of widespread fraud” due to potential “real-world harm.”
Cruz accused Google of ideological bias and suggested the company was “unwilling to express regret for anything at all.”
He contrasted that with Meta’s statement of remorse and concluded that Google’s position reflected “a level of contempt for free speech that does not reflect well.”
Where Erickson had insisted that Google “continued to develop and enforce our policies independently,” the company’s letter to Congress acknowledged that “Senior Biden Administration officials, including White House officials, conducted repeated and sustained outreach” urging the removal of COVID-19 content that did not violate platform rules.
This was somewhat of a departure from the defensive posture Google maintained before the Senate.
|
|
|
|
You read Reclaim The Net because you believe in something deeper than headlines; you believe in the enduring values of free speech, individual liberty, and the right to privacy.
Every issue we publish is part of a larger fight: preserving the principles that built this country and protecting them from erosion in the digital age.
With your help, we can do more than simply hold the line: we can push back. We can shine a light on censorship, expose growing surveillance overreach, and give a voice to those being silenced.
If you’ve found any value in our work, please consider becoming a supporter.
Your support helps us expand our reach, educate more people, and continue this work.
Please become a supporter today.
Thank you for your support.
|
Censorship Industrial Complex
Pro-freedom group to expose dangers of Liberal ‘hate crime’ bill before parliamentary committee
From LifeSiteNews
Canada’s Liberal justice minister has confirmed that the legislation would allow a person to be criminally charged for social media posts deemed offensive by the government.
A top Canadian pro-freedom group has been asked to testify regarding the dangers of the Liberals’ proposed internet censorship legislation.
In an October 28 press release, the Democracy Fund (TDF) announced that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights has invited them to appear at the House of Commons to debate Bill C-9, which experts have warned could kill free speech in Canada.
“Our lawyers have extensive experience defending Canadians accused of breaching speech codes or uttering speech deemed ‘offensive’ by authorities,” TDF litigation director Mark Joseph stated. “We look forward to sharing our legal expertise and concerns about Bill C-9 with the Committee.”
Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act, has been blasted by constitutional experts as allowing empowered police and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
Bill C-9 was brought forth in the House of Commons on September 19 by Justice Minister Sean Fraser. The Liberals have boasted that the bill will make it a crime for people to block the entrance to, or intimidate people from attending, a church or other place of worship, a school, or a community center. The bill would also make it a crime to promote so-called hate symbols and would, in effect, ban the display of certain symbols such as the Nazi flag.
Canada’s Liberal justice minister has confirmed that the legislation would allow a person to be criminally charged for social media posts deemed offensive by the government.
Currently, the legislation is undergoing debate as Canadian lawmakers discuss how best to frame and implement the bill. Issues with the legislation, as pointed out by TDF, include “broad and undefined language” that could allow for widespread censorship online.
TDF warned that the bill “could be used to justify increased censorship and restrict Canadians’ rights to peacefully assemble, protest, and speak freely, particularly on digital platforms.”
The Committee meeting, scheduled for November 6, is a crucial part of Parliament’s review process before the bill continues to its third reading in the House of Commons.
TDF’s warnings against the legislation echo statements from various pro-freedom legal groups across Canada.
As LifeSiteNews previously reported, Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) president John Carpay has warned that Canada will be a “police state by Christmas” if lawmakers pass three new bills introduced by the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney.
Carpay further predicted that Bill C-9 would “empower police” and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
The proposed legislation mirrors a movement in Germany to restrict sharing controversial or anti-government content online by arresting citizens who posted content deemed ‘hateful’ by the German government.
As LifeSiteNews previously reported in June, German authorities conducted more than 180 operations across the country, targeting individuals accused of spreading hate and incitement online – most of them tied to content considered far-right.
From Underdog to Top Broodmare
Trans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder
Coutts border officers seize 77 KG of cocaine in commercial truck entering Canada – Street value of $7 Million
The painful return of food inflation exposes Canada’s trade failures
Thousands of Albertans march to demand independence from Canada
Premier Smith sending teachers back to school and setting up classroom complexity task force
CBC uses tax dollars to hire more bureaucrats, fewer journalists
-
International2 days agoSagrada Familia Basilica in Barcelona is now tallest church in the world
-
Alberta2 days agoGondek’s exit as mayor marks a turning point for Calgary
-
Agriculture2 days agoCloned foods are coming to a grocer near you
-
Business21 hours agoYou Won’t Believe What Canada’s Embassy in Brazil Has Been Up To
-
Censorship Industrial Complex21 hours ago
Senate Grills Meta and Google Over Biden Administration’s Role in COVID-Era Content Censorship
-
Fraser Institute2 days agoOttawa continues to infringe in areas of provincial jurisdiction
-
Business20 hours agoMystery cloaks Doug Ford’s funding of media through Ontario advertising subsidy
-
Crime8 hours agoPublic Execution of Anti-Cartel Mayor in Michoacán Prompts U.S. Offer to Intervene Against Cartels