Mud slinging, smears & lies as election campaign hots up

Mud slinging, smears & lies have already become the order of the day as the election campaign hots up. Most of the parties have been accused of underhand tactics with each accusing the other of disseminating lies or of refusing to debate the serius issues of the day

Blatant lies

Labour has slammed Tory claims that Ed Miliband wants an alliance with Sinn Féin if there were a hung Parliament saying it amounted to blatant "lies".

Sinn Féin has also dismissed reports that the party was in negotiations with British Labour MPs over a deal to prop up an Ed Miliband government following the general election [Guardian].

Yet the claims have been repeated and become part of an election smear campaign.

Pamphlets distributed by Hornchurch & Upminster Conservative MP Angela Watkinson prominently warn voters that Labour proposed to seek an alliance with the Republican Party.

The election flyer distributed to homes across Havering in East London talks of a "nightmare" pointing out that the SNP have said they'd help Ed Miliband into the next election", a deal that the Conservatives say "would mean more spending, more borrowing, more taxes - and chaos for Britain."

"And even worse, reports say Labour are also trying to secure the support of Sinn Féin to prop up Miliband as Prime Minister" the leaflet claims.

Whatever the deals demanded for propping up Ed Miliband, the election publication insists that "hardworking taxpayers would pay the price."


The claims that Labour was seeking to make a deal with Sinn Féin were first published in The Sun newspaper back in January. However, most papers have since dismissed the reports as fanciful.

Rubbished

Sinn Féin has rubbished the reports, with MP Conor Murphy saying the party had never held talks with any party on the issue. "Sinn Féin's position on Westminster is very well known. We work hard in delivering a good service to our voters but we do not take our seats in Westminster," he told the Daily Mirror.

"None of these parties have ever asked us over the course of these meetings to support them on the other side of an election," he said.

The scaremongering may have little basis in fact but the suggestion that the SNP and Sinn Fein might prop up Ed Miliband has been used in mock election posters posted on Twitter and in an official YouTube video [BBC].

Chickens running scared

However it's not just the Tories running a smear campaign. Labour themselves have mocked the Conservatives, and Prime Minister David Cameron in particular, for their apparent unwillingness to take part in pre-election TV debates [YouTube].

Cameron has been accused of "running scared" and of being "chicken" for his refusal to take part in a head to head with David Miliband. The PM said he would only take part in a single debate and one that must include the Green Party. After weeks of debate a deal was finally struck with a single 7-way debate which will air on ITV and be shared amongst the other broadcasters [Telegraph].

TV debates

Cameron has rejected a head to head debate. Instead there is now a proposal for two separate interviews of Cameron and Miliband hosted by Jeremy Paxman and then questioned by a studio audience in a Sky/Channel 4 special on 26th March.

After the dissolution of parliament at the end of March, Cameron would appear in a debate featuring the leaders of seven parties on ITV on the 2nd April.

Later the BBC are planning "a challengers' special" involving the SNP, UKIP, Plaid Cymru the Greens and the DUP. The programme scheduled for 16th April will likely anger UKIP leader Nigel Farage who wants the party to be seen as a major player.

There are also plans for separate half-hour segments in a Question Time-style event hosted by David Dimbleby with the main party leaders David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg taking part. That would be broadcast on the BBC on 30th April, just a week before Britain goes to the polls.

UKIP smears

One party that has been smeared more than any other is UKIP. Hardly a day goes by without the party being taken to task over its policies, especially of those concerning race and immigration. Channel Four's "The First 100 Days" drew hundreds of complaints for its speculative look at Britain after the general election should UKIP win.

The spoof drama-documentary prompted more than 6,500 complaints, many from the right wing group Britain First [Independent] .

The programme portrayed a fictional Asian woman UKIP MP who suffers a crisis of conscience when she witnesses the divisive impact of the party's policies on immigration in action and Britain's pull out from the EU having an impact on jobs.

Farage described the programme as "liberal-left poppycock" [Independent]. Meanwhile some members of the public branded the show a "hatchet job" as a number voiced their criticisms on Twitter, including comedian Jason Manford who raised concerns about bias.

One viewer said, "This is so biased from a mainstream media [organisation], it makes me furious - and I don´t even support UKIP." [Daily Mail]

Clowns & racists

Another programme also drew ire from party supporters. Broadcast on the BBC, the fly on the wall documentary Meet the Ukippers exposed the prejudiced views of some party activists and was watched by 1.4m viewers.

Described as "riveting" by some reviewers the programme exposed many of UKIP's shortcomings [Telegraph]

The programme even led to the party expelling councillor Rozanne Duncan for racist comments she made during the making of the show. During the programme she was filmed saying she had a "problem" with "negroes".

"A friend of mine said, 'What would you do if I invited you to dinner and put you next to one?' I said, 'I wouldn't be there, simple as that."

The revelations shown in the documentary were described as "jaw dropping by the Kent Messenger, a local paper which covers Thanet where the programme was filmed.

Some media coverage was more sardonic. The Telegraph viewed the party with mirth pointing out some of the "terrifying things" the documentary revealed out UKIP.

"They really, really love clowns" the paper said, referring to the slightly obsessive UKIP member who had a rather large collection of ceramic clowns. There were some more serious observations such as the chairman of UKIP's South Thanet branch, Martyn Heale, who was once a member of the National Front but seemed not to understand why it bothered people.

And of course there was a deep focus on Rozanne Duncan and her discomfort with people displaying "negroid features" but who insisted she was "absolutely not racist" [Telegraph]. The documentary can be watched on BBC iPlayer until 24th March.

Minor parties criticised

Even the minor parties have not escaped the criticism of being involved in a smear campaign. The latest to come under the spotlight is George Gallaway and his Respect Party with accusations that Labour opponents were receiving telephone threats, though there's no evidence thus far to show actual party members are involved [Guardian].

With around 48 days to go until the polls open the smear campaigns, lies and criticisms are likely to heat up. Indeed the mud slinging appears to just be starting.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

China's Asian Investment Bank a tool to spread soft power

The International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, and World Bank may lose their influence and place in the Far East as China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank [AIIB] gains backers and draws in support from European countries.

Beginnings

The establishment of the AIIB was first discussed in 2013 with the Chinese government expressing its frustration with what it regarded as the slow pace of reforms and governance, and wanted greater input in global established institutions like the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development Bank which it claimed were dominated by American, European and Japanese interests [Economist].

The United Kingdom signed up to be a founding member of the bank ahead of a deadline at the end of March 2015 [WSJ]. France, Germany and Italy have followed Britain's lead but the US has a move that has rattled the US [Guardian / FT].

Originally unveiled in October 2013 by China's President Xi, the proposal was to harness some of China's vast financial resources and the expertise acquired in its modernisation in order to improve situations elsewhere in the region. However, as well as becoming a potential rival to the Washington-based World Bank, there are fears that Beijing will use the bank to extend its soft power in the region.

Geopolitics & economics

Martin Wolf, widely considered to be one of the world's most influential writers on economics, and an associate editor and chief economics commentator at the Financial Times, has dismissed such concerns. Whilst he acknowledges the AIIB may well precipitate geopolitical and economic rivalry, he says the general idea "makes sense" [FT].

It might make sense on one level, after all China arguably has a better understanding of its neighbours' needs and wants. Some of its neighbours such as Laos and Myanmar, for example, lack the resources themselves to invest heavily in infrastructure. Indeed estimates of the cost of a railway from Kunming in south-western China to Vientiane, the Lao capital, for example, start at $6 billion, almost as much as Laos's entire GDP.

"Soft power"

For China to step in and build and finance it on its own might look like colonialism. But since the bank would enhance both China's direct influence over what gets built and its indirect "soft power" the effect would essentially be the same.

In fact it may prove more beneficial to China since local sentiments would be less strained as direct Chinese investment in neighbouring countries has often been seen as interfering.

The US has been particularly outspoken about the potential influence the AIIB may have in the region. With talk of western European countries joining one unnamed official expressed concerns saying, "We are wary about a trend toward constant accommodation of China, which is not the best way to engage a rising power." [FT / Washington Post]

Changing the rules

The Obama administration has expressed the opinion that should the G7 group of leading economies and others rush to join institutions such as the AIIB, it could end up becoming an instrument of Chinese foreign policy.

But Britain's chancellor of the exchequer, George Osborne, has been unrepentant, arguing that Britain should be in at the start of the new bank, ensuring that it operates in a transparent way. Furthermore Osborne believes it fills an important gap in providing finance for infrastructure for Asia.

It remains unclear whether the Chinese-led AIIB initiative will complement or compete with the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to meet Asia's capital investment needs. What is clear, however, is China's willingness to challenge America's long-established strategy of institutionalising power in a rules-based order [lowyinterpreter].

When China negotiated its becoming a member of the World Trade Organisation in 2001, it hinted that its long term intention was one of reshaping the organization it wanted to join. Indeed at one particularly contentious point in its negotiations to enter the WTO, the Chinese ambassador reportedly thundered, "We know we have to play the game your way now, but in ten years we will set the rules!" [IIE].

In the 15 years since, not only has China's economy grown significantly, but so too has its confidence. This confidence is repeatedly manifesting itself in greater assertiveness with China pushing the bar higher and higher as it demands things be conducted according to its vision of the future.

There are some that argue the US join the party and attempt to effect change from the inside [Forbes]. However by doing so the US would lose face.

Of course it could simply drop the issue and let the AIIB rise or fall on its own merits. But this option simply leaves the US sitting on the fence, watching as China increases its influence in Asia.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

BBC website down due to "technical problems"

The BBC website went down on Saturday afternoon with reports that the site could not be accessed from many locations around the globe.

The reason for the outage was not immediately clear but came as surprise to many people who took to Twitter to express their opinion with some describing it as "amazing". Speculation mounted as to the reason for the outage with many people believing hackers were responsible according to a poll on the Daily Mirror website. Indeed only 3 days earlier the hacking group Anonymous threatened to bring down the website if Jeremy Clarkson wasn't reinstated following his suspension from the programme Top Gear after a 'fracas' with a producer [Daily Mirror].

The site showed the once familiar testcard image  showing a clown and an "Error 500" alongside a statement that the site might be down because  of "abnormal traffic" to the network or that "the service or servers it is on is not currently available".

The BBC would only say they were experiencing technical difficulties. "Apologies, as we are experiencing technical problems on the BBC News website. We are working hard to resolve the issues," the organisation tweeted. However some Internet users also noted that other BBC web services were unavailable including the BBC iPlayer which could not be resolved on Android devices.

The website went down shortly after 13:00 GMT but some services returned to normal for some users with the hour.

For the BBC website to go down is relatively rare. The last time the site went down for any significant period of time was in July 2012 [Telegraph].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

RSF move to Amazon Web Services runs risk to business

It was reported this week that Reporters Without Borders, also known as Reporters Sans Frontiers, had facilitated the unblocking of several banned websites in countries like China, Russia and Saudi Arabia by setting up mirror websites on Amazon's cloud web service.

However, the exercise, while highlighting an important issue concerning censorship may prove futile and damage legitimate businesses who work out of China.

Calculated risk 

The use of Amazon Web Services calls China's bluff under the pretext that the authorities will be discouraged from trying to block these new links at their source for fear of disrupting traffic to other websites.

"The countries concerned could block these services but almost certainly will not," explained a Reporters Without Borders spokesperson. "Blocking Amazon, Microsoft or any major cloud computing service provider would cripple the thousands of tech companies that use them every day."

"The economic and political cost of blocking the mirror sites would therefore be too high."

Amazon Web Services is encrypted, and so to block sites using it the Chinese government would need to block the entire AWS domain, a step that some believe it would be hesitant to do since it would also hinder e-commerce by the country's businesses. In a 2013 press release Amazon said thousands of Chinese customers, including major corporations, depended on AWS for database management and other cloud-computing applications.

Wholesale blocking 

However, China has a long history of disregarding WHO rules, and risking a loss of business in playing a protectionist card as well as cutting off Internet traffic at the risk of affecting legitimate business sites.

In November 2014 Edgecast, which also provides web services like Amazon, was blocked in a clear stepping up of Internet censorship. Sites affected included Sony Mobile and The Atlantic magazine [Bloomberg].

Recently tvnewswatch learned that Internet users in Chengdu, in Sichuan province, were unable to access the Chinese version of the Mothercare website and were thus unable to make online purchases. This apparent block was itself hard to explain given the IP address is registered with China's Internet body.

Recent rules concerning banks and govt. departments and their use of technology also shows no regard for foreign competition . Symantec, Kaspersky and other foreign antivirus software is also effectively banned in official departments [tvnewswatch: China tightens policies over use of foreign tech]. Windows 8 is also banned from govt computers following Microsoft's ending support for XP. And now all software companies supplying banks and other companies must supply source code and comply to stringent vetting by authorities [tvnewswatch: China: business challenges & tightening grip on net].

Naivety

So to believe that China won't cut off Amazon Web Services in order to block unwanted content could be considered rather naive.

Professor Alan Woodward, a cybersecurity expert at the University of Surrey, was not convinced that the mirror sites would remain effective over the several months that Reporters Without Borders intends to run the initiative.

Speaking to the BBC he said that once the authorities had found the mirrored webpages they could simply block the relevant URLs, or web addresses. "It is an interesting principle because it shows people are aware of censorship and want to do something about it," Professor Woodward said. Changing the URLs frequently might counter such efforts, but the professor question how often Reporters Without Borders were willing to change them.

Even if URLs were changed on a frequent basis, and AWS remained accessible, Internet users in such counties might have difficulty finding the mirrored websites.

Collateral damage

Nonetheless, Reporters Without Border remain clear in their determination to publicise the phenomena of Internet censorship and disseminate information banned in certain regions.

"The censoring country would be unlikely to block one of these servers because the collateral disruption and damage would outweigh the benefits to be gained from restoring censorship," the organisation said [Betanews]. It is not the first time AWS has been used to circumvent censorship. In 2014 a banned report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists concerning an exposé of the use of offshore tax havens by Chinese politicians and business moguls was made accessible using the service[ChinaFile].

Activists believe that Chinese censors won't block sites like AWS and GitHub, a cloud-hosting service many Chinese computer programmers use for storing data and sharing code.

Operation Collateral Freedom, as it has been dubbed, may open one door, but the irony is that there may well be collateral damage as other doors are shut.

King-wa Fu, an Assistant Professor and censorship researcher at the Journalism and Media Studies Centre at the University of Hong Kong, says that the Chinese government will eventually play hard ball.

If the mirror sites attract a tipping-point level of Chinese visitors, Fu fears "that the Chinese government would block Amazon or ask Amazon to take down the contents."

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Election debate may join YouTube generation

The debate surrounding TV election debates has descended into farce and become ever more heated with little over 50 days to the General Election. Broadcasters have been accused of breaking impartiality rules. The PM has been labelled a chicken.

The election debates have run the risk of being shelved altogether. But with a  proposal of a Digital Debate, the election debates may be saved.

Chickens and empty chairs

As proposals for election debates began in January the current Prime Minister David Cameron said that he would take part in TV political debates that included the Green Party. This sparked allegations that the PM was chicken and was trying to duck out of the debates altogether.

Broadcasters squabbled over what they might air initially rejecting the suggestion that the Green Party might be involved and with some threatening to 'empty chair' the Prime Minister.
There were then proposals that as well as the Green Party, leaders from other parties be involved including those from Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.

Ultimatums and temper tantrums

Then came a declaration from Downing Street saying that David Cameron would only take part in a single debate and that the broadcasters should argue it out amongst themselves as to how they might organise the event [BBC].

In Wednesday's PMQs the debate became particularly heated with the opposition leader Ed Miliband accusing the PM of "chickening out" while Cameron himself labelled Miliband as being "despicable" for only wanting to discuss a TV programme rather than political policies [BBC / Daily Mail].

Digital debate

As the main broadcasters, Sky, the BBC, Channel 4 and ITV, discussed their proposals, two national papers put forward a new suggestion [Telegraph].

The Telegraph Media Group, which publishes The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian and Google, which owns the YouTube video website, invited the leaders to a five way "digital debate" on 26th or 27th of March.

The proposal would fulfil Cameron's insistence that the debate be held before the end of March as well as his call for the Green Party to be involved.

In their letter executives from the consortium wrote, "We note that the prime minister has said he is willing to take part in a debate in the week beginning 23rd March and that the leader of the opposition is prepared to debate 'any time, any place, anywhere'."

"We also note that the impasse in negotiations with the broadcasters means that meaningful television debates now look unlikely to take place."

Joining the YouTube generation

The consortium have said that the debate would be available live, and after the event, for any and all TV networks to broadcast in addition to being on YouTube platforms [Guardian].


Speaking shortly after Prime Minister's Questions, sources close to David Cameron and Ed Miliband said they were considering the proposal for the digital debate. Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps told the BBC's Daily Politics a digital debate seemed a "plausible" way forward. Lib Dem general election co-ordinator Lord Ashdown said the party remained committed to election debates and would consider the digital debate proposal.

Meanwhile UKIP leader Nigel Farage said he will take part in the digital debate [Telegraph]. "Scrutiny is an important part of democracy, and for this reason I am delighted to accept the Telegraph/Guardian/YouTube invitation to this debate - so that I can make the case to the British electorate on why they should vote UKIP," Farage was quoted as saying.

Media circus

The so-called digital debate may prove to be the best option. It would certainly bring an end to the media circus that has surrounded the TV debates.

There have already been accusations from both sides of the house that the broadcasters have held a gun to the Prime Minister's head with the threat of empty chairing the Conservative leader.

Answering questions at the Retail Week Live conference in London, former Labour strategist Lord Mandelson said broadcasters were not entitled to "empty-chair" leaders who refuse to take part in debates.

The former business secretary said, "I think voters feel entitled to have that sort of debate and comparison directly in front of them."

"I think that David Cameron, though, is entitled not to do that debate in the particular way the broadcasters have prescribed and the Labour Party is entitled to make him look and appear completely 'frit' and chicken and force him to take a hit for not doing the debates," Mandelson said. "What I don't think is that the broadcasters then are entitled to impose what they want on the political parties and empty-chair party leaders." [Daily Mail]

Conservative Peer Lord Grade has also stepped in saying  the broadcasters were breaching impartiality rules and "playing politics" in the row over election debates.

The ex-BBC, ITV and Channel 4 boss said it was "not acceptable for unelected journalists" to replace David Cameron with an "empty chair" if he refused to take part in any televised debates. "There was no divine right to have election debates" [BBC / Telegraph].

Taking stock

The digital debate may well take place given it fulfills Cameron's main demands, But the broadcasters meanwhile continue to discuss the possibility of going ahead with their own debates whether or not the PM takes part.

However, it should be considered by all media outlets that TV debates - or even those conducted on a digital platform - are not a cornerstone of the electoral process.

Britain has been conducting general election campaigns under universal suffrage for over 200 years. Only once, in 2010, have TV debates played a part. There is no great issue of constitutional precedence at play here. Indeed in Britain, debates are an electoral curiosity, not an electoral necessity and could be considered to be an American import.

Debates are not, of themselves, politically neutral events. They provide an inbuilt advantage to the challenger, or challengers, at the expense of the incumbent. By demanding the debates take place, something the broadcasters are doing now, demanding and threatening, rather than negotiating, they are siding with one political party, or parties, against another. This, as Lord Grade has pointed out, goes against impartiality rules.

Should the broadcasters go ahead and empty chair David Cameron a week before polling day, as they currently seem to be proposing, they may turn the election debates into a farcical spectacle especially if the only person taking part is the opposition leader Ed Miliband.

The digital platform may not appease the broadcasters whose ratings would surely suffer. But at least according to one poll, 79% of participants thought the Internet was the best medium for the election debates [Telegraph].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Should online pornography be banned?

Adults in Britain often appear to have differing attitudes when it comes to pornography. Many may shun it altogether. Others may occasionally buy a top shelf magazine or flick through late night adult programming on television. But for most people wanting to access pornography, the Internet has become the main medium to access such content.

But while there are easily applied and more robust controls concerning magazines, DVDs and broadcast content, there is almost no way to stop access to online pornography for children.

Such ease of access to pornography has prompted parents, politicians and even celebrities to call for curbs on what many say is a corrupting influence.

Restricting access

Whilst some websites showing adult content make an attempt to restrict access to under age persons the method employed simply requires the Internet user to press a button. Indeed most online pornography websites often 'trust' in the 'honesty' of a user to click a "Yes" or "No" to the question "Are you over 18" in order to access such sites or navigate away.

Such age verification in the form of asking site visitors whether they're old enough to legally access the content is pointless. How many lusty 13-year-olds are going to answer truthfully?

Should such simplistic hurdles be applied to television, magazines or DVD purchases there would quite rightly be a public outcry. Yet when there is ever the suggestion of tightening access to online pornography there are suggestions of censorship, an attack on freedom or that one is entering a nanny state.

Nonetheless there is a growing tide of discontent, especially amongst parents that little or nothing is being done to protect children from inappropriate online content.

Difficult task

It is no easy task to block such content. Various search engines offer sophisticated filtering methods to stop content getting through. This is not foolproof however, and does not stop a user entering a web address directly.

Both Google and Bing allow the setting of safe search filters though these may be circumvented simply by opening an 'incognito' window in the Chrome browser for example, or even using a different browser altogether.

To be truly effective pornography needs to be stopped even before it enters the home. Therefore some Internet Service Providers have begun to employ their own filtering and begun blocking content even before it arrives in someone's browser.

This opt-in approach has been suggested by the British prime minister David Cameron many times over the last few years [BBC / Guardian]. But his proposal to force ISPs to block pornography by default was widely criticised by the tabloid press despite his claims that access to online pornography was "corroding childhood".

Even the more serious broadsheets labelled the move as "censorship creep" and questioned how far the restrictions might go [Guardian].

But while new laws forcing ISPs to block content were effectively shelved, some of Britain's top broadband providers have voluntarily decided to implement filters with customers needing to make a request to have them removed [tvnewswatch: UK govt reject Internet porn blocks].

ISPs begin opt-in approach

In January Sky announce it was to phase in filtering for all customers applying its so-called Sky Broadband Shield which would block all content deemed unsuitable for persons under the age of 13 [Sky / BBC / tvnewswatch: UK ISPs line up to block pornography].

Meanwhile TalkTalk said it too was following suit and would apply a block to all users' accounts, unless they had already opted out of such blocks. Customers would then have to ask TalkTalk to allow pornographic websites to be visited through their Internet connection.

Meanwhile BT said it was contacting its customers to ask them whether they want to have the tool introduced. Virgin Media, which was the last of the major UK ISPs to offer filtering tools, has yet to make the decision to apply them by default [BBC].

Websites change approach

It is not just the ISPs who are beginning to react to government and public concerns over pornography. Some web firms have also changed their approach to hosting such content.

In mid-February the search giant Google announced that it would ban pornographic content on its Blogger platform and make all sites containing such material private [BBC / Guardian / Telegraph / Daily Mail].

And within days of Google's announcement the forum website Reddit also said they would begin to clamp down on those that posted explicit images, though only those they deemed to be "stolen" and posted without the owner's consent [Telegraph / Daily Mail].

There has also been much debate as to whether Twitter, Flickr and Tumblr should also clean up their act. Google's decision to clean up Blogger reportedly prompted many sex bloggers to migrate to Tumblr which is already saturated with pornographic content [Mirror].  

Meanwhile there have been calls for Twitter to purge their platform of the pornography that accounts for more than 500,000 sexual images posted per day, according to a Channel 4 investigation [Channel Four News / Metro].

Twitter have said they have no plans to change their policy, and Google made a U-turn on their decision to ban adult content after what it called "a ton of feedback" [BBC].  

Difficult task

Removing such content from the web or effectively blocking access to it is far from easy.

Automatic filtering software may block most inappropriate material but some pictures may also slip through.

Filters may also block legitimate websites too. Indeed since an automatic filter may not differentiate between the word 'sex' and a word containing the same three letters, some innocent websites have found themselves blocked.

A girl guides website in Essex was just one of many innocent websites blocked by BT's filters, presumably because of the word "girls" and "sex". Meanwhile Talk to Frank, a website that helps educate young people about drugs, was found blocked by mobile network Three [ExpertReviews]. 

In order to prevent overzealous blocking the British government is said to be drawing up a list of sites inadvertently blocked by such filters [BBC].

Many sites on the list are run by charities that aim to educate children and others about health, sex education and drugs issues.

By creating a so-called white list, alongside a black-list of websites, ISPs would be able to filter content more effectively.

But a problem still exists especially where inappropriate content is posted on social networks.

Recently it was discovered that hardcore pornography had been posted on YouTube and was effectively hidden from filters because those that posted the content used unusual keywords [Daily Mail].

Such issues are a major problem for web companies. As already discussed age verification is a nonsense unless qualified with appropriate identity checks which would likely draw criticism from privacy advocates.

And for companies themselves to vet every single post is an almost impossible task. Pictures are particularly difficult to filter out. Twitter for example would have to look through as many as 25 million images a day if it wanted to weed out sexual imagery and other offensive content.

Growing concerns

Kids and porn is an issue that's certainly not going away [Channel Four News]. And while parents are taking steps to prevent their children accessing such material, it's not just kids that are at risk.

In fact one top UK judge made headlines this year after saying that "extreme pornography" caused rapists and murderers to commit crimes.

Lord Chief Justice Thomas of Cwmgiedd made the comments after presiding over two disturbing criminal cases, where both defendants claimed extreme pornography had influenced their actions [Telegraph].

There are also concerns of a rise in so-called porn-addiction. It's a loaded subject. Opponents argue that it can ruin marriages, lead to sexual addiction or other unhealthy behaviours, and encourage sexual aggression. Advocates meanwhile insist that erotica can enhance sex lives, provide a safe recreational outlet and perhaps even reduce the incidence of sexual assault.

But there is a growing feeling that there is far too much pornography, both soft and hardcore, invading all corners of life.

One unlikely critic this week posted a video on YouTube describing pornography as "icebergs of filth floating through every house" due to the introduction of WiFi [Metro].

However, this wasn't a Tory MP or a message from a child protection society. This was a statement from comedian Russell Brand who likened pornography to a narcotic.

In the video, made for Fight The New Drug campaign "dedicated to educating and raising awareness on the harmful effects of pornography using only science, facts, and personal accounts," Brand discusses the pitfalls of pornography and why he would never watch it if he had full control over his body.

Whilst Brand stops short of calling for a ban on porn, he like many others raises the question concerning the saturation of sexual imagery in our society.

There is no immediate solution but it is perhaps clear that the war on pornography is heating up.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Shopping centre terror threat should be “taken seriously”

Lone wolf terrorists could be planning to target shopping centres in the West according to US Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson. But whilst he referred to the threat as something that should be "taken seriously", other officials have downplayed the warning as "not credible".

There appears also to be a clear security response to the threat which could leave potential targets even more vulnerable.

"New phase" of terrorism

Commenting on threats made by the Somali-based group al-Shabab, which released a video urging its followers to carry out attacks on shopping centres in the US, Canada and the UK, Johnson said the threat represented a "new phase" of terrorism.

Attacks on shopping malls are not unprecedented. The al Qaeda linked group Al-Shabab was responsible for the 2013 attack on Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi that killed 67 people [Wikipedia - Westgate shopping mall attack].

Naming targets

In the 77 minute video, the fighter - wearing a camouflage jacket with a headscarf covering his face - threatens action and refers to the group's 2013 siege on Kenya's Westgate Mall.

Specifically mentioned was the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, as a possible target, prompting the massive shopping centre to conduct two drills Monday. He also calls for attacks on several shopping centres in Europe including the Westfield shopping centres in Stratford, East London and White City in West London.

The Forum des Halles, a large underground shopping centre in Paris, and Les Quatre Temps in the north-western suburb of the city, were also specifically mentioned.

But other large shopping centres could also be at risk - indeed more so given they may be overlooked by security officials.

For example Lakeside shopping on the outskirts of London or Bluewater in Kent may be just as vulnerable. In fact Bluewater itself has been targeted before [Telegraph]. And in 2007 five men linked to al-Qaeda were jailed for life for a bomb plot targeting the shopping mall and other targets [BBC].

Threat "not credible"

But despite the drills and comments made by the US Homeland Security Secretary, some officials have expressed scepticism concerning al-Shabab's threat.

"Our view is it's propaganda," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said of the video. "There's not a credible threat against malls."

The FBI and Department of Homeland Security also dismissed an imminent threat saying on Sunday that so-called "homegrown violent extremists" were "not likely to respond immediately" to the weekend call for attacks [ABC].

Imminent or not, the potential threat has raised concerns about how to protect the public in such relatively soft targets as shopping malls.

Defence and self defence

The debate has focused particularly on guns and whether members of the public might seek to protect themselves by ignoring bans on concealed weapons in such places.

Ronald Noble, the secretary-general of Interpol noted two means of protecting people from mass shootings. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves [should be] so secure that in order to get into the soft target, you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."

It i virtually impossible to stop killers from getting weapons, Noble says, adding that "you can't have armed police forces everywhere."

"It makes citizens question their views on gun control," he noted. "You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past, with an evolving threat of terrorism?'"

Since at least 1950, all but two public mass shootings in America have taken place where general citizens are banned from carrying guns. In Europe, there have been no exceptions. Every mass public shooting has occurred in a gun-free zone since the general public are mostly prohibited from owning such weapons.

But while there is a growing anti-gun lobby in America, and a blanket ban across much of Europe, John R. Lott Jr, a former chief economist for the United States Sentencing Commission and president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, suggests that gun free zones are a magnet for criminals and terrorists.

Lott points to a number of examples including the movie theatre shooting in the Aurora, Colorado, when  James Eagan Holmes burst in killing 12 people and injuring 70 others [Wikipedia - 2012 Aurora shooting].

Of seven theatres showing the "Batman" movie premiere within 20 minutes of the suspect's apartment, only one banned permitted concealed handguns. The suspect didn't go to the closest or the largest, Lott observes, but to the one that banned self-defence [Chicago Tribune - opinion].

America may be easier to convince, and some may simply change their habits, avoiding gun free zones or spending less time in them.

Europe 'vulnerable'

However, in Europe the public have no such luxury. In most European countries gun ownership is almost entirely banned and even those who are allowed to own them are not permitted to carry them in public. In Britain even the carrying of knives is banned.

Thus many European shopping malls are particularly soft targets for lone wolf terrorists who could carry out an attack with little or no fear of being stopped.

Whilst there is often an obvious security presence in British shopping malls, such personnel are armed with little more than a radio. Furthermore they are hardly experienced, or would unlikely be brave enough, to tackle a terrorist brandishing an AK-47.

Security response

As yet there has been no word on whether armed police might be deployed or stationed at such venues in Britain, although the police said they were aware of the video and in a process of assessing the contents.

In France the number of security guards at the two named shopping centres in Paris has been increased as a result of the video threats. And management at the two malls are said to be in permanent contact with police headquarters in Paris and the department of Haute-Seine as well as the interior ministry.

The Mall of America said it was also taking "extra security precautions" in light of the threat, though not all would be immediately visible.


More reports: BBC / Guardian / Telegraph / Daily Mail / The Local.fr / 

tvnewswatch, London, UK

“Non-doms” & “buy-to-leave” investors are killing London

Vast swathes of London are being bought up by foreign investors and leaving parts of the capital like ghost town. And as populations dwindle in parts of the city, local businesses are seeing a decline in trade forcing some to shut up shop.

The latest victim to the growing trend of "buy-to-leave" was one of London's best loved French restaurants, Racine, which finally shut its doors after a little over 12 years serving up such classics as côte de boeuf with Béarnaise sauce and veal chop and Roquefort butter.

Despite being a favourite of the singer Bryan Ferry and the American actor and producer Harvey Keitel, such kudos was not enough to pay the bills. Owner and chef patron Henry Harris said he had made the decision largely because of a falling clientele as well as rising rents and other costs.

"Non-doms" and "buy-to-leave" investors

"The non-doms have bought up large chunks of central London and then only live here for certain months of the year," Harris says. "It is very noticeable in Knightsbridge and South Kensington" which he describes as resembling a ghost town.

So-called non-doms, or non-domiciled residents, have changed the face of London and other parts of the country. There is also the so-called "buy-to-leave" investor who is helping create ghost towns.

According to research consultancy Molior, in developments of more than 20 units across London, over 70% of new-build sales in the £10,700 to £16,000 per square metre range were to investors, with some "held as permanently available hotel suites" by the owners.

Some property investments are even making money for their owners before they've even been built. A flat in Battersea in West London made the headlines in November after it was revealed to have been bought for £1 million in the spring but was later put on the market for £1.5 million less than 8 months later despite not even being built.

Rising property prices

The effects of all this buying up is not only creating ghost towns, it's also driving up property prices for ordinary Londoners who are struggling to find affordable homes in the capital.

And as property prices rise many families are finding themselves unable to climb aboard the property ladder. This has in turn increased the numbers of people on council house waiting lists.

Tackling the problem

The situation concerning housing has become so serious that it is likely to become a key issue in the upcoming general election in May.

There are concerns about private rental costs and a lack of housing stock, particularly council housing. But despite such concerns, none of the political parties have made housing central to their campaign.

Nonetheless there are indications that both central and local government are beginning to take notice of the effects foreign investors are having on the property market.

Wealthy foreigners who are long-term residents of the UK may now face an annual charge of up to £90,000 and higher taxes on homes held through companies after chancellor George Osborne said they should pay "a fair contribution".

However there are fears that this could scare off much needed foreign investment. Indeed, the number of non-dom residents dropped by almost 16,000 in the year following the Labour government's announcement of a plan to bring in a £30,000 levy in 2008.

Some local authorities are also beginning to act against so-called "buy-to-leave" investors. One London council plans to impose heavy restrictions on any new property purchased solely as an investment and left unoccupied, with punitive consequences if breached.

There is even a threat of jail for transgressors. Under the proposals, put forward by Islington council, property found to be unoccupied for more than three months would be subject to legal action leading to injunctions, the breaking of which could lead to a fine, the seizure of the empty property or even prison.

However critics say the proposals are merely a cosmetic exercise, designed to look enticing to voters. Moreover, given the rules will only apply to new homes the fear is that existing properties will become even more desirable and push prices higher and further out of reach.

Growing problem

With an ever growing number of people migrating further away from London due to rising property prices in the capital, something needs to be done at a state level rather than at local level.

Whilst there is a shortage of hard evidence, the indications are that "buy to leave" is an issue. It may however be localised to certain areas and associated with certain types of property, specifically city centre apartment blocks. Indeed it is mainly confined to large cities.

There are around 635,000 empty homes in Britain according to the latest statistics from the government, and around 72,100 in London alone. Many have been bought up by Chinese, Arab and Russian investors.

But while the UK government says it is committed to helping local people bring empty homes back into use, it has not announced specific measures to deal with so-called "buy to leave" properties.

Of course property might be left for any number of reasons. But all such situations should be tackled lest many parts of the country be left virtual ghost towns and could have a detrimental effect upon investors too. After all who would want to buy an apartment or house in an area where few people live and where all the shops have shut?

Further reading: propertyinvestmentsuk / Buy to Leave Empty [PDF] / BBC / Guardian / FT / Telegraph / Standard / New Statesman / Guardian / Standard / Sky News / Sky News / BBC documentary Inside Out / Inside Out clip [YouTube]

Outrage after ISIL burns Jordanian pilot to death

There has been shock, outrage and condemnation after Islamic State militants released a video that showed the barbaric murder of a Jordanian pilot. But the horrific killing has not managed to bring all nations together in a united effort to destroy the terror group.

Previous video style

This was not a simple video of Jihad John ranting in the desert that the terror group had previously released. The new video was something entirely different from what had been seen before.

Previous execution videos released by ISIL usually consisted of a short propaganda message followed by a statement by both the victim and an ISIL militant who  has become known as Jihad John.

After the political rant Jihad John would raise his knife to the hostage's throat at which point the video would fade to black. The only confirmation the hostage had indeed been killed was a subsequent shot showing the decapitated victim.

These videos, despite holding back on the actual execution itself, were extremely shocking and prompted a severe response from the West to degrade and destroy the terror group.

There have been successes in terms of degrading ISIL, but the terror group remains strong and they continue to taunt their enemies with execution videos.

Japanese hostages killed

The latest series of such video taunts were the murders of two Japanese citizens. Haruna Yukawa and Kenji Goto [BBC].

Their killings prompted anger in Japan and from the Prime Minister Shinzo Abe who said Japan "would not give in to terrorism" and that he would expand his support to countries fighting ISIL.

Each video has come with demands. Some have merely come with a demand for the West to stop their attacks. But recently the terror group has changed tack and demanded large sums of money or the release of terror suspects.

Refusal to give in to demands

Japan refused to bow to ISIL's demand for money and Jordan similarly backed down from a prisoner exchange. There had been calls from Jordan for ISIL to offer evidence their captured airman was still alive before negotiating any prisoner swap.

However no evidence was forthcoming, and it is believed the Jordanian pilot had already been killed weeks before demands were even made to Jordan.

The brutality of his death has enflamed Jordanians, some of whom have questioned the country's role in the US led war on ISIL.

Professional video production

The slickly produced video was far removed from previous releases. This was a 25 minute propaganda film, in Arabic, aimed primarily at the Jordanian people.

Complete with hi-tech graphics, music and tight editing, this was produced almost to Hollywood standards.

But this went beyond the the kinds of propaganda seen in the past. In the 1940s the Nazis used film to dramatic effect, to garner support for the party and to stir up emotions.

One such film was The Eternal Jew [Video] which likened Jews to rats. This was shocking in its time and went far beyond Leni Riefenstahl's propaganda film Triumph of the Will [Video].

China has used propaganda films to push its message about Tibet claiming that its 'liberation' was to save the territory from serfdom [Video].

The propaganda now emanating from groups such as ISIL is in a different league altogether. Less intellectually constructed, propaganda films coming from terror groups tend to veer more towards shock value.

Media battle

Ayman al-Zawahiri,  the current leader of al-Qaeda, is quoted as saying that "We are in a media battle for the hearts and minds of our umma [community] of Muslims."

In this battle, media has been exploited extensively by terror groups. In the Iraq war hostages found themselves the unwitting stars of execution videos which were little more than short clips showing the victim being forced to read a statement before being killed, usually by a cut to the throat.

ISIL have gone further, with slick editing, video graphics and a well constructed script. But the core of the videos have centred around the shock of a hostage being murdered.

New low

The latest video hit a new low as the terror group set fire to a captured airman. Held in a cage, the man is doused in petrol before a masked ISIL militant ignites it. The horror, which lasts several minutes, and filmed from several angles plays out to Islamic music whilst the screams of the victim are heard in the background.

As he collapses to his death a digger then drops hardcore upon the cage burying the victim. The video then fades to a graphic calling for other 'crusaders' to be put to death.

Media reaction

Most Western media have stopped short of showing the video or even still images, not wanting to air the terror propaganda. CNN, the BBC, Sky News and Al Jazeera all made the decision not to show any images, though in Jordan clips from the film were shown repeatedly on news broadcasts prompting anger and revenge for the abhorrent murder. Fox News also made the decision to post the entire video on its website [Guardian].

Newspapers took a different tack with some showing images of the Jordanian pilot Muath Al-Kasasbeh prior to his execution, though none showed his actual immolation.

The Daily Mail described the killing as "22 minutes of sickening savagery" adding that the "execution video has reached a truly depraved new low" [Daily Mail].

Of the video Piers Morgan said, "It was just as repulsive and sickening" and "truly the worst thing I have ever had to witness." [Daily Mail].

Morgan says he was "glad" to have watched it. Glad because it had revealed "exactly what these monsters are capable of", that they "have no limits, no humanity, no semblance of any kind of soul."

"Sadists"

It reinforced and affirmed, if there were any doubt remaining, that these were "utter sadists".

"We all have to feel the same kind of unquantifiable, collective horror everyone felt when the full scale of the Nazi concentration camps was revealed," Morgan writes.

Hitler's Nazis and ISIL shared similar aspirations and values, he further asserts. "And as with the Nazis, the world must now come together to rout and destroy them."

Fear and anger

There is certainly a boiling anger. But there appears to be no cohesive plan [CNN]. Indeed some countries appear to have given into the fear as it emerges the UAE halted airstrikes after the capture of the Jordanian pilot [Guardian].

One academic has described ISIL's latest propaganda video as part of an asymmetry of fear [BBC]. Questions abound over how or why ISIL could do this. To understand their mindset requires a brief examination of Islamic, or Sharia, law.

Eye for an eye

ISIL believes in a principle known as "qisas" which, in its broadest terms, is the law of equal retaliation. Put another way, it is the Islamic equivalent of "lex talionis", or the doctrine of an eye for an eye.

Jordan retaliated in kind as it put to death the very individuals that ISIL had demanded be released [BBC]. But there are fears, especially in the West, that by going down such a route lowers themselves to the same standards of the enemy.

But as the psychological war and barbarism continues there is no clear consensus with how to deal with the threat. Jordan has vowed an "earth-shattering" response, and Safi al-Kasasbeh, the pilot's father, has called for the Jordanian government to do "more than just executing prisoners".

The blood of his son was the blood of the nation, he said, "and the blood of the nation must be avenged." He also called for ISIL to be eliminated completely.

Weakening coalition

There are few that would disagree with his call. But despite recent terror attacks seen in Australia, France and elsewhere, there is little stomach for an all out war against ISIL.

PM David Cameron would face a difficult task convincing the British public to launch an invasion, and it might well amount to political suicide in an election year. Barack Obama too would be reticent as the US also approaches the 2016 election. There are also concerns that some Arab partners are reticent in bolstering any military efforts.

The question facing everyone is how bad does ISIL's brutality have to get before the fight becomes more than a few targeted drone strikes.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

China: business challenges & tightening grip on net

China is facing economic and business challenges as overspending and overbuilding take its toll. The country also faces a battle placating tech companies and the country's 640 million Internet users as it introduces more draconian regulations.

Threat to growth

China may have become the world's largest economy - by some standards -  but a credit-fuelled construction binge threatens its future growth.

China's official growth rate of 7.4% in 2014 was at its slowest pace since 1990, a time when the country still faced sanctions in the wake of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

The International Monetary Fund has lowered its growth forecast for China for 2015 from 7.1% to 6.8% and predicts the country's gross domestic product will grow slower than India next year for the first time in decades.

The effects of a China slowdown could spread far beyond China's borders. The "slowdown in China could turn into a disorderly unwinding of financial vulnerabilities with considerable implications for the global economy," the World Bank warned this month.

Global impacts

In fact there are already signs of an impact reflected in global commodity prices, including oil, and in the stuttering performance of economies in Brazil, Germany, Australia and much of Asia, which are all increasingly reliant on Chinese demand.

Overspending, especially at a local level, and often overlooked by Beijing has not helped matters. Building projects, funded by enormous loans, have certainly kept China's economy moving. It has kept millions in work too from construction workers to their suppliers and support industries. But the chickens may be coming home to roost, since all debts have to be repaid. In essence spending to control debt is unsustainable [WSJ / FT].

"Intrusive" rules on foreign firms

While China sits back to take stock on its growing debt and slowing economy it has another challenge. Newly implemented regulations require technology firms such as Cisco or Microsoft to hand over source code and incorporate backdoors in products supplied to China's banking and financial industry.

The US Chamber of Commerce and other groups have called the rules "intrusive" and business groups are now seeking "urgent discussions" with the Chinese authorities.

The new rules, laid out in a 22-page document approved at the end of 2014, also require firms to submit to invasive audits and are just latest in a series of policies designed to strengthen cybersecurity in China.

But many tech companies are not comfortable with the new rules, which many see as yet more protectionist measures designed to oust foreign competition.

The US Chamber of Commerce has called for "urgent discussion and dialogue" about what they said was a "growing trend" toward policies that cite cybersecurity in requiring companies to use only technology products and services developed and controlled by Chinese firms [NYT / BBC / Guardian / WSJ].

Caught between a Rock and a Hard Place

Many Western tech companies might well baulk at revealing their source code and other data. But to not do so risks losing a market worth billions of dollars.

According to the American market research firm the International Data Corporation [IDC] China was expected to spend some $465 billion in 2015 on information and communications technology and that the expansion of China's tech market would account for 43% of the worldwide tech-sector growth.

And according to Frank Gens, the IDC's chief analyst, the main driver of ICT spending growth was the sheer size of China's market and its growing number of Internet users estimated in 2015 to be around 680 million, more than two-and-a-half times the number of users in the United States.

Tough challenges

But foreign firms doing business in China face other headaches too as authorities tighten Internet censorship.

In the last few months there have been sporadic several turnings of the screw with Google's GMail and other Internet services being almost completely blocked,

But authorities ramped up censorship even more this week as they began to target VPN's, or Virtual Private Networks, which many people and businesses use to circumvent Internet blocks.

Slowing legitimate commerce

"One unfortunate result of excessive control over email and Internet traffic is the slowing down of legitimate commerce, and that is not something in China's best interest," said James Zimmerman, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China. "In order to attract and promote world-class commercial enterprises, the government needs to encourage the use of the Internet as a crucial medium for the sharing of information and ideas to promote economic growth and development."

However China seems unrepentant and appears to ignore any criticism of its control of the Internet. In fact one official claimed the blocking of VPNs was to do with "Internet safety" [China Daily].  

Wen Ku, a top official from the ministry, said that VPN providers must abide by Chinese laws to operate in the country and reiterated the government's commitment to the 'healthy development of the internet sector'. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has requested that VPN providers register with the government agency. However given that the main function of a VPN is to circumvent the Great Firewall, this seems unlikely and indeed none have done so thus far [CNN / NYT / Time].

In November last year China blocked access to hundreds of websites just days before they held the World Internet Conference [Guardian]. 

Premier Li Keqiang seemingly did not see the irony nor the contradictions as he hailed the Internet as one of the greatest inventions in human history and claimed China was a lucrative market for all the global Internet giants [Xinhua].

The stifling of the Internet hasn't just angered expats and foreign businesses, it is also annoying Chinese students, academics and researchers who say their work is directly affected by the blocks.

In recent weeks, a number of Chinese academics have gone online to express their frustrations, particularly over their inability to reach Google Scholar, a search engine that provides links to millions of scholarly papers from around the world.

"Living in the Middle Ages"

"It's like we're living in the Middle Ages," Zhang Qian, a naval historian, complained on the microblog service Sina Weibo.

Meanwhile a biologist also criticised the policy of blocking VPNs and legitimate websites. "For a nation that professes to respect science and wants to promote scientific learning, such barriers suggest little respect for the people actually engaged in science."

This week Zhang Jianguo, director of the State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs, bemoaned the nation's shortage of scientists and technology entrepreneurs and beckoned foreign experts to come to China [China Daily].

But the very nature of China's Internet may dissuade many expats form relocating, Avery Goldstein, a professor of contemporary Chinese studies at the University of Pennsylvania, says. Indeed, the growing online constraints could also compel ambitious young Chinese studying abroad to look elsewhere for jobs.

China has yet to see an exodus of experts or businesses thus far. Nor are there obvious signs of a slow down of foreign experts heading to the country. But should online restrictions worsen that situation may change and may slow China's economy further still.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

UK ISPs line up to block pornography

UK broadband Internet provider Sky is to block adult content by default, unless users opt out.

The decision comes nearly two years after Prime Minister David Cameron put pressure on Internet service providers [ISPs] to make online filtering mandatory [BBC / BBC Q&A].

ISPs initially rejected the proposal and there was widespread criticism in the media. But with TalkTalk also reported to go the same route as Sky, the blocking of pornography and other adult content could become the norm.

Announcement

Sky announced it was to phase in the filtering in the coming months in a blog posted on its website https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/our-blog/2015/sky-broadband-shield-rolling-out-to-all-our-customers  

Meanwhile TalkTalk said it too was following suit and apply a block to all users' accounts, unless they have already opted out of such blocks. Customers will then have to ask TalkTalk to allow pornographic websites to be visited through their Internet connection.

BT is also contacting its customers to ask them whether they want to have the tool introduced. Virgin also gives parents the option to turn on the free tools but keeps them off by default.

The filter enabled by TalkTalk's HomeSafe product can stop Internet connections from being used to access violent content and gambling websites, as well as pornography.

Big Brother or Nanny State

Some Internet users have criticised the move saying it was another move towards a more draconian state. "Britain is getting more like North Korea every day. What are they going to block next?" one comment read on the Daily Mail website. 

Others have also condemned the move as a danger to freedom of expression [Belfast Telegraph].

While there is undoubtedly some concerns over censorship, there is a change in mood not only from the government but also the Internet industry. In fact as early as 2013 Dido Harding, TalkTalk's chief executive, said that she supported such automatic blocks [Independent].

Some filtering will be tiered. For example Sky's Broadband Shield offers various levels of filtering from PG, 13, 18, customizable settings or none. With the new system the default will be set to the 13-year-old age rating which will block sites that deal with dating, file-sharing, violence, drugs, "criminal skills," suicide and self-harm, and pornography, and many more types of objectionable content.

It is not entirely clear how the ISP deals with enquiries made on search engines especially those that involve image searches [BBC].

However for a sense of how such filtering might work one need only look to China where ISPs as well as Internet companies are required to block, filter or censor objectionable content.

Internet blocking

China's Golden Shield Project - often referred to as the Great Fire Wall - is used to great effect in stopping access to content authorities deem sensitive. Indeed the GFW attempts to stop the spread of rumours, stifling protests and dissent. However it also plays a part in stemming the flow of online pornography.

Searching for the Chinese term Sèqíng [色情] or pornography on Baidu, China's top search engine, and there will be few salacious pictures shown in image searches. There may also be a message displayed stating that "According to relevant laws, regulations and policies, some search results are not displayed".

Searches for inappropriate search terms may even result in 404 error pages or the Internet connection being reset, in other words cut off for a period of time.

Using foreign search engines will often be of little help since they may often be blocked whilst others such as Bing comply to local Chinese law.

Nonetheless filtering out specific content is an imprecise science. The Open Rights Group's Blocked project [www.blocked.org.uk] has shown that filters block all kinds of websites, including some that provide useful advice to children and young people says Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group. "Customers need to understand the implications of filters before deciding whether or not they want them."

Even in China some inappropriate images still get through whilst legitimate sites get blocked. And in the UK too reports suggest that legitimate sites are also being blocked by porn filters [Russia Today], whilst some fail to block unsavoury material [PCPro].

Andrew Ferguson, founder of broadband news site ThinkBroadband, said that parents should not rely solely on filters to protect their children from online nasties. "As ever the filters don't block all unsavoury material so are not a replacement for parenting and the embarrassing questions all parents have to face," he said.

Free choice

At present Internet users have a choice whether or not they want the censored Internet or the fully accessible one. But it may perhaps only be a matter of time before pornography and other 'objectionable content' becomes mandatory.

Certainly if China had its way much of the world would be applying similar Internet restrictions that it does on its own citizens [Does China Hope to Remap the Internet in its Own Image?]. In fact some have already speculated that China may have influenced the implementation of porn filtering being rolled out in the UK [AnimalNewYork].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

China’s economy slows as property prices slide

It was not a good week for China as new figures revealed economic growth had slowed to its weakest in 24 years, expanding 7.4% last year from 7.7% in 2013. Enviable by many other country's standards, but for China any slowdown could be disastrous if domestic spending does not keep afloat the economy as exports wane [BBC].

Property prices are already beginning to drop in a country where people buy housing stock as an investment rather than to live in. And the risk of a property bubble bursting is a very real danger.

The buying up of empty properties and leaving them empty has led to a massive increase in so-called ghost cities [CNN / Sky News].

Bursting bubbles

The situation could become very uncomfortable indeed. Not just for those with property investments who could lose millions. Even single-home owners may find themselves in negative equity. Such a bubble burst could dry up public confidence in spending which could lead to further economic woes [tvnewswatch: Will China's bubble burst as global economy slides? / Reuters / BBC]

There are few that would argue against the risks of a property bubble burst. But for China it would be particularly dangerous [FT].

For example, not only does the property market account for more than a sixth of the total GDP, property in the country is closely tied to various other sectors such as banking and construction [CNBC].

The real problem that is hindering banking is that property in China is used as the main form of collateral, and for the property market to collapse would mean default on loans that would have a trickling effect. Unlike other nations, Chinese private banks are closely tied to the government, often headed by ex-government officials and were used as key tools to implement their stimulus package in 2009. Being so closely tied to the government, while beneficial in backing, could in the same way turn parasitic should default on the big scale hit these banks that hold a majority of mortgages in the nation [SeekingAlpha].

"A property price crash in the world's second largest economy would have global implications," says Wells Fargo Securities economist Jay Bryson [Time].

But how bad could it be? There are some that suggest the results would not be as disastrous as doommongers predict. But there are some worse case scenarios that one cannot ignore.

Domino effect

A collapse in housing prices would result in fewer construction jobs, accounting for an estimated 60 million people in urban China. Jobless workers would of course spend less, which would mean goods and services the now-unemployed construction workers would normally purchase would not get bought.

If out-of-work construction workers reduce their spending on food and entertainment, the businesses that produce that food and entertainment will make less money and then some of their workers may face unemployment too.

Lower spending would mean people having less money in their paychecks, and the nation's GDP would suffer as a whole.

Moreover, if housing tanks, banks would see losses, resulting in the tightening of credit and fewer loans for people to start businesses. And as already stated, homeowners would spend less having found themselves in negative equity.

Countries outside China would also feel the pinch as export to the country dry up as demand would undoubtedly shrink.

"Don't lose sleep at night worrying about China," Bryson tells Time magazine. But nonetheless advises investors to "keep an eye on it." [Economist]


tvnewswatch, London, UK

China in spotlight over stealing US military secrets

China has strenuously denied it stole the designs for America's next generation fighter jet in the latest spat over cyberattacks for which it is often blamed.

"Groundless" accusations

China angrily refuted the allegations it had stolen US military secrets this week. The Foreign Ministry in Beijing was responding to the publication by German magazine Der Spiegel of new documents purportedly from NSA leaker Edward Snowden.

The ministry's spokesperson Hong Lei told reporters Monday, that he wondered if his country's accusers could produce any evidence to support their claims and said the accusations were "groundless" [FMPRC].

"Cyber attacks are hard to trace back and are usually committed across borders. This complexity means that it is extremely difficult to identify the source of the attacks," Hong said.

According to one document published by Der Spiegel, China stole "many terabytes of data" related to the United States F-35 fighter jet, including detailed engine schematics and radar design [CNN].

No comment from US

Whilst it was hardly unusual for China to refute allegations that it hacked US military computers to gain access to classified data, the US would neither confirm nor deny the allegations.

A Pentagon spokesman Army Col. Steve Warren declined on Tuesday [20/01/2015] to discuss whether the Chinese had been able to obtain US military technology secrets.

"We never talk about cyber-intrusions and we don't comment on leaked information," he said [Washington Times].

China's latest statements on the Snowden leaks are a U-turn on previous communiques. Edward Snowden had become a cause célèbre in China, particularly for exposing the widespread NSA. spying program, Prism, in 2013.

Praised by state media as "a bright idealistic young man", Snowden offered China the opportunity, enthusiastically seized upon, to expose what it saw as American hypocrisy over cyberespionage [Xinhua].

Indeed many Chinese officials had used the Snowden revelations as a defensive retort when American officials pressed China to end state-sponsored hacking.

But Beijing has not been so quick to embrace the latest batch of leaked NSA materials [NYT]. In fact there is scant mention of Edward Snowden or the F-35 fighter jet in Chinese state media at all.

Previous allegations

It is not the first time China has been accused of stealing US stealth jet technology.

In 2011 experts claimed China had stolen stealth fighter technology by smuggling parts of a downed F117 Nighthawk out of Serbia during the Balkans War [tvnewswatch: China stole stealth fighter technology]

The United States Air Force retired the F-117 on 22 April 2008, primarily due to the fielding of the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II.

But there are fears amongst some military personnel  that China's new Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter, that made its debut at the Zhuhai international airshow in December last year, could eventually become more than a match for American stealth fighters in battle [USNI].

The J-31 is China's latest stealth fighter and replaces the J-20 which itself was believed to have incorporated stolen US technology [Guardian / tvnewswatch: Chinas stealth fighter takes to air].

Growing military spend

As well as stealing technology, China is ploughing millions of dollars into its military year on year [tvnewswatch: China increase military to "win local wars"].

Whilst accusing the US of "warmongering" and interfering in the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, China could also be criticised for its own aggressive stance in the region [tvnewswatch: China plays with fire as year of dragon looms]

Indeed the balance of military spending was by February 2014 tipping towards China [BBC].

Figures published by the IISS last year indicated that whilst the United States still topped the list with a military spend of $600 billion in 2013, China ranked second with a spending budget of some $112 billion.

However given the opaque nature of Chinese financial matters, there are complex debates about how far Beijing's figures encompass all of its defence-related spending. Indeed China's real military budget could be much higher than generally agreed.

tvnewswatch, London, UK