How one Brazilian judge could suspend Musk’s X in the coming hours

How one Brazilian judge could suspend Musk’s X in the coming hours
In this file photo, taken on July 24, 2023, computer monitors and a laptop display the X, formerly known as Twitter, sign-in page in Belgrade, Serbia. (AP/File)
Short Url
Updated 30 August 2024
Follow

How one Brazilian judge could suspend Musk’s X in the coming hours

How one Brazilian judge could suspend Musk’s X in the coming hours
  • Countries such as Pakistan, Turkiye and Egypt have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest
  • X is banned in several countries such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan

SAO PAULO: It’s a showdown between the world’s richest man and a Brazilian Supreme Court justice.
The justice, Alexandre de Moraes, has threatened to suspend social media giant X nationwide in the coming hours if its billionaire owner Elon Musk doesn’t swiftly comply with one of his orders. Musk has responded with insults, including calling de Moraes a “tyrant” and “a dictator.”
It is the latest chapter in the monthslong feud between the two men over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation. The deadline for compliance is fast approaching, and many in Brazil are waiting and watching to see if either man will blink.
What is the basis for de Moraes’ threat?
Earlier this month, X removed its legal representative from Brazil on the grounds that de Moraes had threatened her with arrest. On Wednesday night at 8:07 p.m. local time (7:07 p.m. Eastern Standard Time), de Moraes gave the platform 24 hours to appoint a new representative, or face a shutdown until his order is met.
De Moraes’ order is based on Brazilian law requiring foreign companies to have legal representation to operate in the country, according to the Supreme Court’s press office. This ensures someone can be notified of legal decisions and is qualified to take any requisite action.
X’s refusal to appoint a legal representative would be particularly problematic ahead of Brazil’s October municipal elections, with a churn of fake news expected, said Luca Belli, coordinator of the Technology and Society Center at the Getulio Vargas Foundation, a university in Rio de Janeiro. Takedown orders are common during campaigns, and not having someone to receive legal notices would make timely compliance impossible.
“Until last week, 10 days ago, there was an office here, so this problem didn’t exist. Now there’s nothing. Look at the example of Telegram: Telegram doesn’t have an office here, it has about 50 employees in the whole world. But it has a legal representative,” Belli, who is also a professor at the university’s law school, told The Associated Press.




In this file photo, taken on June 22, 2023, Brazilian Supreme Court Chief Justice Alexandre de Moraes arrives for a court hearing in Brasilia, Brazil. (AP/File)

Does a single judge really have that much power?
Any Brazilian judge has the authority to enforce compliance with decisions. Such measures can range from lenient actions like fines to more severe penalties, such as suspension, said Carlos Affonso Souza, a lawyer and director of the Institute for Technology and Society, a Rio-based think tank.
Lone Brazilian judges shut down Meta’s WhatsApp, the nation’s most widely used messaging app, several times in 2015 and 2016 due to the company’s refusal to comply with police requests for user data. In 2022, de Moraes threatened the messaging app Telegram with a nationwide shutdown, arguing it had repeatedly ignored Brazilian authorities’ requests to block profiles and provide information. He ordered Telegram to appoint a local representative; the company ultimately complied and stayed online.
Affonso Souza added that an individual judge’s ruling to shut down a platform with so many users would likely be assessed at a later date by the Supreme Court’s full bench.
How would de Moraes suspend X?
De Moraes would first notify the nation’s telecommunications regulator, Anatel, who would then instruct operators — including Musk’s own Starlink Internet service provider — to suspend users’ access to X. That includes preventing the resolution of X’s website — the term for conversion of a domain name to an IP address — and blocking access to the IP address of X’s servers from inside Brazilian territory, according to Belli.
Given that operators are aware of the widely publicized standoff and their obligation to comply with an order from de Moraes, plus the fact doing so isn’t complicated, X could be offline in Brazil as early as 12 hours after receiving their instructions, Belli said.
Since X is widely accessed via mobile phones, de Moraes is also likely to notify major app stores to stop offering X in Brazil, said Affonso Souza. Another possible — but highly controversial — step would be prohibiting access with virtual private networks ( VPNs) and imposing fines on those who use them to access X, he added.
Has X been shut down in other countries?
X and its former incarnation, Twitter, are banned in several countries — mostly authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan.
China banned X when it was still called Twitter back in 2009, along with Facebook. In Russia, authorities expanded their crackdown on dissent and free media after Russian President Vladimir Putin sent troops into Ukraine in February 2022. They have blocked multiple independent Russian-language media outlets critical of the Kremlin, and cut access to Twitter, which later became X, as well as Meta’s Facebook and Instagram.
In 2009, Twitter became an essential communications tool in Iran after the country’s government cracked down on traditional media after a disputed presidential election. Tech-savvy Iranians took to Twitter to organize protests. The government subsequently banned the platform, along with Facebook.
Other countries, such as Pakistan, Turkiye and Egypt, have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest. Twitter was banned in Egypt after the Arab Spring uprisings, which some dubbed the “Twitter revolution,” but it has since been restored.
Why is Brazil so important to X and Musk?
Brazil is a key market for X and other platforms. Some 40 million Brazilians, roughly one-fifth of the population, access X at least once per month, according to the market research group Emarketer. Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” has claimed de Moraes’ actions amount to censorship and rallied support from Brazil’s political right. He has also said that he wants his platform to be a “global town square” where information flows freely. The loss of the Brazilian market — the world’s fourth-biggest democracy — would make achieving this goal more difficult.
Brazil is also a potentially huge growth market for Musk’s satellite company, Starlink, given its vast territory and spotty Internet service in far-flung areas.
Late Thursday afternoon, Starlink said on X that de Moraes this week froze its finances, preventing it from doing any transactions in the country where it has more than 250,000 customers.
“This order is based on an unfounded determination that Starlink should be responsible for the fines levied— unconstitutionally— against X. It was issued in secret and without affording Starlink any of the due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution of Brazil. We intend to address the matter legally,” Starlink said in its statement.
Musk replied to people sharing the earlier reports of the freeze, adding his own insults directed at de Moraes.
“This guy @Alexandre is an outright criminal of the worst kind, masquerading as a judge,” he wrote.
De Moraes’ defenders have said his actions have been lawful, supported by most of the court’s full bench and have served to protect democracy at a time in which it is imperiled.
In April, de Moraes included Musk as a target in an ongoing investigation over the dissemination of fake news and opened a separate investigation into the executive for alleged obstruction.




In this file photo, taken on March 9, 2020, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk listens to a question at the SATELLITE Conference and Exhibition in Washington. (AP/File)

Will X appoint a new legal representative in Brazil?
X said Thursday in a statement that it expects its service to be shutdown in Brazil.
“Unlike other social media and technology platforms, we will not comply in secret with illegal orders,” it said. “To our users in Brazil and around the world, X remains committed to protecting your freedom of speech.”
It also said de Moraes’ colleagues on the Supreme Court “are either unwilling or unable to stand up to him.”


Jewish Chronicle deletes Gaza articles over fabrication allegations

Jewish Chronicle deletes Gaza articles over fabrication allegations
Updated 14 September 2024
Follow

Jewish Chronicle deletes Gaza articles over fabrication allegations

Jewish Chronicle deletes Gaza articles over fabrication allegations
  • World’s oldest Jewish newspaper severs ties with journalist after Israeli media labeled his information ‘baseless’
  • JC has faced scrutiny in UK in recent months over its editorial direction, ownership

LONDON: The Jewish Chronicle has removed several articles from its website over allegations that the journalist behind them, Elon Perry, fabricated information about the conflict in Gaza and his professional life.

The articles, supposedly based on sources within Israeli intelligence, detailed military operations in Gaza as well as what appeared to be highly sensitive information on Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.

The world’s oldest Jewish newspaper issued a statement saying: “The Jewish Chronicle has concluded a thorough investigation into freelance journalist Elon Perry, which commenced after allegations were made about aspects of his record.

“While we understand he did serve in the Israel Defense Forces, we were not satisfied with some of his claims.

“We have therefore removed his stories from our website and ended any association with Mr Perry.

“The Jewish Chronicle maintains the highest journalistic standards in a highly contested information landscape and we deeply regret the chain of events that led to this point.

“We apologise to our loyal readers and have reviewed our internal processes so that this will not be repeated.”

Perry’s articles came under suspicion after several journalists were unable to verify key details, and last week his stories were described as “fabrications” in a report published by Israeli media. 

There have even been suggestions in Israel that articles with false information have been planted in Western media, including in German tabloid Bild, which are supportive of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s position on Gaza.

On Sept. 4, for instance, Netanyahu claimed in a press conference that Sinwar could use the Philadelphi Corridor between Gaza and Egypt to escape with hostages if the area was not under Israeli control.

The next day, an article by Perry was published in the JC stating that Israeli intelligence claimed to have proof that this was Sinwar’s plan based on information obtained by interrogating a senior Hamas figure and documents found in Gaza.

A spokesperson for the Israeli military described the story as “baseless” after it was shared by Netanyahu’s wife and son on social media.

Questions have also been raised about Perry’s history serving in the Israeli military, including that he was involved in the Entebbe hostage rescue mission in 1976.

Perry also claims to have worked as a professor in Tel Aviv for 15 years, which has been questioned by journalists.

One of the journalists involved in disputing Perry’s claims, Ben Reiff of Israeli outlet +972, posted on X: “It seems that by firing Elon Perry @JewishChron is hoping to put this whole affair to bed, as if decisions weren’t made at the very top to employ a fake journalist, publish nine fake articles without verifying sources, and use the paper (as) an active agent in a pro-Bibi influence op.”

The JC, founded in 1841 and a once much-respected publication in the UK, has faced questions over its rightward editorial direction under its editor, Jake Wallis Simons, and over its ownership in recent months.

Earlier this year, Sunday Times journalist Gabriel Pogrund voiced his concerns about the paper on social media, saying: “The coarseness and aggression of the JC’s current leadership is such a pity and does such a disservice to our community. 

“It also once again poses the question: who owns it!? How is it that British Jews don’t know who owns ‘their’ paper. Moreover, how can a paper not disclose its ownership?

“It’s an oxymoron. I hate having to pose the question publicly but I asked privately more than a year ago to no avail.”

A figure close to the JC told The Guardian: “There was a sense that it was in the pocket of no one. It worked for the whole Jewish community, and because of that it had a greater institutional reach … in the Jewish community. It has become much narrower in its outlook and campaigns on a particular set of issues.”

When contacted by The Guardian, both the JC and Wallis Simons refused to comment. 

Perry told The Observer that the JC’s statement is a “huge mistake,” and that he is the victim of a “witch-hunt … caused by jealousy from Israeli journalists and outlets who could not obtain the details that I managed to.”


Australia PM hits back at Musk after ‘fascists’ quip

Australia PM hits back at Musk after ‘fascists’ quip
Updated 14 September 2024
Follow

Australia PM hits back at Musk after ‘fascists’ quip

Australia PM hits back at Musk after ‘fascists’ quip
  • Australia introduced a ‘combating misinformation’ bill earlier this week
  • Bill includes sweeping powers to fine tech giants up to five percent of their annual turnover for breaching online safety obligations

SYDNEY: Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hit back at Elon Musk on Saturday after the tech mogul called his government “fascists” for proposing laws that would fine social media giants for spreading misinformation.
Australia introduced a “combating misinformation” bill earlier this week, which includes sweeping powers to fine tech giants up to five percent of their annual turnover for breaching online safety obligations.
“Fascists,” Musk posted Thursday on his social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
But Albanese fired back at Musk on Saturday, saying social media “has a social responsibility.”
“If Mr.Musk doesn’t understand that, that says more about him than it does about my government,” he told reporters Saturday.
The exchange between Musk and Australian officials is the latest in a long-running spat with the Australian government over social media regulation.
Australia’s government is exploring a raft of new measures that would see social media companies take greater accountability for the content on their platforms — including a ban for those under 16 years old.
The country’s online watchdog took Musk’s company to court earlier this year, alleging it had failed to remove “extremely violent” videos that showed a Sydney preacher being stabbed.
But it abruptly dropped its attempt to force a global takedown order on X after Musk scored a legal victory in a preliminary hearing, a move he celebrated as a free speech triumph.
Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” has clashed with politicians and digital rights groups worldwide, including in the European Union, which could decide within months to take action against X with possible fines.
In Brazil, where X has effectively been suspended after it ignored a series of court directives, Musk has responded by blasting the judge as an “evil dictator cosplaying as a judge.”


Blinken denounces ‘covert’ activities by Russia’s RT media

Blinken denounces ‘covert’ activities by Russia’s RT media
Updated 14 September 2024
Follow

Blinken denounces ‘covert’ activities by Russia’s RT media

Blinken denounces ‘covert’ activities by Russia’s RT media

WASHINGTON: Top US diplomat Antony Blinken on Friday accused Russian media outlet RT of being a “de facto arm of Russia’s intelligence apparatus.”
“We know that RT possess cyber capabilities and engaged in covert information influence operations and military procurement,” the secretary of state told reporters.
Earlier this month, US authorities announced a battery of measures including sanctions and potential prosecution targeting Russian media over alleged attempts to interfere in this year’s American elections.
The State Department at that time imposed visa restrictions affecting a media group that includes RT, Rossia Segodnia, as well as others of its affiliates.
On Friday, Washington emphasized that the group’s efforts at destabilization extend far beyond the United States.
It said the Russian government this spring “embedded within RT an entity with cyber operational capabilities and ties to Russian intelligence.”
It added: “This cyber entity has focused primarily on influence and intelligence operations all over the world.”


Advocacy groups urge UN to investigate killing of Reuters video journalist in Lebanon

Advocacy groups urge UN to investigate killing of Reuters video journalist in Lebanon
Updated 14 September 2024
Follow

Advocacy groups urge UN to investigate killing of Reuters video journalist in Lebanon

Advocacy groups urge UN to investigate killing of Reuters video journalist in Lebanon
  • Issam Abdallah was killed by Israeli tank shells while filming cross-border exchange in south Lebanon in October
  • Letter demands UN Commission to investigate possible war crimes, ensure accountability

LONDON: Advocacy groups have urged UN officials to investigate the death of Reuters video journalist Issam Abdallah, who was killed in southern Lebanon in October.

In a letter signed by 11 organizations, including the Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without Borders and the Lebanese Center for Human Rights, the group requested the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel, to examine the circumstances surrounding Israel’s Oct. 13 attack.

They also urged the commission to investigate potential war crimes committed against journalists since the start of the Israel-Gaza conflict on Oct. 7.

Abdallah, a 37-year-old video journalist, was killed by Israeli tank shells while filming a cross-border exchange.

Six other journalists were injured in the attack, including AFP photographer Christina Assi, who had her leg amputated.

Independent investigations by Reuters, AFP, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and RSF concluded that the attack was “deliberately” launched by Israeli forces on “clearly visible media members.”

The organizations condemned the attack as a violation of international law and called for a war crimes investigation.

A sixth investigation conducted by UNIFIL similarly concluded, according to a Reuters report published in March, that “an Israeli tank killed Reuters reporter Issam Abdallah in Lebanon by firing two 120 mm rounds at a group of ‘clearly identifiable journalists’ in violation of international law.”

The letter asked the UN to publicly identify the military unit responsible for the attack and criticized Israeli authorities for failing to hold the perpetrators accountable.

“We submit this request in the hope that the work of the Commission may contribute to ensuring accountability for the killing of Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah, who lost his life in that attack, and for the six other journalists injured alongside him: Agence France Presse (AFP) journalists Christina Assi and Dylan Collins; Al Jazeera journalists Carmen Joukhadar and Elie Brakhya; and Reuters journalists Maher Nazih and Thaer Al-Soudani,” the letter read.

“Over 10 months have passed since this potential war crime was committed, but no tangible steps have been taken by any judicial body to secure justice for the victims and accountability for the perpetrators.”

It added: “We believe this to be of crucial importance to ensure redress for all victims, as well as to end impunity for crimes committed against journalists since 7 October 2023, including the ongoing targeting of journalists in Gaza, where more than 100 media employees have been killed by Israeli forces.”


Toronto festival drops Russian war film screenings over threats

Toronto festival drops Russian war film screenings over threats
Updated 13 September 2024
Follow

Toronto festival drops Russian war film screenings over threats

Toronto festival drops Russian war film screenings over threats
  • Desicion was taken after receiving ‘significant threats to festival operations and public safety’
  • Film features a Russian battalion as it advanced across eastern Ukraine in February 2022

OTTAWA: The Toronto International Film Festival said Thursday it was pausing all upcoming screenings of controversial documentary “Russians at War” after receiving “significant threats.”
“We have been made aware of significant threats to festival operations and public safety,” festival organizers said in a statement, pointing to reports they received “indicating potential activity in the coming days that pose significant risk.”
“This is an unprecedented move for TIFF,” read the statement.
“Given the severity of these concerns, we cannot proceed as planned.”
Anastasia Trofimova first presented “Russians at War” at the Venice Film Festival.
In the film, she embedded with a Russian battalion as it advanced across eastern Ukraine after Moscow launched its invasion in February 2022.
It was to have its North American premiere in Toronto on Friday, followed by additional screenings on Saturday and Sunday.
Both in Venice and Toronto it has sparked outrage in Ukrainian cultural and political circles against what many consider a pro-Kremlin film that seeks to whitewash and justify Moscow’s assault on its neighbor.
Ukraine’s presidential chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, said he felt the festival should have dropped the film.
“The threat is Russian propaganda,” he wrote on Telegram, adding that the film should be “banned.”
Canada’s deputy prime minister, Chrystia Freeland, criticized the planned screening in Toronto.
“There can be no moral equivalency in our understanding of this conflict,” she said.
Canadian public broadcaster TVO, which had helped fund the documentary, pulled its support for the film and said it would not be airing it.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s state film agency appealed to TIFF to drop the film, which it said was “a dangerous tool for public opinion manipulation.”
Trofimova has rejected the criticisms, telling AFP the Canada-France production was “an anti-war film” that showed “ordinary guys” who were fighting for Russia.
The soldiers depicted appear to have little idea of why they have been sent to the front, and are shown struggling to make Soviet-era weapons serviceable.
Others chain-smoke cigarettes and down shots of alcohol amid the deaths and wounds of their comrades.
Producer Sean Farnel said on X that the decision to cancel the screenings was “heartbreaking.”
He blamed officials’ public criticisms for having “incited the violent hate that has led to TIFF’s painful decision to pause its presentation of ‘Russians at War.’“