Tag: Ban

Categories
World News

Fb upholds Trump ban however will reassess choice over coming months

Facebook upholds Trump ban but will reassess decision over coming months

Former US President Donald Trump speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference on February 28, 2021 in Orlando, Florida, USA.

Joe Skipper | Reuters

Facebook’s independent board of directors decided on Wednesday to uphold the company’s January decision to suspend former President Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts.

However, the indefinite time frame for the suspension is “not appropriate”. The board has effectively relayed the decision on the length of the suspension to Facebook, stating that it insists that the company look into this matter to identify and justify an appropriate response that is in line with the rules in place for other users of its platform be valid. “”

The board asked Facebook to complete the review within six months and made suggestions on how to create clear guidelines that balance public safety and freedom of expression.

“We will now examine the decision of the board and determine a measure that is clear and proportionate,” said Facebook in a blog post after the announcement. “In the meantime, Mr. Trump’s accounts remain suspended.”

The case

Facebook blocked Trump’s accounts after the January 6 riot in the U.S. Capitol. The suspension was Facebook’s most aggressive move against Trump during his four-year tenure.

“We believe that the risk that the president can continue to use our service during this time is simply too great,” wrote Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg at the time in a post on his Facebook page.

Facebook referred the decision to its board of directors a few weeks later, saying that given the importance of the decision, “it is important for the board to review it and make an independent judgment as to whether it should be upheld”.

The decision to maintain Trump’s suspension is the most important action taken by the board of directors so far, which was initiated in October as the de facto “supreme court” for the company’s decisions on content moderation.

The Board is an independent body made up of experts in the fields of citizenship, technology, freedom of speech, journalism and human rights from around the world. A randomly selected but diverse group of five board members was selected to deliberate on the case, and the recommendation had to be approved by a majority of the entire 20-member board of directors.

Facebook had previously agreed to abide by the decisions of the board of directors, although Zuckerberg still has undisputed control over the company and the majority rule over the company’s shares.

The results of the board

The board found that Trump’s January 6th post “seriously violated” Facebook’s community standards. However, the platform “tries to evade its responsibilities” by imposing a vague penalty and then sending it to the board for review.

Trump’s statements on Facebook: “We love you. You are very special,” referring to the people who hang around the US Capitol, who rioters called “great patriots” and told them to “stay forever.” remember this day, “violated the rules of Facebook prohibiting the praise of people who are involved in violence, wrote the board of directors.

“The board noted that by maintaining an unfounded portrayal of electoral fraud and persistent calls to action, Mr Trump has created an environment where there is a serious risk of violence,” the board wrote, adding that Trump was posting his testimony there , immediate risk of harm and his words of support for those involved in the riots legitimized their violent actions. “

However, Facebook’s decision to issue the ban indefinitely was not justified, the board found, because it “did not follow a clear, published procedure.”

“By imposing a vague, standard-less penalty and then referring this case to the board for resolution, Facebook is trying to evade its responsibilities,” the board wrote. “The board rejects Facebook’s request and insists that Facebook apply and justify a defined penalty.”

Speaking to reporters after the decision, co-chair Helle Thorning-Schmidt said the group basically told Facebook that they can’t just invent new unwritten rules if they see fit. Co-chair Michael McConnell said it was far from the first time Facebook had made ad hoc rules.

The co-chairs admitted Facebook’s decision might get back to their desks, but McConnell said the decision could be easier if Facebook followed its recommendations for creating clear guidelines.

The board said that while Facebook should apply the same rules to all members, the company should consider context when assessing the harm, even if posts are made by “influential users”. It added that timeliness considerations “should not be a priority when urgent action is needed to prevent significant harm”.

Facebook should publicly explain the rules by which users are banned for specific periods of time and assess whether the risk of harm has changed before the ban is lifted, the board wrote. Still, the board said that deleting an account or page might be appropriate in certain circumstances.

Categories
Health

Dubai Airports boss blasts UK journey ban as visitors slumps close to 70%

Dubai Airports boss blasts UK travel ban as traffic slumps near 70%

Emirates operated aircraft at Dubai International Airport in the United Arab Emirates.

Christopher Pike | Bloomberg | Getty Images

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates – Dubai Airports General Manager has made a decision by the UK authorities to keep the UAE on their “red” list for international travel as new data from the group shows that passenger traffic through the airport has dropped at 67, The first quarter fell 8%.

“I think the approach is wrong,” Dubai Airports CEO Paul Griffiths told Dubai Eye Radio on Thursday, expressing frustration with the rule prohibiting air travel or costly quarantine for thousands of Britons in the Emirates upon arrival forces who want to go home.

UK Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said that given its status as an international transport hub, the UAE could stay on the list despite falling cases and the second fastest vaccination rate in the world.

“I can’t be too honest with you about my thoughts on these comments,” Griffiths said when asked to respond. “We have made very strong claims to the UK government about the credibility of the numbers here and the way we deal with everything.”

Griffiths called for “a far more proactive relationship” to address confusion over the verdict as public frustration mounts. The UAE remains on the United Kingdom’s Red List, although Abu Dhabi has the United Kingdom on its own “green” list of travel destinations.

“There are countries on the green list (UK) that we believe have not taken the care and the number of measures that we have taken here in Dubai to keep everyone safe,” Griffiths said. “Getting back to life as we once knew it is just not practical.”

The UK Foreign Office and Transport Department spokespersons were not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC. Last week Shapps said, “We are not restricting the UAE because of the coronavirus levels in the UAE. The problem is the transit problem.”

The UK Foreign Office is currently advising against “all but essential travel throughout the United Arab Emirates, based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.”

A health worker checks a man’s temperature before receiving a dose of coronavirus vaccine at a vaccination center at the Dubai International Financial Center in the Gulf emirate of Dubai on February 3, 2021. The United Arab Emirates has seen an increase in cases after the holiday season.

Photo by KARIM SAHIB | AFP via Getty Images

The United Arab Emirates has delivered more than 9.9 million vaccine doses from its population of around 10 million people, just behind Israel in the global vaccination race. Dubai residents can choose between the China-made Sinopharm vaccine, the UK-developed AstraZeneca, the America-made Pfizer Stuff, or the Russian Sputnik V, while Abu Dhabi residents could only access Sinopharm until Pfizer last week at Emirate of the capital was introduced.

Some in the medical community have expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the Sinopharm shot due to conflicting numbers from interim studies and a lack of published data on the Phase 3 trials. It has not yet been approved by the World Health Organization.

Economic and personal costs

The UK list, which will be reviewed in the coming weeks, lists 40 high-risk countries considered too dangerous to travel, including India, which is in a national crisis due to rising infection rates and rising death tolls.

The ban also had real ramifications for Dubai Airports, which call London a “key city” for passenger traffic at Dubai Airport. Before the pandemic, more than 6 million people would fly between the two cities in a single year, Griffiths said.

“It is almost unthinkable not to have a solid 28-a-day flight bridge between here and the UK,” said Griffiths. “The irony, of course, is that you can fly to Scotland, but not England.”

“It is obviously something that everyone here in Dubai is trying very hard to resolve very quickly.”

The ruling also affects many of the roughly 120,000 British nationals living and working in the United Arab Emirates and their family members who have expressed confusion and anger, particularly over the hotel quarantine requirement which is costing a hefty £ 1,750 (US $ 2,428) per person Person.

Categories
Business

A 3rd of Basecamp’s staff resign after a ban on speaking politics.

A third of Basecamp’s workers resign after a ban on talking politics.

About a third of Basecamp employees said they were stepping down after the company that makes productivity software announced new guidelines banning discussions in the workplace about politics.

Jason Fried, CEO of Basecamp, explained the guidelines in a blog post on Monday, describing “social and political discussions” about corporate messaging tools as a “major distraction”. He wrote that the company also prohibits committees, cutting benefits such as a fitness allowance (giving employees cash value) and stopping “dwelling on previous decisions and thinking about them.”

Basecamp had 57 employees, including Mr Fried when the announcement was made, according to a staff list on its website. Since then, at least 20 of them have publicly announced that they want to resign or have already resigned, according to a New York Times tally. Basecamp did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mr Fried and David Hansson, two of Basecamp’s founders, have published several books on work culture, and news about their latest management philosophy has received a mixture of applause and criticism on social media.

After the Platformer newsletter published details of a dispute within the company that contributed to the decision to ban political talks, Hansson wrote in another blog post that Basecamp employees who disagreed with the founders would receive a severance payment of up to six Month salary offered me choice.

“We are committed to a deeply controversial stance,” wrote Hansson, Basecamp’s chief technology officer. “Some employees are relieved, others are angry, and that describes the public debate about it pretty well.”

Coinbase, a start-up that enables people to buy and sell cryptocurrencies, announced a similar ban last year, with a similar offer to provide severance pay to employees who disagreed. The company said 60 of its employees had resigned, about 5 percent of its workforce.

Categories
Health

FDA to suggest ban on menthol-flavored cigarettes, with trade prone to problem

FDA to propose ban on menthol-flavored cigarettes, with industry likely to challenge

The Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it would propose a ban on menthol-flavored cigarettes in the US, which would mean a big blow to future tobacco sales.

Menthol is the last permitted flavor for cigarettes. According to the FDA, menthol cigarettes were disproportionately used by teenagers, black people and low-income groups. The vast majority of black smokers prefer menthol brands of cigarettes, and black men currently have the highest rates of lung cancer in the country.

“With these actions, the FDA will help significantly reduce initiation of adolescents, increase the likelihood of smoking cessation among current smokers, and eliminate health gaps that occur among color communities, low-income populations, and LGBTQ + people, all of which are far more likely are to use these tobacco products, “said Janet Woodcock, acting FDA commissioner, in a press release.

This decision was in response to a 2013 citizen application. A court had ordered a response from the agency by Thursday.

Years until implementation

However, Jefferies analyst Owen Bennett said that proposal would take years to reach a conclusion, as it would need sufficient evidence from both sides, which could be difficult.

“If we see a proposed rule for menthol, it could take years to reach the final rule as a waterproof evidence package would have to be put together … the FDA itself has said in the past that there was not enough evidence,” he said in a report, adding that large tobacco companies might strike back in response, which would mean more time.

This decision was made after years of deliberation by public health officials to help smokers make the transition to less harmful practices such as non-flammable products or smoking cessation altogether.

Menthol cigarettes make up about a third of all cigarettes sold in the United States. The leading brands are Newport, owned by British American Tobacco’s RJ Reynolds, and Kool, owned by Imperial Tobacco’s ITG Brands.

British American Tobacco controls a whopping 66% stake in the menthol market, while Altria has a 26% stake and Imperial an 8% stake, according to a report by Bernstein analyst Callum Elliott.

Altria’s business is less exposed to menthol sales. Elliott estimates that only about 17% of its volume falls into this category. It would be a bigger blow to British American as more than half of its cigarette volume comes from that category, Elliott said.

Imperial Brands said the FDA’s decision was “disappointing” but expected. According to Elliott, menthol makes up about 30% of its volume.

“We believe the rulemaking process will show that there is no clear scientific evidence to support a menthol and flavor ban at the federal level. We hope the FDA will comply with the law and prioritize sound politics and science over political pressure,” said the enterprise.

‘Unintended Consequences’

Marlboro cigarette maker Altria has warned of the possibility of a ban that could create an illegal market.

“We share a common goal of switching adult smokers from cigarettes to potentially less harmful alternatives, but the ban is not working,” Altria said in a statement. “The criminalization of menthol will have serious unintended consequences.”

Reynolds and his parent company British American Tobacco were not immediately available for comment.

The argument against flavors

If implemented, the proposal would be of great benefit to anti-tobacco advocates who have long seen flavored cigarettes as a way for consumers to become acquainted with smoking.

Tobacco product smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the country, according to the FDA. There are plans to introduce product standards to eliminate menthol in cigarettes within the next year, as well as to eliminate all signature flavors, including menthol, in cigars.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, fourteen percent of all American adults smoked cigarettes in 2019. Although smoking rates are similar between black and white populations, black smokers are less likely to quit, which some have attributed to the menthol taste. The mint taste of menthol cools the throat and makes it easier for smokers to tolerate the tobacco taste.

The FDA cited a tobacco control study indicating that a ban could help smokers quit smoking. It pursued behavior after menthol bans were introduced in Canada. The FDA estimates a US ban could cause an additional 923,000 smokers, including 230,000 African Americans, to quit in the first 13 to 17 months.

Last week, the Biden government also announced it was considering limiting nicotine levels in cigarettes. This is another step that the FDA has been pushing for years. However, today’s announcement on menthol cigarettes makes no mention of a reduction in nicotine levels.

Altria and British American Tobacco, Reynolds’ parent company, lost nearly 2% in midday trading.

Read the FDA statement here.

Categories
Business

Senators push for reopening of worldwide journey, raise of CDC’s crusing ban

Senators push for reopening of international travel, lift of CDC's sailing ban

People wait for their luggage in the terminal of Boston Logan International Airport in Boston.

Erin Clark | Boston Globe | Getty Images

A new Senate Travel and Tourism subcommittee held its first hearing on Tuesday calling on the U.S. government to take concrete steps to boost U.S. tourism after a devastating 2020.

Legislators have been eager to see when international entry restrictions that have hit tourism-dependent states like Florida, Nevada and Washington would be lifted, including pushing for a way for cruise lines to resume sailing.

“There is reluctance to map out a roadmap for reopening international travel,” said Tori Barnes, executive vice president of the US Travel Association.

She said resuming international travel would shorten the recovery time for the rundown travel industry.

Lawmakers also suggested that greater cabinet-level representation of travel would help travel and tourism.

“There is no cabinet-level position focused on tourism. We believe leadership is needed,” Barnes said.

Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan raised concerns about the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Centers’ conditional sailing order for the cruise lines.

The Republican senator recently met with CDC director Rochelle Walensky and said, “She really had no idea about these issues. Cruise lines in America through mid-July were what she thought possible … none of it turned out to be true.”

Earlier Tuesday, Sullivan, along with Florida Senators Rick Scott and Marco Rubio, announced a bill aimed at overriding the CDC’s current framework for cruise ship return to sea. In this new piece of legislation, known as the CRUISE Act or Careful Resumption Under Improved Safety Enhancements, lawmakers are urging U.S. health officials to change the current guidelines.

The proposal is just the latest effort by Republican lawmakers in states that rely heavily on the industry to urge the CDC to come up with a clearer schedule for cruise lines. Democratic officials from Florida were particularly silent when the cruise lines were taken out of service.

Over the past year, several Democratic lawmakers have taken steps to block funding from the cruise industry.

“You are not American … You do not pay any taxes in the United States,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., In mid-March 2020.

But Florida and Alaska’s economies are feeling the effects after more than a year without cruising.

In the first six months of the pandemic, Florida lost $ 3.2 billion to the cruise industry shutdown, including nearly 50,000 jobs that paid $ 2.3 billion in wages, according to a September 2020 report by the Federal Maritime Commission.

Meanwhile, Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy estimated that the overall impact of the 2020 and 2021 cruises being canceled will result in more than $ 3.3 billion in domestic product loss.

Last Thursday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis filed a lawsuit against the CDC, calling the agency’s existing policies “irrational”.

Dunleavy was also critical. In a strong statement last week to Jeff Zients, Coordinator of the White House’s Covid-19 Task Force, Dunleavy wrote, “The CDC’s recent decision to extend the 2020” conditional sail order “effectively removes any potential for one Cruise season 2021 and puts the future of thousands of family businesses in Alaska at risk. “

The CDC has stated that coronavirus is easy to spread in a cruise environment and has advised caution. The latest guidelines suggest that daily reporting of Covid disease, frequent testing and vaccinations are required if crossings are allowed to resume.

Categories
Health

CDC eviction ban will quickly expire. Specialists warn of a Covid surge

CDC eviction ban will soon expire. Experts warn of a Covid surge

Protesters gather for a rally to support bills and laws to block evictions in Massachusetts for up to a year.

Boston Globe | Boston Globe | Getty Images

The country’s attempts to bring the coronavirus pandemic under control could be undermined by the impending expiration of the national eviction ban, experts warn.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s moratorium on most evictions across the country has been in place since September 2020, but is set to expire in a week.

According to a survey published this month by the Census Bureau, around one in five adult renters say they haven’t paid last month’s rent. Closer to 1 in 3 black tenants said the same thing.

According to a recent study, continuing the mass evictions could lead to an increase in cases and deaths in Covid.

More from Personal Finance:
Four months behind the rent he got help from his landlord
More than 2,000 organizations are calling on Biden to extend the eviction ban
What you should know about applying for a portion of the $ 45 billion rental allowance

That’s because many displaced people double up with family members or friends, or are forced to turn to overcrowded shelters.

During the pandemic, 43 states and Washington, DC temporarily banned evictions. Many of the moratoriums only lasted 10 weeks, while some states continue to ban the process.

The researchers found that continuing evictions in these states between March and September caused 433,700 cases of Covid-19 and 10,700 additional deaths in the U.S. before the CDC ban went into effect nationwide.

“If you look at an infectious disease like Covid-19, evictions can have implications not only for the health of displaced families, but the health of the wider community,” said Kathryn Leifheit, one of the study’s authors and a postdoctoral fellow at UCLA Fielding School of Public Health.

Evicting tenants is a last resort, said Bob Pinnegar, president of the National Apartment Association. However, the last year has marginalized the landlords, he said.

“Over 50% of rental housing providers in the country are mom and pop owners who rely on their few housing units as their only source of income,” he said. “The reserves are running out and in many cases are exhausted.”

The CDC has sent the Bureau of Administration and Budget a proposal to review the rules, which experts say indicates that the health authority is taking steps to maintain protection.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the ban can be extended through July.

CDC spokesman Jason McDonald said a decision to extend the moratorium had not been made. And the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, housing advocates are watching the clock and saying the ban must be in place at least until the historic cash pot allocated by Congress for rent arrears is distributed.

“An expired moratorium only increases disease transmission and defeats the purpose of the $ 45 billion grant,” said Emily Benfer, eviction expert and visiting law professor at Wake Forest University.

Categories
Health

Alabama Might Enable Yoga in Public Colleges After a 28-Yr Ban

Alabama Could Allow Yoga in Public Schools After a 28-Year Ban

Mr. Gray indicated that his bill would allow schools and students to make their own decisions about whether to offer or attend yoga classes. It is also said that public school teachers cannot say “namaste,” a greeting often used in yoga, or any type of chant.

“You have to compromise to get this bipartisan support,” he said.

Most of the time, Mr. Gray encountered the problem by accident. In a speech at a public high school in Auburn, Ala., In 2019, he mentioned that yoga had helped him keep grounded while juggling responsibilities.

After he explained, the teachers informed him that they could not arrange exercises for their students. “That’s how I learned it was banned,” said Mr. Gray.

Around the time of the ban in 1993, the state’s parents raised concerns not only about yoga, but also about hypnosis and “psychotherapeutic techniques.” According to an April 1993 article in The Anniston Star, a mother in Birmingham said her child brought home a relaxation tape that made a boy “visibly high,” The Montgomery Advertiser reported.

But for Mr. Gray, a former soccer player, yoga has long been a useful part of his training schedule. The gentle stretches helped him cool off after a workout, while the breathing exercises strengthened his lungs. (That, he added, may have helped him recover quickly from a Covid-19 attack last year.)

He put his first bill to challenge the yoga ban in 2019, but it quickly failed. His second attempt passed the house in 2020, but was pushed into the background because of the pandemic.

This time Mr. Gray is optimistic about the bill’s prospects. He said a Republican Senator, Tom Whatley, has agreed to drive legislation in the Senate, where Republicans like the House have a majority. (Mr. Whatley didn’t immediately respond to an email asking for comment on Friday.)

Categories
Business

Fb Ends Ban on Political Promoting

Facebook Lifts Ban on Political Advertising

SAN FRANCISCO – Facebook announced on Wednesday that it intends to lift the ban on political advertising on its network and to resume a form of digital advertising that has been criticized for spreading misinformation and falsehoods and inflaming voters.

The social network said it would allow advertisers to purchase new ads on “social issues, elections or politics” starting Thursday. This is evident from a copy of an email sent to political advertisers and viewed by the New York Times. These advertisers are required to perform a series of identity checks before they are allowed to serve the ads, according to the company.

“We introduced this temporary ban after the November 2020 elections to avoid confusion or abuse after election day,” Facebook said in a blog post. “We have had a lot of feedback on this and learned more about political ads and campaigns during this election cycle. For this reason, we plan to use the coming months to take a closer look at how these ads work in our service and to determine where further changes are appropriate. “

Political advertising on Facebook has long been faced with questions. Mark Zuckerberg, the executive director of Facebook, said he wanted to maintain a largely straightforward attitude towards the speech on the site – including political advertisements – unless it would pose direct harm to the public or individuals, saying that he ” does not want “the arbiter of truth. “

However, after the 2016 presidential election, the company and intelligence officials discovered that Russians had used Facebook ads to sow dissatisfaction among Americans. Former President Donald J. Trump also used Facebook’s political ads to reinforce claims of an “invasion” of the Mexican border in 2019, among other things.

Facebook banned political ads late last year to stave off misinformation and threats of violence related to the November presidential election. In September, the company announced that it would ban new political ads for the week leading up to election day and act swiftly against posts that were intended to prevent people from voting. In October, Facebook expanded this action by stating that it would ban all political and thematic advertising after polls were closed for an indefinite period on November 3rd.

The company eventually limited itself to groups and sites that were spreading certain types of misinformation, such as: B. Prevent people from voting or registering to vote. It has spent billions of dollars eradicating foreign influence campaigns and other forms of interference from malicious government agencies and other bad actors.

In December, Facebook lifted the ban to allow some advertisers in Georgia to post political-themed and candidacy ads for the state’s January Senate election. Otherwise, the ban remained in force for the remaining 49 states.

Attitudes towards how political advertising should be treated on Facebook are decidedly mixed. Politicians, who are often not well known, can use Facebook to raise their profile and awareness of their campaigns.

“Political ads aren’t bad things in and of themselves,” said Siva Vaidhyanathan, professor of media studies and author of a book on Facebook’s impact on democracy. “They do an essential service by directly representing the concerns or positions of the candidate.”

He added, “When you ban all campaign ads on the most accessible, affordable platform out there, you tend the balance to the candidates who can afford radio and television.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, also said political advertising on Facebook can be a crucial component of democratic digital campaigning strategies.

Some political ad buyers welcomed the lifting of the ad ban.

“The advertising ban was something that Facebook did to appease the public for the misinformation being spread on the platform,” said Eileen Pollet, digital campaign strategist and founder of Ravenna Strategies. “But it hurt really good actors, while bad actors had a completely free hand. And now, especially since the elections were over, the ban has really hurt nonprofits and local organizations. “

Facebook has long tried to pull the needle between a forceful moderation of its guidelines and a lighter touch. For years, Mr Zuckerberg defended politicians’ right to say what they wanted on Facebook, but that changed last year amid mounting concerns about possible violence related to the November elections.

In January, Facebook banned Mr. Trump from using his account and posting it on the platform after delegitimizing election results on social media and sparking a violent uprising among his supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol.

Facebook said Mr. Trump’s suspension was “indefinite”. The decision is currently under scrutiny by the Facebook Oversight Board, a third-party company founded by the company made up of journalists, academics, and others that will rule on some of the company’s delicate decisions regarding content policy enforcement. A decision is expected to be made in the next few months.

On Thursday, political advertisers on Facebook can submit new ads or activate existing political ads that have already been approved. Each ad comes with a small disclaimer stating that it was “paid for” by a political organization. For those buying new ads, it could take up to a week to complete the process of authorizing identity and verifying the ad, according to Facebook.

Categories
Business

Fb Lifts Ban on Political Promoting

Facebook Lifts Ban on Political Advertising

SAN FRANCISCO – Facebook announced Wednesday that it intends to lift the ban on political advertising on its network and resume a form of digital advertising that has been criticized for spreading misinformation, lies and voter inflammation.

The social network said it would allow advertisers to purchase new ads on “social issues, elections or politics” starting Thursday. This is evident from a copy of an email sent to political advertisers and viewed by the New York Times. These advertisers are required to perform a series of identity checks before they are allowed to serve the ads, according to the company.

“We introduced this temporary ban after the November 2020 elections to avoid confusion or abuse after election day,” Facebook said in a blog post. “We have had a lot of feedback on this and learned more about political ads and campaigns during this election cycle. For this reason, we plan to use the coming months to take a closer look at how these ads work in our service and to determine where further changes are appropriate. “

Political advertising on Facebook has long been faced with questions. Mark Zuckerberg, the executive director of Facebook, said he wanted to maintain a largely straightforward attitude towards the speech on the site – including political advertisements – unless it would pose direct harm to the public or individuals, saying that he ” does not want “the arbiter of truth. “

However, after the 2016 presidential election, the company and intelligence officials discovered that Russians had used Facebook ads to sow dissatisfaction among Americans. Former President Donald J. Trump also used Facebook’s political ads to reinforce claims of an “invasion” of the Mexican border in 2019, among other things.

Facebook banned political ads late last year to stave off misinformation and threats of violence related to the November presidential election. In September, the company announced that it would ban new political ads for the week leading up to election day and act swiftly against posts that were intended to prevent people from voting. In October, Facebook expanded this action by stating that it would ban all political and thematic advertising after polls were closed for an indefinite period on November 3rd.

In December, the company lifted the ban to allow some advertisers to advertise political issues and running for Georgia for the January runoff in the state. Otherwise, the ban remained in force for the remaining 49 states.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Categories
World News

The Indian authorities could ban cryptocurrencies like bitcoin

The Indian government may ban cryptocurrencies like bitcoin

Narendra Modi, India’s Prime Minister, speaks during the United Nations Virtual General Assembly on Saturday, September 26, 2020.

Daniel Acker | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The Indian government plans to introduce a bill in the country’s lower house that bans private cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and creates a national cryptocurrency.

The so-called “cryptocurrency and regulation of the official law on digital currencies” aims to “provide a framework for the creation of the official digital currency to be issued by the Reserve Bank of India”.

In addition, “the bill is also intended to ban all private cryptocurrencies in India, but provides certain exemptions to promote the underlying technology of the cryptocurrency and its uses.”

Bitcoin’s value rose more than 20% to $ 38,566 on Friday after Elon Musk changed his personal Twitter bio to #bitcoin.

This isn’t the first time Indian lawmakers have taken such a strong stance on cryptocurrencies. In 2018, an Indian government body recommended banning all private cryptocurrencies and proposed prison sentences of up to 10 years for offenders.

In the same year, then Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said: “The government does not recognize cryptocurrency as legal tender or coin and will take all measures to prevent the use of these crypto-assets to fund illegitimate activities or as part of the payment system.” . “

Many countries – including the USA, China, Japan, Canada, Venezuela, Estonia, Sweden and Uruguay – have examined the development of their own digital currencies.

However, there are significant differences between national digital currencies and private cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are decentralized, while national digital currencies are usually centralized.