Pakistan's opposition said Thursday the government is seeking to further suppress freedom of speech a day after it proposed sweeping controls on social media that could include blocking platforms and sending users to prison for spreading disinformation. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, introduced in the National Assembly by Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar on Wednesday, would create an agency with the power to order “unlawful and offensive content” blocked from social media, and to ban individuals and organizations from social media, AP reports. Social media platforms would be required to register with the new Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority, and those failing to comply with the law could face temporary or permanent bans. The law also makes spreading disinformation a criminal offense, punishable by three years in prison and a fine of 2 million rupees ($7,150). Landslides, flash floods in Indonesia kill 17, missing 8 The move comes nearly a year after Pakistan blocked the X platform ahead of an election that the opposition party of imprisoned former Prime Minister Imran Khan says was rigged. X is still blocked in the country, although many people use virtual private networks to access it, like in other countries with tight internet controls. Khan has a huge following on social media, especially X, where supporters frequently circulate demands for his release. Khan has been behind bars since 2023, when he was arrested for graft. Khan's party also uses social media to organize demonstrations. The leader of the opposition denounced the proposed legislation, saying it was aimed at further suppressing freedom of speech. Omar Ayub Khan, who is not related to the imprisoned former premier, said the bill could “lay a foundation for the suppression of voices advocating for constitutional rights”. Man sentenced to life for rape, murder of doctor in India The new agency would be able to order the immediate blocking of unlawful content targeting judges, the armed forces, parliament or provincial assemblies. The law also forbids uploading remarks from parliament that have been struck from the record. Pakistani media has faced growing censorship in recent years. Journalists have said they face state pressure to avoid using Imran Khan's name, and most TV stations have begun referring to him only as the “founder of the PTI" party. Human rights defenders and journalists' unions have vowed to oppose the law, but with the government holding a majority, its passage is all but assured. Afzal Butt, president of the Federal Union of Journalists, said the law was an attempt to suppress the media, social media and journalists. The government says the law is necessary to limit the spread of disinformation.

Within hours of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the new administration took down the Spanish-language version of the official White House website. The site — currently https://www.whitehouse.gov/es/ — now gives users an “Error 404” message. It also included a “Go Home” button that directed viewers to a page featuring a video montage of Trump in his first term and on the campaign trail. The button was later updated to read “Go To Home Page”. Hispanic advocacy groups and others expressed confusion at the abrupt change and frustration at what some called the administration’s lack of efforts to maintain communication with the Latino community, which helped propel him to the presidency. The Spanish profile of the White House’ X, @LaCasaBlanca and the government page on reproductive freedom also were disbanded. Meanwhile, the Spanish versions of other government agencies such as the Department of Labor, Justice and Agriculture remained available for users on Tuesday. Asked about the changes, White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields responded Tuesday that the administration is “committed to bringing back online the Spanish translation section of the website.” “It’s day two. We are in the process of developing, editing and tweaking the White House website. As part of this ongoing work, some of the archived content on the website went dormant. We are committed to reloading that content in a short timeline," he said without elaborating. Trump removed the Spanish version of the page in 2017. At that time, White House officials said they would reinstate it. President Joe Biden reinstated the page in 2021. The page's removal coincided with Trump’s first-day wave of executive orders highlighted by the launch of an illegal immigration crackdown that was one of his key campaign pledges. Trump on Monday declared a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border and announced plans to send U.S. troops to help support immigration agents and restrict refugees and asylum. According to 2023 Census Bureau estimates, about 43.4 million Americans — 13.7% of the U.S. population age 5 and older — speak Spanish at home. The U.S. has no official language. Monica Rivera, a brand and communications strategist in New York City of Puerto Rican and Cuban descent, said the shutdown sends a clear signal. Read: Trump announces 500 bln USD AI infrastructure investment in U.S. “There are 43 million Latinos who speak Spanish as their first language and removing access to information directly from the White House draws a distinct line as to who they are serving and more dangerously, signals to the administration’s MAGA base that we as Latinos are ‘other’ and a less significant part of this country," Rivera said. Anthony Hernandez, a paralegal in the nation's capital, wasn’t initially aware of the move and said it suggests what the coming years of a second Trump presidency would look like, with specific issues making headlines while “minor but equally malicious things like that go unnoticed.” “A move like shutting down the Spanish White House page and X profile serves no purpose other than to cut off resources for millions of Hispanic Americans and immigrants attempting to enter the United States legally," Hernandez said. "And it’s a slap in the face to the millions of Hispanic voters that supported him in this recent election.” Trump’s secretary of state, Marco Rubio, is Cuban American and speaks Spanish. At his swearing-in Tuesday, he gave remarks in Spanish, thanking God, his family and Trump. Meanwhile, Hispanic leaders and communication strategy experts expressed surprise with the page's removal, given Trump’s popularity with certain Latino voters. “If the White House is seriously interested in engaging with Latinos, the second largest group in this country, then they need to make sure that updates can also be distributed in Spanish, a preferred language for millions in our community,” said Frankie Miranda President and CEO of the Hispanic Federation. He called that a way to ensure "everyone is a part of the civic process.” Kris Klein Hernández, a U.S. historian specializing in race, gender, and sexuality at Connecticut College, said the content removal from official White House websites not only limits the access available to Spanish-speaking U.S. citizens and migrants but leads "some to question which constituencies the administration prioritizes.” Read more: Rhino.ai announces $50M series A to transform enterprise modernization Jeff Lee, former deputy cabinet secretary and deputy director of external and international affairs for former California Gov. Jerry Brown, said the move seems counterintuitive given the opportunity to “showcase” policy changes, especially ones related to economics and border security. “I didn’t see any other language mediums that got the kibosh. So I think that’s a really interesting thing to single out — if that’s the case," Lee said. AP VoteCast, a nationwide survey of more than 120,000 voters, found Trump won a larger share of Black and Latino voters than he did in 2020, and most notably among men under age 45. Young Latinos, particularly young Latino men, also were more open to Trump than in 2020. Roughly half of young Latino men voted for Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris, compared with about 6 in 10 who went for Biden.

The Ministry of Public Administration has issued instructions to take action against government employees posting on social media without adhering to established guidelines. A letter was sent to secretaries, senior secretaries, divisional commissioners, and district administrators on Thursday instructing them to take immediate steps against employees violating social media protocols. ACC seeks info on dual citizenship of govt employees The letter said certain government officials are using social media to post status updates that not only undermine the government’s image but may also jeopardise national security. In its communication, the Ministry pointed out that a number of employees have been disregarding the “Social Media Usage Guidelines for Government Institutions, 2019.” These employees have been sharing documents and posting content that embarrasses the government or creates unnecessary controversy, which goes against the service rules for government personnel. Govt employees to receive dearness allowance The Ministry’s warning said that such behavior is both a breach of the official code of conduct and, in some cases, could be deemed harmful to national security. The Ministry’s guidelines clearly state that employees must refrain from engaging in conduct that is detrimental to the government or violates the code of ethics for public servants. Such actions can be categorized as misconduct under the 'Government Employee Discipline and Appeal Rules, 2018.' Govt employees must submit wealth statement by November 30: Senior Secretary To address these concerns, the Ministry has urged relevant authorities to take necessary actions in line with established regulations. The letter stressed the importance of vigilant monitoring and adherence to the social media usage guidelines, with strict consequences for violations.

In a crucial case for the social media era, free speech and national security collide at the Supreme Court on Friday, as arguments unfold over the fate of TikTok, a hugely popular platform used by nearly half of Americans for entertainment and information, report AP. TikTok has announced plans to shut down in the U.S. by January 19 unless the Supreme Court either overturns or delays the implementation of a law aimed at forcing the sale of the platform by its Chinese parent company. ByteDance’s Lemon8 gains popularity amid TikTok ban threat With a tight deadline, the justices are also considering a request from President-elect Donald Trump, who has reversed his previous support for a ban, asking for time to reach a “political resolution” to avoid a ruling. It is uncertain whether the court will take the views of the Republican president-elect, a rare attempt to influence a case, into account. TikTok, along with its parent company ByteDance, and content creators and users, argue that the law is a severe violation of the Constitution’s free speech protections. Small businesses brace themselves for potentially disruptive TikTok ban “Rarely, if ever, has the court dealt with a free-speech case that impacts so many people,” the lawyers for the users and creators stated. Many creators are anxiously awaiting a ruling that could threaten their livelihoods and are considering other platforms. This case is another instance of the court being asked to rule on a medium with which the justices have admitted little familiarity, although they frequently weigh in on significant speech restriction issues. The Biden administration, defending the law signed by President Joe Biden in April after it was approved by bipartisan majorities in Congress, asserts that “no one can seriously dispute that (China’s) control of TikTok through ByteDance represents a grave threat to national security.” Officials argue that Chinese authorities could compel ByteDance to hand over data on U.S. TikTok users or manipulate the platform to control information. However, the government “concedes that it has no evidence China has ever attempted to do so,” TikTok told the justices, adding that limitations on speech should not be justified by fears based on future potential risks. Venezuela's top court issues a $10 million fine for TikTok over allegedly deadly video challenges In December, a panel of three appellate judges, two appointed by Republicans and one by a Democrat, unanimously upheld the law and rejected the free speech claims under the First Amendment. Adding to the urgency, the court is hearing arguments just nine days before the law’s scheduled implementation and 10 days before the new administration takes office. In an unusual move, Trump’s lawyers have asked the court to temporarily block the TikTok ban while waiting for a political resolution rather than making a definitive decision. “President Trump alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform while addressing the national security concerns expressed by the Government — concerns which President Trump himself has acknowledged,” stated D. John Sauer, Trump’s nominee for top Supreme Court lawyer. Trump has not taken a stance on the case’s merits, with his campaign using TikTok to connect with younger voters, especially males, and holding a meeting with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida in December. He has 14.7 million followers on the app. The justices have allotted two hours for arguments, though the session is expected to run longer. Three experienced Supreme Court lawyers will present arguments: Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar will defend the law for the Biden administration, former Trump Solicitor General Noel Francisco will represent TikTok and ByteDance, and Stanford Law professor Jeffrey Fisher will argue for the content creators and users in his 50th Supreme Court case. Should the law be enacted, Trump’s Justice Department would be tasked with its enforcement. Lawyers for TikTok and ByteDance have argued that the new administration might attempt to lessen the law’s most severe consequences. However, they also contend that a one-month shutdown would result in TikTok losing a third of its U.S. users and significant advertising revenue. As it deliberates, the court must determine the level of scrutiny to apply to the law. Under strict scrutiny, laws typically fail. However, two appellate judges who upheld the law stated it could be one of the rare exceptions that would survive such a review. TikTok, its users, and many supporters are urging the court to apply strict scrutiny to strike down the law. The Democratic administration and some backers of the law argue that restrictions on foreign ownership of media and other sectors of the economy justify efforts to counter Chinese influence, citing the TikTok ban as part of that strategy. A decision is expected soon.

TikTok is edging closer to a possible ban in the United States, raising questions about the platform’s future, reports AP. On Friday, a federal appeals court upheld a law requiring TikTok to sever ties with its China-based parent company, ByteDance, or face a ban by mid-January. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously ruled that the law was constitutional, rejecting claims from TikTok and ByteDance that it violated their rights and those of U.S. users. TikTok defends handling of Romania election content in grilling by EU lawmakers The government argues that TikTok poses national security risks due to ByteDance’s potential susceptibility to Chinese government influence. Although no public evidence of misuse has been provided, officials remain concerned about possible data access or information manipulation. The law allows ByteDance to divest its stakes in TikTok. If that fails and TikTok is banned, it could significantly disrupt the lives of creators dependent on the platform for income and the broader user base who use it for entertainment and connection. Trump promised to 'save TikTok'. What happens next is less clear Key points from the ruling: The appeals court, in an opinion by Judge Douglas Ginsburg, deemed the law carefully tailored to address foreign adversary control. It dismissed claims that the law constituted an unconstitutional bill of attainder, violated the Fifth Amendment, or infringed on the First Amendment since the government isn’t attempting to suppress or mandate content on TikTok. Next steps: TikTok and ByteDance plan to appeal to the Supreme Court. While the Court’s decision to take the case remains uncertain, the companies aim to secure an emergency stay to block the January 19 deadline. Legal experts anticipate prolonged proceedings. Some creators remain optimistic. TikTok supporter Tiffany Cianci believes the platform has stronger chances at the Supreme Court, viewing the ruling as typical deference to the executive branch at lower court levels. The Trump factor: President-elect Donald Trump, who initially sought to ban TikTok during his first term, now opposes such a move. His Justice Department would be tasked with enforcing or potentially re-evaluating the law after his inauguration. Trump could seek alternative solutions, including facilitating an American acquisition of TikTok or urging Congress to repeal the law. However, any action would require bipartisan cooperation, which remains uncertain. Prospective buyers: While ByteDance has ruled out selling TikTok, potential buyers have shown interest despite challenges posed by Chinese export controls on the platform’s proprietary algorithm. Without the algorithm, a sale would leave the buyer with only a diluted version of the app. Notable figures like Steven Mnuchin and Frank McCourt have expressed interest, with McCourt’s initiative reportedly gathering informal commitments exceeding $20 billion in capital. As TikTok navigates its uncertain path, the stakes are high for creators, users, and stakeholders awaiting the Supreme Court’s next move.

Australia has embarked on an ambitious social experiment to restrict access to social media for children under 16, a move aimed at tackling the rising concerns surrounding digital well-being and child safety. Approved by Parliament last week, the law challenges the entrenched role of platforms like TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram in young lives, raising questions about feasibility, enforcement, and potential repercussions. The ban, set to take effect in a year, will impose fines of up to AUD 50 million (USD 33 million) on platforms that fail to prevent underage accounts. Proponents argue that this policy could set a precedent for safeguarding children from harmful content and social pressures, but critics warn of unintended consequences, including challenges to free expression, privacy concerns, and the risk of isolating vulnerable youth. Enforcing the Ban: A Daunting Task While Australia aims to hold social media giants accountable, enforcing such a ban is no small feat. Young users often circumvent age restrictions, and platforms have struggled to implement foolproof age verification systems. Critics like David Inserra from the Cato Institute have called the policy ineffective, arguing that age-assurance methods risk undermining user privacy without guaranteeing accurate enforcement. Read: Australia imposes world’s first ban on social media for under-16 Impact on Young Lives Advocates like Julie Scelfo of Mothers Against Media Addiction (MAMA) praise the initiative, emphasizing that less screen time fosters genuine human connections. Studies have linked excessive social media use among teens to heightened risks of depression, anxiety, and exposure to inappropriate content, including cyberbullying and social comparisons. However, skeptics caution that banning social media may cut off critical avenues for self-expression and community building, particularly for marginalized groups such as LGBTQ+ youth and those in abusive situations. Anonymity, a cornerstone of online interaction, could also be jeopardized if stricter verification measures become the norm. A Global Trend in the Making? Australia’s bold stance mirrors growing international efforts to protect children online. Norway is considering a similar ban for under-15s, while France is piloting restrictions in schools. In the U.S., initiatives like the "Wait Until 8th" campaign encourage parents to delay giving children access to smartphones and social media. However, federal progress remains slow, with child online safety legislation often stalling amid legal challenges. Balancing Protection and Freedom While Australia’s law represents a significant push to regulate Big Tech, it also highlights a broader debate: How do societies balance protecting children with preserving their freedoms? Parents, policymakers, and experts worldwide will closely watch Australia’s experiment, weighing its successes and pitfalls as they navigate the complex intersection of technology, childhood, and safety. Could this approach work universally? Time — and the resilience of tech-savvy teens — will tell. Source: With inputs from agenceis 

Australia has made history by passing a world-first law that effectively bans children under the age of 16 from using social media. The landmark decision comes in response to growing concerns about the adverse effects social media has on the mental health and well-being of young people, including rising incidents of cyberbullying, addiction, and exposure to harmful content. The legislation, which was approved by Parliament earlier this week, mandates social media platforms to enforce stricter age verification systems. These new regulations will ensure that individuals under 16 years old will be unable to create accounts or access platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat. Social media companies now have until early 2025 to implement the necessary changes, giving them time to adapt to the new rules. Under the new law, platforms will be given a one-year grace period to comply with the age verification requirements. Starting in 2025, social media companies will be legally required to deploy systems capable of detecting and blocking users under 16. If they fail to meet these regulations, they will face hefty fines, with penalties potentially reaching up to $50 million AUD for repeated violations. The law has placed significant pressure on social media companies, which will need to develop and integrate advanced age verification technologies to comply. US universities urge Indian students to return before Trump takes office Some platforms have already begun exploring digital identification systems and facial recognition technologies to better authenticate users' ages. However, the widespread use of such technologies has raised privacy and data security concerns. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has hailed the new law as a crucial step in safeguarding the country’s youth. He emphasised that the legislation aims to protect the mental and emotional health of children in the digital age. The decision comes after extensive research by Australian health experts, who have long warned about the dangers posed by social media for young people. Studies have shown a strong link between excessive social media use and a range of mental health issues, including depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders. China sentences journalist to 7yrs for espionage A 2023 report by the Australian Psychological Society revealed that nearly 40 per cent of teenagers reported feelings of anxiety or depression linked to their online experiences. Cyberbullying and the pressures of social comparison have been identified as major contributing factors to these challenges. By implementing this groundbreaking law, Australia has set a precedent for the rest of the world, challenging other nations to consider the long-term impact of social media on the younger generation and the steps necessary to mitigate those effects. Source: With inputs from wirers  

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir expressed grave concern on Wednesday over the evil efforts by certain individuals who, he said, are attempting to lead the nation into darkness by inciting a division through social media. “We are deeply worried following some of the events for the last few days. Just imagine the madness stirred up around the issue of religion,” he told a discussion. The BNP leader expressed concern, wondering how, despite the long-standing struggle of the BNP and other democratic parties for press freedom, media outlets such as the Prothom Alo and The Daily Star are now coming under attack. “It is unfortunate that some people, who consider themselves the most popular and patriotic, are inciting division within the nation and pushing it towards darkness," he said. Without naming anyone directly, Fakhrul questioned whether those responsible for sowing division and disunity are true friends or enemies of Bangladesh. "We do not want to see this Bangladesh. I strongly condemn the attacks on Prothom Alo, The Daily Star, and other newspapers. I have fought for press freedom my entire life. That is my goal, my belief, my conviction," he said. "You ousted a fascist regime that was stifling our freedom of expression, killing us, silencing us, depriving us of our right to vote, and resorting to suppression and repression. (After her ouster, if you now seek to gag someone’s voice or eliminate them, how can you justify that?" Fakhrul said. Stating that has been on a struggle for 15 years to restore people’s rights, the BNP leader said he had been jailed numerous times for this cause. "I am ready to go to jail again at any time, but I do not want to see this kind of Bangladesh. Both I and my party firmly believe that I will speak the truth, even if it costs me my life. I believe in liberal democracy. I believe in the people's freedom, freedom of speech, and the right to vote," he added. Doctors Association of Bangladesh (DAB) organised the event at the Jatiya Press Club to mark Shaheed Dr Milon Day, commemorating the 34th martyrdom anniversary of Dr Shamsul Alam Khan Milon, who was killed during the 1990s anti-autocratic movement. Fakhrul said although not even three months have passed since the formation of the current interim government, the true nature of certain individuals has already started to emerge. "We’ll never succeed with such faces, no matter how grand our rhetoric," he said. "It will never be possible to overcome a crisis if there is division within my own house." He said those inciting violence were leading the country towards destruction and inviting danger. "Think about where Bangladesh is being taken. Do we understand the reason for our fears? Do you understand the assailant is standing, with a knife behind us? Had they truly realised this, they would not have made such irresponsible remarks." The BNP leader said that incidents of street violence, bloodshed, attacks on media outlets, and self-destructive actions are putting the achievements of the student-led mass uprising into question. He called for unity, urging everyone to abandon efforts to create division for the sake of the country's welfare and the well-being of its people. "If you want to protect the country and its independence and protect your rights, then all of you must unite. You will never bow to division, you will not bow to injustice, and you will not pamper injustice," Fakhrul said. He said the current interim government was established on the blood of many students and ordinary people, not through anyone's mercy. "So, we believe it is best for them (govt) to focus on achieving the people’s main goal of a democratic state.” Fakhrul also urged those in charge of the interim government to refrain from making comments that could create confusion among the people.

All social media platforms including Facebook will be unblocked within two hours on Wednesday. State Minister for Posts, Telecommunications, and Information Technology Zunaid Ahmed Palak confirmed the development. Palak shared the update following virtual meeting with representatives from Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube, joining from Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) building in Dhaka's Agargaon this morning. Earlier on July 18, internet services were disrupted and access to social media platforms were blocked.   Read more: Only Youtube gets back to Palak; Facebook, others have till Wed morning

Acknowledging restoration of telecommunications across Bangladesh, the United States has called for a full and undisrupted public access to internet and social media services. “We’re aware of some restoration of telecommunications across Bangladesh, but we are calling for a full and undisrupted public access to internet and social media services,” Principal Deputy Spokesperson for the United States Department of State Vedant Patel told reporters at a regular briefing on July 29. This will enable people in Bangladesh – including US citizens in the country – to be able to access critical information, he said. Read more: Mobile internet restored after 10 days Patel said that they, both in public and private, continue to call for a “lasting and peaceful” resolution to the current situation. “And we reiterate our unwavering support for the freedom of peaceful assembly,” he said.