SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Vietnam's Force 47 is run by the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) to hack anti-government websites and spread pro-government messages online, and is believed to be at least 10,000-strong.
Anh Chi, the pen name of 46-year-old Nguyen Chi Tuyen, knows the ministry's tactics well. He has created videos criticising Force 47, and has expressed concern about the impact of a new cyber-law that came into effect at the beginning of the month.
The deadly January 9 incident in Dong Tam is a case in point.
According to the authorities, three police officers and 84-year-old village leader Le Dinh Kinh were killed after local residents clashed with police in the early hours of that day.
The dispute, over agricultural land next to a military airport, shocked the country. But afterwards, Vietnam's cyber-army, also known as Force 47, was deployed to counter the content on social media platforms deemed critical of the way the authorities handled the situation.
"Facebook is the main source of independent news now in Vietnam," said Trinh Huu Long, a co-founder of Legal Initiatives for Vietnam.
"The government has been working with Facebook to try to control content posted by dissidents and independent voices," he added.
Vietnam is said to be following China's lead in policing its citizens speech online. Is this going to become the global norm?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @03:11AM (4 children)
Discrimination based on political leanings will go to court and get ruled against. But as usual you are just conflsting refusal of service to an individual with political prejudice. Would be interesting to dig back to the bakers who wouldn't make a gay cake, I have the feeling you were defending their right to free association instesd of condemning their discrimination.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @03:21AM (1 child)
We can have red flag laws against racists, black people, drug addicts, conspiracy theorists and other anti-social undesirables, what's your point even?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @08:30AM
Uhhhh, just to be clear, in the United States, so-called "red flag laws" are a form of gun control which is designed to deprive legal gun owners of their right to own weapons. In a messy divorce, this will be a new revenge thing. Tell the cops that you're afraid your ex might shoot you, and they'll happily destroy his home in the search for weapons, and confiscate everything they find, no matter how trashy or how valuable. And, THERE IS NO DUE PROCESS!!
(Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Saturday January 18 2020, @06:06AM
Depends on who drives the discrimination. The US government (and all state governments) can't so discriminate, even by proxy. Keep in mind here that it's way too easy to do quid pro quo deals where a business provides such censorship in exchange for some of the many benefits a powerful government can provide. Those are just as illegal as if the US government discriminated directly.
It also depends on the conditions of the services provided. If the service provider is promising open communities or honoring free speech (which incidentally is an issue with almost all US universities), for example, then such discrimination may well be a case of false advertising or even a contract violation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @03:56PM
There's a big nuance in that gay cake case that most don't understand.
It had nothing to do with whether or not you can refuse service to gays - you cannot. However, you also cannot be forced to engage in an expression that you disagree with. Imagine political views were a protected class to make this clear. And now imagine I go to Liberal Lisa's Commissioned Art Shop and ask her to paint something showing Trump as an awesome person. She could disagree because her right of protection against forced expression trumps the right of you to impose your will on her just because you're advocating for a protected class.
So the question the case was answering was, 'Are wedding cakes a form of artistic expression, or a normal commodity?' And no, 'expression' is not just a casual loophole to bypass all our little laws. It's pretty well defined and that wedding cakes were even a question shows how stringently it's interpreted. Wedding cake folks do style themselves as artists and customers pay a massive premium exclusively because it is generally seen as art. It's certainly not a normal commodity, yet the burden of proving it was an artistic expression was nonetheless left on the baker.