Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


5 safe country where they can host their website for journalists - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

5 safe country where they can host their website for journalists

2»

Comments

  • I thought free speech havens are regions/countries like...

    Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Gibraltar, Bahamas, Bermuda, Curaçao...

  • @02mia02 said:
    Finland, which ranks first in the press freedom index…

    Norway, which ranks second in the press freedom index…

    Denmark, which ranks third in the press freedom index…

    The Netherlands, which ranks fourth in the press freedom index…

    Sweden, which ranks fifth in the press freedom index…

    Interesting… but according to whom? Maybe quote a link to the source, so that interested parties could learn about the evaluation methodology and variables of this particular study?

  • Interesting mix of subjects here. The title suggests safe places to host news sites, people talk about free speech, and so on. How these all relate is case specific so might as well be completely different subjects. All this just highlights that without a well defined threat model there will be no clear solution.

    Thanked by 1ricardo
  • 02mia0202mia02 Member
    edited April 2016

    @aglodek said:

    My source. Not reply.

  • @02mia02 said: My source. Not reply.

    Wut…?

  • FuslFusl Member

    Microlinux said: Vatican City doesn't even have a datacenter

    They do. And some IP blocks.

    Singlehomed to Telecom Italia it seems.

  • 02mia0202mia02 Member
    edited April 2016

    @aglodek said:
    Wut…?

    I did not understand what you said. @aglodek

    Thanked by 1PieHasBeenEaten
  • 02mia02 said: I did not understand what you said. @aglodek

    He's asking what we are all wanting to know. What criterion did you use to make this list? It's an interesting topic, regardless of whether this came from your opinion, or if it is based on some published list of related information. But we'd like to know.

    Thanked by 1aglodek
  • @Ole_Juul said:

    @Ole_Juul This list is taken from the institution that controls the international press freedom. Also myself I did some analysis. I was contacted by some officials in preparing this list. It is definitely a reliable list. ☺

    Thanked by 1Ole_Juul
  • 02mia02 said: 02mia02

    From one of your previous comments, that's what I was thinking you did. Yes, that's reliable information. :)

    Nevertheless, I still insist that any individual needs to clearly define their own threat model. The above list is important information, but details will have to be tailored to each situation.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    Freedom of speech=/=porn=/=IP rights infringement.
    Freedom of speech is the right to talk about anything you want, from incest to political assassination, from holocaust to "blasphemy", drugs. Nobody should be able to use "morals" for stoping you to express your views, much less laws.
    The laws should only punish actual action, like murder, rape, tax evasion, beating, torture, harassment, etc.
    You should be able to document anything, to use parodies and satire against any target using any means which do not harm anyone.
    Nowhere in the world is this allowed in full, mostly due to religion and "morals", but also due to other excesses, for example the holocaust issue is in a category of it's own, same the "anti-anti-semitic" laws, meant to cover warcrimes and other human rights violations in a particular country with powerful allies. Hate speech against arabs, still semitic people, are, if not encouraged, at least allowed.
    Also, surveillance is not allowing free speech, because you can always be targetted under some common law, people to testify for some "rape" can be found, also planting some child porn. drugs, for example, is very easy once you let someone in, even without that. Most people do not want to be targetted by the police/government, so they censor themselves. For example, raiding Tor node operators is used as a weapon against this, also the high profile cracking encryptions and commercial devices are meant to show "we know what you do anywhere and if we find out you donate to the wrong charity we will make sure you will regret it" kind of thing.

    Thanked by 1Ole_Juul
  • Hello @Maounique. Nice to see your blend of antiestablishmentarianism and privacy advocation!

    May I suggest that the OP is more about transparency and openness, than privacy. It's about the right to publish something and for it to stay published (hopefully without retribution, maybe you were referencing that more).

    Thanked by 1Ole_Juul
  • ricardo said: Arguably, wikileaks? But not through traditional channels. IIRC the US authorities were looking to confiscate the domain & payment gateways who processed donations to wikileaks.

    wikileaks is not journalism though is it..

  • TarZZ92 said: wikileaks is not journalism though is it..

    Just taking wikipedia's definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism

    Journalism is the social work and work-craft, and profession (high-level) of reporting on the events, facts, and people that are the "news of the day," such that a society is "informed," to some non-trivial degree.

    Their definition of Social_work

    Social work is an academic and professional discipline that seeks to facilitate the welfare of communities, individuals and societies.[1] It facilitates social change, development, cohesion, and empowerment. Underpinned by theories of social sciences and guided by principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility, and respect for diversities, social work engages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing.

    I think the wikileaks situation can fit into the description of journalism.

    Are these threads truly about freedom of press, though? Seems they always get confused with people's more selfish reasons for Tor/privacy/protection, typically to host stolen content or where there's a more liberal interpretation and enforcement of IP protection. Which would be a shame, as it detracts from the main argument, which is the one about society holding itself to account.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran
    edited April 2016

    ricardo said: May I suggest that the OP is more about transparency and openness, than privacy. It's about the right to publish something and for it to stay published (hopefully without retribution, maybe you were referencing that more).

    Right, this is my point too. Free speech includes the right to publish, because free speech at home under the shower is not free speech. Various laws against free speech exist under various pretexts, from the right to privacy of public and political figures, to the "defense" of children, religion, jews, whatever. The take down orders are the least someone targeted by the government should worry about. When your opinions are not liked by the religion/government/corporations/mafia/etc in many cases one and the same thing, you need to hide and publish underground, but that is a part of the same problem, as long as the government knows who you are, they can easily plant something on you or fabricate some tax evasion (china/russia), rape (US), to give just some examples. They can easily plant some terrorist name in your onedrive for example, or even make up one in your name, hijack your domain(s), to make up some "evidence".
    Today you cannot speak freely without being anonymous, losing your job for "anti-semitic" or "hate speech" is just a small subset of what can happen to you, being raided and harassed is the next step, being sued or jailed the third and killed last, if you still did not get the idea from the beginning. Many people are "suicided" today, from black people held illegally in us under trumped up charges, to lawyers and publishers in china which dared to defend the "wrong" people. You can only defend against that by being anonymous. There is another way, but does not offer the same level of protection, I mean being a public figure widely known, but that does not offer protection from some "thugs" hired by the government. This is how russians operate, mostly, but there are well documented cases in other countries too.

    Thanked by 2k0nsl ricardo
  • @Ole_Juul said:
    Nevertheless, I still insist that any individual needs to clearly define their own threat model. The above list is important information, but details will have to be tailored to each situation.

    Thank you. So I made myself a little editing. This list is updated annually. For instance, Switzerland's ranking in previous years, it was good. But Switzerland declined in recent years because of their attitude. Analysis can be done like this. ☺

  • If you don't mind being flagged, try Hong Kong/Taiwan.
    Otherwise, don't even think Asia.

  • lootloot Member

    Each nation also defines speech in wildly different manners, and also the meaning of protection should also include methods to mitigate (usually legal) prohibitions and avenues of appeal and the granting of relief. Although I've always figured that a list like this necessarily sells a certain world view and a single ranking system that assigns absolute values to what has to be evaluated from many different angles to be... well... pretty useless and OP's source is frankly, from the limited methodology it employs that's imposed on a worldview, at best a survey and really quite pointless except as, well, mere puffery, kind of like a Buzzfeed article circa 2011.

  • @loot said:
    Each nation also defines speech in wildly different manners

    For example, the nation of fish defines it as the act of flapping your fins in such a way that the rippling creates distinguishable and composable patterns to other speciments of the flapping fish that are in relative proximity.

  • lootloot Member

    And that, my friend, is where Finland got its name.

    Thanked by 2Maounique Amitz
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    Fusl said: They do. And some IP blocks.

    The IP blocks I believe, but I'm extremely skeptical there is a true "datacenter" in Vatican City. I've been there. It's less than .44 km^2 (less than .17 mi^2).

    The architecture is 500+ years old and it's not exactly designed to be space efficient, given that there's a massive basilica and an enormous public square, leaving very little room for one of the world's largest museums and archives. Additionally there are large Rennaissance-era treasures like the papal apartments, the Sistine Chapel, etc.

    Finally, there is a full government operating there, the Pope's living quarters, a post office, etc. I can think of almost every square meter of Vatican City, having walked around a lot, and while of course they could stick servers in rooms somewhere, so much of Vatican City's infrastructure runs on Italian soil that I'm not sure why they would. It's not like Vatican City has its own power plants, water systems, waste management facilities, etc. - that is all bought from Italy. I'd wager DCs beyond departmental stuff is, too.

    Thanked by 1deadbeef
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    Maounique said: Nowhere in the world is this allowed in full, mostly due to religion and "morals", but also due to other excesses, for example the holocaust issue is in a category of it's own,

    Dude, there's no issue. It happened.

    350,000+ of your fellow countrymen were killed by your fellow countrymen. Ask your fellow countrymen if you have doubts.

  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    Depends if you want to piss Russia off, go USA. If you want to piss the USA off go Russia.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran
    edited April 2016

    @raindog308 said:

    I am not contesting that, nor the fact Romania was last country in Europe to outlaw slavery, my family included, owned slaves and serfs.
    I have an issue about the banning of the discussion. This pushes nutcases underground and creates a legend that there is something to hide, otherwise it will be allowed, while, if left in the open, those rants would cause, at best, some laughs from sane people.

  • @Nyr said:
    Many people is laughing at that but he is actually right. Most of the conflictive content in the Internet is actually hosted in the US, as are most of the English investigative journalism websites and many foreign ones too.

    This is true, but try to pull a Snowden in the US and you will disappear. Just like any other country.

  • elgselgs Member

    Essentially Scandinavia and their neighbors.

Sign In or Register to comment.