[PASSED] Protecting Press Freedoms

[Hulldom]

That seems eminently reasonable.

Edit: That any better?

You still say that members must "not prevent citizens from accessing content created by any journalist or news organization except by implementing age restrictions...". Setting age limits for content should be the responsibility of the content creator, not the government.

'We have added a new definition of 'Public Interest' and are eager to receive feedback on it"

Some random intern: That term is used... exactly once outside the definition. I will tell Mister Smith to have a closer look if you remove Article 1 and, in your current Article 2, say instead that "member states may not prevent the reporting of information whose reporting is necessary for the wellbeing of society as a whole," or something like that anyway.

"No, I actually quite like that formulation of "public interest". I'll see if I can't reword the other clause as well."

[Kenmoria]

“Why is the first clause grammatically different to the other three? It is the only one to be in the form of a sentence, rather than a verbal phrase.”

[The Ice States]

"Could a nation simply argue that any reporting they dislike is not 'necessary for the wellbeing of society as a whole'?"

~Alexander Nicholas Saverchenko-Colleti,
World Assembly Ambassador,
The Communal Union of the Ice States.

[Second Sovereignty]

Member states may not prevent the reporting of information whose reporting is necessary for the wellbeing of society as a whole.

"This is, undefined, and therefore effectively meaningless; the draft is, at the moment, quite brief, perhaps you could utilize the unused space for definitions of such thing as the 'wellbeing of society'."

Orders that journalists or news organizations not be:
subject to civil or criminal penalties for the content they produce by member state governments, or

"What would the impact of this phrasing be on the criminality of, for example, hate speech? Such things must continue to be prosecuted for betterment of society and the protection of the vulnerable from violence, regardless of whether the speaker claims to be a journalist."

Requires that member nations not prevent citizens from accessing content created by any journalist or news organization except by implementing age restrictions to prevent individuals below the age of majority from accessing content inappropriate for consumption by minors.

"Again, we raise the issue of hate speech and other such things - 'journalists' that collate information on minority populations for the purposes of harassment or violence, as a further example. Such things very well should be restricted and removed, by means very different from simple age restrictions."

[Hulldom]

So new draft, not much has really changed overall, just reworked some things and turned clause 3 into a more...positive statement rather than a negative one. Huge thanks to Attempted Socialism, I do think he helped me crack this nut. Consider this one last push.

[Comfed]

What's the intent behind 3b?

[Hulldom]

What's the intent behind 3b?

Presumably binding someone to a contract, but frankly, if the prevailing opinion it's bad as is, I can either go back to the "not be" version from earlier or just ditch it altogether.

[Comfed]

What's the intent behind 3b?

Presumably binding someone to a contract, but frankly, if the prevailing opinion it's bad as is, I can either go back to the "not be" version from earlier or just ditch it altogether.

I mean, what's the reason for creating an exception for such contracts?

[Hulldom]

Presumably binding someone to a contract, but frankly, if the prevailing opinion it's bad as is, I can either go back to the "not be" version from earlier or just ditch it altogether.

I mean, what's the reason for creating an exception for such contracts?

I can see the...issue with that. Should hopefully be fixed now.

[Istastioner]

Support (in concept at least)

(how long has this proposal been in the drafting stage?)

[Hulldom]

Support (in concept at least)

(how long has this proposal been in the drafting stage?)

Six months. Blame me being in grad school.

[Terra dei Cittadini]

Why not prohibit content that dehumanizes marginalized groups?

For example, a hate group's blog should be prohibited from being included within news broadcasts under this resolution.

[Istastioner]

Support (in concept at least)

(how long has this proposal been in the drafting stage?)

Six months. Blame me being in grad school.

Oh ... So, wayyyyyy too long.

[Second Sovereignty]

Why not prohibit content that dehumanizes marginalized groups?

For example, a hate group's blog should be prohibited from being included within news broadcasts under this resolution.

"While the draft does not make explicit permission to do so, Resolution #436 makes allowances for the restriction of such, and the draft in question does permit restrictions where otherwise permitted by World Assembly Law."

[Tinhampton]

5. Requires that member nations not prevent citizens from accessing content created by any journalist or news organization except by implementing age restrictions to prevent individuals below the age of majority from accessing content inappropriate for consumption by minors...

I must once again object to this wording. The introduction of age gates for news stories should be at the discretion of publishers, not the government.

* * * * * *

6. Requires that news organizations create content warnings for material that may not be suitable for consumption by minors, but notes that the specific implementation of said content warnings is subject to the discretion of each news organization.

A: Does this apply even when age gates are in effect?
B: Would warnings describing the kind of content without making reference to age ("Warning: This story contains explicit descriptions of sexual assault and rape") be permissible, or is that covered under the second part of this clause?

[Hulldom]

Ever so subtly nudges this so it can be found easily in like 36 hours.

[Chipoli]

"Full support."

[Tinhampton]

Props to Hulldom for resolving all my complaints about age-gates in a more than satisfactory fashion, FTR.

[Attempted Socialism]

Support, despite the second co-author being a long-winded pseudo-intellectual.

[Heidgaudr]

Asgeir blows several thick layers of dust off the proposal and wipes away a few cobwebs. How many weeks has this been in queue, I wonder. He looks at the submission date and lets out a long sigh. Bureaucracy at its worst, he thinks to himself as he rolls his eyes.

"Support," he mutters under his breath to nobody in particular.

[Pooblic]

The Anti-Christ shows once again its overreach!
The People of Greater Spawn say no, once again, to the Anti-Christ's attempt to protect its minions (journo scum)

[Gayiyyah]

Gayiyyah opposes PPF because of the following segment:

"not prevent citizens from accessing content created by themselves or any journalist affiliated with them except to prevent individuals below the age of majority from accessing content inappropriate for consumption by minors, and"

Gayiyyah takes issue with this. While we shouldn't be actively shoving certain types of content on minors, age-based censorship is not a good thing, and Gayiyyah must thusly oppose this infringement on the civil rights of young Gayiyyahians.

[New Falkarth]

While we still see some issues regarding this resolution, the general idea of it is good and its definitely better than not having any protection of press freedoms. Therefore we vote FOR this resolution.

[Juansonia]

Gayiyyah opposes PPF because of the following segment:

"not prevent citizens from accessing content created by themselves or any journalist affiliated with them except to prevent individuals below the age of majority from accessing content inappropriate for consumption by minors, and"

Gayiyyah takes issue with this. While we shouldn't be actively shoving certain types of content on minors, age-based censorship is not a good thing, and Gayiyyah must thusly oppose this infringement on the civil rights of young Gayiyyahians.

"That clause doesn't require news organisations to impose restrictions on access to inappropiate content by minors. In fact, it simply exempts age-filtering from the prohibition of censorship. Age restrictions can be mandated or prohibited by the member state or by news organisations without violating this resolution."
- Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

[Lake Fish]

The Anti-Christ shows once again its overreach!
The People of Greater Spawn say no, once again, to the Anti-Christ's attempt to protect its minions (journo scum)

So true!!! its great to see someone talking about the REEL issues!!!
Death to the anti-christ!!!