[okfn-br] [bestbits] Fwd: Join coalition letter to Twitter on Politwoops?

Quinta Setembro 10 18:27:59 UTC 2015

Eu sei! Só quis escrever pois o tema em si é interessante!

Público e privado são tão complexos, e cada vez mais.
No caso, público são os atos oficiais dos políticos, esses devem ser
públicos.
As coisas privadas são privadas como para todos nós, só que para pessoas
comuns a privacidade deve ser mais protegida, enquanto que para pessoas
públicas há coisas privadas que podem merecer escrutínio.
O debate público é o debate público, ou seja, por natureza é igual para
todos. Naturalmente há mais escrutínio se a pessoa é conhecida; não vejo
por que proteger mais ou publicizar mais em algum caso. As coisas estão na
esfera pública, para todos verem, por definição.

2015-09-10 10:38 GMT-03:00 Carolina Rossini <carolina.rossini em gmail.com>:

> Vero
> Isso vem da AccessNow
>
>
> On Thursday, September 10, 2015, Heloisa Pait <heloisa em ok.org.br> wrote:
>
>> Olá Carolina,
>>
>> Não concordo que essa decisão traga "grave consequences for free
>> expression and transparency around the world." Pelo contrário. Política é
>> algo fluido, e é bom que os políticos se sintam à vontade para ouvir,
>> propor, refletir, voltar atrás, ouvir novamente, mudar de opinião. Essa
>> gana por uniformidade e coerência militar é ruim para a política.
>>
>> Acho que não se deve proibir de veicular opiniões passadas, isso não.
>> Volto sempre a falar da morte dos blogueiros brasileiros, que é algo de uma
>> gravidade tremenda. Mas se um aplicativo não faz tudo o que está a seu
>> alcance para que essas opiniões sejam facilmente resgatadas, não é um
>> problema gravíssimo nem ameaça a livre expressão.
>>
>> Heloisa
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-09-09 17:19 GMT-03:00 Carolina Rossini <carolina.rossini em gmail.com>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>> *From:* Deji Olukotun <deji em accessnow.org>
>>> *Date:* September 9, 2015 at 4:01:13 PM EDT
>>> *To:* "global-nn em lists.riseup.net" <global-nn em lists.riseup.net>
>>> *Subject:* *[global-nn] Join coalition letter to Twitter on Politwoops?*
>>> *Reply-To:* Deji Olukotun <deji em accessnow.org>
>>>
>>> Hi to All,
>>>
>>> Apologies for cross posting. Please find below an open letter to Twitter
>>> about its decision to turn off Politwoops, a crucial tool for holding
>>> politicians accountable in 32 countries. We've had great coverage of the
>>> campaign so far (you can see media hits at the bottom). Help us make a
>>> broader impact.
>>>
>>> *Please let us know if your group will sign on by Friday 9am NYC.*
>>>
>>> This an important fight for transparency, accountability, and free
>>> expression.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Deji
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.accessnow.org/pages/open-letter-twitter-restore-politwoops-access-api
>>> Open letter to Twitter to restore Politwoops access to API
>>>
>>> *September 2015 *
>>>
>>> We, the undersigned, are international human rights and transparency
>>> groups based around the world. We are writing in opposition to Twitter’s
>>> recent decision to revoke the ability of the tool Politwoops and similar
>>> tools to utilize Twitter’s Application Programming Interface, or API. We
>>> believe Twitter’s decision holds grave consequences for free expression and
>>> transparency around the world.
>>>
>>> *Background*
>>>
>>> In 2010, the Netherlands-based Open State Foundation created the
>>> Politwoops tool to publish Tweets deleted by politicians. From then
>>> onwards, the Open State Foundation rolled out Politwoops with the help of
>>> individuals and organizations in 32 countries, including the Sunlight
>>> Foundation in the U.S. Twitter then revoked the ability of the Sunlight
>>> Foundation to use its API in May 2015 and it revoked the Open State
>>> Foundation’s access to the API on August 21.
>>>
>>> *Transparency and due process*
>>>
>>> To justify its decision, Twitter explained
>>> <https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2301490-case-20502126-twitter-api-violation-notification.html>
>>> that, “No one user is more deserving of that ability [to delete a tweet]
>>> than another. Indeed, deleting a tweet is an expression of one’s voice.”
>>>
>>> Twitter’s reasoning conflates transparency and accountability with
>>> privacy. We agree that when users decide to delete tweets they are engaging
>>> in expression—but add that the public has a compelling interest in the
>>> expression of public officials. Recognizing this public interest, courts
>>> have long held that public officials do not receive the same treatment for
>>> privacy. Further, when public officials use Twitter to amplify their
>>> political views, they invite greater scrutiny of their expression.
>>> Journalists and civil society utilize tools like Politwoops to understand
>>> the views and commitments of the people these politicians represent—and the
>>> politician or candidate’s own intents and perspective. In this case, the
>>> citizen’s right to freedom of expression —which includes access to
>>> information—outweighs the official’s right to a retroactive edit.
>>>
>>> In terms of process, this decision involved minimal dialogue with the
>>> Open State Foundation and the Sunlight Foundation. There was no opportunity
>>> to appeal the decision, which impacted a widely-used, volunteer-run
>>> service. The action carried out by Twitter was arbitrary and cuts against
>>> the very principles of transparency that Politwoops was designed to
>>> confront.
>>>
>>> We recognize that the API license gives Twitter discretion to enforce
>>> its terms. However, Twitter should also take into account human rights when
>>> it exercises that discretion—and particularly the right of people to access
>>> to information where it serves the interest of public accountability and
>>> transparency in a democratic society. There are times when what is legal
>>> must be outweighed by what is right.
>>>
>>> *Recommendations*
>>>
>>> We note that Twitter has been a leader in transparency and free
>>> expression since its founding. The platform has helped foster numerous
>>> advances in journalism and in accountability. This makes the unilateral
>>> decision by Twitter so troubling and off-course. Accordingly, we urge you
>>> to:
>>>
>>>    - immediately restore access for the Politwoops tool to the Twitter
>>>    API in every country around the world;
>>>    - convene stakeholders to develop a forward-looking API policy, or
>>>    other constructive solution, that allows civil society groups to
>>>    effectively promote accountability and transparency for the public interest;
>>>    - make clear exceptions in the “Twitter Developer Agreement &
>>>    Policy” for information shared in the public interest, such as for
>>>    transparency or journalistic purposes; and
>>>    - participate in multistakeholder organizations which facilitate
>>>    meetings between civil society, investors, academics, and corporations on
>>>    decisions impacting human rights.
>>>
>>> Signed,
>>>
>>> Access
>>>
>>> Alternatif Bilisim (Turkey)
>>>
>>> American Civil Liberties Union
>>>
>>> Art 34-bis (Italy)
>>>
>>> Asociacion por los Derechos Civiles (Argentina)
>>>
>>> Bits of Freedom (Netherlands)
>>>
>>> Blueprint for Free Speech (Australia)
>>>
>>> Civio Foundation (Spain)
>>>
>>> Clean Air Action Group (Hungary)
>>>
>>> Derechos Digitales (Latin America)
>>>
>>> Electronic Frontier Foundation
>>>
>>> Electronic Frontiers Australia
>>>
>>> EDRi
>>>
>>> European Federation of Journalists
>>>
>>> Fondation Sciences Citoyennes (France)
>>>
>>> Free Press
>>>
>>> Fundación Ciudadana Civio (Spain)
>>>
>>> GovTrack.us
>>>
>>> Hiperderecho (Peru)
>>>
>>> Human Rights Watch
>>>
>>> Iraqi Network for Social Media
>>>
>>> Jinbonet (Korea)
>>>
>>> Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten (Netherlands)
>>>
>>> Open Knowledge Foundation (Australia)
>>>
>>> OpenMedia (Canada)
>>>
>>> Open State Foundation
>>>
>>> Paradigm Initiative (Nigeria)
>>>
>>> Pirate Party (Turkey)
>>>
>>> La Quadrature du Net (France)
>>>
>>> Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales (Mexico)
>>>
>>> Sunlight Foundation (U.S.)
>>>
>>> Support for Information Technology Center (Egypt)
>>>
>>> Vrijschrift (Netherlands)
>>>
>>> Web Foundation
>>>
>>> *Learn more about the open letter: *Fortune
>>> <http://fortune.com/2015/09/04/twitter-politwoops>, The Verge
>>> <http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/4/9259939/coalition-demands-politwoops-api-restoration>,
>>> Fast Company
>>> <http://www.fastcompany.com/3050785/tech-forecast/human-rights-watch-transparency-groups-condemn-twitters-politwoops-ban>,
>>> The Hill
>>> <http://thehill.com/policy/technology/252762-digital-rights-groups-pressure-twitter-to-restore-politwoops>,
>>> Business Insider
>>> <http://www.businessinsider.com/rights-groups-open-letter-twitter-politwoops-ban-2015-9>,
>>> Washington Post
>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/09/08/waiting-for-the-senate-on-cybersecurity-fcc-weighs-new-router-rules-could-politwoops-come-back/>,
>>> TechCrunch
>>> <http://techcrunch.com/2015/09/04/human-rights-groups-lambast-twitter-for-banning-service-that-tracked-politicians-deleted-tweets/>,
>>> Dutch Radio 1
>>> <http://nos.nl/artikel/2055918-organisaties-vragen-twitter-in-brief-blokkade-op-politwoops-te-stoppen.html>,
>>> Nu.nl
>>> <http://www.nu.nl/tech/4119267/ngos-spreken-zich-twitter-blokkade-politwoops.html>,
>>> The Register
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/08/digi_rights_groups_take_aim_at_twitter_for_abandoning_the_principles_of_free_speech/>,
>>> Tech Times
>>> <http://www.techtimes.com/articles/82262/20150905/political-watchdog-banned-on-twitter-why-are-rights-groups-pushing-for-reversal.htm>,
>>> CNET
>>> <http://www.cnet.com/news/rights-groups-want-twitter-to-reverse-ban-on-political-watchdog-group/>,
>>> Villamedia
>>> <https://www.villamedia.nl/artikel/open-brief-voor-opheffen-blokkade-politwoops>,
>>> Ansa
>>> <http://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/tecnologia/internet_social/2015/09/08/attivisti-twitter-ripristini-politwoops_cb2b717a-a05b-4890-83f8-77540f0f388f.html>,
>>> Arizona Wildcat
>>> <http://www.wildcat.arizona.edu/article/2015/09/twitter-should-hold-politicians-accountable>,
>>> Nieman Lab
>>> <http://www.niemanlab.org/2015/09/advocacy-groups-call-on-twitter-to-restore-api-access-to-politiwoops/>,
>>> Nos
>>> <http://nos.nl/artikel/2055918-organisaties-vragen-twitter-in-brief-blokkade-op-politwoops-te-stoppen.html>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Deji Olukotun
>>> Senior Global Advocacy Manager
>>> Access | accessnow.org
>>>
>>> tel: +1 415-935-4572 | @dejiridoo
>>> PGP: 0x6012CDA8
>>> Fingerprint: 3AEE 4194 F70E C806 A810 857A 6AD5 8F48 6012 CDA8
>>>
>>> *Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter on digital rights, the Access
>>> Express: accessnow.org/express <https://accessnow.org/express>*
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> okfn-br mailing list
>>> okfn-br em lists.okfn.org
>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-br
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-br
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
>
> *Carolina Rossini *
> *Vice President, International Policy*
> *Public Knowledge*
> *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ <http://www.publicknowledge.org/>*
> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-br mailing list
> okfn-br em lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-br
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-br
>
>
-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-br/attachments/20150910/bc0d48f9/attachment-0005.html>