Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.
Dana Polatin-Reuben examines the fiercely contested 2015 FCC rules and their free speech implications.
Katie Engelhart attends the public hearing of Google’s Advisory Council, set up in response to a European Court of Justice judgement.
Timothy Garton Ash introduces a sample tour of the content on our site
A leaked document in June 2014 from Egypt’s ministry of the interior invited tenders for cyber-surveillance technology to combat blasphemy, sarcasm and ‘lack of morality’ - the technology would likely come from the west. Max Gallien reports.
Internet Service Providers do not merely route data packets from end-to-end, but are heavily involved in monitoring their customers’ online activities. Ian Brown discusses the implications of Britain's suggested “voluntary” opting out of “adult content”, with little parliamentary and court involvement.
Anthony Lester and Zoe McCallum discuss the need to balance national security and privacy in the age of internet surveillance.
Nazi past? Stasi past? Sebastian Huempfer challenges the conventional explanations for Germany’s strong reaction to Edward Snowden’s revelations about NSA snooping.
Oxford University’s Ian Brown asks what Europe can do to protect our digital rights and privacy.
The debate raised by revelations of NSA surveillance has drawn our attention to how we are being tracked online. Sebastian Huempfer describes a new tool to show us how those electronic cookies crumble.
Sarah Glatte explores the potential and pitfalls of social media in combating sexism.
A globally-effective privacy regime is a realistic goal, argues Ian Brown. But it needs giants like Google to get behind it.
The question of how best to respond to the unauthorised dissemination of copyright-protected expression over the internet has long troubled copyright owners. But the proposed solution of a Copyright Alert could potentially erode free speech, writes Graham Reynolds.
The UK’s Director of Public Prosecutions has released guidelines on when social media users should be prosecuted. But there are still not adequate guarantees for freedom of expression, writes Dominic Burbidge.
Data protection laws now touch everyone’s lives and those living within the EU are about to have their regulations updated, writes David Erdos. These proposed laws are overly restrictive: the time has come to take a stand for those working in research.
At the invitation of Index of Censorship and the Editors Guild of India, Timothy Garton Ash joins Kirsty Hughes at a panel discussion in Delhi with Shri Ajit Balakrishnan, Shri Sunil Abraham and Ramajit Singh Chima.
In a panel John Lloyd, T.R. Andhyarujina, Harish Salve and Daya Thussu discussed whether self-regulation can continue to remain a viable way forward for the Indian media.
At the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT), authoritarian governments staked worrying claims. But the US-dominated model of non-governmental internet governance brings its own problems, writes Alison Powell. Beware of the Clinton Paradox.
In 2008 two convicted murderers asked for their names to be removed from Wikipedia and other online media outlets, in accordance with German law. Does the individual’s right to be forgotten take priority over the public’s right to know?
The Oxford Internet Institute’s Ian Brown writes from Azerbaijan, asking whether a country that suppresses online freedom should be allowed to host a gathering devoted to discussing it.
Eli Dourado provides an overview of what WCIT is and what's at stake. He co-founded WCITLeaks to bring transparency to the ITU's proceedings.
In July the ITU Governing Council released one summary document of proposed ITR amendments. Dourado says this move did not represent real transparency.
Dourado suspects only the most egregious proposals have been uploaded to WCITLeaks for fear that a mass upload could bring diplomatic backlash.
The WCITLeaks.org co-founder discusses how anonymous uploads to his website are shedding light on the upcoming World Conference on International Telecommunications.
Manav Bhushan, an Indian member of the Free Speech Debate team, makes the case for blocking hate-filled websites in his country.
The Swedish Pirate Party's outspoken MEP explains why the European Parliament overwhelmingly rejected the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement in July and discusses WCIT, the internet's next four-letter foe.
An upcoming International Telecommunication Union meeting in Dubai could forever change the internet as we know it, writes Brian Pellot.
Amendments approved by the senate of the Netherlands limit the ability of internet service providers to block or slow down applications and services on the internet, writes Graham Reynolds.
"Stretch friends" - individuals who are outside of your social circle online - will help break down cultural barriers.
According to a new report, annual global internet traffic will increase nearly fourfold between 2011 and 2016, moving us into the zettabyte era, writes Maryam Omidi.
Google's executive chairman believes online connectivity benefits everyone; social psychologist Aleks Krotoski tries to introduce a little more serendipity into the equation, writes Maryam Omidi.
Punishing internet intermediaries for their content will have a chilling effect on free speech, says Kevin Bankston of the Centre for Democracy and Technology.
EU member states should reform the data protection framework to address the realities of life in the Web 2.0 age, writes David Erdos
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has proposed a law to punish readers of websites promoting terrorism and violence, writes Clementine de Montjoye.
Restrictions on hate speech are not a means of tackling bigotry but of rebranding often obnoxious ideas or arguments are immoral, argues writer Kenan Malik.
Liam Stacey, a 21-year-old student, was sentenced to 56 days in prison for posting racially offensive comments on Twitter, writes Maryam Omidi.
Online censorship is futile as it can almost always be circumvented, says Moez Chakchouk, the head of the Tunisian Internet Agency.
In the second part of this panel discussion just off Tahrir Square in Cairo, a panel of bloggers, journalists and human rights experts ask what are - and what should be - the limits to freedom of expression in Egypt today.
In this panel discussion just off Tahrir Square in Cairo, a panel of bloggers, journalists and human rights experts ask what are - and what should be - the limits to freedom of expression in Egypt today.
The co-founder of Global Voices discusses the nexus between governments, internet companies and citizens.
Belarus and Bahrain are the latest additions to the Reporters Without Borders’ “Enemies of the Internet” 2012 list while France and Australia are "under surveillance".
As of August 2012, Saudi Arabian writer Hamza Kashgari faced a trial for allegedly insulting the Prophet Muhammad on Twitter, writes Brian Pellot.
The right to be forgotten should give us greater control over the data we post about ourselves online, writes Sebastian Huempfer.
The author of the Master Switch says that while the right to be forgotten is a good idea in theory, the reality is that it may hamper entrepreneurship in Europe.
The Grass Mud Horse Lexicon, a catalogue of subversive online witticisms in China, is an example of the unflagging creativity of the human spirit, writes Amy Qin.
The author of The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires tells us why Facebook should not go into China and why Twitter's new take-down policy may harm the microblog.
In part one of this interview with Timothy Garton Ash, Ian Brown of the Oxford Internet Institute talks about the internet and freedom of expression, net neutrality, internet service providers and censorship by both democratic and autocratic governments.
For those of you who missed it first time round, here's Timothy Garton Ash, director of Free Speech Debate, speaking to the Wikipedia co-founder, a day after the encyclopedia's English pages were blacked out in protest against two anti-piracy bills in the US. They talk about SOPA and PIPA, the controversial Muhammad cartoons and Wikipedia's decision to go dark.
Private powers are not a "large threat" to free speech, the Canadian lawyer and publisher tells Katie Engelhart.
Are Google+ and Facebook right to ban pseudonyms? Voice your opinion here.