The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance.
-
@mullvadnet say what? Tell us more of this more please!
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet hold up! Mullvad wasn't censored. that word has a particular, specific meaning, and unlike most private organisations that might deny someone a platform, Clearcast has a judicial review ruling saying that it's a private, non-governmental body:
had Mullvad's ad been banned by the ASA, that would have been censorship - and indeed, since the ASA also monitors billboard ads, that might still happen... but what happened here was that nobody who broadcast the ads would broadcast Mullvad's, which is probably not terribly surprising given that they're all owned by companies with a vested interest in not letting VPNs get a foothold.
moreover, it was just that ad that was rejected. not Mullvad as a whole.
And then? And then Mullvad was censored in the UK.
UK ramps up censorship & surveillance. Mullvad's critical TV ad "And Then?" was banned. Watch it here.
Mullvad VPN (mullvad.net)
-
@mullvadnet do you have some more information about the "ban" here? I'd like to write to the ASA to complain about that decision if possible. I can't see a ruling entry for it on the ASA site.
@ret @mullvadnet Mullvad's own account is here.
And then? And then Mullvad was censored in the UK.
UK ramps up censorship & surveillance. Mullvad's critical TV ad "And Then?" was banned. Watch it here.
Mullvad VPN (mullvad.net)
there's nothing to complain to the ASA about - the ad was rejected by the TV companies' own (private, joint-owned) pre-vetting body, and mainly on grounds of quality and clarity.
-
@ret @mullvadnet Mullvad's own account is here.
And then? And then Mullvad was censored in the UK.
UK ramps up censorship & surveillance. Mullvad's critical TV ad "And Then?" was banned. Watch it here.
Mullvad VPN (mullvad.net)
there's nothing to complain to the ASA about - the ad was rejected by the TV companies' own (private, joint-owned) pre-vetting body, and mainly on grounds of quality and clarity.
@mewsleah thanks, I hadn't seen that. Disappointing.
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet It's a great ad.
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet WOW. Guess they're using 1984 as a playbook and not a warning.
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet Strong words for neither being Banned nor Censored
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet
I like the ad. Consider uploading it to peertube so we can share it here? -
@mullvadnet
I like the ad. Consider uploading it to peertube so we can share it here?Which instance would you suggest? I looked at Odysee but I am not sure it is a good alternative to YT.
-
@mullvadnet It's a great ad.
and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then and then
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet
> the TV ad “And Then?” […] was banned on British television.
Source? -
Which instance would you suggest? I looked at Odysee but I am not sure it is a good alternative to YT.
@jbjrkng
I have no experience with public instances unfortunately. -
@mullvadnet say what? Tell us more of this more please!
@mullvadnet ah, so reading more it wasn’t accepted by the TV advertisers. Which is not exactly surprising given they hate technology like VPNs. I know you wanted to make a stink but this just looks silly.
-
@mullvadnet do you have some more information about the "ban" here? I'd like to write to the ASA to complain about that decision if possible. I can't see a ruling entry for it on the ASA site.
@ret @mullvadnet it wasn’t banned. A private company didn’t clear it for broadcast. Mullvad didn’t try to make it compliant because it suits their commercial interests to claim it was banned. They get more free publicity this way and get to present themselves as the underdog. https://mullvad.net/en/and-then/uk
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet i saw this ad at least a dozen times on tv in sweden over christmas. Not sure if my mom got the message
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
File won't play, says it's corrupt.
-
@mullvadnet
> the TV ad “And Then?” […] was banned on British television.
Source?@mullvadnet
For example, a public statement from the agency responsible -
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet If this passes our checks, weʼd be delighted to show it on our little corner of the web.
-
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
@mullvadnet Was a reason given why it was banned? I’m so curious how they’d rationalize that.
Good ad, BTW. -
The United Kingdom is escalating its censorship and mass surveillance. When Mullvad tried to criticise this with the TV ad “And Then?”, it was banned on British television.
Every time a government says 'we need backdoor access for safety' what they actually mean is 'we want to break encryption for everyone including the criminals we claim to be targeting'
Because here is the thing: backdoors do not check IDs. If the UK government can use it, so can hackers, hostile states, and the exact people they say they want to stop
You cannot build a door that only opens for the good guys. That is not how doors work
