this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
146 points (99.3% liked)

World News

38847 readers
2032 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Extreme restrictions on media workers mean life in Afghanistan – including human rights abuses – will go undocumented, journalists say

The Taliban’s ban on images and videos of “living things” will make it harder to cover Afghanistan, journalists in the country said.

The Afghan ministry for vice and virtue has directed media platforms in Maidan Wardak, Kandahar and Takhar provinces to not show images of “living things with a soul”, taken as meaning people and animals.

A ministry spokesperson, Saif ul Islam Khyber, confirmed to the Associated Press that Taliban-run media stopped showing images of living things in some provinces on Tuesday to comply with the new law.

The ban, part of a set of “morality laws” published by the ministry in August, does not extend to visuals of the Taliban’s more prominent leaders.

In effect, this means journalists can no longer take pictures or videos of people and animals. Photojournalists in particular fear that the restrictions will harm their livelihoods.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So by implication, the more prominent leaders of the Taliban don't have souls? I suppose that tracks?

[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago

So by implication, the more prominent leaders of the Taliban don’t have souls?

Unironically, public figures within the social systems we have developed really do have to act more as a figure than a person.