Social media companies have been heavily criticised at the launch of a major report on the far right, with YouTube being labelled an “organ of radicalization.”
The State of Hate 2020 report by Hope Not Hate, also found the Conservative party had suspended more than 20 officials and activists, including six sitting councilors, who had posted Islamophobic comments on social media.
Yvette Cooper, the Labour chair of the Commons home affairs select committee, said on Monday that when she and others had set up an account to search for one of the far-right groups named in the report, YouTube had automatically suggested that viewers might want to watch neo-Nazi videos.
 
                    Photo: AFP
“Look up one thing out of curiosity and YouTube is ever willing to offer far, far more, often getting far more extreme and pushing further out to the extremes, because that is how YouTube works,” she said. “They have become an organ of radicalization instead of taking responsibility, for that is the way their algorithms work.”
Cooper said a sense of decency which had always been a bulwark against the rise of the far right was on the decline. And she criticized both her own party for its “complicity” at a time when antisemitism was on the rise across Europe and the Conservatives for being “blind” to the Islamophobia in its own ranks.
Hope Not Hate’s report detailed the actions of Tories who had been suspended over Islamophobic social media posts.
In one screenshot taken by the campaign group, a Facebook account appearing to be that of the Nottinghamshire county councilor Steve Vickers published a post after the 2016 terrorist attack in Nice in which he said the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, “and his brethren” were “part of the problem.”
In response to the then-prime minister, Theresa May, wishing Muslims a happy Eid on Facebook, screenshots show an account apparently belonging to the Harworth and Bircotes town councillor Sonia Armstrong leaving a long comment, much of it in capital letters.
“She should put a wig on, disguise herself and have a walk around these cities alone especially at night, and then tell us how much they give to GB and how well they have integrated,” she wrote.
She cited the “raping and killing of our people” as making citizens “too frightened to go out alone any more,” and said that “no one knows how much they enforce sharia law” because police turn “a blind eye to everything they do all because of political correctness.”
The report also accuses the Winchester city councilor Judith Clementson of using an anonymous Twitter account to post conspiracy theories about a “dangerous Muslim agenda for world domination.”
The Hounslow borough councillor Ranjit Pendhar Singh Gill allegedly “celebrated” Donald Trump’s election and his proposals to exclude Muslims from the US. And in another post he reportedly wrote about “75 million Muslim Turks” who planned to “infiltrate the UK.”
The dossier also indicts a number of ex-councilors. It states that Gail Hall, a Gwynedd county councillor from 2008-12, shared multiple anti-Muslim posts from far-right Facebook pages, calling Muslims “savages.”
The report says she had also “liked” comments referring to Muslims as “scumbags” and encouraging them to “sling their hooks back to their ancestral homelands.”
Chris Meakin, the leader of the Conservative opposition in Southwark council during the 1970s and 80s, and who stood for election in Southwark council in 2002, also features in the report. It includes a screenshot of a post from an account matching his name, saying that Muslims did not deserve human rights “because of their animal-like behaviour,” and that it was “time to deploy the machine guns” against these “invaders.”
“Such an enemy must be eliminated,” it ends.
Hope Not Hate called on Conservative Campaign Headquarters “to take immediate action against these individuals,” and said it “will continue to demand that they take proper steps to tackle the Islamophobia crisis that has gripped the party at every level.”
Oct. 27 to Nov. 2 Over a breakfast of soymilk and fried dough costing less than NT$400, seven officials and engineers agreed on a NT$400 million plan — unaware that it would mark the beginning of Taiwan’s semiconductor empire. It was a cold February morning in 1974. Gathered at the unassuming shop were Economics minister Sun Yun-hsuan (孫運璿), director-general of Transportation and Communications Kao Yu-shu (高玉樹), Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) president Wang Chao-chen (王兆振), Telecommunications Laboratories director Kang Pao-huang (康寶煌), Executive Yuan secretary-general Fei Hua (費驊), director-general of Telecommunications Fang Hsien-chi (方賢齊) and Radio Corporation of America (RCA) Laboratories director Pan

President William Lai (賴清德) has championed Taiwan as an “AI Island” — an artificial intelligence (AI) hub powering the global tech economy. But without major shifts in talent, funding and strategic direction, this vision risks becoming a static fortress: indispensable, yet immobile and vulnerable. It’s time to reframe Taiwan’s ambition. Time to move from a resource-rich AI island to an AI Armada. Why change metaphors? Because choosing the right metaphor shapes both understanding and strategy. The “AI Island” frames our national ambition as a static fortress that, while valuable, is still vulnerable and reactive. Shifting our metaphor to an “AI Armada”

The older you get, and the more obsessed with your health, the more it feels as if life comes down to numbers: how many more years you can expect; your lean body mass; your percentage of visceral fat; how dense your bones are; how many kilos you can squat; how long you can deadhang; how often you still do it; your levels of LDL and HDL cholesterol; your resting heart rate; your overnight blood oxygen level; how quickly you can run; how many steps you do in a day; how many hours you sleep; how fast you are shrinking; how

“‘Medicine and civilization’ were two of the main themes that the Japanese colonial government repeatedly used to persuade Taiwanese to accept colonization,” wrote academic Liu Shi-yung (劉士永) in a chapter on public health under the Japanese. The new government led by Goto Shimpei viewed Taiwan and the Taiwanese as unsanitary, sources of infection and disease, in need of a civilized hand. Taiwan’s location in the tropics was emphasized, making it an exotic site distant from Japan, requiring the introduction of modern ideas of governance and disease control. The Japanese made great progress in battling disease. Malaria was reduced. Dengue was