A claim emerged in Chinese-language media posts that US Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris was wearing audio earrings – the Nova H1 – to cheat during a presidential debate in September.
But the claim is false. A photo comparison between earrings worn by Harris during the debate and Nova H1 shows they differ in shape.
The claim was shared on Russian state-run media Sputnik’s Chinese-language Weibo on Sept. 11, 2024.
“Harris wore the Nova H1 Audio earrings during last night’s debate with Trump,” the claim reads in part. Sputnik cited “American musician Jonnie King” to back its claim.
The Nova H1 has wireless earphones embedded in earrings.
“This is why she was seen continuously taking notes with her pen during the debate, when it was explicitly agreed upon before that there would be NO notes,” the claim reads further.
Chinese social media influencers claimed that Harris cheated during the presidential debates. (Screenshots/Weibo)
The claim began to circulate after Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump met for their first debate of the 2024 election campaign on Sept. 10.
The debate took place in Philadelphia at the National Constitution Center, hosted by the American broadcaster ABC News.
But the claim about Harris’ earrings is false.
According to a website set up by fashion blogger Susan Kelley, which documents Harris’ wardrobe during her campaign, the earrings she frequently wears are products of Tiffany & Co.
A photo comparison between the earrings worn by Harris during the debate and the Nova H1 shows they differ in shape. In particular, the metal portions of both earrings show a major difference.
The shape of the earrings worn by Harris during the debate (left) differ significantly from the Nova H1 (right). (AFP/Jim Watson and Screenshot from X)
The claim about Harris’ earrings has also been debunked by other fact-checking organizations, including USA Today, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.
Taking notes
Under the debate rules issued by ABC it is forbidden to use props or pre-written notes.
However, ABC did provide pen and paper for each candidate’s use during the debate.
Pen and paper were provided for both candidates to use during the debate (left). Harris can be seen picking up her pen as she enters the room. (right) (Screenshots/YouTube)
These items were shown on each candidate’s podium as the hosts of the program explained the rules of the debate before the candidates took their positions.
After the candidates entered the room, Harris can be seen picking up the pen at her podium.
Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Shen Ke and Taejun Kang.
Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Zhuang Jing for Asia Fact Check Lab.
Former Prime Minister Hun Sen encouraged supporters of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party to “smash” and “destroy” opposition political activists in audio comments that circulated on Khmer social media this week.
The Cambodian government has neither confirmed nor denied the veracity of the audio, which circulated widely on Facebook and other social media. Listeners say it sounds like the veteran leader, who currently serves as Senate president. It was purportedly recorded at a party meeting last week.
“Please all city, capital and provincial presidents of the party, be informed that in the past few weeks I sent a decision pertaining to a group of people who are experts in destroying the grassroots,” Hun Sen says in the audio.
“You must smash this force to a point that they no longer disturb us, let’s make it clear,” he said. “While we destroy their forces, we can persuade them to join us.”
In August, Hun Sen stepped down as prime minister, a position he held since 1985, allowing his son to take over. But he retains power as the president of the Senate and head of the Cambodian People’s Party, or CPP.
The run-up to the July 2023 parliamentary elections saw a months-long campaign of intimidation and threats against opposition leaders and activists. Some activists were persuaded to publicly switch their allegiance to the CPP.
Additionally, the National Election Committee ruled that the main opposition Candlelight Party couldn’t appear on the ballot, citing inadequate paperwork. The decision paved the way for the CPP to win 120 of 125 seats in the National Assembly.
In the audio, Hun Sen urged CPP officials to work on persuading opposition activists to defect now – instead of waiting to act months before the next round of elections.
Cambodia has local commune council elections scheduled for 2027. Its next parliamentary election is set to take place in 2028.
Supporters of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party participate in a campaign rally in Phnom Penh on July 21, 2023. (Tang Chhin Sothy/AFP)
Efforts should include incorporating party switchers into the CPP’s party structure and encouraging them to recruit more defectors, Hun Sen said.
“I ask the provincial party and local party offices to expeditiously administer these brothers and sisters [defectors] so they do not feel left out, or that there is a lack of care for them by the local party branches,” he said.
“Let’s declare the incorporation [of the defectors] into the party from now,” he said. “Let’s break their grassroot bases now so that they do not have base support.”
Hun Sen is an avid social media user, with 14 million followers on Facebook and 925,000 on TikTok.
RFA messaged Hun Sen on Facebook on Wednesday to verify the audio, but he hadn’t responded by Friday. RFA was also unable to reach government spokesman Pen Bona for comment.
‘Psychological threat’
Eng Chhai Eang, a former opposition lawmaker who now lives in the United States, said the audio was forwarded to him last week after a CPP official had sent it to opposition activists in Cambodia.
He told RFA he believed the audio was real and reflects Hun Sen’s longtime approach to political opponents.
Eng Chhai Eang continues to serve as the vice president of the Cambodian National Rescue Party, or CNRP, which was the main opposition party until it was banned by the Supreme Court in 2017.
“His vicious deeds started after the CNRP dissolution,” he said. “He ordered attacks against those who refused to defect. Any activists were attacked.”
The audio was probably intended as a “a psychological threat,” according to Rong Chhun, a prominent opposition activist who is an adviser to the opposition National Power Party, which was founded last year.
Translated by Yun Samean and Sok Ry Sum. Edited by Matt Reed and Malcolm Foster.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Khmer.
Following the inauguration of Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te on May 20, a claim emerged that Lai complained about his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, in a leaked audio.
But the audio is likely to be AI-generated, according to experts. Using an AI-analysis tool, AFCL also found signs of audio digitally manipulated.
A video with purported leaked audio was shared on X, formerly known as Twitter, by a user named “Guyan Muchan”. AFCL has previously debunked claims shared by this user multiple times.
The one-minute and 33-second video has two parts.
In the first part, a male voice with a Taiwanese accent can be heard describing a “longstanding break” between Lai and Tsai, both high-ranking members of Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party, or DPP, saying that the two figures once almost came to blows over their differences.
At the 45-second mark, the purported voice of Lai can be heard, complaining about Tsai due to their purported disagreements.
Guyan Muchan claimed in a post on X that leaked audio showed new Taiwan President Lai Ching-te complaining about his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen. (Screenshot/X)
But there is not enough evidence to show that the audio was a genuine recording of Lai.
AI generated
AFCL used the open source AI detection tool Hive to analyze a 45-second purported recording of Lai, dividing it into four parts.
Three of the parts were judged to be more than 90% likely to have been generated by AI. The audio snippet from 11 to 20 seconds was judged to be 55.9% likely to have been produced by AI.
The AI detection tool Hive judged all four parts of the supposed audio clip of Lai to be likely generated by AI. (Screenshot/Hive)
Experts analysis
Chih-Chung Hsu, an associate professor of statistics at Taiwan’s National Cheng Kung University specializing in deep learning and image processing, analyzed the purported leaked audio of Lai using an in-house audio-visual detection system.
This system measures AI likeness on a scale from 0 to 1. Hsu found that the voice on the audio measured 0.674, indicating a relatively low similarity to Lai’s voice.
Hsu added high-quality AI-generated audio and real voice typically score 0.85 or higher, but also warned that the low score could be due to the poor quality of the uploaded audio file.
Paul Liu, a Taiwanese information security expert, pointed out that the audio contained clipping, which should not be present in a secret recording.
The over-distortion suggested the microphone was extremely close to Lai, which Liu found unlikely given the sensitive subject matter.
He added that the flat pace and lack of irregular pauses and breaths resembled AI audio.
“I expected Lai’s voice to rise in pitch due to anger, rather than remain monotone given the emotional nature of the subject,” Liu said, adding that the absence of a definite time and place for the recording significantly lowered its credibility.
Taiwan’s Office of the President also said the audio is fake, citing analysis by the National Security Bureau.
Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Shen Ke and Taejun Kang.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Rita Cheng and Zhuang Jing for Asia Fact Check Lab.
Democracy Now! speaks with the creators of a new arts campaign grounded in Black women’s stories. VOICES: a sacred sisterscape is an audio play directed by award-winning poet aja monet weaving together Black feminist poems and perspectives. “Art is an invitation to expand our participation in the world and the ways that we see the world,” says monet, who hopes the project inspires action beyond aesthetics. “Solidarity is about us being not just spectators, but actors in the reality of our lives.”
The project was created with V-Day, the global activist movement to end violence against all women, gender-expansive people, girls and the Earth. “Rather than looking at Black women, we needed to put our headphones on and our masks … and do embodied listening,” says V, playwright of The Vagina Monologues and founder of V-Day. “Through that, we begin to understand where we all connect, where we are all aligned.”
VOICES: a sacred sisterscape will be available for streaming June 11.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
Kia ora koutou. Ko Ngāpuhi tōku iwi. Ko Ngāti Manu toku hapu. Ko Karetu tōku marae. Ko Myles Thomas toku ingoa.
I grew up with David Beatson, on the telly. Back in the 1970s, he read the late news which I watched in bed with my parents. Later, David and I worked together to save TVNZ 7 and also regional TV stations.
The Better Public Media (BPM) trust honours David each year with our memorial address, because his fight for non-commercial TV was an honourable one. He wasn’t doing it for himself.
He wasn’t doing it so he could get a job or because it would benefit him. He fought for public media because he knew it was good for Aotearoa NZ.
Like us at Better Public Media, he recognised the benefits to our country from locally produced public media.
David knew, from a long career in media, including as editor of The Listener and as Jim Bolger’s press secretary, that NZ’s media plays an important role in our nation’s culture, social cohesion, and democracy.
NZ culture is very important. NZ culture is so unique and special, yet it has always been at risk of being swamped by content from overseas. The US especially with its crackpot conspiracies, extreme racial tensions, and extreme tensions about everything to be honest.
Local content the antidote
Local content is the antidote to this. It reflects us, it portrays us, it defines New Zealand, and whether we like it or not, it defines us. But it’s important to remember that what we see reflected back to us comes through a filter.
This speech is coming to you through a filter, called Myles Thomas.
Better Public Media trustee Myles Thomas speaking beside the panel moderator and BPM chair Dr Peter Thompson (seated from left); Jenny Marcroft, NZ First candidate for Kaipara ki Mahurangi; Ricardo Menéndez March, Green Party candidate for Mt Albert; and Willie Jackson, Labour Party list candidate and Minister for Broadcasting and Media. Image: David Robie/APR
Commercial news reflects our world through a filter of sensation and danger to hold our attention. That makes NZ seem more shallow, greedy, fearful and dangerous.
The social media filter makes the world seem more angry, reactive and complaining.
RNZ’s filter is, I don’t know, thoughtful, a bit smug, middle class.
The New Zealand Herald filter makes us think every dairy is being ram-raided every night.
And The Spinoff filter suggests NZ is hip, urban and mildly infatuated with Winston Peters.
These cultural reflections are very important actually because they influence us, how we see NZ and its people.
It is not a commodity
That makes content, cultural content, special. It is not a commodity. It’s not milk powder.
We don’t drink milk and think about flooding in Queenstown, drinking milk doesn’t make us laugh about the Koiwoi accent, we don’t drink milk and identify with a young family living in poverty.
Local content is rich and powerful, and important to our society.
When the government supports the local media production industry it is actually supporting the audiences and our culture. Whether it is Te Mangai Paho, or NZ On Air or the NZ Film Commission, and the screen production rebate, these organisations fund New Zealand’s identity and culture, and success.
Don’t ask Treasury how to fund culture. Accountants don’t understand it, they can’t count it and put it in a spreadsheet, like they can milk solids. Of course they’ll say such subsidies or rebates distort the “market”, that’s the whole point. The market doesn’t work for culture.
Moreover, public funding of films and other content fosters a more stable long-term industry, rather than trashy short-termism that is completely vulnerable to outside pressures, like the US writer’s strike.
We have a celebrated content production industry. Our films, video, audio, games etc. More local content brings stability to this industry, which by the way also brings money into the country and fosters tourism.
BPM trust chair Dr Peter Thompson, senior lecturer in media studies at Victoria University, welcomes the panel and audience for the 2023 media policy debate at Grey Lynn Library Hall in Auckland last night. Image: Del Abcede/Asia Pacific Report
We cannot use quota
New Zealand needs more local content.
And what’s more, it needs to be accessible to audiences, on the platforms that they use.
But in NZ we do have one problem. Unlike Australia, we can’t use a quota because our GATT agreement does not include a carve out for local music or media quotas.
In the 1990s when GATT was being negotiated, the Aussies added an exception to their GATT agreement allowing a quota for Aussie cultural content. So they can require radio stations to play a certain amount of local music. Now they’re able to introduce a Netflix quota for up to 20 percent of all revenue generated in Aussie.
We can’t do that. Why? Because back in the 1990s the Bolger government and MFAT decided against putting the same exception into NZ’s GATT agreement.
But there is another way of doing it, if we take a lead from Denmark and many European states. Which I’ll get to in a minute.
The second important benefit of locally produced public media is social cohesion, how society works, the peace and harmony and respect that we show each other in public, depends heavily on the “public sphere”, of which, media is a big part.
Power of media to polarise
Extensive research in Europe and North America shows the power of media to polarise society, which can lead to misunderstanding, mistrust and hatred.
But media can also strengthen social cohesion, particularly for minority communities, and that same research showed that public media, otherwise known as public service media, is widely regarded to be an important contributor to tolerance in society, promoting social cohesion and integrating all communities and generations.
The third benefit is democracy. Very topical at the moment. I’ve already touched on how newsmedia affect our culture. More directly, our newsmedia influences the public dialogue over issues of the day.
It defines that dialogue. It is that dialogue.
So if our newsmedia is shallow and vacuous ignoring policies and focussing on the polls and the horse-race, then politicians who want to be elected, tailor their messages accordingly.
There’s plenty of examples of this such as National’s bootcamp policy, or Labour’s removing GST on food. As policies, neither is effective. But in the simplified 30 seconds of commercial news and headlines, these policies resonate.
Is that a good thing, that policies that are known to fail are nonetheless followed because our newsmedia cater to our base instincts and short attention spans?
Disaster for democracy
In my view, commercial media is actually disaster for democracy. All over the world.
But of course, we can’t control commercial media. No-one’s suggesting that.
The only rational reaction is to provide stronger locally produced public media.
And unfortunately, NZ lacks public media.
Obviously Australia, the UK, Canada have more public media than us, they have more people, they can afford it. But what about countries our size, Ireland? Smaller population, much more public media.
Denmark, Norway, Finland, all with roughly 5 million people, and all have significantly better public media than us. Even after the recent increases from Willie Jackson, NZ still spends just $44 per person on public media. $44 each year.
When we had a licence fee it was $110. Jim Bolger’s government got rid of that and replaced it with funding from general taxation — which means every year the Minister of Finance, working closely with Treasury, decides how much to spend on public media for that year.
This is what I call the curse of annual funding, because it makes funding public media a very political decision.
National, let us be honest, the National Party hates public media, maybe because they get nicer treatment on commercial news. We see this around the world — the Daily Mail, Sky News Australia, Newstalk ZB . . . most commercial media quite openly favours the right.
Systemic bias
This is a systemic bias. Because right-wing newsmedia gets more clicks.
Right-wing politicians are quite happy about that. Why fund public to get in the way? Even if it it benefits our culture, social cohesion, and democracy.
New Zealand is the same, the last National government froze RNZ funding for nine years.
National Party spokesperson on broadcasting Melissa Lee fought against the ANZPM merger, and now she’s fighting the News Bargaining Bill. As minister she could cut RNZ and NZ On Air’s budget.
But it wouldn’t just be cost-cutting. It would actually be political interference in our newsmedia, an attempt to skew the national conversation in favour of the National Party, by favouring commercial media.
So Aotearoa NZ needs two things. More money to be spent on public media, and less control by the politicians. Sustainable funding basically.
The best way to achieve it is a media levy.
Highly targeted tax
For those who don’t know, a levy is a tax that is highly targeted, and we have a lot of them, like the Telecommunications Development Levy (or TDL) which currently gathers $10 million a year from internet service providers like Spark and 2 Degrees to pay for rural broadband.
We’re all paying for better internet for farmers basically. When first introduced by the previous National government it collected $50 million but it’s dropped down a bit lately.
This is one of many levies that we live with and barely notice. Like the levy we pay on our insurance to cover the Earthquake Commission and the Fire and Emergency Levy. There are maritime levies, energy levies to fund EECA and Waka Kotahi, levies on building consents for MBIE, a levy on advertising pays for the ASA, the BSA is funded by a levy.
Lots of levies and they’re very effective.
So who could the media levy, levy?
ISPs like the TDL? Sure, raise the TDL back up to $50 million or perhaps higher, and it only adds a dollar onto everyone’s internet bill. There’s $50 million.
But the real target should be Big Tech, social media and large streaming services. I’m talking about Facebook, Google, Netflix, YouTube and so on. These are the companies that have really profited from the advent of online media, and at the expense of locally produced public media.
Funding content creation
We need a way to get these companies to make, or at least fund, content creation here in Aotearoa. Denmark recently proposed a solution to this problem with an innovative levy of 2 percent on the revenue of streaming services like Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney.
But that 2 percent rises to 5 percent if the streaming company doesn’t spend at least 5 percent of their revenue on making local Danish content. Denmark joins many other European countries already doing this — Germany, Poland, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, France and even Romania are all about to levy the streamers to fund local production.
Australia is planning to do so as well.
But that’s just online streaming companies. There’s also social media and search engines which contribute nothing and take almost all the commercial revenue. The Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill will address that to a degree but it’s not open and we won’t know if the amounts are fair.
Another problem is that it’s only for news publishers — not drama or comedy producers, not on-demand video, not documentary makers or podcasters. Social media and search engines frequently feature and put advertising around these forms of content, and hoover up the digital advertising that would otherwise help fund them, so they should also contribute to them.
A Media Levy can best be seen as a levy on those companies that benefit from media on the internet, but don’t contribute to the public benefits of media — culture, social cohesion and democracy. And that’s why the Media Levy can include internet service providers, and large companies that sell digital advertising and subscriptions.
Note, this would target large companies over a certain size and revenue, and exclude smaller platforms, like most levies do.
Separate from annual budget
The huge benefit of a levy is that it is separate from the annual budget, so it’s fiscally neutral, and politicians can’t get their mits on it. It removes the curse of annual funding.
It creates a funding stream derived from the actual commercial media activities which produce the distribution gaps in the first place, for which public media compensates. That’s why the proceeds would go to the non-commercial platform and the funding agencies — Te Mangai Paho, NZ On Air and the Film Commission.
One final point. This wouldn’t conflict with the new Digital Services Tax proposed by the government because that’s a replacement for Income Tax. A Media Levy, like all levies, sits over and above income tax.
So there we go. I’ve mentioned Jim Bolger three times! I’ve also outlined some quite straight-forward methods to fund public media sustainably, and to fund a significant increase in local content production, video, film, audio and journalism.
None of it needs to be within the grasp of Melissa Lee or Willie Jackson, or David Seymour.
All of it can be used to create local content that improves democracy, social cohesion and Kiwi culture.
Myles Thomas is a trustee of the Better Public Media Trust (BPM). He is a former television producer and director who in 2012 established the Save TVNZ 7 campaign. Thomas is now studying law. This commentary was this year’s David Beatson Memorial Address at a public meeting in Grey Lynn last night on broadcast policy for the NZ election 2023.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.
A Fulton County grand jury heard a previously unreported recording of former President Donald Trump pressuring a top Georgia Republican to help overturn his election loss in the state, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The special grand jury investigated Trump’s efforts to overturn his election in the state after District Attorney Fani Willis launched a probe into the former president’…
Ralph welcomes journalist, Alec MacGillis, author of “Fulfillment: Winning and Losing in One-Click America” about how Amazon continues to suck the life out of Main Street and what can be done about it. And the director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, Dr. Michael Carome, gives us the latest on our approach to the Covid pandemic. Plus, we answer a listener about how to avoid flying on Boeing’s 737 Max.
Sarah Kendzior and Andrea Chalupa are experts on authoritarian states who warned America about election hacking years before 2016. Here, they take a deep dive on the news, skipping outrage to deliver analysis, history, context, and sharp insight on global affairs.
In this week’s UN Catch-Up: a veteran aid worker’s take on the distressing scale of the humanitarian crisis in Southern Madagascar – it’s on the “periphery of famine”, he tells us, and not for the first time.
There’s an alert too from WHO on Africa where a “third wave “of coronavirus infections is feared, along with some good news – and some not so good – from South Sudan, where schools have reopened after lockdown, and positive news from the United States, which has decided to lift patent restrictions on COVID vaccines.
Regular readers have probably noticed my recent articles have been accompanied by audio recordings read by my husband Tim Foley. We figured out that I haven’t really been able to make the time to consistently do audio content, but Tim can, plus I think our stuff sounds good in an American accent.
If listening is more your thing you can get them on Soundcloud or on YouTube. If you want to listen to them all at once there’s a YouTube playlist here. Let us know what you think!
Here are the ones we’ve done so far:
Detente: The Vital Word Missing From Discourse On Russia And China
Intersectional Torturers
Silicon Valley Algorithm Manipulation Is The Only Thing Keeping Mainstream Media Alive
World’s Most Tyrannical Regime Can’t Stop Babbling About “Human Rights”
Capitalism Rewards Sociopathy: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix
What If The Big Reveal Already Happened?
Biden Lied About Yemen
Reject Mainstream Culture: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix
The Day The World Ended
The Mass Media Will Never Regain The Public’s Trust
_________________________
_________________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you canbuy my books. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here.
As India confronts a devastating second wave of COVID-19 infections, with some 300,000 cases a day, securing essential oxygen equipment is “the need of the hour”.
That’s the message from Dr. Yasmin Ali Haque, Representative of the UN Children’s Fund, UNICEF, in the country, who spoke to our colleague Anshu Sharma in Delhi.
Sarah Kendzior and Andrea Chalupa are experts on authoritarian states who warned America about election hacking years before 2016. Here, they take a deep dive on the news, skipping outrage to deliver analysis, history, context, and sharp insight on global affairs.
