Notices by Jay Baker (mediaactivist@todon.eu)

I'm growing weary of tech advice and recommendations with an admirable emphasis on privacy and security, even sustainability, but that don't also consider ethical options. "Don't use Google Chrome/search" is great until it's followed up with "...use Brave or Kagi." Then there's Framework, an example of a sustainable option...that can no longer be considered an ethical one. Genuine emphasis on privacy and security is about more than just *your* privacy and security, it's about recognising risks to the most marginalised in society - so why support bigots and outright fascists who claim they're private, secure, or even sustainable? We can do better. And I plan to do something about it. Watch this space.

We have a pretty strong stance on #Privacy and don’t believe in advertising as a revenue model. You are not the product! https://blog.elementary.io/you-are-not-the-product/

We believe that #accessibility features should be first class https://blog.elementary.io/accessibility-features-are-just-features/

And we’re all in on #Decentralized technologies like @FlatpakApps https://blog.elementary.io/elementary-appcenter-flatpak/

In case that got you interested..?
More custom parameter URLs (web-addresses) for Google similar to the customized web-search one https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=50&pws=0&sout=1&noj=1&udm=14 in the previous toot, in case you still want to/must use Google's search functions but somewhat de-enshittified through having parameters in the URLs:
Image search: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=50&pws=0&tbm=isch
News search: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=50&pws=0&sout=1&noj=1&tbm=nws&tbs=sbd:1
Video search: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=50&pws=0&sout=1&noj=1&tbm=vid

I still, however, seriously recommend you evaluate other providers for often higher quality search results in some categories and/or other personal priorities such as ethics and/or privacy:
https://search.brave.com (privacy focused)
https://www.ecosia.org (plants trees for environment)
https://duckduckgo.com/?kae=d&ks=t&kpsb=-1&kp=-2&k1=-1&kaj=m&kak=-1&kax=-1&kaq=-1&kap=-1&kao=-1&kad=en_US&k7=242424&kj=212121&km=m&ksn=5 (privacy focused, my URL parameters)
https://www.qwant.com (privacy focused)
https://www.mojeek.com (privacy focused)

@onepict Exactly. After decades as a Firefox loyalist, Vivaldi (lovely Scandinavian worker-owned anti-AI initiative that it is, still based on Chromium) is what I now rely on for workspaces and synchronisation and tab sharing and while I miss containers, the Firefox forks that I know of don't offer me that via account sign-in. So yes, I totally agree! Not least because Google's little "Look, we can't be monopolists, we're funding Mozilla" project isn't cutting it any more, not by a long shot, and not for a long while now. It's almost as if they *want* to seal their fate by alienating the ~5% of browser users they had left.

@Caseydunham @aral What's happened with Ladybird?

@poisonpunk Setting it all up nicely for Nigel Farage, I see.

@zackwhittaker Because of course he did.

Hot off the presses, a great piece here from a writer I have a lot of respect for, at Freedom. "We know that the myth of BBC impartiality is just that. The state broadcaster depends on the government for its charter renewal, its board is appointed by the government, and its periodic attempts to question government have generally ended badly. In 2003 when then-BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan raised questions over the government’s evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Director General was forced to resign, Gilligan was fired, and his source, Dr David Kelly, died in mysterious circumstances. When it produced drama unpalatable to government, as in 1965’s The War Game—the production was shelved. In between, we were treated to the ridiculous choice to have Sin Fein leader Gerry Adams’s voice dubbed by an actor on the daily news at the behest of the government, lest his oratorical skills prove too persuasive. The myth of the impartial BBC helps create an illusion of a democracy, when in fact the state’s mouthpiece obediently pumps out subservient garbage, the odd crease ironed out with resignations and dismissals." https://freedomnews.org.uk/2025/11/10/bbcs-war-on-woke-was-never-enough-for-the-right/

@nini It really was a wonderful find, I'm so glad I discovered it! It was cautionary but kind of prophetic too, even just considering the trials and tribulations of Sesame Street!

A few years after that, Tom Mills elaborated while discussing his book The BBC: Myth of a Public Service. "The BBC will aim to fairly and accurately reflect the balance of opinion amongst elites. In that respect it’s not so different to other reputable media organisations. But a number of studies suggest the range of opinion on the BBC is narrower than some of its rivals. Channel 4 News tends, I think, to have a broader range of perspectives, and the recent Media Reform Coalition’s report on the coverage of Corbyn found that the BBC gave much more airtime to Corbyn’s opponents than ITV." https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/bbc-is-neither-independent-or-impartial-interview-with-tom-mills/

@JustinMac84 I just followed up with a toot sharing just one of the resources in the piece that demonstrate the BBC's long-standing right-wing bias. I have always refused to pay the Licence Fee and always encourage people to boycott them as an institution. If people can access information on genocide from the BBC as you have, how much better informed could they be without them? I know I'm not the only one who has accessed excellent reporting on Gaza without relying on the BBC. It is, after all, an old but rotten institution -- and a state institution at that.

The debunking of the myth is nothing new, as my piece above cites - even back in 2013 the lies were shown for what they were, but it doesn't matter to the BBC, since they find such rhetoric useful as they can claim justification for lurching *even further* to the right, as they are again now: https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-biased-is-the-bbc-17028

@fkamiah17 Haha I like it!

A lot of talk about the BBC today, so I thought I'd offer a reminder about them from my own website: "Contrary to the popular myth, the 'impartial' BBC are actually inherently anti-left – not, perhaps, *despite* being a state broadcaster but *because* they’re a state broadcaster. While Russia Today, or RT, are roundly (and rightly) criticised for being a state media group and therefore at the behest of the Russian government, the BBC, too, is controlled by the increasingly right-wing, authoritarian U.K. government – but repackaged as, instead, a 'public' broadcaster." https://www.mediaactivist.com/1-uncertain-times-divide-and-rule/

Ready for winter with my Survival Street sweater so I can let more people know about the brilliant comic book!

Update: Just watched "Future Shock! The Story of 2000AD" and I'm even more sold on it all now.

@toonie That's a good enough recommendation for me since it comes from a fellow vegan Gen Xer! Thank you!

This week I checked out the #2000AD podcast since they discussed pro wrestling, and ended up realising how much I miss my old #comics of theirs! They did, after all, emerge out of the anti-authoritarian punk movement, going on to challenge Thatcherism in their pages when I was a kid. Then I realised the co-host of the podcast is the author of the above book, which is brilliant. Suffice to say, I have the itch, and I'm going to get back into 2000AD! Anyone else here still enjoy their comics and have recommendations? #HiveMind #AskMastodon #AskFedi

@FediPact Fabulous, thank you!

How to deal with anti-maskers in an ongoing pandemic: