Thierry Ardisson sera l’un des rares rescapés du grand ménage réalisé par Vincent Bolloré dans le groupe Canal. S’il passe sur D8, il conserve son émission qui sera même rallongée. Lundi matin, il a justifié la stratégie de son patron et critiqué ses désormais anciens petits camarades qui quittent la chaîne à la fin de la saison.

«Pour Ardisson tapez 8». C’est le slogan que Thierry Ardisson s’est inventé pour promouvoir son passage de Canal + à D8. L’ex-publicitaire a toujours le sens de la formule et de la punchline, comme il l’a démontré lundi matin sur l’antenne d’Europe 1. Invité du Grand direct des médias de Jean-Marc Morandini, l’animateur a réglé leur compte à plusieurs de ses anciens collègues de Canal+qui ont décidé de partir ou été débarqués à la fin de la saison.

Les deux principales cibles de Thierry Ardisson sont Maïtena Biraben et Ali Baddou. Au sujet du présentateur de La nouvelle édition, il raconte: «Par exemple, quand Belmer me disait il y a trois ans “Ali Baddou va remplacer Denisot au Grand Journal”, j’éclatais de rire ». Et lorsqu’il est interrogé sur le salaire de son salaire, il affirme ne pas savoir et révèle en revanche celui de Bruno Gaccio qui «gagnait paraît-il 50 000 euros par mois».

A propos de Maïtena Biraben, Thierry Ardisson explique: «Maïtena c’est moi qui l’ai fait venir en France à la fin des années 90, elle travaillait à la TSR. Je la trouvais excellente, je pense qu’elle a fait de très bonnes émissions comme Les maternelles, Le supplément. Je pense que le Grand journal était un peu surdimensionné pour elle». Seul Yann Barthès trouve grâce aux yeux de l’homme en noir. «Yann il est super, j’apprends beaucoup de lui, il a progressé en animation, il est formidable» confie-t-il. Mais sur tous ces départs, Thierry Ardisson porte un regard détaché. «Je ne regrette rien ni personne, je ne vais pas pleurer, je m’en fous» assène-t-il.

Thierry Ardisson a aussi profité de son passage sur Europe 1 pour justifier la stratégie de son patron Vincent Bolloré. «Je pense qu’il y a intérêt à faire des économies sur Canal+ quand on voit les chiffres, estime-t-il. Canal+ était une chaîne où il n’était pas franchement question d’argent. Pendant des années, les abonnés faisaient vivre tout le monde. On payait des animateurs, qui entre nous n’étaient pas extraordinaires, des fortunes». L’animateur ajoute: «D’un seul coup il y a le réalisme qui arrive à Canal, la chaîne est là pour gagner de l’argent, point barre». Et au sujet de Cyril Hanouna, auquel Vincent Bolloré a accordé un pont d’or pour le faire rester sur D8, Thierry Ardisson affirme qu’«avec Cyril hanouna on s’entend bien» et que «si la chaîne en est là aujourd’hui c’est surtout grâce à lui donc c’est respectable».

Pour rappel, la saison prochaine, Thierry Ardisson conserve Salut les terriens! qui sera diffusé sur D8, toujours le samedi, toujours à la même heure, mais avec une demi-heure de plus.

Crédits photos : Bertrand Rindoff Petroff

Click Here: Cheap FIJI Rugby Jersey

Plusieurs scènes jouées par Jared Leto dans le rôle du Joker ont finalement été retirées du montage final du film Suicide Squad. Et cela n’a pas tout à fait plu à l’acteur.

Le rôle du Joker est hanté les performances passées de Jack Nicholson et Heath Ledger. Jared Leto, qui interprète le super-vilain de l’univers de Batman dans le film Suicide Squad, qui explose d’ailleurs les scores d’entrées en salles, a donc dû redoubler d’effort pour faire que son interprétation arrive à la cheville de celles de ses prédécesseurs. Si le film est un succès en salles, il l’est beaucoup moins dans les critiques, très partagées.

Cependant, d’après Jared Leto, beaucoup des scènes dans lesquelles il a tant donné ont disparu du montage final du film. Lors d’une interview accordée à IGN, il s’est un peu lâché : “Y’a-t-il quelque chose qui n’a pas été coupé du film? Je vous le demande. […] Il y a eu tant de scènes supprimées du montage final, je ne pourrais même pas commencer à les énumérer. Nous avons fait beaucoup d’expériences lors du tournage, nous avons exploré beaucoup de facettes du Joker. Il y a beaucoup de choses que nous avons filmées qui ne se trouvent pas dans le film.”

Certes, un rôle si complexe est fait d’expérimentations et d’essais. Et justement, Jared Leto a une petite idée de ce que pourraient devenir ces extraits non diffusés. Même si c’est un peu morbide : “Si je meurs bientôt, il est probable que ces scènes refassent surface quelque part. C’est le bon côté concernant la mort d’un acteur, tous ses trucs semblent réapparaître.” Sympa.

Jared Leto, qui a récemment craqué sur une veste Gucci lors d’un défilé pour ensuite se la procurer et la porter lors de l’avant-première londonienne de Suicide Squad, était, il y a deux semaines, en couverture du magazine américain Rolling Stone, torse nu, histoire de contraster avec le Joker.

The FBI on Thursday announced a new policy intended to “clarify and guide timely” notification of state and local election officials of any cyber intrusions, marking a major shift three years after Russian intrusions during the 2016 elections. 

The new internal policy mandates that a state’s chief election official and local election officials be notified as quickly as possible of any credible cyber threats to election infrastructure. It prioritizes working with other federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), to notify these officials.

The previous policy of the FBI was to notify direct victims of a cyber intrusion, but not to always state officials, a stance politicians have protested against, particularly in the wake of findings from former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerSchiff: Trump acquittal in Senate trial would not signal a ‘failure’ Jeffries blasts Trump for attack on Thunberg at impeachment hearing Live coverage: House Judiciary to vote on impeachment after surprise delay MORE that Russians were able to infiltrate systems in at least one Florida county in 2016. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The FBI wrote in a statement announcing the new policy that “decisions surrounding notification continue to be dependent on the nature and breadth of an incident and the nature of the infrastructure impacted.”

The agency added that “it is the intent of the FBI that this new policy will result in increased collaboration between all levels of government for the integrity and security of U.S. elections.” 

A senior FBI official told reporters during a call on Thursday that the bureau would aim to notify state and local officials in person, and that any delays involved in the process of notification would require approval from a “very senior official within the FBI.”

The official emphasized that the new policy deals with notifying state and local officials of specifics of a cyber incident, and “does not preclude informing others about potential vulnerabilities or widespread effects.”

The new policy comes months after the Mueller report found that Russian hackers sent phishing emails to more than 100 Florida election officials in November 2016 to try to gain access to networks. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Mueller noted that the FBI took over this investigation, but that, while the FBI believed the Russian hackers successfully accessed systems in at least one Florida county, it “did not take the investigative steps” to verify this occurred.

Following the release of the Mueller report, the FBI briefed Florida representatives in Congress, and Gov. Rick DeSantis (R) said during a press conference in May that the FBI had told him that Russian hackers had accessed the systems of two unnamed Florida counties.

A senior Justice Department official told reporters on Thursday that federal agencies involved in election security have “learned more about election law and how states are organized” in the wake of past election security concerns.

“In looking at our experience of the last couple of years, we see that we can’t treat states as we would a large company,” the Justice Department official said. “This is our effort to be as well-footed and solidly grounded as we can going into 2020.”

The Mueller report also found that Russian hackers had gained access to the Illinois voter registration database through successfully compromising the network of the Illinois State Board of Elections, and that these hackers scanned for vulnerabilities in the networks of dozens of other states in the summer of 2016.

A coalition of 14 states and two major cities filed a lawsuit Thursday in an attempt to block the Trump administration from eliminating food stamp benefits for hundreds of thousands of unemployed Americans.

The administration’s new rules will restrict the ability of states to provide food stamps to jobless residents. Instead, “able-bodied” Americans who are not caring for a child less than 6 years old will be eligible for food stamps only if they’re employed or enrolled in a vocational training program.

“The waivers that the Rule curtails are critical to ensuring access to food for low-income people who live in areas with limited employment opportunities,” said the complaint filed in federal court by the 14 states and New York City and Washington, D.C. “If implemented, the Rule will have a drastic impact on Plaintiffs and their residents by depriving between 688,000 and 850,000 vulnerable Americans of much-needed nutritional assistance.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Government estimates have said the proposal could cut benefits for about 750,000 people.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

Currently, able-bodied Americans without dependents between the ages of 18 and 49 can receive food stamps for a maximum of three months during a three-year period, unless they are working or enrolled in an education or training program for 80 hours a month.

Agriculture Secretary Sonny PerdueGeorge (Sonny) Ervin PerdueCities, states sue over planned Trump cuts to food stamps Trump admin grants Santa and reindeer permit to fly into US for Christmas The White House crusade to kill food assistance MORE last year described the new approach as an effort to restore “the original intent of food stamps … moving more able-bodied Americans to self sufficiency,” The Washington Post reported.

Perdue said that since 2000, the number of Americans receiving food stamp benefits has jumped from 17 million to 36 million, even though the unemployment rate is now lower than it was in 2000.

Under the new rules, a county must have an unemployment rate of at least 6 percent before the state can apply for a waiver.

The policy change, set to take effect April 1, would reportedly trim $5.5 billion from the federal budget over the next two years.

The finalized plan is one of three programs proposed by the Trump administration to limit food stamps. While the other two plans are not yet finalized, when combined, the plans would constrict food stamp benefits for an estimated 3.7 million people.

Advocacy groups filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s policy that allows asylum-seekers to be deported to Guatemala and soon, El Salvador and Honduras.

The groups, which include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), are alleging that the policies block applicants from ever receiving asylum and put them at risk by returning them to “the same dangerous region they fled,” according to the lawsuit.

“The Trump administration has created a deadly game of musical chairs that leaves desperate refugees without a safe haven, in violation of U.S. and international law,” Katrina Eiland, an attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a press release. “The administration is illegally trying to turn away asylum-seekers and pass the buck to other countries that can’t protect them.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The groups argue that the policies violate the Refugee Act, Immigration and Nationality Act and Administrative Procedure Act. The suit names government figures and agencies including Attorney General Bill Barr, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Asylum-seekers have the right to apply to stay in the U.S. unless they can go to another safe country, but the country has to give “access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum” to be defined as safe. 

“The Rule recklessly subverts our legal framework for accepting refugees into a machinery for casting them off into circumstances as perilous as those they fled,” the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit cites two cases of people who were deported to Guatemala, including a gay man who fears he will be attacked for his sexual orientation and a daughter and a mother, whose common-law husband and sister-in-law were murdered in Honduras.

The National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, and Human Rights First joined the ACLU in filing the suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

The Trump administration began sending asylum-seekers to Guatemala in November as part of a controversial program, and had sent guidance saying that Mexican asylum-seekers were to be sent there, too. Previous reporting from the Los Angeles Times indicated that the administration was also going to send asylum-seekers to Honduras, regardless of if they were from there.

DHS spokeswoman Heather Swift said the department “stand(s) behind the integrity of the program.”

“While we cannot comment on litigation, the U.S. Government and the Government of Guatemala remain committed to the asylum cooperative agreement and stand behind the integrity of the program,” she said in a statement to The Hill.

Click Here: creed perfume sale

Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes CNN’s Van Jones: Democratic debate was ‘dispiriting,’ no evidence party can defeat Trump MORE (I-Vt.) was the only candidate in Tuesday’s Democratic debate to oppose the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), an update to the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“If this is passed I think it will set us back a number of years,” Sanders said of the deal, which has the backing of the AFL-CIO union. Other unions, Sanders noted, remained opposed.

Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes CNN’s Van Jones: Democratic debate was ‘dispiriting,’ no evidence party can defeat Trump MORE (D-Mass.) said that she would support the deal negotiated between President TrumpDonald John TrumpFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes CNN’s Van Jones: Democratic debate was ‘dispiriting,’ no evidence party can defeat Trump MORE and House Democrats because it was an improvement over the current agreement, but would continue to fight for more stringent deals.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We need a different approach to trade and it starts with the corruption of the giant corporations,” she said.

Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes Warren, Buttigieg spar over health care costs MORE (D) agreed that the deal had been improved and said he would support it, as did Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes Warren corrects Sanders after he seeks to correct her at debate MORE (D-Minn.).

Not everyone on the stage addressed USMCA, which passed in the House and could pass in the Senate as soon as this week, specifically.

Former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes Democrats clash at debate over keeping US troops in Mideast MORE and businessman Tom SteyerTom Fahr SteyerFive takeaways from the Democratic debate Sanders, Warren exchange underscores Iowa stakes Sanders, Warren appear to have tense moment onstage after debate MORE both emphasized the need to focus on climate in the deal, an issue Sanders brought up as well.

“There will be no trade agreements signed in my administration without environmental standards,” said Biden.

Steyer, weighing in on a partial trade deal with China that Trump is set to sign Wednesday, said “if climate is not your No. 1 priority, you can’t sign a deal.”

Steyer has previously expressed support for USMCA.

Instagram is facing criticism after taking down content supporting Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a drone strike ordered by President TrumpDonald John TrumpDem lawmaker says Nunes threatened to sue him over criticism Parnas: U.S. ambassador to Ukraine removed to clear path for investigations into Bidens Five takeaways from Parnas’s Maddow interview MORE.

In the wake of the controversial killing, Instagram began taking down content encouraging Soleimani or his ideas on its platform, claiming that it was acting in compliance with U.S. sanctions laws targeting the Iranian government.

A spokesperson for Facebook, which owns Instagram, told The Hill it removed content in support of Soleimani because of sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which was listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the White House last year. Soleimani was the commander of Quds Force, an elite unit of the IRGC.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Instagram’s action also affected posts from some users not directly affiliated with Soleimani or the IRGC, sparking a backlash online from those affected and critics who accused Instagram of censorship and promoting the Trump administration’s views.

Instagram’s move surprised many in the tech world, with some questioning the company’s interpretation of U.S. law. Other prominent companies did not follow Instagram’s lead.

Twitter and YouTube, also among the most-used social platforms in Iran, have not removed content about Soleimani from users not affiliated with the Iranian military.

Soon after Soleimani was killed by a U.S. drone strike on Jan. 3, journalists, activists and celebrities began raising concerns about their content being taken off of Instagram.

At least 15 Iranian journalists have reported having their accounts suspended, according to the International Federation of Journalists (IJF).

“At a time when Iranian citizens need access to information it is unacceptable that Instagram should choose to censor Iranian media and individual journalists and users,” the IJF wrote in a letter to Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri.

ADVERTISEMENT

Human rights activist and journalist Emadeddin Baghi told website Coda Story, which first reported on Instagram’s actions, that four of his posts on the platform related to Soleimani were also removed.

Those posts were later restored, a Facebook spokesperson confirmed to The Hill.

And Alireza Jahanbakhsh, a soccer player for Brighton and Hove Albion in England’s Premier League, told CNN that a picture of Soleimani he posted after the general’s death was removed.

Instagram has been steadfast in pointing to U.S. law. When asked about these removals, the social media company said that sanctions associated with the IRGC’s designation as a terrorist organization compelled Instagram to take them down.

“We review content against our policies and our obligations to US sanctions laws, specifically those related to the US government’s designation of the IRGC and its leadership as a terrorist organization,” a Facebook spokesperson told The Hill in a statement.

The spokesperson clarified that the platform does not remove content for simply supporting Soleimani. Instead, they explained, Facebook platforms remove content if it’s determined that it commends the actions of sanctioned parties or if it seeks to help further their actions.

And the spokesperson said that affected users can appeal disabled accounts and removed posts at the company’s Help Center.

For many, the episode highlighted the challenges tech companies face in policing their platforms. But critics blasted the move from Instagram as heavy-handed, and Tehran also fired back.

Ali Rabiei, an Iranian government spokesperson, called the removals “undemocratic” in a tweet.

Iran’s government in fact has censored most social media platforms in the country, with many Iranian users forced to use software to evade domestic censors.

Legal experts who spoke to The Hill disputed Facebook’s justification for the removals.

“The sanctions law doesn’t prohibit and couldn’t prohibit people from posting things in favor of or against a particular sanctioned person or entity,” Jennifer Granick, a surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told The Hill.

ADVERTISEMENT

There has also been criticism of Instagram within the industry. A technology source with knowledge of the situation characterized Instagram’s actions as going too far, noting that while sanctions law requires removal of affiliated accounts, praising individuals should not be treated the same way.

Twitter last year updated its policies to remove members of terrorist organizations, but it is not taking down content encouraging or supporting Soleimani unless it otherwise breaks platform rules, a company spokesperson told The Hill.

Google, which owns YouTube, declined to comment about Instagram’s actions, but the company’s transparency report makes it clear that content from “government-listed foreign terrorist organizations” violates its rules, while content from other groups falls under other policies.

Twitter previously allowed accounts tied to Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are designated as terrorist organizations, until November, when they began removing them after pressure from lawmakers.

Tech companies will likely have to make such difficult decisions again during future international flashpoints.

Granick said the controversy over Instagram raised troubling First Amendment concerns that would not go away quickly.

“The line between supporting and encouraging actions and seeking to help is nonexistent or fuzzy at best,” Granick said about censoring online content.

“This is why in U.S. law we don’t allow this sort of thing, because it will chill legitimate speech on topics of public interest.”

Businessman Andrew YangAndrew YangYang fourth-most-tweeted-about Democrat during debate despite not qualifying All the frontrunners could survive initial Iowa test DNC, Democratic candidates combine to raise 0M in 2019 MORE was the fourth-most-tweeted-about candidate during the first Democratic presidential primary debate of 2020 despite not qualifying to take the stage Tuesday, according to Twitter.

Mentions of Yang on Twitter Tuesday evening ranked higher than several Democratic candidates onstage, including South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegWarren-Sanders fight raises alarm on the left New Hampshire Rep. Kuster endorses Buttigieg Hillicon Valley: Trump turns up heat on Apple over gunman’s phone | Mnuchin says Huawei won’t be ‘chess piece’ in trade talks | Dems seek briefing on Iranian cyber threats | Buttigieg loses cyber chief MORE (D) and Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharGOP senator: 2020 candidates must recuse themselves from impeachment trial Fight escalates over planned impeachment press restrictions Overnight Energy: Cost analysis backing BLM move comes under scrutiny | Republicans eye legislation to rival Dems’ climate plan | Report claims top global risks all climate-related MORE (D-Minn.), as well as billionaire Tom SteyerTom Fahr SteyerWarren to Sanders: ‘I think you called me a liar on national TV’ Overnight Energy: Cost analysis backing BLM move comes under scrutiny | Republicans eye legislation to rival Dems’ climate plan | Report claims top global risks all climate-related CNN draws 7.3 million viewers for Iowa Democratic debate MORE, according to Twitter Government.

Click Here: cheap rugby league jerseys

Yang ranked behind Sens. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWarren to Sanders: ‘I think you called me a liar on national TV’ Warren-Sanders fight raises alarm on the left Overnight Health Care: Health insurers urge Supreme Court to take ObamaCare case | Lawmakers press Trump officials to change marijuana rules | Bloomberg vows to ban flavored e-cigs if elected MORE (D-Mass.) and Bernie SandersBernie SandersWarren to Sanders: ‘I think you called me a liar on national TV’ Warren-Sanders fight raises alarm on the left On The Money — Presented by Wells Fargo — Trump signs first phase of US-China trade deal | Senate to vote Thursday on Canada, Mexico deal | IRS provides relief for those with discharged student loans MORE (I-Vt.) as well as former Vice President Joe BidenJoe Biden Parnas: U.S. ambassador to Ukraine removed to clear path for investigations into Bidens Five takeaways from Parnas’s Maddow interview Parnas: Trump threatened to withhold more than just military aid to Ukraine MORE in Twitter mentions, and he ranked just behind those three as well as President TrumpDonald John TrumpDem lawmaker says Nunes threatened to sue him over criticism Parnas: U.S. ambassador to Ukraine removed to clear path for investigations into Bidens Five takeaways from Parnas’s Maddow interview MORE and Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiOn The Money — Presented by Wells Fargo — Trump signs first phase of US-China trade deal | Senate to vote Thursday on Canada, Mexico deal | IRS provides relief for those with discharged student loans House delivers impeachment articles to Senate Senate begins preparations for Trump trial MORE (D-Calif.) on Twitter Government’s ranking of the most-tweeted-about U.S. politicians Tuesday night.

Yang failed to qualify for the debate after protesting for weeks that newer polls showing his rising support were not being commissioned in early primary states such as New Hampshire.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If the DNC [Democratic National Committee] had only done their due diligence and commissioned polls in the early states, Andrew Yang would certainly be on the debate stage next week. We are not going to allow the DNC to dictate who they wish to see as the nominee and deny the will of the people,” his campaign manager said in a statement before the debate.

Yang appeared to take missing Tuesday’s contest in stride, saying afterward: “That’s the last debate I’ll miss.”

His campaign, meanwhile, echoed criticism of the debate-stage lineup from media commentators afterward, including CNN’s Van Jones, who said he “missed Andrew Yang” after the debate ended.

A Republican member of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on Thursday expressed support for Medicare negotiating drug prices, an idea typically more supported by Democrats. 

“I may touch a third rail here,” Christine Wilson, said while speaking at a health care conference in Washington. “I think part of the problem is that the federal government has not been able to negotiate under certain parts of Medicare and Medicaid for pharmaceutical prices.”

The remarks from an appointee of President TrumpDonald John TrumpLev Parnas implicates Rick Perry, says Giuliani had him pressure Ukraine to announce Biden probe Saudi Arabia paid 0 million for cost of US troops in area Parnas claims ex-Trump attorney visited him in jail, asked him to sacrifice himself for president MORE to the FTC come amid a raging debate over high drug prices. Democrats are touting a bill the House passed in December to allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices. 

ADVERTISEMENT

But President Trump and Senate Republicans have rejected that bill, backing more modest alternatives. 

“The federal government, which accounts for I think a third of pharmaceutical spending, is essentially a price-taker, and that seems like a problem to me,” Wilson added at a conference hosted by the Council for Affordable Health Coverage, a coalition of health care companies and other groups. 

Democrats have been trying to increase pressure on Trump to support Medicare negotiating drug prices, pointing out that he supported the idea during his 2016 campaign, in a break with Republican orthodoxy, before backing off.

Click Here: azzaro parfum

Access to Wikipedia was restored in Turkey on Wednesday after more than two and a half years, the Wikimedia foundation announced. 

The access comes after Turkey’s highest court ruled at the end of last year against the country’s ban on the website, calling it a violation of freedom of expression. 

“We are thrilled to be reunited with the people of Turkey,” Katherine Maher, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, said in a statement. “At Wikimedia we are committed to protecting everyone’s fundamental right to access information. We are excited to share this important moment with our Turkish contributor community on behalf of knowledge-seekers everywhere.”

Turkey blocked access to Wikipedia in April 2017 under a law that allows it to restrict access to material that is considered to be a threat to national security.

Turkey’s communications ministry had argued that the website attempted to run a “smear campaign” against the country by allowing certain articles to claim that the Turkish government coordinated with militant groups. 

Wikipedia reportedly petitioned the Constitutional Court after talks with Turkish officials and a challenge in lower courts failed.

Click Here: azzaro parfum