Norway’s new law on edited photos

A new law in Norway makes it illegal for advertisers and social media influencers to share     1     photos online without disclosing whether the images were altered.It modifies the 2009 Marketing and Control Act and sets to go into effect when the King of Norway decides it should.

The law concerns advertisers and people who receive “payment or other     2    ” in exchange for their posts. It will impact “brands, companies, and influencers’ sponsored posts,” and concerns posts on all social media sites.

The new law requires disclosures for edits made after the image was taken and before, such as Snapchat and Instagram filters that modify one’s appearance. Examples of edits that people who are being paid for pictures are required to     3    include “enlarged lips, narrowed waists, and exaggerated muscles,” among other things.

Body pressure, or “kroppspress” in Norway, is a major topic of conversation in the country, the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs said in its report. “Young people are exposed to a(n)    4     pressure to look good through advertising and social media, and the models     5     are often digitally retouched, which exposes young people to an ideal of beauty that is impossible to achieve.”

By prohibiting advertisers and influencers from posting such photos without proper     6     with a government-authorized stamp, the Ministry said it hopes to    7     the negative impacts of body pressure on young people. “It is especially important to prevent the desire to make more     8     and long-lasting changes in one’s own look,” the Ministry said.

Some of Norway’s top influencers have already thought     9     about the new law, “Young people today are growing up to a completely     10     beauty ideal,” Husebye, who was awarded “Influencer of the Year”,said “I feel that the new law can only help them to understand that this is not how you look, but it has been edited.”

6 . Known as a “living fossil”, the Chinese sturgeon(中华鲟)is a very precious species. It is believed to have lived alongside the dinosaurs more than 140 million years ago. Although dinosaurs are long since gone, the Chinese sturgeon still exists. However, the species has been listed as ‘‘Critically Endangered’’ on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species．

On May 14,Shanghai legislators(立法机构)passed a new law protecting the Chinese sturgeon, emphasizing “regional cooperation”, according to China Daily. “This is the first local legislation in the country to protect one endangered fish,” said Ding Wei, director of the legislative affairs committee of the Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress.

Taken effect on June 6, the regulation urges cooperation in law enforcement(实施), scientific research and rescue of the species between Shanghai and other provinces and regions in the Yangtze River basin, according to People’s Daily．

The need for collaborative efforts is due to the living habitat of the Chinese sturgeon. As an anadromous(溯河产卵的)species, it mainly lives in the Yangtze River and depends on the Vangtze estuary(河口)for migration.

The protection of the Chinese sturgeon is urgent. China began the artificial breeding and release of the fish in 1984. However, very few of the fanned fish have survived in the wild, the number of which is less than 1000, according to a report by the Shanghai Observer.

Whether this species can be preserved depends on the natural population. “If the natural population is not well protected, the Chinese sturgeon is in danger of extinction.” Li Furong, vice chairperson of the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee of Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress, said in the report.

Since Jan 1 of this year, a 10-year fishing ban on key areas of the Yangtze River basin has been issued, covering 332 nature reserves, which includes Shanghai’s Chinese sturgeon nature reserve．

7 . Germany’s top court has ruled that parts of the country’s 2019 climate (气候) action law must be changed because they don’t do a good job of protecting young people. The result is a big victory for the nine young people who started the law suing (诉讼).

The court suing stresses an important part of the climate change: The change will impact greatly on young people far more than the adults. That’s because the effects of earth warming will become more serious over time. As young people become adults, they’ll be left to deal with many problems that today’s adults have ignored. The government’s failure to plan carefully was putting their future lives in danger.

In 2019, Germany passed a new law, promising that the country would be carbon neutral (碳中和) by 2050. The law made a detailed plan of action until 2030. But the law didn’t have any specific rules or plans for climate actions that would be taken between 2031 and 2050.

Last Thursday, the judges of Germany’s highest court agreed with the young people. They said that not taking climate action made the basic rights of young people to a good future in danger.

The young people had challenged the government’s law in four specific areas. The judges didn’t agree with all of the challenges. But having the court support even a part of their case is seen as a big victory. Neubauer is one of the young people who sued. She works with the climate action group Fridays For Future. Ms. Neubauer said, “Climate protection is our basic right. This is a huge win for the climate movement. It changes a lot.”

The court has given the German government until the end of 2022 to fix the law. The climate law will now need to have a much more detailed plan for the actions that will be taken after 2030 to cut Germany’s pollution, allowing it to become carbon neutral by 2050. Germany’s government has said that it will quickly begin working to make the needed changes.

9 . In the USA, youth curfews (宵禁) are traditionally issued by a parent in the interest of safety. This type of curfew is personal, and rightfully so. However, to stop teenagers committing crimes, some officials have turned youth curfews from family decisions into public laws.

The idea may have been thought to have good intentions. In practice, however, these policies have been shown to be unfair and unconstitutional, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). In the town of Sumner, Washington, a father allowed his fourteen-year-old son to go to a convenience store after 11:00 p.m. Sumner had adopted a curfew law that prohibited people under the age of eighteen from being in public places past that hour. The father was fined, and then he pursued a legal challenge against the town. The ACLU, which filed the case on behalf of the father, claimed the curfew laws had violated (侵犯) parents' rights. In the end, Sumner's curfew laws were struck down.

But isn't it irresponsible not to enforce a curfew on teenagers? Curfew laws supporters argue that officials should provide a curfew to ensure teens are home by a reasonable hour. The risk of a serious accident is three times as high for drivers aged sixteen to nineteen as for drivers over twenty. And dangers only increase at night. This indicates to some that a law keeping teens off the road late at night is a positive safety measure. Still, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) says that the best ways for drivers to increase safety are by obeying the speed limit, wearing a seat belt, and paying attention. The NHTSA makes no mention of youth curfews making driving safer.

In cities, curfew enforcement has been ineffective or even had a negative impact on communities. Most crimes committed by teens actually happen around 3：00 p.m. , right after school. On non-school days, that time shifts to between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The curfew hours, usually between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. , occur at a time of day when teenage crime is at its lowest. Meanwhile, violent crime rates peak around 10:00 p.m. for adults. When law enforcement performs the teen curfew sweep, policemen are distracted from the more serious violent crimes being committed by adults at that time. Also troubling is the racial discrimination in cities with curfews. For example, recent data have found that in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 56% of youths charged with breaking curfews were African American. Other law enforcement department reports show similar problems. Curfew laws are criticized because they are enforced in a racially discriminatory way.

The ACLU has succeeded in striking down at least one curfew law because of concerns over parental rights. Along with other community and civil rights groups, it continues to pursue other cases, arguing that curfew law enforcement can only increase tension and crime. To arrest teens for driving home from the movies, playing basketball in the park, or simply walking their dog is to punish them for being outside their homes—a policy inconsistent with the individual rights established in the U. S. Constitution.

10 . Children experiencing frequent family violence in Guangdong Province will be regarded as victims, according to a local draft against family violence. The draft will be handed in for consideration and agreement by the People’s Congress.

“It will help to improve people’s understanding of family violence and provide a better family environment for the development of children’s mental health.” said Chen Yongkang, deputy director of the social construction committee of the Guangdong Provincial People’s Congress, “More detailed and exact measures against family violence will be made in the near future to better protect children’s health. Although they are not victims of physical hurt, children will be living under huge psychological shadows for quite a long time.”

The Guangdong Women’s Federation said the province recorded 14,172 cases of family violence between 2016 and 2018. Nearly 30 percent of China’s 270 million families have family violence problems, which cause 100,000 families to fall apart every year. About 90 percent of family violence victims are women.

“Family violence not only causes broken marriages, but also brings great harm to the development of children’s mental health,” Chen said. “The new draft will also help offenders realize they are doing something harmful to children. It will also make governments and social organizations pay more attention to the problem.”

According to the draft, mental violence will also be seen as an aspect of family violence. “Family violence is not all about physical hurt. Mental violence, including frequent shouting, does harm to family members, especially children,” Chen said.