Blog

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea began enforcing a law Tuesday that allows steep punitive damages against news outlets and social media influencers for spreading false information as journalist groups warned it could chill public discourse and invite censorship.

Journalists and civil liberties groups say the vaguely worded law fails to clearly define what information it prohibits and lacks adequate safeguards for the media, warning it could potentially discourage critical reporting about government officials, politicians and large businesses.

The law allows courts to award damages of up to five times the proven losses against news organizations and large social media channels, including YouTube creators, that circulate illegal, false or manipulated information to cause harm or generate profit.

In addition, those who distribute information more than twice after a court has confirmed it to be false or manipulated could be fined up to 1 billion won ($656,000) by the country’s media regulator. Internet companies operating large social media platforms with more than 1 million daily users are required to take measures such as removing content or suspending user accounts when they receive reports of false or fabricated information.

The law was backed by President Lee Jae Myung’s liberal Democratic Party and passed by the National Assembly in December over a boycott by the conservative opposition. The liberals, who unsuccessfully sought to pass similar legislation under previous governments, say the law is necessary to combat fake news and disinformation, which they argue is posing a growing threat to democracy by fueling division and hate speech.

The Journalists Association of Korea said the mere prospect of news organizations repeatedly facing massive damage claims or legal disputes could have an “unavoidable chilling effect.”

“Even if a law’s objective is legitimate, it could erode the foundations of democracy if it’s enforced in a way that discourages the media and ordinary citizens from freely criticizing and scrutinizing those in power,” the group said in a statement.

The Seoul Foreign Correspondents’ Club also expressed concern about the potential impact on the work of the media and the free flow of information.

Concerns about murky online discourse

The push for the law came as Lee expressed concern about South Korea’s online discourse and information environment after then-President Yoon Suk Yeol briefly imposed martial law in 2024. He was later impeached and removed from office. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for rebellion, a ruling that he appealed in February.

Yoon, who faces other criminal cases as well, has promoted unsubstantiated election fraud claims circulated on YouTube to defend his botched power grab and rally conservative supporters against the Democrats. Critics say Yoon’s campaign further polarized the country by injecting falsehoods into already bitter political disputes and making compromise increasingly difficult.

The Korea Media and Communications Commission has downplayed concerns that the law could be used as a tool for state censorship. It would be private operators of online platforms, not the government, deciding whether reported content qualifies as false or manipulated information, and the law exempts reporting conducted in the public interest from damages claims, the commission said last week.

But Kim Hong-yeol, a professor at Seoul’s Duksung Women’s University, said the law could encourage widespread self-censorship and discourage reporting or discussions on sensitive issues. Internet companies could end up acting as online censors, adopting overly aggressive moderation policies to avoid liability and removing legitimate content in the process, Kim wrote in an article for the news website Medius.

While major South Korean internet companies like Naver and Kakao have reportedly been updating their systems for reporting and handling false information in line with guidelines from the Korea Internet Self-Governance Organization, it’s unclear how major foreign platforms, like Google’s YouTube, would comply.

In a statement to The Associated Press, YouTube said it strives to balance its commitment to openness with its responsibility to protect users and will “continue to engage with relevant parties and share our longstanding investments we have in this critical work.” The company did not specify how the South Korean law would affect its policies, but encouraged users to report “potentially violative content” directly on YouTube or through its legal web form.

After the law was passed in December, U.S. Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers criticized it in a post on X, writing that the revised law endangers tech cooperation and that “it’s better to give victims civil remedies than give regulators invasive license for viewpoint-based censorship.”

NEW YORK (AP) — After decades of reliable bipartisan backing for Israel, a new AP-NORC poll reveals a dramatic erosion of support for the longtime U.S. ally, with rising opposition from Democrats and signs of division among Republicans.

The survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research arrives at a moment when a once-consensus foreign policy issue is increasingly polarizing Americans along partisan and generational lines, driven by criticism for Israel’s conduct nearly three years after the outbreak of its latest war with Hamas in Gaza.

About one-third of U.S. adults — including roughly half of Democrats — believe that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians during the war in Gaza, an accusation that’s been leveled by some human rights organizations and vehemently denied by Israel and the U.S. government. About 2 in 10 Americans say Israel has not and the rest, about half, don’t know enough to say.

A similar share, 30%, of Jewish adults say Israel has committed genocide, although about half, 49%, say it has not.

Harold Kalmus, a 69-year-old Democrat from Arden, Delaware who describes himself as Jewish by birth, said he remembers being proud of Israel when he was younger. Not anymore.

“I realize that there is a threat from Hamas. And I realize they’re in a very difficult situation, but what they have done is just an unspeakable horror,” he said of Israel’s military action against the Palestinians. “They’re trying to wipe out a civilization as far as I’m concerned.”

The findings show sharply eroded views of Israel in the U.S., nearly three years after Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, 2023, which left 1,200 people dead in Israel, mainly civilians, while 251 hostages were taken back to Gaza. More than 73,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, which doesn’t distinguish between civilian and militant deaths, including more than 1,000 killed since the beginning of the latest ceasefire. American sympathies had been shifting toward the Palestinians and away from the Israelis since around 2020, according to other polling, but has nose-dived since the latest war in Gaza began.

Many Americans, about 4 in 10, don’t know enough to say whether Israel’s immediate military response to Hamas’ attack or its ongoing military operations were justified. Among those who did have an opinion in each case, most say the initial retaliation was justified — but a majority think its current actions are not.

About three-quarters of Jewish adults said Israel’s initial response was justified, but only about 4 in 10 believe that about its ongoing operations.

Only about one-third of U.S. adults view Israel as an “extremely” or “very” important issue to them personally. But it’s been a searing topic in American politics as the relationship between the two countries remains tense, just four months before high-stakes midterm elections determine the balance of power in Congress for President Donald Trump’s final two years in office. Vice President JD Vance recently criticized Israeli leaders who have expressed frustration with Trump, while vocal critics of Israel recently defeated establishment-backed Democrats in New York and Colorado primaries.

Democrats’ support for Israel drops

The AP-NORC poll reveals a decisive shift within the Democratic Party.

About 58% of Democrats now say the U.S. is “too supportive” of the Israelis, up from 45% in an AP-NORC poll from January 2024 when former President Joe Biden was in office. That includes 51% of Jewish Democrats in the new poll.

Roughly 6 in 10 Democrats, 62%, say the U.S. is “not supportive enough” of the Palestinians, up from 49% in 2024. Younger Democrats — those 45 and younger — are still more likely than older ones to say that the United States is “not supportive enough” of the Palestinians, but older Democrats are catching up to their younger counterparts. About 57% of older Democrats now say the U.S. should do more for the Palestinians, up from 39% two years ago.

Joy Jennik, a 73-year-old Democrat from Brookfield, Wisconsin, said she didn’t have strong opinions about the U.S. relationship with Israel until after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack.

Now, she believes Israel is guilty of genocide.

“The Gaza Strip, there’s not a lot left of it. Those poor people are barely living,” said Jennik, a retired home economics teacher.

GOP stays behind Israel, but less so among young Republicans

Just a sliver of Republicans, 13%, describe Israel’s actions as genocide, although there is an apparent age gap. About 2 in 10 Republicans under 45 say Israel has committed genocide, while about 1 in 10 Republicans ages 45 and older say the same.

Overall, 60% of Republicans describe the U.S. support for Israel as “about right.” Only about 2 in 10 Republicans say that the United States is “too supportive” of the Israelis, although Republicans under 45 are more likely to say this.

The share of Republicans overall who say the U.S. is “too supportive” of Israel has not changed meaningfully since 2024, but the share who say the U.S. is “not supportive enough” has shrunk from 39% to 15%.

Mike Cardona, a 70-year-old Republican from suburban Phoenix, said he’s pleased with the level of support that the U.S. is giving Israel and rejects the notion that Israel has committed genocide.

“I wish they’d gone in harder and better,” Cardona, a retired industrial supply salesperson said of Israel’s military action in Gaza. “Unfortunately, some innocents will be hurt, but Hamas and Hezbollah never took that into consideration when they were killing children and women in Israel.”

Netanyahu is broadly unpopular, while views of Mamdani are split

In interviews, several respondents emphasized that their criticism of Israel was focused on its leaders, especially Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is perceived as closely aligned with Trump after repeated clashes with Democratic presidents.

Overall, only 20% of U.S. adults have a favorable view of the Israeli prime minister, while about twice as many, 38%, have an unfavorable view. About 41% don’t know enough to have an opinion.

Netanyahu is particularly unpopular among Jewish adults: about 6 in 10 view him unfavorably, while about one-third see him positively.

Younger adults, regardless of party, are more likely than older adults to say they don’t have an opinion about Netanyahu. But while older Republicans see Netanyahu more positively than negatively, younger Republicans’ views tilt unfavorably.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has gained prominence as an outspoken critic of Israel, and 27% of U.S. adults have a favorable opinion of the 34-year-old democratic socialist. Another 28% of U.S. adults have an unfavorable opinion, while 44% don’t know enough to say.

Jewish adults, who overwhelmingly identify as Democrats, have a more positive view of Mamdani than of Netanyahu, with 44% viewing the New York City mayor positively, 39% viewing him negatively, and 17% saying they don’t know enough to say.

About half of Democrats overall have a favorable impression of Mamdani and only about 1 in 10 have an unfavorable view of him, while the rest, about 39%, don’t have an opinion.

Meanwhile, the U.S.-Israel relationship is not top of mind for many Americans as they think about the upcoming midterm elections.

For people like Michael Ripka, a 34-year-old stage hand from Casper, Wyoming who typically votes Republican, the economy is by far the most important thing on his mind.

“Everything is mad expensive,” he said. The conflicts in the Middle East, he added, is “100% a very big distraction.”

___

Sanders reported from Washington.

___

The AP-NORC poll of 3,040 adults was conducted June 11-17 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The poll included interviews with 1,022 Jewish adults. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 2.8 percentage points and the margin of sampling error for Jewish adults is plus or minus 5.0 percentage points.

PROVO, Utah (AP) — The man charged with killing Charlie Kirk strolled Utah Valley University in shorts and a T-shirt, bought a meal at Chick-fil-A and made contact with people from Kirk’s organization, before returning in different clothes to shoot the conservative activist from a rooftop, an investigator testified Tuesday.

Former State Bureau of Investigation Agent David Hull described Tyler Robinson’s alleged movements before and after Kirk was killed as prosecutors played previously unseen campus surveillance videos in state court. The defendant first arrived on campus about four hours before the shooting and returned several times, including when he allegedly went onto the roof to shoot Kirk and again the night after Kirk was killed, Hull said.

Prosecutors say they intend to seek the death penalty in the case. They are trying to convince Judge Tony Graf that they have enough evidence to bring Robinson to trial on an aggravated murder charge.

Robinson has not yet entered a plea. His attorneys have not commented on his guilt or innocence. They have, however, sought to get the death penalty taken off the table, so far unsuccessfully.

In a video shown Tuesday, Robinson climbs over a railing onto a rooftop, crouches down and runs to a site overlooking where Kirk was speaking, Hull testified. After the shooting, Robinson runs back across the roof, drops to the ground and flees on foot, Hull said.

Investigators found the suspected murder weapon — a bolt-action rifle with one spent round — wrapped in a towel in some nearby woods. DNA on the towel matched to two people. One was Tyler Robinson’s roommate and the other was very likely Robinson, Jennifer Faumuina with the State Bureau of Investigation testified.

This week’s preliminary hearing marks the most significant presentation of evidence to date in the case. Authorities allege Robinson, 23, shot Kirk on Sept. 10 while the 31-year-old activist and ally of President Donald Trump was speaking to a crowd of thousands.

Judge reviews Turning Point USA board member statement

Defense attorney Kathryn Nester questioned Hull’s handling of the crime scene on the day of the shooting. She also asked about a bullet that was found on campus at a different location than the alleged shooting site.

Hull said that bullet was traced back to a law enforcement officer who had “cleared” his weapon, ejecting an unused bullet. He also said a handgun in a backpack was found at the scene.

Robinson’s attorneys also raised questions about the DNA evidence, using testimony from an FBI analyst to demonstrate that finding a person’s DNA on an item doesn’t necessarily mean that person touched the item.

Prosecutors contend the shooting endangered others at Kirk’s campus event — an aggravating circumstance that could make the crime punishable by death under Utah law. Robinson also faces possible sentence enhancements based on the prosecution’s claim that he targeted Kirk because of his political views.

During one of several appearances on campus by Robinson on Sept. 10, Hull said the defendant went to the amphitheater where Kirk was later shot and contacted representatives of Turning Point USA, a group co-founded by Kirk that galvanized the conservative youth vote to help Trump win a second term.

The investigator did not detail what occurred during that interaction or if members of Kirk’s security team were present.

Prosecutors allege Robinson confessed in a note left for his roommate, who was also his romantic partner, that read: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.” Robinson also sent a text saying he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred,” prosecutors have said.

Robinson’s defense team pushed back Tuesday on the idea that he was hostile to Kirk’s politics. Defense attorney Richard Novak sought to block prosecutors from introducing a statement describing the traditional Christian values of Turning Point USA.

“This doesn’t say anything about Mr. Robinson’s state of mind,” Novak said about the statement from Turning Point USA board member David Englehardt. “I don’t think that this court should be deciding — based on the record before it — where, if at all, politics and religion intersect.”

Judge Graf ruled that the statement was relevant and said it would be “provisionally admitted” with a final decision at a later date.

Prosecutors have a low bar

This week marks the first time since the case began that Kirk’s parents, Kathryn and Robert, and widow, Erika, were in the courtroom. Also present were the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., who said Tuesday that Kirk was one his closest friends, and Robinson’s parents, Matt and Amber Robinson.

The proceeding resembles a minitrial, but with a lower standard of proof than for a jury trial where prosecutors must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.” At the preliminary hearing, prosecutors need only demonstrate to the judge that there are reasonable grounds to believe Robinson killed Kirk and should stand trial.

Legal experts say that means prosecutors should have little trouble advancing their case.

Spectators camped out for hearing

Utah County residents Denae Branch and Jean Rivera lined up outside the courthouse in Provo around midnight Tuesday and snagged one of the few seats available to the public for this week’s hearing.

The women said they were in the crowd when Kirk was shot and now think about it every day.

“It feels like a lot of the world just kept spinning and we’re still dealing with the trauma of it,” Branch said. “Our hearts and minds are still trying to process it and, yeah, it kind of helps being here.”

Branch said she was overcome with emotion in court when Erika Kirk, who herself was crying, handed her a tissue.

Rivera on Tuesday morning wore a shirt that read “FREEDOM” — just as Kirk did on the day he was shot — but was told she could not wear it inside. She said she hoped to hear testimony about Robinson’s alleged confession note.

____

Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

PROVO, Utah (AP) — A former campus police officer testified Monday that he found an apparent “sniper pad” on a rooftop near where Charlie Kirk was assassinated, as prosecutors sought to convince a state judge they have enough evidence to put a Utah man on trial for murder.

Former Utah Valley University Officer Christopher Bagley said he witnessed Kirk’s shooting while the conservative activist was speaking on Sept. 10 to a crowd of thousands. Soon after, Bagley searched a nearby gravel rooftop, where it appeared someone had been lying prone with a clear sightline to Kirk’s location, he said.

“It looks like a sniper pad,” Bagley said, adding, “you’ve got markings of elbows, knees and feet.”

The testimony came as Kirk’s parents, Kathryn and Robert, and his widow, Erika, were in the courtroom for the first time since the case began, along with the president’s son Donald Trump Jr.

Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for defendant Tyler Robinson, 23, who is charged with aggravated murder. Robinson’s parents also were present, sitting a few rows behind the Kirks.

The five-day preliminary hearing that began Monday is expected to mark the most significant presentation of evidence to date in the case. There were no major revelations on the first day, although prosecutors aired new video that investigators believe showed Robinson getting in and out of his vehicle on Sept. 10 and 11.

Robinson turned himself in the day after the shooting. He has not yet entered a plea, and his attorneys have not commented on his guilt or innocence. They have, however, sought to get the death penalty taken off the table, so far unsuccessfully.

A low threshold for prosecutors

Prosecutors showed several videos of Kirk’s shooting as they made their case to state District Judge Tony Graf. Attorneys from both sides tried to shield their monitors from courtroom spectators, after Graf said the assassination videos couldn’t be publicized because of their graphic nature.

The sound was still audible in court — Kirk’s response to a question about mass shootings in the U.S. is interrupted by a loud pop, followed by screams.

Kirk’s family briefly stepped out of the courtroom twice — when investigators began testifying about the day of the shooting and again when prosecutors introduced the graphic videos.

David Hull, who was an agent with the State Bureau of Investigation at the time of Kirk’s killing, said investigators reviewed hundreds of hours of video to track the suspect’s movements before and after the shooting. He pointed out Robinson in court after prosecutors asked him if the suspect he identified during his investigation was in the room.

The proceeding this week resembles a minitrial, but prosecutors need only demonstrate that there are reasonable grounds to believe Robinson killed Kirk. The standard is lower than for a trial, where prosecutors must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Prosecutors, as a result, should have little trouble advancing their case, said Mark Kouris, a former prosecutor and state judge in Salt Lake City.

“This standard is extremely low and the chances of them not getting through it are, quite frankly, almost nothing,” said Kouris, now an adjunct professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law.

Defense attorney Kathryn Nester repeatedly objected to evidence introduced by prosecutors. She was mostly overruled by the judge.

However, Graf sided with the defense to block the introduction of a compilation of surveillance videos from Utah Valley University because some had been altered to zoom in or had circles drawn around individuals. Prosecutors said they would try again Tuesday to introduce that video with the alterations removed.

Nester asked Bagley, the prosecution’s first witness, about finding an empty pistol holster on the ground after the crowd fled. Bagley acknowledged he never took custody of the holster and didn’t know whether it had been fingerprinted.

Utah is an open carry state, meaning people can carry guns openly or conceal them without a permit.

Roommate’s recorded testimony could be focal point

Prosecutors have said they also plan to present DNA evidence linking Robinson to the suspected murder weapon, autopsy findings and witness statements. They are expected to argue the shooting endangered others at Kirk’s campus event — an aggravating circumstance that could make the crime punishable by death under Utah law.

Prosecutors allege Robinson confessed in a note left for his roommate, who was also his romantic partner, that read: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.”

Robinson’s roommate is not expected to testify in person during the hearing. Still, the roommate’s recorded testimony could be a focal point for prosecutors. Besides the alleged confession note, Robinson reportedly texted his roommate that he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred,” prosecutors have said.

Erika Kirk says court proceedings are a ‘painful reminder’

Before his death, Kirk and the organization he co-founded, Turning Point USA, galvanized the conservative youth vote to help President Donald Trump win a second term.

The Republican president has said he hopes Robinson receives the death penalty.

Erika Kirk said during her husband’s memorial service that she forgives Robinson.

Ahead of Monday’s hearing, she thanked supporters in a statement for their kindness and prayers.

“Every court proceeding serves as a painful reminder of his death,” she wrote, “and the loss that has irrevocably impacted our lives and the lives of his children.”

___

Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

TORONTO (AP) — Alberta and Ontario proposed a pipeline Monday to carry western Canadian oil east, seeking to reduce Canada’s reliance on U.S. infrastructure and open new export markets, reviving an idea that was abandoned nearly a decade ago.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said the proposed 3,300-kilometer (2,050-mile) pipeline would run from Hardisty, Alberta, to Sarnia, Ontario, carrying up to 500,000 barrels of oil a day with potential for up to 800,000 barrels. She said the corridor eventually could extend to Canada’s Atlantic coast, opening the door to oil exports to Europe.

The United States is by far the largest buyer of Canada’s crude oil, while Alberta holds one of the world’s largest proven oil reserves.

“50% of oil imports into Ontario run through a pipeline that cuts through the U.S,” Ontario’s Minister of Energy Stephen Lecce posted on social media. “It is clear we need a sovereign pipeline route that connects Alberta crude oil to Sarnia — the country’s largest refinery and petrochemical hub.”

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said the pipeline would be a sound investment regardless of whether it is publicly or privately financed. A feasibility study is planned.

“There is still a lot of work ahead of us to deliver,” Ford said.

Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think tank, said a few factors have made energy security more important for Canada, but in this case the threat is more immediate.

“Michigan’s Governor has been trying for several years to shut down Enbridge’s Line 5, which feeds Canadian oil to Sarnia via the United States,” she said. “Whether the cost of building an entire 3300 kilometer pipeline to bypass the United States is proportionate to that threat remains to be seen.”

Concerns about Line 5 have grown since 2017, when Enbridge disclosed that engineers had known for years about gaps in the protective coating on the section running beneath the Straits of Mackinac, which connect Lake Michigan and Lake Huron. A boat anchor struck the pipeline in 2018, heightening fears that a rupture could trigger a major oil spill in the Great Lakes.

The Alberta to Ontario proposal faces major hurdles including financing, regulatory approvals and consultations with the Indigenous population. A similar project, Energy East, was abandoned in 2017 after years of political, regulatory and environmental opposition, including in Quebec.

“It’s technically feasible but it would be a massive undertaking. We are only at a very early stage of the project and we don’t have the final route or cost estimates yet,” said Daniel Béland, a political science professor at McGill University in Montreal. “It’s not even sure the Hardisty-Sarnia pipeline will ever be built so the idea it could at some point reach the Atlantic sounds quite speculative at this stage to say the least.”

Last week, Smith and Prime Minister Mark Carney advanced plans for a separate, taxpayer-backed Pacific Coast pipeline to boost oil exports to Asia. Alberta is partnering with the federally owned Trans Mountain Corp. and Calgary-based Pembina Pipeline. Smith wants Alberta to double oil production to 8 million barrels a day over the next decade and has blamed former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s policies for fueling separatist sentiment. Alberta will vote this fall on whether to hold an independence referendum.