YouTube Bends the Knee; The Atlantic, October 1, 2025

Charlie Warzel , The Atlantic; YouTube Bends the Knee

"This is just the latest example of major tech companies bowing to Trump."

Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal; Reuters, June 13, 2025

 Sara Merken, Reuters; Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal

"A group of seven partners is leaving Willkie Farr & Gallagher, which struck a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump in April to avert an executive order targeting its business, to join Cooley, which is representing one of the law firms fighting Trump's orders.

Cooley on Friday said Simona Agnolucci, Benedict Hur, Joshua Anderson, Tiffany Lin, Jonathan Patchen, Michael Rome and Eduardo Santacana are joining the firm as litigation partners in San Francisco."

Stop bending the knee to Trump: it’s time for anticipatory noncompliance; The Guardian, June 8, 2025

David Kirp, The Guardian; Stop bending the knee to Trump: it’s time for anticipatory noncompliance

"Fearing Hurricane Donald, a host of universities, law firms, newspapers, public schools and Fortune 500 companies have rushed to do his bidding, bowing before he even comes calling. Other institutions cower, in hopes that they will go unnoticed.

But this behavior, which social scientists call “anticipatory compliance”, smoothes the way to autocracy because it gives the Trump regime unlimited power without his having to lift a finger. Halting autocracy in its tracks demands a counter-strategy – let’s call it anticipatory noncompliance...

Restoring democracy is no easy task, for it is infinitely easier to destroy than rebuild. It will take a years-long fight that deploys an arsenal of tactics, ranging from mass demonstrations and consumer boycotts to litigation and political organizing. It’s grueling work, but if autocracy is to be defeated there’s no option. “Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced,” observed James Baldwin, in a 1962 New York Times article. A half-century later, that message still rings true."

Criticism of Trump Was Removed From Documentary on Public Television; The New York Times, May 23, 2025

 Marc Tracy, The New York Times; Criticism of Trump Was Removed From Documentary on Public Television

[Kip Currier: Another example of anticipatory obedience]

[Excerpt]

"The executive producer of the Emmy Award-winning “American Masters” series insisted on removing a scene critical of President Trump from a documentary about the comic artist Art Spiegelman two weeks before it was set to air nationwide on public television stations.

The filmmakers say it is another example of public media organizations bowing to pressure as the Trump administration tries to defund the sector, while the programmers say their decision was a matter of taste.

Alicia Sams, a producer of “Art Spiegelman: Disaster Is My Muse,” said in an interview that approximately two weeks before the movie’s April 15 airdate, she received a call from Michael Kantor, the executive producer of “American Masters,” informing her that roughly 90 seconds featuring a cartoon critical of Trump would need to be excised from the film. The series is produced by the WNET Group, the parent company of several New York public television channels."

Trump gives commencement address at University of Alabama; The Washington Post, May 1, 2025

The Washington Post ; Trump gives commencement address at University of Alabama

"The president talked about the “internet people” like Elon Musk and other tech moguls and businessmen. “They all hated me in my first term,” Donald Trump said. “And now they’re kissing my ass”

“It’s true,” he added. “It’s amazing. It’s nicer this way now.”"

The loss of editorial freedom at 60 Minutes is a sorry milestone for US media; The Guardian, May 1, 2025

Margaret Sullivan, The Guardian ; The loss of editorial freedom at 60 Minutes is a sorry milestone for US media

"Pelley said that, to date, no story had been killed but that Owens “felt he lost the independence that honest journalism requires”.

Pelley’s comments were picked up widely, and now the world knows that viewers can no longer fully trust what they see on the Sunday evening show that has done such important and groundbreaking journalism for decades.

Of course, as with so many of the red alerts mentioned above – lawsuits, threats, changes in long-held practices that protect the public’s right to know – the problem involves Donald Trump’s overweening desire to control the media. Controlling the message is what would-be authoritarians always do.

Trump sued 60 Minutes for $20bn a few months ago, claiming unfair and deceptive editing of an interview with his then rival for the presidency, Kamala Harris. And his newly appointed head of the Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr, took an aggressive approach by reopening an investigation into CBS over supposed distortion of the news. The editing of the Harris interview, by all reasonable accounts, followed standard practices.

What has happened with 60 Minutes is a high-octane version of what is happening everywhere in Trump 2.0.

Those who could stand up to Trump’s bullying are instead doing what scholars of authoritarianism say must be avoided, if democracy is to be salvaged. They are obeying in advance.

Not everyone, of course. It’s inspiring to see prominent institutions – Harvard and other universities, many law firms, Georgetown law school and the Associated Press – refusing to buckle."

Anticipatory Obedience at the Library of Congress; ACRLog: Blogging by and for academic and research librarians, March 28, 2025

Violet Fox,  ACRLog: Blogging by and for academic and research librarians; Anticipatory Obedience at the Library of Congress

"Editor’s note: We are pleased to welcome Violet Fox to the ACRLog team. Violet is a Cataloging & Metadata Librarian at Northwestern University’s Galter Health Sciences Library. She is the creator of the Cataloging Lab, a wiki designed to encourage collaboration in library metadata. Violet is passionate about critical cataloging, zine librarianship, and promoting the mental health of library workers. 

On February 18, the Library of Congress (LC) sent an email announcement through its regular channels about a special list of revisions in the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). This list contained 45 proposed revisions to LCSH relating to Trump’s Executive Order 14172 “Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness.” These revisions would change the LCSH for Gulf of Mexico to America, Gulf of, and would change the LCSH for Mount Denali back to McKinley, Mount (Alaska).

Geographic names in LCSH generally follow the form of name decided on by the US Board on Geographic Names, a body under the Secretary of the Interior. (This relationship is laid out in the LC Subject Heading Manual instruction sheet H 690 Formulating Geographic Headings.) The Board on Geographic Names takes its cues from the State Department, taking into account which countries the US has recognized.

It was not surprising that LC would follow the example of the US Board of Geographic Names, as that’s standard operating procedure. What wasn’t standard was the speed at which this revision was pushed through."

Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, just sent out this email of total submission.; The Ink, February 26, 2025

The Ink; Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, just sent out this email of total submission.

[Kip Currier: Nail by nail by nail by nail, the three richest persons on the planet -- Elon Musk (Twitter/X), Jeff Bezos (Amazon/Washington Post), Mark Zuckerberg (Meta/Facebook/Instagram/WhatsApp/Threads) -- are erecting barriers to information and solidifying control of their versions of information. 

Note what Bezos, in part, wrote today: 

"We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We'll cover other topics too, of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others."

Point 1: Bezos's prior conduct tells us that he will decide how the two pillars of "personal liberties" and "free markets" are defined. That's censorship of ideas and free expression.

Point 2: Bezos will determine the parameters of "viewpoints opposing those pillars". That's also censorship of free speech.

Point 3: Bezos downplays the time-honored tradition of U.S. newspapers providing "a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views" by stating that "Today, the internet does that job." This is an abject abandonment of the historical role of one of the nation's foremost papers of record; indeed, the very newspaper that exposed the Watergate scandal that brought down the presidency of Richard Nixon. Bezos knows, too, that the internet is rife with misinformation and disinformation. A chief reason that readers seek out creditable, trusted news providers like The Washington Post is the expectation of fact-checking and responsible curation of opinions and facts. Bezos's statement amounts to disingenuous dissembling and the ceding of responsibility to the Internet and social media, which he well knows are highly flawed information ecosystems.

Point 4: Bezos states later that "freedom is ethical". But freedom always comes with ethics-grounded responsibilities. Nowhere in Bezos's statement does he talk about ethical responsibilities to truthfulness, free speech, accountability, transparency, the public/common good, constitutional checks and balances, or the rule of law, all of which are integral to informed citizenries and functioning democracies.

Bezos's actions and viewpoints are antithetical to free and independent presses like The Washington Post, as well as to the core principles of one of the world's oldest democracies.]

[Excerpt]

"Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, just sent out this email of total submission.

Bezos appears to have misread Timothy Snyder’s advice “Do not obey in advance” as “Obey in advance,” missing a couple words."

Biglaw Firm Quietly Begins Purging Diversity Language From Website; Above The Law, February 7, 2025

Joe Patrice , Above The Law; Biglaw Firm Quietly Begins Purging Diversity Language From Website

"This is the story we hoped wouldn’t happen, but let’s be honest — of course it did. It was always going to happen. 

Between the administration publicly threatening criminal action against private sector companies over diversity initiatives and law firms rushing to curry favor with the White House, it was only a matter of time before a Biglaw firm tried to memory-hole prior diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.

As we’ve monitored Biglaw websites over the couple weeks since Trump returned to power, we took heart every time we noticed that a major firm still hadn’t tried to subtly purge its public-facing site of any mention of diversity. Unfortunately, though perhaps inevitably, the legal community is no longer pitching a perfect game...

The entire “Diversity and Inclusion”-turned-“Opportunity and Inclusion” page has changed. The old website included visual representations backing up the firm’s commitment. For example:

The accomplishments of these attorneys are now deleted. The page still offers general statements about inclusion, but any specific claims about individual achievements are gone, hiding from public view any way to measure the firm’s success in this area. The page also linked to “a robust educational toolkit” developed by the firm and a block set off in all caps recognizing that “WE PLEDGE TO FOLLOW THE MANSFIELD RULE.” 

And for what? If firms think scrubbing diversity efforts will shield them, they should ask Target how that worked out. The retail giant backtracked on its public DEI commitments — only to get sued by Trump’s fellow travelers anyway. These people won’t be satisfied until the entire workforce looks like a 1950s country club. It undermines firm culture for nothing."

David Frum Accuses MSNBC Of Giving Into Fear Of Trump After Mika Brzezinski Apologizes On-Air For His Comment; Mediate, December 4, 2024

Alex Griffing , Mediate; David Frum Accuses MSNBC Of Giving Into Fear Of Trump After Mika Brzezinski Apologizes On-Air For His Comment

[Kip Currier: Mika Brzezinski's on-air apology yesterday is what self-censorship looks and sounds like.

Since last month's election of Donald Trump, MSNBC's Morning Joe program has been periodically engaging in what Yale University authoritarianism expert Dr. Timothy Snyder calls "anticipatory obedience", due to fear of potential retribution from an incoming Trump administration.

When media personalities like Brzezinski kowtow to perceived risks of reporting and engaging in constitutionally-protected free speech, we the public are well-advised to be skeptical of their integrity and commitment to showing and telling the truth. Brzezinski's servile appeasement is more about saving her own skin than having skin in the game of speaking truth to power.

Look for free and independent presses and journalists who don't surrender to fear to curry favor.]

[Excerpt]

"Mika Brzezinski, the co-host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, apologized on-air Wednesday for David Frum making a comment that “was a little too flippant” about Fox News earlier in the show. Frum then took to The Atlantic and accused MSNBC of capitulating to the fear felt in the media of President-elect Donald Trump’s promised retribution.

Frum’s article later elicited a response from MSNBC...

Frum’s article on the incident was titled, “The Sound of Fear on Air,” and ran with the subhead, “It is an ominous sign that Morning Joe felt it had to apologize for something I said.”

MSNBC comms exec Richard Hudock responded to Frum in a statement, saying, “Joe and Mika have consistently expressed their strong reservations and perspectives regarding Pete Hegseth’s nomination from the very beginning, and that stance remains unchanged. We would have responded in the same manner regardless of when these comments were made or what news organization was referenced.” Hudock also invited Frum back to discuss the topic on-air tomorrow.

In the piece, he recapped what had happened and commented on the current environment MSNBC finds itself in as viewers continue to tune out following Trump’s win...

“I do not write to scold anyone; I write because fear is infectious. Let it spread, and it will paralyze us all. The only antidote is courage. And that’s infectious, too,” he concluded.
Watch the clips above via MSNBC."

The Sound of Fear on Air: It is an ominous sign that Morning Joe felt it had to apologize for something I said.; The Atlantic, December 4, 2024

David Frum, The Atlantic; The Sound of Fear on Air: It is an ominous sign that Morning Joe felt it had to apologize for something I said.

"This morning, I had an unsettling experience."

‘Anticipatory obedience’: newspapers’ refusal to endorse shines light on billionaire owners’ motives; The Guardian, October 26, 2024

Lois Beckett, The Guardian; ‘Anticipatory obedience’: newspapers’ refusal to endorse shines light on billionaire owners’ motives

"When two American billionaires blocked the newspapers they own from endorsing Kamala Harris this month, they tried to frame the decision as an act of civic responsibility.

“I think my fear is, if we chose either one, that it would just add to the division,” Patrick Soon-Shiong, the biotech billionaire who owns the Los Angeles Times, said. He emphasised that though some might assume his family is “ultra-progressive”, he is a registered “independent”.

At the Washington Post, which reported that its billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos, was behind the decision, publisher William Lewis described the retreat from making presidential endorsements as “a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds”.

Veteran journalists and media critics are using a very different phrase to describe Soon-Shiong’s and Bezos’s choice: they’re saying the two billionaires, among the richest men on the entire globe, are performing “anticipatory obedience” to Donald Trump.

Yes, “cowardice” has also been a popular way to describe the choice by the billionaire owners of two of the country’s major newspapers to not to risk angering Trump by allowing their papers to endorse his opponent.

But “anticipatory obedience” is more specific. The term comes from On Tyranny, the bestselling guide to authoritarianism by Timothy Snyder, a historian of eastern and central Europe. The phrase describes, in Snyder’s words, “the major lesson of the Nazi takeover, and what was supposed to be one of the major lessons of the twentieth century: don’t hand over the power you have before you have to. Don’t protect yourself too early.” It’s a way of describing what Europeans did wrong as totalitarians came to power: by “mentally and physically conceding, you’re already giving over your power to the aspiring authoritarian”, Snyder explains."

The Guardrails Are Already Crumpling; The Bulwark, October 25, 2024

JONATHAN V. LAST , The Bulwark; The Guardrails Are Already Crumpling

"ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON, the Washington Post announced that it would not be making an endorsement in the presidential race. After that, a number of things happened very quickly.

First, the paper’s former executive editor Marty Baron called the decision “cowardice.”

Second, at least one senior Post opinion writer resigned.

Third, it was leaked that the editor of the editorial page had already drafted the paper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris when publisher Will Lewis—who is a new hire, hailing from the Rupert Murdoch journalism tree—quashed it and then released a CYA statement about how the paper was “returning to its roots” of not endorsing candidates. The Post itself reported that the decision was made by the paper’s owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.

Everything about this story feels like a tempest in a teapot, a boiling story about legacy media fretting over itself in the mirror.

It’s not.

It’s a situation analogous to what we saw in Russia in the early 2000s: We are witnessing the surrender of the American business community to Donald Trump.

But this isn’t a journalism story. It’s a business story.

Following Trump’s 2016 victory, the Post leaned hard into its role as a guardian of democracy. This meant criticizing, and reporting aggressively on, Trump, who responded by threatening Bezos’s various business interests.

And that’s what this story is about: It’s about the most consequential American entrepreneur of his generation signaling his submission to Trump—and the message that sends to every other corporation and business leader in the country. In the world.

Killing this editorial says, If Jeff Bezos has to be nice to Trump, then so do you. Keep your nose clean, bub."...

These guys can hear the music. They’ve seen the sides being chosen: Elon Musk and Peter Theil assembling with Trump’s gangster government in waiting. They see Mark Zuckerberg praising Trump as a “badass.” And now they see Bezos getting in line, too.

What’s remarkable is that Trump didn’t have to arrest Bezos to secure his compliance. Trump didn’t even have to win the election. Just the fact that he has an even-money chance to become president was threat enough.

Or maybe that’s not remarkable. One of Timothy Snyder’s rules for resisting authoritarians is that “most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given.” People surrender preemptively much more often than you might expect.

Two weeks ago, Ian Bassin and Maximillian Potter wrote what might be the most prophetic essay of the year. They warned about “anticipatory obedience” in the media.

Seventeen days later, Bezos made his demonstration.

In case you needed reminding: The “guardrails” aren’t guardrails. They’re people.

And they’re already collapsing. Before a single state has been called."