Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 8, 2022

Holocaust Denial Materials and Other Fascist Content Removed from Library Ebook Platforms; Library Journal, March 7, 2022

 Matt Enis , Library Journal; Holocaust Denial Materials and Other Fascist Content Removed from Library Ebook Platforms

"In February, collection development librarians from U.S. public libraries pointed out on listservs and social media that several fascist ebooks—including ebooks that deny the Holocaust, a sympathetic biography of Hitler, and a new English translation of a title written by Nazi officer—were available for patrons to download on hoopla and were surfacing in searches alongside other nonfiction content. One of the titles was also available for libraries to license via OverDrive Marketplace. On February 22, the Library Freedom Project (LFP) and Library Futures (LF) released a joint statement demanding “full accountability for how these materials were selected for inclusion on the platforms and more transparency in the companies’ material selection processes going forward” along with a form letter template for concerned librarians to email the leaders of both companies...

Citing the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s collection of antisemitic content as an example, Potash argued that there are legitimate uses for this content, such as the study of propaganda or the history of the Holocaust. He emphasized that context-free antisemitic or Holocaust denial ebooks surfacing in a library’s popular history collection was highly unlikely to happen on OverDrive’s patron-facing platform.

“We are strong advocates of freedom of speech and First Amendment rights, and we also believe in trusting librarians,” Potash said. “So, every aspect of what gets added or discovered in a patron-facing site is because a librarian made that judgement call or selected the title.”...

Macrina contends that the current climate makes the removal of fascist propaganda even more important. “My view of free speech has an analysis of power in it,” she said. “Who is really at risk of being silenced? Who is really under threat for their speech? [Currently] it’s queer people, it’s Black people, it’s people of color in general…. Trans children right now have just become criminalized in Texas. So, the context of the book bannings that we’re seeing are part of a bigger issue that we are facing as a society that is challenging the very humanity of some of the most marginalized people…. Nazis went after those people. Nazis burned books.”"

Sunday, February 20, 2022

How free speech is under attack in the U.S.; CBS News, February 20, 2022

CBS News; How free speech is under attack in the U.S.

""I would argue that the culture of free speech is under attack in the U.S.," said Jacob Mchangama, the author of "Free Speech," a new book that documents the history of free expression. "And without a robust culture of free speech based on tolerance, the laws and constitutional protection will ultimately erode.

"People both on the left and the right are sort of coming at free speech from different angles with different grievances, that point to a general loss of faith in the First Amendment."

The free-speech erosion is even happening in schools. Since January last year, according to PEN America, Republican lawmakers have introduced more than 150 state laws that would restrict how teachers can discuss race, sexual orientation, and gender identity in the classroom.

Jennifer Given, who teaches high-school history in Hollis, New Hampshire, said of the laws, "It's about making up false narratives to further a political goal of your own. 

"It's a really scary time to be a teacher," she told Pogue. "We're self-censoring, We are absolutely avoiding certain things and ideas in an effort to stay within the lines as best we understand them.""

Monday, February 7, 2022

UI professors violated ethics policy, free speech, investigation finds; The Daily Iowan, February 3, 2022

Rylee Wilson, The Daily Iowan; UI professors violated ethics policy, free speech, investigation finds

"An investigation found that three University of Iowa professors violated the university’s ethics policy after threatening a graduate student with discipline because of remarks he made that fellow students found to be homophobic.

Jacob Johnson, a second-year graduate student in the Occupational and Environmental Health department, lodged a formal complaint against the university in November, assisted by the Kirkwood Institute, a conservative public-interest law firm.

The complaint, written by attorney Alan R. Ostergren, alleges that Johnson’s due process rights were violated, and that the professors involved violated UI policies about academic freedom, and free speech rights provided by the Iowa and U.S. constitutions."

Friday, February 4, 2022

Book Ban Efforts Spread Across the U.S.; The New York Times, January 30, 2022

Elizabeth A. Harris andBook Ban Efforts Spread Across the U.S.

Challenges to books about sexual and racial identity are nothing new in American schools, but the tactics and politicization are.

"“It’s a pretty startling phenomenon here in the United States to see book bans back in style, to see efforts to press criminal charges against school librarians,” said Suzanne Nossel, the chief executive of the free-speech organization PEN America, even if efforts to press charges have so far failed.

Such challenges have long been a staple of school board meetings, but it isn’t just their frequency that has changed, according to educators, librarians and free-speech advocates — it is also the tactics behind them and the venues where they play out. Conservative groups in particular, fueled by social media, are now pushing the challenges into statehouses, law enforcement and political races...

So far, efforts to bring criminal charges against librarians and educators have largely faltered, as law enforcement officials in Florida, Wyoming and elsewhere have found no basis for criminal investigations. And courts have generally taken the position that libraries should not remove books from circulation.

Nonetheless, librarians say that just the threat of having to defend against charges is enough to get many educators to censor themselves by not stocking the books to begin with. Even just the public spectacle of an accusation can be enough.

“It will certainly have a chilling effect,” said Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s office for intellectual freedom."

Sunday, January 30, 2022

Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young, ditches Spotify: 'Irresponsible people are spreading lies; Fox Business, January 29, 2022

 , Fox Business; Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young, ditches Spotify: 'Irresponsible people are spreading lies

"Joni Mitchell is joining Neil Young in his protest against Spotify, declaring on Friday that she is seeking to remove all of her music from the streaming service.

Young this week railed against Spotify for airing Joe Rogan's podcast. He claimed Rogan is spreading misinformation about the coronavirus...

"Irresponsible people are spreading lies that are costing people their lives," Mitchell said Friday in a message posted on her website. "I stand in solidarity with Neil Young and the global scientific and medical communities on this issue.""

Saturday, March 27, 2021

A Yale Psychiatrist’s Tweet About Dershowitz, Her Dismissal, and a Lawsuit; The New York Times, March 26, 2021

 Mihir Zaveri, The New York Times; A Yale Psychiatrist’s Tweet About Dershowitz, Her Dismissal, and a Lawsuit

The psychiatrist, Bandy X. Lee, said she was let go after the lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz complained to the university. Yale said she violated ethics rules against diagnosing public figures, her lawsuit claims.

"Others have questioned the relevance of the Goldwater rule. Jonathan Moreno, a bioethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said he had not heard of anyone being disciplined by the American Psychiatric Association for violating the rule, even though people repeatedly broke it.

He also said professionals in other medical fields routinely comment in the press about the health of public figures."

Friday, July 10, 2020

American Girl Walks Back Threat to Sue 'Karen' Doll Parody Meme; Comic Book Resources, July 8, 2020

Kelvin Childs, Comic Book Resources; American Girl Walks Back Threat to Sue 'Karen' Doll Parody Meme

"American Girl has walked back its previous assertion that it would take legal action against a spoof ad for a "Karen 2020 Girl of the Year" doll.

On Twitter, the company said, "American Girl has no intention of censoring this parody meme and anything shared to the contrary was in error. We apologize for any misunderstanding.""

Sunday, May 10, 2020

The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage; Slate, May 7, 2020

Joshua Lamel, Slate; The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage

"Copyright is the perfect vehicle for SLAPP suits. First of all, copyright is a government-granted, exclusive right to speech. There is no better way to prevent someone from publicly criticizing you than to use copyright law. Copyright lawsuits are expensive and place enormous costs on defendants. Fair use has to be raised once you are sued, so defendants will likely have to spend more. The potential damages are extreme: For every violation of a copyright, you can get $150,000 in statutory damages. Additionally, copyright law has injunctive relief—you can actually stop the speech from happening.

One would think that Congress would recognize this and specifically include copyright in federal anti-SLAPP efforts. But that is not happening anytime soon. Instead, thanks to their lobbying and fundraising, copyright holders have been successful in convincing senior members of Congress in both parties to exclude copyright. These members have told federal anti-SLAPP advocates that they need to be willing to give up copyright for a chance of being successful. There is not a single good policy argument to exclude copyright. Copyright litigation abuse is exactly what anti-SLAPP legislation should be designed to prevent. This type of abuse is the reason we need a federal fix.

In my dream world, the saturation of Joe Exotic’s story will help everyday Americans understand the relevance of copyright law in our daily lives—maybe even spur federal lawmakers to introduce and pass anti-SLAPP law without a special carve-out for copyright."

Sunday, March 15, 2020

This Minecraft Library Provides a Platform for Censored Journalists; Gizmodo, March 12, 2020

Joanna Nelius, Gizmodo; This Minecraft Library Provides a Platform for Censored Journalists

"Today is World Day Against Cyber Censorship. Launched by Reporters Without Borders in 2008, its goal is to raise awareness of how various governments around the world are censoring free speech online, whether it’s by blocking keywords on social media, removing individual articles and blogs, or in extreme cases, jailing and executing those individuals. With the WHO officially declaring the spread of COVID-19 a pandemic, perhaps now is more important than ever to fight against government censorship—and one of the ways to do that is with Minecraft.

Spearheaded by Reporters Without Borders and built by BlockWorks and DDB Berlin, The Uncensored Library is a place you can visit within Minecraft to read the works of censored journalists from Russia, Mexico, Egypt, Vietnam, and Saudi Arabia. Unlike news websites or personal blogs, Minecraft is still accessible in countries that tightly control what is reported about their governments, and Reporters Without Borders is now using this loophole to bypass internet censorship."

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Anti-harassment policy raises First Amendment questions; University of Pittsburgh University Times, November 18, 2019

Marty Levine, University of Pittsburgh University Times; Anti-harassment policy raises First Amendment questions

"Members of the University Senate’s Faculty Affairs committee say they have met with University officials and voiced concerns that a proposed new anti-harassment measure may potentially stifle classroom discussion and require the entire Pitt community to report suspicious speech to University authorities.

After the meeting, the policy was pulled from a vote before Faculty Assembly."

Friday, November 22, 2019

Shepard Smith, Late of Fox News, Gives $500,000 to a Free Press Group; The New York Times, November 21, 2019

, The New York Times; Shepard Smith, Late of Fox News, Gives $500,000 to a Free Press Group

"“Our belief a decade ago that the online revolution would liberate us now seems a bit premature, doesn’t it?” Mr. Smith said in his customary Mississippi lilt. “Autocrats have learned how to use those same online tools to shore up their power. They flood the world of information with garbage and lies, masquerading as news. There’s a phrase for that.”...

The Committee to Protect Journalists, founded in 1981, works to advance press freedoms, particularly in dictatorial and autocratic countries. In recent years, speakers at its gala have increasingly referred to Mr. Trump’s attacks on the press and the hostile atmosphere faced by American journalists.

On Thursday, the group presented its Gwen Ifill Press Freedom Award to Zaffar Abbas, the editor of a daily Pakistani newspaper, Dawn. The other honorees were Patrícia Campos Mello, a journalist at a Brazilian publication, Folha de S. Paulo; Neha Dixit, a freelance investigative journalist in India; two Nicaraguan broadcast journalists, Lucía Pineda Ubau and Miguel Mora, who were imprisoned for 172 days on false charges; and Maxence Melo Mubyazi, a journalist in Tanzania."

Thursday, October 24, 2019

The Black-and-White World of Big Tech; The New York Times, October 24, 2019

, The New York Times; The Black-and-White World of Big Tech

Mark Zuckerberg presented us with an either-or choice of free speech — either we have it or we’re China. Tech leaders have a duty to admit it’s much more complicated.

"Mr. Zuckerberg presented us with an either-or choice of free speech — either we have free speech or we’re China. “Whether you like Facebook or not, I think we need to come together and stand for voice and free expression,” he said with an isn’t-this-obvious tone.

But, as anyone who has lived in the real world knows, it’s much more complex. And that was the main problem with his speech — and it’s also what is at the crux of the myriad concerns we have with tech these days: Big Tech’s leaders frame the debate in binary terms. 

Mr. Zuckerberg missed an opportunity to recognize that there has been a hidden and high price of all the dazzling tech of the last decade. In offering us a binary view for considering the impact of their inventions, many digital leaders avoid thinking harder about the costs of technological progress."

Saturday, October 19, 2019

Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t understand free speech in the 21st century; The Guardian, October 18, 2019

Siva Vaidhyanathan, The Guardian; Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t understand free speech in the 21st century

"The problem of the 21st century is cacophony. Too many people are yelling at the same time. Attentions fracture. Passions erupt. Facts crumble. It’s increasingly hard to deliberate deeply about complex crucial issues with an informed public. We have access to more knowledge yet we can’t think and talk like adults about serious things...

The thing is, a thriving democracy needs more than motivation, the ability to find and organize like-minded people. Democracies also need deliberation. We have let the institutions that foster discussion among well informed, differently-minded people crumble. Soon all we will have left is Facebook. Look at Myanmar to see how well that works."

Tuesday, September 17, 2019

TikTok’s Beijing roots fuel censorship suspicion as it builds a huge U.S. audience; The Washington Post, September 15, 2019

Drew Harwell and Tony Romm, The Washington Post; TikTok’s Beijing roots fuel censorship suspicion as it builds a huge U.S. audience

"TikTok’s surging popularity spotlights the tension between the Web’s global powers: the United States, where free speech and competing ideologies are held as (sometimes messy) societal bedrocks, and China, where political criticism is forbidden as troublemaking."

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

OPINION: The Ethics in Journalism Act is designed to censor journalists; The Sentinel, Kennesaw State University, April 22, 2019

Sean Eikhoff, The Sentinel, Kennesaw State University; OPINION: The Ethics in Journalism Act is designed to censor journalists

"The Ethics in Journalism Act currently in the Georgia House of Representatives is a thinly veiled attempt to censor journalists. A government-created committee with the power to unilaterally suspend or probate journalists is a dangerous concept and was exactly the sort of institution the framers sought to avoid when establishing freedom of the press.

The bill, HB 734, is sponsored by six Republicans and would create a Journalism Ethics Board with nine members appointed by Steve Wrigley, the chancellor of the University of Georgia. This board would be tasked to create a process by which journalists “may be investigated and sanctioned for violating such canons of ethics for journalists to include, but not be limited to, loss or suspension of accreditation, probation, public reprimand and private reprimand.”

The bill is an attempt to violate journalists’ first amendment rights and leave the chance of government punishing journalists for reporting the truth."

Monday, April 22, 2019

Iancu v. Brunetti Oral Argument; C-SPAN, April 15, 2019

April 15, 2019, C-SPAN; 

"Iancu v. Brunetti Oral Argument

The Supreme Court heard oral argument for Iancu v. Brunetti, a case concerning trademark law and the ban of “scandalous” and “immoral” trademarks. Erik Brunetti founded a streetwear brand called “FUCT” back in 1990. Since then, he’s attempted to trademark it but with no success. Under the Lanham Act, the U.S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) can refuse an application if it considers it to be “immoral” or “scandalous” and that’s exactly what happened here. The USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board also reviewed the application and they too agreed that the mark was “scandalous” and very similar to the word “fucked.” The board also cited that “FUCT” was used on products with sexual imagery and public interpretation of it was “an unmistakable aura of negative sexual connotations.” Mr. Brunetti’s legal team argued that this is in direct violation of his first amendment rights to free speech and private expression. Furthermore, they said speech should be protected under the First Amendment even if one is in disagreement with it. This case eventually came before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. They ruled in favor of Mr. Brunetti. The federal government then filed an appeal with the Supreme Court. The justices will now decide whether the Lanham Act banning “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks is unconstitutional."

Monday, April 15, 2019

EU approves tougher EU copyright rules in blow to Google, Facebook; Reuters, April 15, 2019

Foo Yun Chee, Reuters; EU approves tougher EU copyright rules in blow to Google, Facebook

"Under the new rules, Google and other online platforms will have to sign licensing agreements with musicians, performers, authors, news publishers and journalists to use their work.

The European Parliament gave a green light last month to a proposal that has pitted Europe’s creative industry against tech companies, internet activists and consumer groups."