Florida biologist fired over Charlie Kirk post wins $485,000 settlement; The Guardian, May 22, 2026

Associated via The Guardian; Florida biologist fired over Charlie Kirk post wins $485,000 settlement

Biologist was fired by a state agency for criticizing Charlie Kirk on social media after his shooting death

"Florida officials have agreed to pay nearly half a million dollars to a biologist who was fired by a state agency for criticizing conservative political activist Charlie Kirk on social media after his shooting death.

The state’s fish and wildlife conservation commission (FWC) fired biologist Brittney Brown in September after she reposted a meme on her personal Instagram account that claimed Kirk wouldn’t care about children being shot in their classrooms. She filed a lawsuit seeking reinstatement, saying she struggled to find other work because the state agency is the regulatory body for her research specialization in bird conservation.

Brown on Thursday signed a $485,000 settlement agreement with agency directors that covers backpay, damages and attorney costs. She agreed as part of the deal to not seek future employment at the agency...

Kirk’s supporters combed social media after the killing for posts they viewed as celebrating his death. Influencers like Laura Loomer pledged to ruin the careers of people who made light of the killing, and the conservative social media account Libs of TikTok shared the identities and workplaces of many who posted with its audience of millions...

In a rare instance in Tennessee, a retired police officer was jailed for 37 days over a Facebook post joking about Kirk’s assassination. Tennessee officials agreed on Wednesday to pay $835,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by the man, Larry Bushart. While behind bars, Bushart lost his postretirement job and missed the birth of his granddaughter before authorities eventually dropped a felony charge against him, he said in the lawsuit."

Boston University Pulls Pride Flags, Raising Free Speech Worries; The New York Times, March 23, 2026

Alan Blinder , The New York Times; Boston University Pulls Pride Flags, Raising Free Speech Worries

The university said the flags broke a rule against hanging signs, a policy embraced by other campuses that cracked down on protests. Professors and others say such rules chill speech.

"Boston University removed Pride flags that were displayed in campus buildings this month, angering professors who believe school leaders may be suppressing expression because they fear the Trump administration.

University officials have suggested the displays could imply the school endorses them, violating its pledge to be evenhanded with its standards around speech.

The university’s decision is a new skirmish in academia about campus expression, and it comes after more schools across the country embraced so-called neutrality policies, curbing the views they express publicly. Universities have also imposed more stringent limits on protests in the years since demonstrations over the war in Gaza rocked campuses."

‘Trump is aiming for dictatorship’. That’s the verdict of the world’s most credible democracy watchdog; The Guardian, March 17, 2026

Martin Gelin, The Guardian ; ‘Trump is aiming for dictatorship’. That’s the verdict of the world’s most credible democracy watchdog

"The US is no longer a democracy. One of the most credible global sources on the health of democratic nations now says this outright. The Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute at Gothenburg University reaches the alarming conclusion in its annual report, that the US is hurtling towards autocracy at a faster rate than Hungary and Turkey.

“Our data on the USA goes back to 1789. What we’re seeing now is the most severe magnitude of democratic backsliding ever in the country,” says Staffan Lindberg, founder of the institute.

Since 2012, Lindberg has led his small group of researchers in Sweden to become the world’s leading source for analysis of the health of global democracy. In their latest report, published on Tuesday, they conclude that the US, for the first time in more than half a century, has lost its long-term status as a liberal democracy. The country is now going through a rapid process of what the report’s authors call “autocratisation”...

A record 41% (3.4 billion) of the world’s population currently resides in countries where democracy is deteriorating, the report claims, adding that Washington is leading this global turn away from democracy.

The researchers use 48 different metrics to assess democratic health, such as the freedom of expression and the media, the quality of elections and the observance of the rule of law. The resulting “liberal democracy index” shows that the speed with which US democracy is being dismantled is unprecedented in modern history. The main factor is a “rapid and aggressive concentration of powers in the presidency”, Lindberg says. Congress has been marginalised, jeopardising the “checks and balances” (judicial and legislative constraints on the executive) so crucial to US democracy. At the same time, civil rights have been rapidly declining and freedom of expression is now at its lowest level since the 1940s."

Stephen Colbert says CBS lawyers pulled James Talarico interview as early voting begins in Texas; AP, February 17, 2026

MEG KINNARD, JIM VERTUNO AND JOHN HANNA, AP; Stephen Colbert says CBS lawyers pulled James Talarico interview as early voting begins in Texas

"Late-night host Stephen Colbert said his interview with Democratic Texas Senate candidate James Talarico was pulled from Monday night’s broadcast over network fears it would violate regulatory guidance from the Trump administration on giving equal time to political candidates.

The issue came just hours before early voting opened Tuesday in Texas’ primary elections, which feature hotly contested Senate nomination races in both parties. 

“He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network’s lawyers, who called us directly, that we could not have him on the broadcast,” Colbert said on his program, ”The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.”

“Then I was told, in some uncertain terms, that not only could I not have him on, I could not mention me not having him on. And because my network clearly doesn’t want us to talk about this, let’s talk about this.”"

Olympics turn political as US athletes speak out against Trump; The Hill, February 16, 2026

DOMINICK MASTRANGELO , The Hill; Olympics turn political as US athletes speak out against Trump

 "A growing number of Olympic athletes competing for the U.S. in this month’s Winter Games are expressing discomfort with representing the country under President Trump’s administration, sparking intense pushback from the president’s supporters and Trump himself. 

Trump attacked U.S. athlete Hunter Hess directly after Hess said he was conflicted about competing for Team USA given the country’s political climate.

“It brings up mixed emotions to represent the U.S. right now. I think it’s a little hard,” Hess, a freestyle skier, told reporters during a recent press conference. “There’s obviously a lot going on that I’m not the biggest fan of, and I think a lot of people aren’t. Just because I’m wearing the flag doesn’t mean I represent everything that’s going on in the U.S.” 

The president in a Truth Social post hours later called Hess a “real loser” and said it is “very hard to root for someone like this” when watching the games. 

Hess’s comments came days after Amber Glenn, an American figure skater, decried the administration’s policies toward people in the LGBTQ community."  

Trump Would Have Slim Chance in Court Against Trevor Noah, Experts Say; The New York Times, February 2, 2026

Benjamin Mullin, The New York Times ; Trump Would Have Slim Chance in Court Against Trevor Noah, Experts Say

Legal experts said that jokes like the one told by Mr. Noah at the Grammys on Sunday were protected by the First Amendment.

"President Trump early on Monday added Trevor Noah to the long list of high-profile individuals and institutions in his legal cross hairs after the comedian made a joke while hosting the Grammys about Mr. Trump’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

But legal experts say that Mr. Trump’s threat to sue Mr. Noah, whom he called a “poor, pathetic, talentless, dope of an M.C.” on social media, has very little chance of succeeding in a courtroom.

“Trevor Noah is pretty clearly protected by the First Amendment,” said Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. “The fact that Noah was hosting the Grammys and not writing a news story in The Washington Post has constitutional significance,” he added.

Mr. Noah said on Sunday evening’s broadcast, which was aired on CBS, that Mr. Trump’s pursuit of Greenland made sense “because Epstein’s island is gone, he needs a new one to hang out with Bill Clinton.” Though Mr. Trump had been a friend of Mr. Epstein’s until the early 2000s, there is no evidence that he visited Mr. Epstein’s private island."

DOI cracks down on stickers covering Trump's face on national park passes; SF Gate, January 5, 2026

Sam Hill, SF Gate; DOI cracks down on stickers covering Trump's face on national park passes

[Kip Currier: It's still hard to believe this news story is real -- the Department of the Interior is voiding people's U.S. National Parks passes if Donald Trump's face (yes -- his face is on the entrance passes!) is covered up by anything -- and not from The Onion.]

[Excerpt]

"Covering up Donald Trump’s face on an America the Beautiful pass may come with an extra cost at national park entrance gates this year.

The Department of the Interior recently updated its “Void if Altered” rules for 2026, explicitly flagging stickers and other coverings as alterations that could invalidate the pass. The move appears to respond to visitors preparing to cover the image of Trump, which was set to begin appearing on passes Jan. 1 despite legal challenges.

An internal email from department business specialists Allison Christofis and Jeff Beauchamp to regional National Park Service staff shared updated guidelines for passes this year, highlighting changes to the department’s altered pass policy. The email was provided to SFGATE by a Park Service employee who requested anonymity to protect their job, which was granted in accordance with Hearst’s ethics policy."

ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from Trump’s FCC chair; CNN, September 17, 2025

Brian Stelter, Elizabeth Wagmeister, Liam Reilly , CNN; ABC yanks Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely’ after threat from Trump’s FCC chair

"Disney’s ABC is taking Jimmy Kimmel’s late night talk show off the air indefinitely amid a controversy over his recent comments about Charlie Kirk’s suspected killer.

“Jimmy Kimmel Live will be pre-empted indefinitely,” an ABC spokesperson said, declining to share any further details.

A representative for Kimmel did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The stunning decision came just a few hours after the Trump administration official responsible for licensing ABC’s local stations publicly pressured the company to punish Kimmel."

Trump’s lawsuit against The New York Times is meritless, First Amendment experts say; CNN, September 17, 2025

Brian Stelter, Liam Reilly, CNN ; Trump’s lawsuit against The New York Times is meritless, First Amendment experts say

"President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times is meritless, according to half a dozen lawyers and First Amendment scholars who spoke with CNN.

But Trump’s chances in court are almost beside the point, some of the experts said, because the president seems to want a political rather than legal or financial victory.

Rebecca Tushnet, the Frank Stanton Professor of the First Amendment at Harvard Law School, said the 85-page suit “is a statement of contempt for truth, the American public, the judicial process, and everything that deserves our respect in the American tradition.”

However, Tushnet said, “to pick through its legal defects, such as the complaints about statements about Fred Trump — a deceased man who cannot be defamed — is to ignore its purpose: to threaten any criticism of Trump.”

Trump is targeting several Smithsonian artworks. Here they are.; The Washington Post, August 26, 2025

Kelsey Ables

, 

Samantha Chery

 and 

Sophia Nguyen,

 The Washington Post; Trump is targeting several Smithsonian artworks. Here they are.

[Kip Currier: Donald Trump and his administration's efforts to remove, revise, and erase artistic and historical content are the opposite of free speech and intellectual freedom. Art should challenge us to think and feel in new ways. We as individuals are certainly free to like a piece of art, hate it, or everything in between on the spectrum of how we feel about it. But the federal (or state) government should not be controlling access to art and suppressing or falsely presenting history in a free democracy. That's what authoritarians and dictators do in non-democratic nations like Russia, China, and North Korea.

If you don't like a particular painting, book, or movie, you can simply walk away from that painting, not read that book, or not watch that movie. But it isn't your right to stop everyone from seeing art, reading books, and watching films. To paraphrase the late Robert Croneberger, Director of the venerable Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh and a prolific proponent of intellectual freedom, a library isn't doing its job if it doesn't have at least one item that offends each person.

Similarly, museums, like libraries in healthy democracies, are not meant to reflect a compulsory unitary state viewpoint. We're not the Star Trek Borg Collective where everyone must think alike and individuality is verboten. The mantra of the Borg is that Resistance is Futile. Fortunately, we know that resistance is not futile: we can continue to resist efforts to sanitize art, literature, culture, and history. Exercise your right to consume what you want and disregard what you don't want. But don't tell everyone what they can and can't choose to view and read. That's undemocratic and un-American.]

[Excerpt]

"When the White House posted an article condemning a long list of Smithsonian content last week, it pointed to several specific artworks, a sampling that underlined the kind of material that could be targeted by a president who is increasingly interested in influencing what Americans see in public museums.

The list also criticized Smithsonian exhibition texts, learning materials, past performances and the institution for previously flying the intersex-inclusive Pride flag. This month, President Donald Trump said White House officials were conducting a review of the Smithsonian Institution — months after he signed an executive order seeking to root out “anti-American ideology” in the museum and research complex, an effort that experts say would amount to censorship.

The pieces are an eclectic bunch, united mainly by the Trump administration’s public criticism of them. Not all the artworks are currently on view at the museums. Taken together, they tell a story of a White House that is sensitive to imagery that appears to contradict its messaging, whether it shows a transgender woman cast as the Statue of Liberty or a boy peering over the Southern border...

Here is a look at the artworks named by the White House as evidence that Trump is “right” about the Smithsonian — and how several of the artists have responded."

What Happened When Their Art Was Banned; The New York Times, July 31, 2025

Interviews by Kate GuadagninoNick Haramis and Coco Romack

Artwork by Barbara Kruger

, The New York Times ; What Happened When Their Art Was Banned

"Of the 26 executive orders President Donald Trump signed on the first day of his second term, one was billed as “restoring freedom of speech and ending federal censorship,” barring the government from “any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.” In his address to Congress a few weeks later, Trump reiterated this point: “I have stopped all government censorship and brought back free speech in America. It’s back.”

Free speech has long been, as NPR’s media correspondent David Folkenflik put it, “an article of faith” for conservative politicians and especially, recently, for the MAGA right, which has argued that their views have been suppressed by left-leaning social media platforms and misconstrued in the mainstream press. (Some on the left have expressed similar concerns about their views.) Yet what’s transpired since late January wouldn’t meet a free speech absolutist’s definition of unfettered discourse. Federal mandates targeting diversity or racial and gender equality have resulted in bans or attempted bans on words, ideas, books and people. Employees at NASA and other agencies were ordered to remove pronouns from their email signatures. The Department of Defense briefly excised a tribute to Jackie Robinson’s army service from the Pentagon website and instructed West Point to adjust its curriculum, in an attempt to purge U.S. military institutions of “divisive concepts and gender ideology.” In March, a Turkish grad student in Massachusetts was taken off the street by plainclothes officers in masks and held without charges for weeks in a Louisiana immigration detention center, seemingly for the crime of having co-authored an opinion essay in the Tufts University student newspaper critical of the school’s response to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

American artists have long seen their creative freedom attacked by governments of all political persuasions. They’ve also been the ones to speak out when others are too frightened to do so. We spoke with several seasoned artists in various fields about their own experience with having been censored. In some cases, that censorship, decades old, feels like a relic of another political moment, of other culture wars, even as it resonates with what’s happening now: same wars, new battles. It almost always affected careers and artists’ tolerance for risk — but not always negatively. For censorship can also be a rallying cry, a reminder of why artists make art in the first place. — M.H. Miller"

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."

US Naval Academy canceled author’s lecture that would have criticized book bans; CNN, April 19, 2025

Natasha Bertrand , CNN; US Naval Academy canceled author’s lecture that would have criticized book bans

"The US Naval Academy canceled a lecture that author Ryan Holiday was scheduled to give to students there last week after he refused to remove slides from his planned presentation that criticized the academy’s decision to remove nearly 400 books from its main library.

Holiday, a writer and philosopher who has lectured at the US Naval Academy more than half a dozen times since 2019, told CNN on Saturday that he was invited by the academy in November to give a lecture about wisdom to midshipmen on April 14. He had previously spoken to students there, including during the first Trump administration, as part of a series on stoicism and the pursuit of virtue and excellence.

But an hour before he was scheduled to give his talk last week, as he was getting ready in his hotel room in Annapolis, Holiday says he received a call from the school asking him if he could refrain from mentioning the academy’s decision earlier this month to remove 381 books from the shelves of its Nimitz Library.

“I said I couldn’t do that,” Holiday recalled. “I couldn’t have spoken in front of these midshipmen about courage and about doing the right thing, and then remove, I think, a very reasonable objection to a very egregious concept."...

“I actually agree that the Academy should be apolitical,” Holiday told CNN. “That’s what makes this political meddling in their access to books so troubling. And then to suppress criticism of that obvious mistake, is to model even poorer moral leadership to the midshipman.”"

List of Books Removed from USNA Library; America's Navy, April 4, 2025

America's Navy; List of Books Removed from USNA Library

[Kip Currier: The freedoms to read, speak, and think are fundamental American values enshrined by our Constitution. Libraries should and must have books and resources that represent a wide range of information, views, and lived experiences. Whether or not we as individuals or members of groups agree or disagree with every book in a library is immaterial and contrary to our freedoms. As the late Robert Croneberger, Director of Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh (1986-1998), aptly observed, a library is not doing its job if it doesn't have at least one book that offends every person.

Military service members have served, fought, and died to preserve our freedoms and core values. Enlisted persons and their families should and must have access to a broad continuum of ideas and information. Anything less is blatant censorship that is antithetical to the American way of life.]

[Excerpts from list]

     "How to be an antiracist / Ibram X. Kendi.

Uncomfortable conversations with a black man / Emmanuel Acho.

Why didn't we riot? : a Black man in Trumpland / Issac J. Bailey.

Long time coming : reckoning with race in America / Michael Eric Dyson.

State of emergency : how we win in the country we built / Tamika D. Mallory as told to Ashley A. Coleman ; [forewords, Angela Y. Davis and Cardi B].

How we can win : race, history and changing the money game that's rigged / Kimberly Jones.

My vanishing country : a memoir / Bakari Sellers.

The gangs of Zion : a Black cop's crusade in Mormon country / Ron Stallworth, with Sofia Quintero.

American hate : survivors speak out / edited by Arjun Singh Sethi.

The rage of innocence : how America criminalizes Black youth /
Kristin Henning.

Our time is now : power, purpose, and the fight for a fair America /
Stacey Abrams.

What's your pronoun? : beyond he & she / Dennis Baron.

Rainbow milk : a novel / Paul Mendez.

The genesis of misery / Neon Yang.

The last white man / Mohsin Hamid.

Light from uncommon stars / Ryka Aoki.

Everywhere you don't belong : a novel / by Gabriel Bump.

Evil eye : a novel / Etaf Rum.

Lies my teacher told me : everything your American history
textbook got wrong / James W. Loewen.

Gender queer : a memoir / by Maia Kobabe ; colors by Phoebe
Kobabe.

The third person / Emma Grove."

Washington Post columnist quits after her opinion piece criticizing owner Jeff Bezos is rejected; The Hill, March 10, 2025

 DAVID BAUDER, ASSOCIATED PRESS via The Hill; Washington Post columnist quits after her opinion piece criticizing owner Jeff Bezos is rejected

"A columnist who has worked at The Washington Post for four decades resigned on Monday after the newspaper’s management decided not to run her commentary critical of owner Jeff Bezos’ new editorial policy.

Ruth Marcus, who has worked at the newspaper since 1984, wrote that “it breaks my heart to conclude that I must leave.” Her resignation letter was first reported by The New York Times.

Her exit is fallout from the billionaire owner’s directive that the Post narrow the topics covered by its opinion section to personal liberties and the free market. The newspaper’s opinions editor, David Shipley, resigned because of the shift, announced two weeks ago.

Marcus said that the Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, declined to publish her column, which she said was “respectfully dissenting” from Bezos’ edict. It was the first time in nearly 20 years of writing columns that she’s had one killed, she said.

The decision “underscores that the traditional freedom of columnists to select the topics they wish to address and say what they think has been dangerously eroded,” she wrote."

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."

President Trump's Self-Described "Takeover" of the Center is an Attack on Creative Freedom; PEN America, February 8, 2025

PEN America; President Trump's Self-Described "Takeover" of the Center is an Attack on Creative Freedom

"In response to President Trump saying he is firing the Kennedy Center trustees and naming himself chair, Hadar Harris, PEN America’s Washington managing director, made the following comment:

“President Trump’s self-described “takeover” of the Kennedy Center is another salvo in his demonstrated attack on free expression. He is taking the unprecedented move of clearing out board members “who do not share our vision for a Golden Age in Arts and Culture.” Presidents should not be dictating a singular view of culture. The cultural sector must remain free from political control; that is fundamental to protecting creative freedom in a democracy.”

About PEN America

PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible. Learn more at pen.org."

A Pulitzer winner quits 'Washington Post' after a cartoon on Bezos is killed; NPR, January 4, 2025

David Folkenflik, NPR; A Pulitzer winner quits 'Washington Post' after a cartoon on Bezos is killed

[Kip Currier: Every day, U.S. oligarchs like Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos and Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong feel more emboldened to cravenly censor criticism of themselves and impede freedom of expression and access to information.

Thank you, Ann Telnaes, for speaking truth to power with your satirical artistry and standing up for the importance of free and independent presses with your principled resignation decision. As the Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist underscored in explaining her resignation, "Democracy can't function without a free press".

The evidence is now even more clear than one year or a decade ago: Consolidation of ownership of print journalism and broadcast media by a few billionaires and corporate conglomerates chills the ability to dissent and provide access to diverse perspectives.

The diagnosis and ramifications are also clear: Having a handful of oligarchs control America's newspapers is antithetical to well-informed citizenries and healthy democracies. (See here for a prescient 2017 article by veteran journalist and free speech/free press advocate Bill Moyers.)

Potential remedies? It's absolutely imperative that free speech-supporting Americans develop and nurture alternative ways to promote access to information and freedom of expression, as is increasingly being done on Substack accounts (see examples here, and here, and here) and via podcasts.

In the longer term, collaborative trusts (see here, for example) that can purchase newspapers and share ownership among more than one individual offer some potential ways to challenge oligarch newspaper monopolies.]

[Excerpt]

"A Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist for the Washington Post has resigned after its editorial page editor rejected a cartoon she created to mock media and tech titans abasing themselves before President-elect Donald Trump.

Among the corporate chiefs depicted by Ann Telnaes was Amazon founder and Post owner Jeff Bezos. The episode follows Bezos' decision in October to block publication of a planned endorsement of Vice President Harris over Trump in the waning days of last year's presidential elections.

The inspiration for Telnaes' latest proposed cartoon was the trek by top tech chief executives including Bezos to Trump's Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago, as well as the seven-figure contributions several promised to make toward his inauguration. She submitted a sketch before Christmas. It was never published."