The Harpers Letter Is a Weak Defense of Free Speech – The …

The letter in Harpers vaguely alludes to instances of alleged silencing that sparked complicated discussions, very often about institutional racism. Whatever the arguments around each particular incident, the letter concludes, the result has been to steadily narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. (At least two of the signatories have since distanced themselves from the statement, and on Friday another group of writers and academics published a lengthy counterletter that originated in a Slack channel called Journalists of Color.)

That the signatories of a letter denouncing a perceived constriction of public speech are among their industries highest-paid and most widely published figures is a large and obvious irony. Many of the writers who signed their name have been employed or commissioned by outlets including The New Yorker, The New York Times, Vox, The Washington Post, and this magazine. Several have received lucrative book deals; otherslike Rowling, Salman Rushdie, and Wynton Marsalisare global icons. The educators on the list are affiliated with universities including Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Columbia.

Theres something darkly comical about the fretfulness of these elite petitioners. Its telling that the censoriousness they identify as a national plague isnt the racism that keeps Black journalists from reporting on political issues, or the transphobia that threatens their colleagues lives. The letter denounces the restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, strategically blurring the line between these two forces. But the letters chief concern is not journalists living under hostile governments, despite the fact that countries around the world impose draconian limits on press freedom.

Across the globe, the challenge facing journalists and intellectuals is not the pain of Twitter scorn; the Committee to Protect Journalists estimates that at least 250 journalists were imprisoned worldwide last year for their reporting. In the U.S., the Trump administration continues to threaten reporters safety and undermine the belief that journalists play a valuable role in a democracy. The country is moving deeper into an economic recession, decimating industries including journalism and academia. And yet the suddenly unemployed people the Harpers statement references clearly lost their jobs not because of a pandemic or government pressure, but for actions criticized as potentially harming marginalized groups. This small group includes James Bennet, the former editor of the New York Times editorial page (and a former editor in chief of this magazine), who was forced to resign after the op-ed page he supervised published an article by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton that endorsed state violence.

More:

The Harpers Letter Is a Weak Defense of Free Speech - The ...

Related Posts

Comments are closed.