Category Archives: Free Speech

Why don't jurors know that now that Kyle Rittenhouse was a right-wing terrorist? Why are the people Kyle Rittenhouse shot not allowed to be referred to as victims?

What you don't know, could turn a jury. Will Rittenhouse get out because of a corrupt judge?

--

The Thom Hartmann Program covers diverse topics including immigration reform, government intrusion, privacy, foreign policy, and domestic issues. More people listen to or watch the TH program than any other progressive talk show in the world! Join them. #MorefromThom

The Thom Hartmann Program is on Free Speech TV every weekday from 12-3 pm EST.

Missed an episode? Check out Thom Hartmann Playlist on our Youtube channel or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling and online at freespeech.org

Judge Kyle Rittenhouse The David Pakman Show The Thom Hartmann Program Thom Hartmann Vigilante White Supremacy

See the original post:
Why Is The Judge Hiding Rittenhouse's Ties To White Supremacy? - Free Speech TV

SEAGROVE BEACH Just days away from a hearing in front of Walton County's code compliance magistrate, Seagrove Beach homeowner Marvin Peavy remains adamant that he won't take down two large banners hanging from his Walton County Road 30A home expressing support for former President Donald Trump.

One of the banners reads "Trump Won," while the other reads "Let's go Brandon," a veiled insult to President Joe Biden.

Biden defeated Trump in the 2020 presidential balloting. But Peavy is among the significant number of people across the country who contend the election was rigged against Trump, despite the failure of numerous lawsuits to prove electoral irregularities.

Marvin Peavy (at the podium), the Walton County Road 30A homeowner cited by county code officials for pro-Donald Trump banners hanging from his home, vowed that the banners will stay up during a speech at the South Walton Republican Club meeting Thursday.

'Not going to take it down': 30A property owner hangs 'Trump Won' banner on home despite fines

Nonetheless, a recent poll by the political news website Politico and the data intelligence firm Morning Consult noted that just 22% of self-identified 2020 Trump voters believe the 2020 elections were free and fair, with 72% saying that balloting was either probably or definitely not free and fair.

"I'm going to stand up. I won't go down until I win," Peavy, a south Georgia real estate and property management businessman who lives in the Seagrove Beach house four days each week, told a wildly supportive crowd at Thursday night's meeting of the South Walton Republican Club.

"I'm here for one thing: my freedom of speech," Peavy said as he got a standing ovation from an audience of nearly 100 people. "I'm not taking my sign(s) down."

Peavy was cited by the county code compliance office in July for the "Trump Won" banner the first to be installed at the house under provisions of the county land development code that limit signage for properties adjoining CR 30A in connection with the route's local status as a scenic corridor.

The code section, which does not address political content of signage, prohibits display of "streamers, feather flags, pennants, ribbons, spinner and other similar devices" on property adjacent to the beachside route.

Story continues

"It could have said 'Minnesota Vikings' " and still have been subject to a citation, county code compliance manager Mike Lynch said Friday.

Standing between cardboard cutouts of former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Seagrove Beach homeowner Marvin Peavy told the South Walton Republican Club on Thursday that, despite a citation from Walton County code compliance officials, he intends to continue displaying two large pro-Trump banners on the side of his house.

At an Oct. 20 hearing, county Code Compliance Magistrate Hayward Dykes Jr. found Peavy in violation of the county's land development code and set a compliance hearing for Nov. 17.

The upcoming Wednesday hearing at which Peavy could face fines of as much as $250 per day, starting with the Oct. 25 date when Dykes ordered that fines start being calculated if the "Trump Won" banner didn't come down is set for 2 p.m. in the South Walton Courthouse Annex at 31 Coastal Centre Boulevard in Santa Rosa Beach.

A defiant Peavy installed the "Let's go Brandon" banner, which also hangs down three stories on the west-facing side of his home, within a week of Dykes' order becoming effective.

The county code office subsequently received a complaint about that second banner, and code officials at the upcoming hearing will advise Dykes of that complaint, leaving it to him to determine how the issue of the second banner will be handled, Lynch said Friday.

Banners supporting former President Donald Trump hang from Marvin Peavy's home in Seagrove Beach. Peavy has been cited for the banners under a section of Walton County's land development code governing signage along the Walton County Road 30A corridor, and faces a code magistrate hearing on Wednesday.

County Code Compliance Director Tony Cornman said recently that there are additional sanctions that could be applied in Peavy's case, but he did not say specifically what they might be.

Meanwhile, a move is underway to fill the meeting room at the code magistrate hearing with Peavy's supporters.

"We want to pack that room, and we want to tell them what free speech means to the people of Walton County," Miramar Beach businesswoman and staunch Peavy supporter Suzanne Harris told the crowd at Thursday's Republican Club meeting.

Peavy has retained a Tallahassee law firm to represent him at the hearing, and said Thursday that he will speak if given a chance.

'Let's go Brandon': Second banner joins 'Trump Won' banner on Seagrove Beach house

He spoke for a little more than five minutes at Thursday's Republican Club meeting, alternating between stand-up comedy and an impassioned plea for free speech.

"I'm a good southern Georgian, but I'm fixing to be a north Floridan and I'm fixing to join up with y'all because I love fighting for what is right," he said. "It's the right thing to do.

"My wife is even more of a fighter than I am," Peavy continued. "... She looks real sweet, but she's mean as hell sometimes. I know y'all probably got one of those at home, too.

"It's about free speech, guys," he said. "... If they take this from us, guys, who the hell are we? Will we be able to say, 'I pledge allegiance to the flag,' or will we be able to say the Lord's Prayer? I mean, what do you want to do? What do you stand for?"

In the days since his citation, people have offered to pay or help to pay whatever fines might eventually be assessed against Peavy. One of those people, he said Thursday, was a young girl.

"This little girl came up to me, and she was like 12 years old, and she wanted to give me money," Peavy said. "I'm like, 'I don't need no money,' but her daddy told me, 'You're going to take the money because she believes in your cause.' I don't cry for nothing, and it brought tears to my eyes."

Peavy has also seen other signs of support, including people who have gathered in front of his house on recent Sundays to wave Trump-themed and free speech-related flags and signs, and otherwise express support for his stand. That support routinely prompts motorists passing by to wave or honk their horns, and has also included people stopping by with pizza and barbecue for the people in front of Peavy's house.

"I've got great people backing me. I've had great people out at my house," Peavy said during his speech at the Republican Club meeting. "I've eaten some damn good food, from barbecue places, pizza places.

"Y'all are all just like me," he added. "We're all the same kind of people. We love God, we love our country and we're here to fight for it."

This article originally appeared on Northwest Florida Daily News: Pro-Trump banners in Walton County gaining support, racking up fines

Go here to read the rest:
'Here for one thing: my freedom of speech': 30A homeowner remains defiant on pro-Trump banners - Yahoo News

Theres new reporting from ABCs Jonathan Karl which reveals that Donald Trump threatened GOP party leadership with leaving the Republican Party as he was flying out on Air Force One for the last time as president on January 20th. This confirms numerous reports at the time that Trump was considering leaving the GOP, feeling as though the party wasnt fighting hard enough following his reelection defeat and the subsequent insurrection and impeachment. The sourcing for this phone call comes from Karls new bookBetrayal: The Final Act of the Trump Show. Karl wrote in the book, [RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel] called to wish him farewell. It was a very un-pleasant conversation. Donald Trump was in no mood for small talk or nostalgic goodbyes. He got right to the point. He told her he was leaving the Republican Party and would be creating his own political party. When McDaniel pushed back and said this would mean the right wing would lose elections forever, Trump said, I don't care . . . this is what Republicans deserve for not sticking up for me. In addition to confirming Trumps plans to create a third party, it also confirms that the ex-president was always just in it for himself and had no interest in ever putting the interests of his party over his own.

--

The David Pakman Show is a news and political talk program, known for its controversial interviews with political and religious extremists, liberal and conservative politicians, and other guests.

Missed an episode? Check out David Pakman on our Youtube Channel anytime or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling and online at freespeech.org

Air Force One David Pakman Donald Trump GOP Jonathan Karl Republican Party The David Pakman Show

Go here to read the rest:
Trump Threatened to Leave Republican Party After Riots - Free Speech TV

The former consul, Mall Helam, tweeted in English Saturday that: "Speaker Jri Ratas reported about friendly meetings with Hungarian Minister of Justice Judit Varga. It seems that the use of NSO spyware under the responsibility of minister Varga, as well as restrictions in Hungary on the free press and academic freedoms, were not important enough issues to discuss."

Hellam was honorary consul from 1994 until 2017, resigning over the policies of Viktor Orbn's administration, specifically its pressure in causing a university to relocate to neighboring Austria.

As reported by ERR News, Ratas was on an official visit to Budapest Friday, also meeting with his counterpart, Lszl Kvr, speaker of the Orszggyls, the Hungarian National Assembly, President of the Hungary-Estonia Friendship GroupAttila Tilki and Honorary ConsulAndrs Bereczki while there, in addition to his meeting with Vargas.

Ratas also met Hungarian President Jnos der.

Conservative People's Party of Estonia (EKRE) MP Anti Poolamets, who is chair of the Estonian-Hungarian parliamentary group, accompanied Ratas at some of the meetings, and a further parliamentary group visit to Hungary is planned for the near future, the Riigikogu press service says.

Full diplomatic relations between the two countries were reestablished in 2018, with embassies opening reciprocally in Budapest and Tallinn.

EU has launched several proceedings against Hungary

In February, foreign minister Eva-Maria Liimets, a former ambassador to the Czech Republic, who joined Ratas' party after becoming minister early on this year, criticized what she called Hungary's deviation from principles of democracy, the rule of law, human dignity and diversity, and the free market.

Liimets made her remarks before the Riigikogu, ERR's online news in Estonian reports. Liimets said then that Estonia belongs to a space of values where the principles noted above are adhered to.

Several proceedings have been initiated against Hungary at EU-level, ERR reports, calling into question the ruling party's policies and relationship to the rule of law, while U.S.-based democracy,political freedom, andhuman rights NGO Freedom House said in a 2020 report that: "Prime Minister Viktor Orbn's government in Hungary has similarly dropped any pretense of respecting democratic institutions."

"After centralizing power, tilting the electoral playing field, taking over much of the media, and harassing critical civil society organizations since 2010, Orbn moved during 2019 to consolidate control over new areas of public life, including education and the arts. The 2020 adoption of an emergency law that allows the government to rule by decree indefinitely has further exposed the undemocratic character of Orbn's regime," the Freedom House report continued.

Judit Varga admitted in summer that covert surveillance tools had been used to wiretap Hungarian citizens' phones, albeit legally.

The Pegasus project, a collaborative investigation run by 17 news outlets and named after the Israeli-made software in question,foundthat 300 Hungarian phone numbers had been targeted with surveillance attacks, English-language news portal Hungary Today reports.

Pegasus software can hack any Android or iOS smartphone, gaining total access, including to photos, videos, search history, messages, and more can be accessed, as well as the option to record phone calls and make use of a phone's camera and microphone, Hungary Today reports.

That it was the Hungarian government behind the snooping and not some other body is most likely given private corporation NSO Group only provides its product tonational governmentsand government agencies, and then only after being granted permission to do so by Israel's defense ministry. The software is primarily used to fight terrorism, but the Pegasus project revealed instances of its use in targeting journalists, opposition politicians, activists and others.

Malle Hellam resigned as Hungarian honorary consul in Estonian, a role she had held since 1994, in 2017, a year before full diplomatic ties were restored.

She cited pressure from Prime Minister Viktor Orban's government on the George Soros-funded Central European University (CEU), which in 2018 relocated from Budapest to Vienna, Austria, as a major factor in her resignation.

The European Court of Justice ruled last Octoberthat the higher education reform initiated by the Hungarian government which forced the CEU to leave the country was contrary to domestic law.

Hellam is now director of the Open Estonia Foundation, founded in 1990 via the support of George Soros.In 2010 Hellam was voted European of the year.

Riigikogu spokesperson: Ratas did speak about rule of law principles while on visit

The Riigikogu's press service told ERR Saturday that the Riigikogu speaker raised the principles of the rule of law at all meetings the meetings he attended during his visit to Hungary.

The press service says that its press releases on the content of a high-level meeting never cover all of the topics under discussion, hence the issue not being mentioned.

Ratas issued comment also, saying EU member states' cooperation against hybrid attacks is of paramount importance at this moment.

"Right now, EU unity is more important to us than ever before," he said."In order to achieve and maintain this coherence, all member states need to work more closely together."

Ratas would have been referring to the current migratory pressure on the Belarus-Poland and Belarus-Lithuania borders.

This article was updated to include the statement from the Riigikogu's press service.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!

Follow this link:
Former consul: Ratas ignored free speech issues while on Budapest visit - ERR News

Democrats are not amused.

Recently, Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona tweeted a video of anime characters doing battle with President Joe Biden and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over illegal immigration.

The video reportedly shows a character with Gosars face allegedly killing AOC.

As The Free Press reported on Thursday, Democrats were not amused. Led by AOC, they dog-piled each other in criticizing Gosar, and announced they would work to censure him.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi tweeted, Threats of violence against Members of Congress and the President of the United States must not be tolerated. She also called on Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to join in condemning this horrific video and call on the Ethics Committee and law enforcement to investigate.

The hysteria here is matched only by the Democrats hypocrisy.

When former President Donald Trump occupied the White House, Pelosi and these same Democrats sat in stone silence as their supporters routinely depicted Trumps assassination whether it was alleged comedienne Kathy Griffin hoisting what resembled Trumps severed head; rapper Snoop Dogg making a music video that ends with him shooting a Trump-like character in the head; a New York City actors group putting on Shakespeares Julius Ceasar, which includes a Trump-like Ceasar being stabbed to death; or incidents such as actor Johnny Depp publicly asking about when the last time an actor killed a president, or Rosie ODonnell promoting a game called Push Trump off a Cliff.

In fact, when liberals spoke at all, they defended such actions. In 2017, for example, Washington Post columnist Alyssa Rosenberg wrote that Snoop Dogg had an absolute right to make a video depicting Trumps death.

Ironically, Robby Soave, a columnist for the libertarian publication Reason, makes the same argument about Gosar which on the left will assuredly fall on deaf ears.

Responding to the criticism from AOCs pals in Congress, Soave wrote, Congress is not like other workplaces. Employees are chosen not by bosses, but by a democratic process: elections. Gosar doesnt work for an HR-conscious manager; he works for the voters of Arizona, and its their job to boot him if they dont like his anime videos.

One can sympathize with Gosars Democratic colleagues for being irritated with his highly unprofessional even creepy behavior, he continued.

But setting aside the alleged ethics violation, Soave added, (T)here is little doubt that the anime video constitutes First Amendment-protected expression: Though it was in poor taste for Gosar to share it, he did not actually credibly threaten the lives of Biden or Ocasio-Cortez. A parody video of an anime figure vanquishing a villainous Democrat is clearly not a true threat of violence.

Law enforcement should make no effort to investigate the Gosar video, since the only conceivable conclusion they could reach is that its protected speech, he concluded. And the government should not and indeed, cannot police speech solely because it is offensive to people in power, even if the speech is, in fact, offensive.

Support journalism byclicking here to our GoFundMeor sign up for ourfree newsletter by clicking here

Android Users,Click Here To Download The Free Press AppAnd Never Miss A Story. Its Free And Coming To Apple Users Soon

Link:
Columnist: Anti-AOC Anime Video Is Free Speech In Action, So Get Over All The Hysteria - The Free Press

A group of faculty members at the University of Michigan is seeking to reframe the debate over the Bright Sheng case, arguing in a new open letter to administrators that antiracism is not contrary to academic freedom but rather supports both free inquiry and pedagogical excellence.

The letter, written by 12 mostly junior professors from across the College of Literature, Science and the Arts and the School of Music, Theater and Dance, and signed by more than 150 other faculty members, also demands changes to how the university will support students and professors through future race-based incidents in the classroom.

This is not about pointing fingers, said Naomi Andr, one of the letters 12 authors and a professor of Afroamerican and African studies and womens and gender studies at Michigan who has written about Black opera. This is about, Something happened. It was painful. And this is the best place, as an educational setting, to try to do some care and repair.

Andr continued, Sadly, these things are happening. When they happen, we need to have set of protocols and offices and clarity for what to do and where students and faculty members can go outside of their home departments. Externally, Andr also said, Since Michigan has pretty much designated itself a leader in this very active diversity, equity and inclusion space, when something like this happened, it should not have gone to the papers first. But thats what it felt like.

Sheng, Leonard Bernstein Distinguished University Professor of Composition at Michigan, stepped down from teaching earlier this semester after he showed a class the 1965 film version of Shakespeares Othello, which stars white actor Laurence Olivier in blackface. Students, backed by some graduate students and faculty members, complained that Sheng had failed to prepare them for the use of blackface. They also took issue with Shengs initial written apology for the incident, in he which he attempted to defend his intentions by saying that hed cast people of color in musical productions throughout his career.

That apology letter implies that it is thanks to him that many of them have achieved success in their careers, says a student and faculty open letter, as first reported by the Michigan Daily student newspaper.

Sheng has said little about the case publicly, but Michigan said he agreed to take a break from teaching this term. The university has since said it will not formally investigate Sheng for what happened in his class, but his case continues to concern academic freedom advocates from inside and outside the university. Some 700 faculty members and students signed their own open letter last month demanding that Sheng be reinstated to teaching and that the university apologize to him.

The new letter, by Andr and others, says students arent objecting to the content of Shengs lecture, meaning the use of blackface in particular context, and that this is therefore not a free speech issue. What students did object to is the manner in which the content was presentedlacking any context for the history and harmful nature of blackface. And although the university does not regulate faculty speech in the classroom, it does have a responsibility to evaluate and improve pedagogy.

Weighing in, indirectly, on the debate surrounding trigger and content warnings, the letter continues, In our experiences, when students ask for content warnings or pedagogical care in classrooms, they do not expect a lack of challenging material. Rather, they are asking that we respect the experiences of our students, many of whom encounter racism and sexual violence in their daily lives. More broadly, the letter says, presenting racist content without context does more than create a hostile learning environment. It normalizes racism, rendering it invisible and closing the door on critical engagement. By contrast, giving students tools to engage racist content can be empowering, and many faculty have taught on these issues for years without incident.

News coverage of what happened has framed students requests for safe spaces as infringing on free speech, characterizing those requests as anti-intellectual, the letter says. On the contrary, the ability to contextualize racism is a prerequisite for sound pedagogy and practice in all disciplines. The role of racism in theater and opera is the subject of a rich body of academic literature; the issue has also received coverage in the press as opera and classical music continue to grapple with racist practices, including the use of blackface and yellowface.

Similar issues exist in all disciplines, the letter says, and in asking us to engage with scholarship on race and racism, we believe that Michigan students are not advocating censorship. Rather, they demand the responsible, up-to-date instruction they deserve from a premier public university.

To this point, the letter says that faculty members at Michigan deserve the resources to develop inclusive pedagogy. Because of the systemic nature of racism in higher education, many of us did not receive that education ourselves. We support student advocacy and engagement, but whereas some students called for individual accountability, we see this as an institutional failure with responsibility shared by both leadership and faculty at large.

An act can be racist without intent, and personal bias is not the issue here.

Beyond training and resources, the letter demands a clear protocol that allows us to de-escalate situations and work toward mutual understanding.

The authors of the letter make three specific demands, which they say echo many of the recommendations made this year by the College of Literature, Science and the Arts Anti-Racism Task Force, and which they say reflect a belief in transformational justice: first, faculty and student awareness of relevant resources before an incident occurs in the classroom; second, clear protocols for department chairs for responding to student reports of a racist incident; and third, effective antiracism training that it is better integrated into regular service and professional development expectations and offerings. Significantly, the letter says its not appropriate to expect students to work things out with the faculty member themselves, given the power differential that exists in this dynamic.

There will always be instances of genuine bias and deliberate racism. This is something faculty, students, and staff face, and it should be dealt with administratively, the letter says. But racism can also result from a lack of knowledge, an ignorance that has often been actively cultivated by educational institutions themselves. This is the knowledge that students seek, and we as faculty need the universitys support to rise to the challenge. All faculty should be equipped to recognize racist content and should be aware that presenting it without warning, context, and purpose represents irresponsible pedagogy.

Tiffany Ng, an associate professor of music who co-wrote the letter, said that the Sheng case underscores the likelihood that there are faculty on every campus, not just at [Michigan], who have remained sheltered from conversations about anti-Black racism and may unwittingly blunder into harmful classroom situations. Campus leaders therefore need to be prepared with measures that center community dialogue, learning, and growth.

Ng said that the music school held two required workshops on antiracism earlier this year that were wonderfully designed but presumed that all participants were already aware that practices such as blackface were racist and needed acknowledgment and contextualization when presented.

While its tempting to dismiss Professor Shengs classroom screening event as an exception, she said, its an important reminder that faculty antiracism training needs to be scaffolded, starting with bringing participants from various specialties and milieus up to speed. These efforts could be conversations within departments and units so that specific disciplinary histories can be addressed.

Department chairs should also be able to rely on clear protocols that recognize the power differential between faculty and students, and be able to offer students options such as a guided discussion with their professor in the presence of a transformative justice facilitator, Ng said. Likewise, deans should have a chief officer of diversity, equity and inclusion to implement schoolwide responses that promote discussion, trust, learning and community.

Faculty members, meanwhile, should be informed of resources on campus to help them navigate their own responses to student concerns, and, when appropriate, respond to students in a way that focuses on taking responsibility for a mistake and making concrete plans to become more informed about the issue in question, Ng said.

Andr said she imagined some kind of rapid-response mechanism, to help students and faculty members deal with racist incidents case by case, and then help them repair and rebuildnot with corporate language, but with language that was specifically tailored to the different dynamics.

While such processes are happening internally, Andr said, the university would help itself by being as transparent as possible in public statements about incidents such as the Sheng case, with a similar sense of authenticity. Something like, Were going to heal these the ruptures that have happened, the breakdown in communication. Were not a perfect place, but we know that its OK to talk about these things, she said. Instead, in Shengs case, at least, it felt like other people were framing this as a freedom of academic rights issue, and that Prof. Sheng had been, you know, booted out of the university, instead of having agreed to step down from teaching this term.

Sheng did not respond to a request for comment about the new letter.

Kim Broekhuizen, university spokesperson, said Friday that the institution had just announced revamped protections for students and faculty and staff members who report wrongful conduct, in the form of a protection-from-retaliation policy.

Regarding responses to specific incidents, Broekhuizen said that there are multiple ways to file a report against a faculty member, depending on the nature of the complaint, and that every situation is handled independently.

Numerous resources about racial equity and antiracist pedagogy are available, as well, despite the challenges posed by COVID-19, she said, including the Center for Research on Learning and Teachings campuswide and unit-level programs. The music school, specifically, is committed to fostering a culture of academic and artistic excellence that is safe, equitable and inclusive for all students, faculty and staff, and provides antiracism education and professional development for all professors and staff members.

Keith E. Whittington, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics at Princeton University, chairs the Academic Freedom Alliances Academic Committee and has said its outrageous that Michigan entertained the complaint against Sheng in the first place. Whittington said its rather disingenuous of the new letter to suggest that there isnt a free speech issue here, when the university suspended a professor from teaching and threatened a disciplinary investigation on the basis of student complaints about the substantive content of a professors course. (Many of Shengs supporters argue that he was pressured to step down from teaching, even if he did so voluntarily in the end.)

Its still quite troubling that letter wants to throw around the rhetoric of assigning offensive course materials being a racist act, even if racist without intent, Whittington also said. Characterizing instructional activity in that fashion will always invite disciplinary action, and it further encourages a misconception of the educational and scholarly process.

That said, Whittington said the letter is perhaps better read as indicating that the substantive content of courses is fully protected by academic freedom and that in the future such student complaints should not be treated as matters that require disciplinary action. In that case, Whittington said, I would certainly agree that the administration mishandled these student complaints, and to the extent that the letter suggests that such complaints should be handled quite differently in the future, then that would be a mark of progress.

If the protocols that the letter writers want would give chairs and deans clear guidance on the protections afforded by academic freedom and appropriate administrative actions, then that would potentially be helpful in avoiding these sorts of violations of academic freedom in the future, he also said, as it seems quite evident that many department chairs and deans at universities across the country do not understand what is protected by academic freedomand many violations of academic freedom could be avoided if those administrators had a better understanding of how teaching and scholarship is protected from administrative interference.

On antiracist training, Whittington said it would be useful for the university to integrate this topic into professional development offerings, if it hasnt already done soon a voluntary basis. Otherwise, such requirements run a serious risk of impinging on rather than enhancing the scholarly judgments that faculty are entitled to make when designing and running their courses.

Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression and education at PEN America, said, Universities must defend the academic freedom of their facultythat is absolute. But that doesnt mean that they cant also do more to equip and support faculty with tools to deal with contentious issues and student concerns about inclusion when they arise.

No one can deny that the issues raised by the Sheng case are difficult, he added. But faculty engaging in serious debate about academic freedom, free speech and antiracism is a good thing on a university campus.

Link:
Seeing middle ground on the Bright Sheng case at U of Michigan - Inside Higher Ed

The founders of Voices of Monterey Bay the VOMB Squad were honored as recipients of the Ralph B. Atkinson Award for Civil Liberties by the Monterey County chapter of the ACLU during a streaming ceremony on Sunday.

The award cited the VOMB Squads efforts to maintain a free and independent press in Monterey County and to stand up for our unabridged First Amendment Rights. The Atkinson Award has been presented by the ACLU annually since 1977.

In addition to handsome plaques delivered to the recipients Julie Reynolds Martinez, Claudia Melndez Salinas, Kathryn McKenzie and Joe Livernois the ACLU gathered certificates of recognition from Rep. Jimmy Panetta, state Sens. John Laird and Anna Caballero and Assemblymembers Robert Rivas and Mark Stone.

The keynote speaker for the event was Dr. Eduardo Ochoa, who told about four dozen attendees that a thriving democracy relies on the press to tell the stories of those who do not have the social influence to directly affect our community, to bring light to the realities of the human condition and to articulate the effects of policymakers decisions. As a watchdog for democracy, the press holds our leaders and our brokers accountable for their actions and helps to encourage them to follow through on their commitments.

Caballero, who appeared at the event to make the presentation, said she regrets the steady erosion of local news organizations, and praised VOMBs founders for its efforts.

As an elected official, we write the press releases and its a lot easier if its printed without any questions, Caballero said. Its done all the time. And Im not saying that I need somebody to come and ask me critical and tough questions, but its a better story a challenge to the public if they hear different sides

Its not enough to just print a press release. Our system of government is stronger and people are better citizens if they share information, criticize its assumptions, argue about the solutions and come to some common understanding about next steps. We cant get there without journalists who believe in free speech who ask tough questions and who are willing to invest the time and effort necessary to tell a really coherent story even if it makes people uncomfortable.

Former state Sen. Bill Monning praised the VOMB Squads annual Youth Media Project, a free journalism bootcamp held each summer for high school students in the Salinas Valley. I sometimes feel like our First Amendment and real journalism is on life support, he said. And this recognition today I think instills a sense of possibility and a continuation, particularly the mentorships that (Voices editors) are providing to younger students and those who aspire to become journalists. Its so critical now more than ever.

Watch the entire program here:

Cover illustration by ACLU Monterey County

Have something to say about this story? Send us a letter or leave a comment below.

SUPPORT NONPROFIT JOURNALISM

GET OUR FREE WEEKLY NEWSLETTER

Follow this link:
A celebration for a free and independent press - Voices of Monterey Bay

On May 16, 2017, Fox News posted an article that drew on a report from the local Fox station in Washington, laying out a conspiracy theory about the death of Seth Rich, a staff member at the Democratic National Committee who was apparently the victim of an attempted street robbery. The story falsely implicated Rich in the Russian hacking of committee emails, which were released by WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign. Sean Hannity amplified the lies about Rich on his Fox News show that night and the former House speaker Newt Gingrich repeated them on Fox & Friends a few days later. The falsehoods spread to conspiracy websites and social media. Fox News retracted its false report online a week later, but Fox & Friends did not; Hannity said on his radio show, I retracted nothing. An ABC affiliate owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, a conservative owner of local TV stations, then aired another report on the Rich conspiracy theory, which the local Fox station covered, giving it life for another news cycle.

In a 2018 book, Network Propaganda, Yochai Benkler, a director of the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard, and two researchers there, Robert Faris and Hal Roberts, mapped the spread of political disinformation in the United States from 2015 to 2018. Analyzing the hyperlinks of four million news articles, the three authors found that the conservative media did not counter lies and distortions, but rather recycled them from one outlet to the next, on TV and radio and through like-minded websites.

The dearth of competition for factual accuracy among conservative outlets leaves their audiences vulnerable to disinformation even if the mainstream news media combats it. People are more likely to believe fact-checking from a source that speaks against its apparent political interest, research shows. In the eyes of many conservatives, news outlets like The Washington Post, The New York Times and CNN do not fill that role when they challenge a story that Trump and Fox News promote.

Mainstream publications also make mistakes or run with a hyped narrative. The repeated front-page coverage that The New York Times gave to Hillary Clintons use of a private email server, after breaking the story, shadowed her defeat in 2016. It was also skewered by press critics an example of how competing outlets challenge and correct one another (even if the system sometimes fails in real time). This reality-check dynamic in the mainstream and left-leaning media, Benkler, Faris and Roberts write, still leaves plenty of room for partisanship. But the standards of journalism, however flawed, appear to significantly constrain disinformation.

In the past, ensuring a vibrant free press made up of competing outlets was an express aim of federal policy. From the founding until the early 20th century, Congress lowered the cost of starting and running a newspaper or magazine by setting low postage rates for mailed copies. The advent of radio raised questions about how to foster competition and public access. Lawmakers of both parties recognized the danger that an information chokehold poses to democratic self-government, says Ellen P. Goodman, a law professor at Rutgers University. So policymakers adopted structures to ensure diversity of ownership, local control of media and public broadcasting.

In 1927, when Congress created the licensing system for exclusive rights to the broadcast spectrum, so that radio broadcasters could secure a place on the dial, lawmakers told broadcasters to act as if people of a community should own a station. The 1934 Communications Act similarly required anyone with a broadcast license to operate in the public interest and allocated spectrum based on ensuring that local communities had their own stations. In 1949, the Federal Communications Commission established the fairness doctrine, which interpreted operating in the public interest to require broadcasters to cover major public-policy debates and present multiple points of view. And in 1967, Congress created and funded the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, whose mission is to promote an educated and informed civil society, and reserved broadcast spectrum for local NPR and PBS stations.

During these decades, broadcasters were held to a standard of public trusteeship, in which the right to use the airwaves came with a mandate to provide for democratic discourse. Broadcasters made money lots of it but profit wasnt their only reason for existing. The networks had a public-service obligation, and when they went to get their licenses renewed, the news divisions fulfilled that, says Matthew Gentzkow, an economist at Stanford who studies trust in information. The model coincided with a rare period, in American history, of relatively high levels of trust in media and low levels of political polarization.

Follow this link:
The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation ...

Governments and school boards have wide leeway in setting curriculums in K-12 public schools, where courts have generally held that teachers do not have the same degree of academic freedom as those in universities. But many of these bills, PEN argues, are written so vaguely that they may chill a broad range of speech.

This over-breadth and ambiguity is why they are so alarming, Jonathan Friedman, PENs director of free of expression and education, said. The truth is, most administrators and general counsels will quickly say, lets not run afoul of this.

Erwin Chemerinsky, a First Amendment expert and the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley, who previewed the report, agreed. Whenever the government regulates speech, it has to be clear about whats prohibited and whats allowed, he said. These laws are so vague in their wording that a teacher cant tell.

According to PEN, nine bills specifically target critical race theory. Eleven bills explicitly ban lessons based on the 1619 Project, an initiative by The New York Times Magazine exploring the history and continuing legacy of slavery that has been adapted into a classroom curriculum.

So far, by PENs count, 11 bills have become law, in nine states, sometimes within days of being introduced. Another 18 are pending from the 2021 legislative session, and six more have already been drafted for consideration for 2022.

Many of the bills, according to PEN, include language that purports to affirm freedom of speech and thought. Ten bills prohibit schools or teachers from compelling a person to affirm belief in a divisive concept, while eight mandate balanced teaching of controversial topics. (In Texas, such a law recently led one school official last month to suggest that educators who teach the Holocaust should make sure to have books that offer opposing views.)

Read more here:
Bans on Critical Race Theory Threaten Free Speech, Advocacy Group Says - The New York Times

Hundreds of college professors pleaded to join a new university dedicated to free speech just hours after it was announced, a founding faculty member told Fox News on Monday.

The University of Austin a newly founded college announced on Bari Weiss' substack Monday is committed to "freedom of inquiry, freedom of conscience, and civil discourse," according to the school's website. Its primary founders are vocal critics of the direction traditional academic institutions have taken.

Texas State Capitol in Austin, TX (Texas Legislature)

"One fellow even said Im caught in an insane asylum, everybodys gone crazy, I will work for half," a founding faculty fellow and former Portland State University professor, Peter Boghossian, told Fox News in an exclusive interview. "They're desperate to get out. They can't stand the illiberalism."

"They can't stand the censoriousness, they can't stand the diversity statements," he continued. "They can't stand pretending to believe something that not only do they not believe, they just know it is false, but they can't do anything about it lest they receive accusations of bigotry or discrimination."

PORTLAND STATE PROFESSOR RESIGNS AFTER UNIVERSITY MUZZLES PHILOSOPHY, FREE SPEECH: IT'S A 'DOGMA FACTORY'

Boghossian said the new school is not conservative.

"The purpose of the university, it's based upon free speech, free inquiry, the open exchange of ideas. It is an on-ground campus," Boghossian told Fox News.

"This has people from all over the intellectual, political, moral spectrum," he said. "When I say intellectual spectrum, I mean they've published different things, scholarly outlooks, different epistemologies, different ways to approach problems, and it's needed because our institutions now have been hijacked by maniacs."

"It's not liberals who have taken over the institutions," Boghossian added. "It's authoritarians who have taken over the institutionstraditional academic institutions."

Dr. Peter Boghossian (John Rudoff/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images))

The University of Austin is seeking accreditation and isn't currently offering degrees, according to its website. Boghossian told Fox News the process takes time and called the first courses "pilot programs."

"We are done waiting for the legacy universities to right themselves," University of Austin President Pano Kanelos wrote in the article posted in Weiss' newsletter. "And so we are building anew."

Bari Weiss, a former New York Times columnist, famously quit the liberal paper in a scathing resignation letter that claimed she was bullied by colleagues in an "illiberal environment."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

University of Austin is a private, nonprofit institution sponsored by Cicero Research, itself a nonprofit organization. The university will begin offering master's programs in fall 2022 and plans to launch an undergraduate college in 2024, according to the school's website.

See the article here:
University of Austin dedicated to free speech will counter colleges 'hijacked by maniacs,' founding prof says - Fox News