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

Thursday, July 30, 2026

Elon Musk’s xAI sues Minnesota over law banning ‘nudification’ technology; Associated Press via The Guardian, July 29, 2026

 Associated Press via The Guardian; Elon Musk’s xAI sues Minnesota over law banning ‘nudification’ technology

"Elon Musk’s company xAI has sued Minnesota over the state’s first-in-the-nation law banning “nudification” technology on websites and apps, potentially providing a test for how far states can go in constitutionally regulating the use of artificial intelligence.

Musk’s company sued on Monday in federal court, days before the law is set to take effect on Saturday and make Minnesota the first state to try to outlaw the increasingly proliferating technology that lets people use AI to create fake nude images of real people. The law was signed in May.

In the 38-page lawsuit, xAI – whose AI model chatbot and image generator Grok is available on the social media platform known as X, formerly Twitter, and elsewhere – said it does not contest the state’s interest in banning the distribution of AI-generated nude images of real people without their consent. But it said Minnesota’s law “extends far beyond that goal”, banning many constitutionally protected images and video and subjecting the company to a penalty of $500,000 for each violation."

Saturday, May 9, 2026

Banned Nonfiction Books Double in Public Schools, Erasing Authentic Stories & Histories; PEN America, May 7, 2026

 PEN America; Banned Nonfiction Books Double in Public Schools, Erasing Authentic Stories & Histories

"In its latest report on book bans in public schools, PEN America today documents a doubling of censorship of nonfiction on subjects from history and health to general knowledge, including biographies and memoirs. The targeting of titles about real events or people underscores “an embrace of anti-intellectualism” within the book banning movement, according to the new report Facts & Fiction: Stories Stripped Away By Book Bans.

The report offers detailed analysis of the content of the 3,743 unique titles that were removed from school libraries and classrooms from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025. Over this same period, PEN America tracked 6,780 total instances of bans across 23 states.


Twenty-nine percent of the unique titles banned last school year were nonfiction. In addition, approximately 13% of all unique titles fell into the educational/informational genre – texts primarily written for students for reference or learning purposes and covering a range of subjects. Overall, the rise of banned nonfiction and educational titles exposed a new casualty in the campaign to suppress and restrict learning, which goes hand in hand with efforts to undermine public education and librarianship itself, the report states.


“This latest trend shows an embrace of anti-intellectualism, undermining public knowledge by  devaluing education and expertise,” said Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America’s Freedom to Read program. “It is another example of how censorship sweeps broadly, leading to removals of all kinds of books, in its efforts to sow fear and distrust in our public education system.”


As book bans in public schools have exploded since 2021, PEN America, the writers and free expression organization, has documented the crisis nationwide, counting more than 23,000 bans over the period.


The increase in nonfiction bans over 2024-2025 is especially troubling as reading scores and literacy rates decline while the report notes that nonfiction “is the gateway to literacy” and essential for young people to make sense of the world and form their own opinions. Books in this category often deal with personal, artistic, historical, and educational topics – just this month, Utah added the memoir of Jaycee Dugard, who was abducted from the street at age 11 and held for 18 years, to its list of books banned statewide."

Friday, May 8, 2026

ABC Accuses Government of Violating First Amendment; The New York Times, May 8, 2026

 Jim Rutenberg and  , The New York Times; ABC Accuses Government of Violating First Amendment

The network’s argument, made to the F.C.C., is the most aggressive posture taken yet by a television network toward the Trump administration.

"ABC has accused the Federal Communications Commission of violating its free speech rights, potentially setting the stage for a protracted, high-stakes legal battle between the network and the Trump administration.

The company said in a filing with the agency that regulators had a “chilling effect” on free speech by trying to punish political content they disagreed with. The filing, made public on Friday, is the most aggressive defense from any television network since President Trump kicked off an extended campaign last year to bring media organizations to heel.

It represented a striking departure for ABC. The network, under the corporate stewardship of the Walt Disney Company, set an early tone of compliance toward Mr. Trump when it settled a defamation lawsuit with him for $15 million in December 2024. Many legal experts considered Mr. Trump’s case unlikely to succeed in court.

The filing was registered on behalf of a single ABC station in Houston and involved a minor regulatory dispute over the talk show “The View.” But in a signal of its importance, the company’s paperwork was signed by one of the most experienced Supreme Court litigators in the country, Paul D. Clement, a solicitor general under President George W. Bush."

Friday, February 6, 2026

Grant Guidelines for Libraries and Museums Take “Chilling” Political Turn Under Trump; ProPublica, February 6, 2026

 Jaimie Seaton , ProPublica; Grant Guidelines for Libraries and Museums Take “Chilling” Political Turn Under Trump


[Kip Currier: ProPublica's 2//6/26 article detailing Trump 2.0 guidelines for IMLS grant applications should be deeply concerning for anyone who values scholarly inquiry and academic freedom. 

IMLS grant applicants are told that the agency "particularly welcomes” projects that align with President Donald Trump’s vision for America".

The description goes on to note that the kinds of projects that would be favored "would include those that foster an appreciation for the country “through uplifting and positive narratives". Stop and think about that language for a moment -- "through uplifting and positive narratives". A "problem statement" is an essential component of most grant applications and is often the fundamental component of research. Problems by their very nature are almost always not uplifting and positive. But it is crucial for researchers and research grant applicants to identify problems in order to understand and solve problems.

As the ProPublica article's author notes, IMLS grant application guidelines have historically been apolitical. These Trump 2.0 IMLS grant guidelines are nakedly political and evince an intent to suppress research that does not fit within the narrowly-defined contours of "acceptable research" by the present administration. Such brazen bias is antithetical to free societies, healthy, functioning democracies, and the ideals of scientific inquiry by higher education and research organizations.]


[Excerpt]

"A library in rural Alaska needed help providing free Wi-Fi and getting kids to read. A children’s museum in Washington wanted to expand its Little Science Lab. And a World War I museum in Missouri had a raft of historic documents it needed to digitize. They received funding from a little-known federal agency before the Trump administration unsuccessfully tried to dismantle it last year.

The Institute of Museum and Library Services is now accepting applications for its 2026 grant cycle. But this time, it has unusually specific criteria.

In cover letters accompanying the applications, the institute said it “particularly welcomes” projects that align with President Donald Trump’s vision for America.

These would include those that foster an appreciation for the country “through uplifting and positive narratives,” the agency writes, citing an executive order that attacks the Smithsonian Institution for its “divisive, race-centered ideology.” (Trump has said the museum focused too much on “how bad slavery was.”) The agency also points to an executive order calling for the end of “the anti-Christian weaponization of government” and one titled Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again.

The solicitation marks a stark departure for the agency, whose guidelines were previously apolitical and focused on merit.

Former agency leaders from both political parties, as well as those of library, historical and museum associations, expressed concern that funded projects could encourage a more constrained or distorted view of American history. Some also feared that by accepting grants, institutions would open themselves up to scrutiny and control, like the administration’s wide-ranging audit of Smithsonian exhibits “to assess tone, historical framing and alignment with American ideals.”"

Monday, February 2, 2026

Is Jeff Bezos going to destroy the Washington Post? It sure looks like it; The Guardian, February 2, 2026

 , The Guardian; Is Jeff Bezos going to destroy the Washington Post? It sure looks like it

"The turn began in earnest when Bezos – apparently trying to protect his other commercial interests – spiked the draft of an editorial endorsing Kamala Harris for president. Whatever one thinks about endorsement editorials, the timing was terrible; it was the 11th hour, shortly before the 2024 election.

Unsurprisingly, droves of Post subscribers canceled. They were disgusted by the apparent effort to please Donald Trump at the price of editorial independence.

Later, even more subscribers decamped after Bezos made it clear that he wanted its opinion section to take a sharp right turn. Some of the nation’s best columnists departed, and a fine cartoonist, Ann Telnaes, left after she tried to publish a cartoon depicting Bezos and others of his ilk cozying up to Trump. On the news side, many of the paper’s star reporters and editors left for places like the Atlantic, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

Since then, Bezos only continued down this misbegotten path, with Amazon contributing to the Trump inauguration and putting a ridiculous $40m behind a regrettable Melania Trump documentary that is leaving seats empty in a theater near you."

Friday, January 9, 2026

Washington National Opera Is Leaving the Kennedy Center; The New York Times, January 9, 2026

 , The New York Times; Washington National Opera Is Leaving the Kennedy Center

"The Washington National Opera decided on Friday to move its performances out of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, abandoning the hall where it has played since 1971 in perhaps the largest artistic rebuke yet to President Trump’s campaign to remake the Kennedy Center in his image.

The opera company is seeking to sever its ties with the Kennedy Center after a tumultuous year in which both groups have faced cancellations by artists, empty seats and the retrenchment of donors protesting Mr. Trump’s intervention. Within weeks of beginning his second term, the president named himself chairmanof the center and installed a political ally, Richard Grenell, as its executive director, while filling its board with supporters.

A resolution to leave was approved by the Washington National Opera’s board of trustees on Friday, according to a statement the opera provided to The New York Times...

Officials with the Washington National Opera noted that operas often advance strong political and moral points of views — whether they were written two centuries or two years ago — and that they were worried they would be blocked from performing operas that did not follow Mr. Grenell’s edicts. Among its programming this season is Robert Ward’s “The Crucible,” based on the Arthur Miller play that explored the waves of paranoia overtaking a small town during the Salem witch trials of the 17th century."

With Pittsburgh set to lose legacy paper, experts talk impact of Post-Gazette closure announcement; WESA, January 7, 2026

 Julia Maruca , 90.5 WESA; With Pittsburgh set to lose legacy paper, experts talk impact of Post-Gazette closure announcement

"Wednesday’s announced closure of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has left media experts reeling and wondering about what the future holds for the city’s news environment...

The Blocks’ announced intention to shut down the Post-Gazette — following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to deny the company’s application for a stay in reinstating health care for the workers — means Pittsburgh and its surrounding areas will lose their oldest newspaper.

The legacy publication, first started in 1786 by John Scull and Joseph Hall as the Pittsburgh Gazette, has long touted itself as the “the first newspaper west of the Allegheny Mountains.” And after the paper publishes its last issue this May, the Pittsburgh metropolitan area of 1.2 million people will be without a daily newspaper specifically dedicated to covering the city...

“ One would imagine any number of other parties may be interested in talking with the Blocks about possibly purchasing some or all of the assets of the paper. There are still a lot of open questions,” Davidson said. “I don't think we've seen the end of this story yet.”"

Wednesday, January 7, 2026

Trumpy Owners Close Major City’s Pulitzer-Winning Newspaper: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is the region’s largest newspaper.; The Daily Beast, January 7, 2026

 , The Daily Beast; Trumpy Owners Close Major City’s Pulitzer-Winning Newspaper: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is the region’s largest newspaper.

"Billionaire twins John and Allan Block suddenly told dozens of workers for the 125-year-old Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that it will cease publication on May 3. The paper had won a Pulitzer Prize in 2019 for its coverage of the Tree of Life Synagogue massacre. But at 1:15 p.m., with just 45 minutes notice, they played a pre-taped Zoom announcement that the newspaper would close completely...

The twins are third generation owners of the paper through the family company Block Communications which also owns the Toledo Blade...

The twins, 71, have heavily backed President Donald Trump and have donated thousands of dollars to Republican causes...

Two years later, the Post-Gazette made national headlines for “shifting right” after John Block fired the Post-Gazette’s veteran cartoonist, Rob Rogers, over cartoons critical of Trump.

During the president’s 2020 campaign, John Block ordered the editorial board to endorse Trump—despite previously granting its request not to endorse a candidate—an insider at the publication told the Daily Beast. The board was forced to scrap its planned editorial just an hour before the print deadline and hastily write a new piece backing Trump, much to the staffers’ dismay.

On Wednesday, the brothers delivered the stunning news to staff via a brief, pre-recorded video, Post-Gazette reporters told the Daily Beast—despite owning multiple properties within short driving distance of the newsroom, including John Block’s sprawling Squirrel Hill mansion worth over $1.5 million.

Instead, staffers received an email at 12:34 p.m. informing them of a mandatory online meeting scheduled for 1:15 p.m. The meeting turned out to be a pre-recorded message that reporters described as “dehumanizing.”"...

Tensions between ownership and union journalists reached a boiling point in 2019, when John Block reportedly stormed into the newsroom and threatened to “burn the place down.”

Several staffers believe the Blocks are shutting down the outlet as punishment after a federal appeals court upheld a November ruling finding that the Post-Gazette illegally declared an impasse in union negotiations to impose its own terms."

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Announces It Will Cease Operations; The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, January 7, 2026

 , The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Announces It Will Cease Operations


[Kip Currier: As someone who loves and depends on the vital access to information that newspapers singularly provide, my heart sunk when I saw this breaking news New York Times story about the Block family's decision to shutter The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, as of May 3, 2026. It's a shocking and yet not surprising development, given the appalling manner in which the Block family has managed this storied newspaper for more than a decade:

The most unfortunate victims of the Block family's actions are the newspaper staff, the residents of the Greater Pittsburgh area, and all those who are interested in news involving this region.]


[Excerpt]

"The family-owned company that operates The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette said on Wednesday that the newspaper would cease publication on Sunday, May 3, signaling the end of a newspaper whose origins date to 1786.

The company, Block Communications Inc., said it had lost more than $350 million over the past 20 years while publishing the newspaper. In a statement, it said the financial pressures facing local journalism had made “continued cash losses at this scale no longer sustainable.”

The company cited recent court decisions that would require The Post-Gazette to operate under the terms of a 2014 labor contract, which it described as imposing “outdated and inflexible operational practices.” 

The Post-Gazette’s closure will not affect The Toledo Blade in Ohio, which is also owned by Block Communications. The company is based in Toledo.

The Post-Gazette’s closure will not affect The Toledo Blade in Ohio, which is also owned by Block Communications. The company is based in Toledo.

In a statement, the Block family said it regretted how the loss of the newspaper would affect the communities it has served. The family said it was “proud of the service The Post-Gazette has provided to Pittsburgh for nearly a century.”"

Saturday, October 4, 2025

Weber State cracks down on censorship conference; KSL.com, October 2, 2025

 

Par Kermani, KSL.com ; Weber State cracks down on censorship conference

  • Weber State University canceled its Unity Conference due to diversity initiative shifts.
  • The 2024 Utah law requires eliminating diversity programs at public institutions.
  • The Wildcat Collective, which operates outside of official university programming, organized an uncensored version of the conference for Friday."

Sunday, September 7, 2025

The USTA’s censorship of Trump dissent at the US Open is cowardly, hypocritical and un-American; The Guardian, September 7, 2025

  , The Guardian ; The USTA’s censorship of Trump dissent at the US Open is cowardly, hypocritical and un-American

"When the dust finally settles in the days after Sunday’s eagerly awaited US Open men’s final, the United States Tennis Association will issue its annual victory-lap press release. It will tout another record-setting Open: more than a million fans through the gates, unprecedented social-media engagement, double-digit growth in food and beverage sales, and hundreds of celebrities packed into suites from Rolex to Ralph Lauren. It will beam about growing the game, championing diversity and turning Flushing Meadows into a pop-culture destination.

But for all the milestones the USTA is preparing to celebrate, this year’s tournament will be remembered for a different kind of first: the governing body’s lamentable decision to ask broadcasters not to show dissent against Donald Trump. In making that pre-emptive concession, the USTA has committed an unforced error that can’t be undone: sacrificing authenticity and credibility in order to shield a politician – any politician, regardless of party, ideology or affiliation – from the sound of public disapproval.

According to internal emails obtained by outlets including PA and Bounces, the USTA instructed its television partners to “refrain from showcasing any disruptions or reactions” when Trump appears on screen during Sunday’s final. A separate note reminded staff he would be seated in Rolex’s suite as a client guest. The 11-word statement to the Guardian on Saturday night from a USTA spokesperson – “We regularly ask our broadcasters to refrain from showcasing off-court disruptions” – is so weak it could buckle under the weight of its own hypocrisy. (Rolex did not respond to a request for comment.)"

Saturday, March 1, 2025

How to Assess the New Legal Risks of Your DEI Policies; Harvard Business Review (HBR), February 27, 2025

 and , Harvard Business Review (HBR); How to Assess the New Legal Risks of Your DEI Policies

"With a series of executive orders, the Trump administration has put a target on corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. As of this writing, key portions have been enjoined by a federal court. Yet the administration has signaled its intention to make noncompliance so punitive that many companies still are scrambling to review their DEI programs and practices for EO compliance.

In the rush, two key facts are getting lost in the shuffle. The first is that core federal and state equal employment opportunity (EEO) laws have not changed. Trump’s executive orders did end federal contractor affirmative action programs, and Trump can direct federal employees to take certain actions against “illegal” DEI policies and programs. But what is “illegal” under core EEO laws today hasn’t changed from before President Trump took office. This highlights that what companies are concerned about is not entirely legal risk, but regulatory and litigation risk.

The second core fact is that companies have a First Amendment right to express their views on DEI. This right was affirmed in the spring of 2024 by a conservative-leaning panel of judges of the Eleventh Circuit, which struck down Florida’s prohibiting companies from expressing certain ideas in DEI trainings.

But with Attorney General Pam Bondi’s February 5th memo directing the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division “to investigate, eliminate, and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities in the private sector,” leaders are understandably and urgently looking for guidance on how to pursue their lawful, fair, and business-driven DEI initiatives."

Thursday, February 27, 2025

Jeff Bezos’s Hypocritical Assertion of Power; The Atlantic, February 26, 2025

 Joshua Benton, The Atlantic; 

His decision will only make The Washington Post a weaker institution. 


"But the scale of the hypocrisy on display here is eye-watering, and this decision can only make the Post a weaker institution.

Let’s get the motivation out of the way. This is the same Jeff Bezos who decided to cancel the Post’s endorsement of Kamala Harris just before the election—a move that led more than 250,000 paying Post readers to cancel their subscriptions within days. The same Bezos who flew to Mar-a-Lago to cozy up to Donald Trump after the election. The same Bezos whose Amazon donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund and paid $40 million for a Melania Trump documentary—the most it had ever paid for a doc, nearly three times what any other studio offered, and more than 70 percent of whichwill go directly into Trump’s pockets. All of that cash seems to have served as a sort of personal seat license for Bezos, earning him a spot right behind the president at the inauguration. The tech aristocracy’s rightward turn is by now a familiar theme of the postelection period, and it doesn’t take much brain power to see today’s announcement as part of the same shift."

Dying in Darkness: Jeff Bezos Turns Out the Lights in the Washington Post’s Opinion Section; Politico, February 26, 2025

 MICHAEL SCHAFFER , Politico; Dying in Darkness: Jeff Bezos Turns Out the Lights in the Washington Post’s Opinion Section

"In personally announcing that he was dramatically re-orienting the editorial line, and in fact wouldn’t even run dissenting views, Bezos added another sharp example to a narrative that represents a grave threat to the Post’s image: The idea that its owner is messing around with the product in order to curry favor with his new pal Donald Trump, who has the power to withhold contracts from Amazon and other Bezos companies.

The paper’s image is not some abstract question for journalism-school professors. It’s a matter of dollars and cents. If readers don’t trust a publication’s name, no amount of Pulitzer-worthy scoops will fix it. For Bezos, a guy who believes that the Post needs to gain a broad-based audience, it’s a baffling blind spot...

Owners may get the final say at publications they own, but the wisest among them have let their newsrooms and editorial boards make their own decisions without fear or favor. That’s to prevent the very impression that Bezos is making — that of a mogul trying to disguise his own predilections as independent thought...

Yet even as leadership talked about amping up readership, the owner personally alienated real and potential readers: first by spiking the endorsement, then by showing up in the line of moguls at Trump’s inauguration and now by declaring that the publication would have one editorial line for all of its contributors. It all made his publication look wimpy, or possibly corrupt.

Instead of being an occasionally fussy repository of mostly mainstream points of view, the venerable publication’s opinion pages now risk looking like a vessel for a very rich owner to curry favor with the man who runs the government. It’s going to be hard to keep that image from sticking to the whole organization — including the non-wimpy, non-corrupt reporting corps that keep digging up scoops on the administration.

Bezos, of all people, should know this: He’s the branding whiz who came up with “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

Among many journalists, Wednesday’s bombshell announcement is being debated as a matter of media ethics: Was Bezos within his rights as an owner to call the tune on opinion matters? Or was this type of process meddling a violation of norms that go back at least to the 1950s?...

“I am of America and for America, and proud to be so,” he added. “Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical; it drives creativity, invention and prosperity.”

Sounds good late at night in the dorm room. But does said freedom include, say, the freedom to start a union at an Amazon warehouse? Or run a business without worrying that some monopolistic e-commerce behemoth is going to drive you under? Come to think of it, these sound like great subjects for energetic debate on a pluralistic op-ed page somewhere. Too bad Bezos, instead of embracing the great American history of arguing about freedom, announced that he’s not so keen on debate."

Monday, January 6, 2025

CSotD: Telnaes is only unemployed, not gone; The Daily Cartoonist, January 4, 2025

 , The Daily Cartoonist; CSotD: Telnaes is only unemployed, not gone

"We try to avoid duplication and stepping on each other’s toes around here, and by now you’ve likely seen DD Degg’s coverage of Ann Telnaes’ resignation from the Washington Post. And if you haven’t seen his coverage here, you’ve almost certainly seen some coverage because it is all over the Internet, with regret and praise coming from around the globe. As of seven this morning, her Substack announcement had 5,307 likes and had been shared 910 times...

Seeing these pieces on the importance of political cartooning and press freedom, it’s easy to recognize how inconsistent it would have been for her to accept the squelching of her voice by the Post’s current management.

Telnaes will no longer be on the pages of the Washington Post, but perhaps going out into the wider world will make her voice heard by a more diverse audience, particularly if the Post continues to cater to the new administration while hemorrhaging both talent and readership.

She’ll need support on her Substack, by which I mean subscriptions, not just applause, and if you haven’t been supporting small and local media outlets, this is an excellent place to start. 

The cartoon her editor refused to run, which was the final straw that induced her to walk away from a prestigious and well-paying job, offers the very reasonable suggestion that the billionaires who control major media are selling out to the administration, not just with obedience but in several cases with substantial financial contributions.


And here’s something else they’d just as soon not hear anyone say: It seems that major media may be working to gain influence with the wrong people, that they’re making friends with oligarchs but losing touch with their actual customers...


Samizdat is a term that defined underground writings — mimeographed or photocopied — that circulated in the Soviet Union as it began to totter and crash. In our country, in these times, we’re seeing the growth of Substacks and other small-scale publishing by people who, like Ann Telnaes, want to say what they think needs to be said, without being filtered and both-sidesed and required to be “fair and balanced” by management that is more interested in marketing than in journalism.


Supporting small publishers and individual writers matters. The big boys will get along with or without you, but the voices we need to hear need backing."

Monday, October 30, 2023

Books under attack, then and now; MIT News, October 26, 2023

  MIT Libraries, MIT News; Books under attack, then and now

"Richard Ovenden was dressed appropriately for the start of Banned Books Week. He proudly displayed the American Library Association’s “Free people read freely” T-shirt as he approached the podium at Hayden Library on Oct. 2. Ovenden, Bodley’s Librarian at the University of Oxford, spoke about the willful destruction of recorded knowledge for an event titled “Book Wars,” the inaugural event in a new series called Conversations on Academic Freedom and Expression (CAFE), a collaboration between the MIT Libraries and History at MIT. 

“The idea for CAFE is to introduce the MIT community to the broader landscape of what’s going on in the world of academic freedom and free expression, beyond some of our local exchanges,” says Malick Ghachem, history professor and department head and a member of MIT’s Ad Hoc Working Group on Free Expression. 

“The libraries were a natural partner for the CAFE series,” says Chris Bourg, director of MIT Libraries. “The value of free and open access to information underpins everything we do.” 

Ovenden, who writes extensively on libraries, archives, and information management, is the author of “Burning the Books: A History of the Deliberate Destruction of Knowledge,” which was shortlisted for the Wolfson History Prize in 2021. In his MIT talk he provided a historical overview of attacks on libraries — from the library of Ashurbanipal in the Assyrian capital of Nineveh (now northern Iraq), destroyed by fire in 612 BC, to book burning under the Nazi regime to current efforts across the United States to remove or restrict access to books.

In spite of this history of loss, Ovenden finds hope in “the human impulse to preserve, to pass on, to bear witness, to allow for diverse ideas to thrive.” He detailed the extraordinary actions people have taken to save knowledge, citing the “Paper Brigade,” a forced labor unit of poets and intellectuals in Nazi-occupied Vilnius who smuggled and hid rare books and manuscripts, and the tragic death of Aida Buturovic, a 32-year-old librarian who was killed as she tried to rescue books during the 1992 assault on the National and University Library in Sarajevo.

Ovenden concluded by making the case that libraries and archives are the infrastructure for democracy — institutions dedicated not only to education, but to safeguarding the rights of citizens, providing reference points for facts and truth, preserving identity, and enabling a diversity of views. Despite millennia of attacks, libraries continue to fight back, most recently with public libraries expanding digital access to combat book bans nationwide. 

Following Ovenden’s talk, Ghachem led a discussion and audience Q&A that touched on the connections between book bans and so-called “cancel culture,” how censorship itself is used as a means of expressing political views, and growing distrust of expertise.  

The CAFE series is one of several opportunities to engage the Institute community that emerged from the Report of the MIT Ad Hoc Working Group on Free Expression. Ghachem also started a new first-year advising seminar, “Free Expression, Pluralism, and the University,” and the Institute Community and Equity Office launched Dialogues Across Difference: Building Community at MIT. A second CAFE event is being planned for the spring term. 

“At this moment in our history, we should try to encourage discussion, and not debate,” said Ovenden. “We must try to move away from this idea that it’s a contest, that it’s a battle, and encourage and foster the idea of listening and discussion. And that's all part of the deliberation that I think is necessary for a healthy society.”" 

Saturday, April 1, 2023

Zoom Panel: Haven’t We Been Here Before: A Panel Discussion on Banning LGBTQIA+ Books. Wednesday, April 5. 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM EDT. University of Pittsburgh

Haven’t We Been Here Before: A Panel Discussion on Banning LGBTQIA+ BooksWednesday, April 5. 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM EDT. University of Pittsburgh

https://calendar.pitt.edu/event/been_here_before#.ZCgmRi-B2_U

[This session will be live via Zoom and also recorded for asynchronous viewing, following processing by Pitt. See registration link.]

There has been a recent uptick in attempts to remove or ban certain books from schools, public libraries and other educational spaces. In 2022 alone, 4 in 10 banned books contained LGBTQIA+ themes and representation, according to PEN America, a nonprofit organization that works to defend and celebrate free expression through the advancement of literature and human rights. 

Join the University Library System and the Pitt Queer Professionals for a lively virtual panel discussion with education, literary and legal experts on intellectual freedom and the societal impact of banning books. Guest panelists will be Dr. James “Kip” Currier, Assistant Professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information (SCI) in the Information Culture and Data Stewardship (ICDS) Department, Dr. Katrina Bartow Jacobs, Associate Professor of Practice of Language, Literacy, and Culture within the Department of Teaching, Learning, and Leading and Jeff Trexler, Interim Director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, an American non-profit organization formed to protect the First Amendment rights of comics creators, publishers, and retailers. The panel will be moderated by Acacia O’Connor (they/them/theirs) currently the University’s Executive Director of Social Media, and former manager of the Kids’ Right to Read Project of the National Coalition Against Censorship.  

Dial-In Information

Register at https://pitt.libcal.com/event/10570583Links to an external site.

Wednesday, April 5 at 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

 Virtual Event

 Filter replies by unread