Mediaboss Marketing

Heard about the new James Bond movie, soon going into production, which features a Chinese hacker who manages to penetrate the northeastern United States electric grid?

Thought so. It is not actually in production, nor is it ever going to be. From now on, entertainment may feature American villains, Russian villains, evil Iranians, Germans, and cops, but there wont be a new Dr. No. Chinese censors wouldnt like it, so why bother trying? Attempts to stay on Chinas good side have gone so far that in its new live-action version of the movie Mulan, Disney even credits the Turpan Public Security Bureau, an institution that helps operate Uighur internment camps.

Such behavior is not just demeaning to the artists involved, its harmful to democracy. And although the Chinese censors are mighty, they can be defeated through collective action. Artists of the world, unite!

For the past several years, a specter has been haunting Europe, North America, Japan, South Korea, and many other democratically ruled lands: censorship. Beijing has done its best to strengthen that ghost through its various weapons for controlling the media: its State Film Administration, State Administration of Radio and Television, and State Administration of Press and Publication; the China Film Group Corporation; the China Film Co-Production Corporation; and the Central Committee Publicity Department.

Two years ago, Disney, the powerful studio now humbly thanking an arm of the Chinese government, was seemingly unaware of Beijings reach. When Disney released Christopher Robin, a live-action version of the beloved Winnie the Pooh stories, it found the film mysteriously blocked from the 1.4 billion viewers in the Chinese market. Christopher Robin featured no subtle mention of Tibet, no Chinese villain in the Hundred Acre Wood. The likely problem? Winnie the Pooh happens to look a lot like Chinese President Xi Jinping, which caused merriment after enterprising Chinese Internet users posted images of the two.

Tinseltown has learned to be more circumspect, as the nonprofit PEN America detailed in a recent report. Hollywood studios increasingly see access to China as a prerequisite for their movies financial success, PEN noted. Given that Chinas movie market overtook the United States for a quarter in 2018, thats entirely logical. But Hollywood cant bring movies to China the way it does to, say, Switzerland or India. If it wants movies released in China, it needs to please the countrys censors. Failing to do that can be the difference between a black and a red bottom line. In turn, Beijing bureaucrats can demand changes to Hollywood moviesor expect Hollywood insiders to anticipate and make these changes, unprompted, according to PEN America.

As a result, the censors usually dont even need to ply their trade. The moviemakers try their hardest to anticipate what may encounter disapprovaland that means a lot of sanitizing just in case. The trailer for a forthcoming Top Gun sequel, for example, shows Tom Cruise wearing his familiar bomber jacket, but with the flags of Taiwan and Japan altered. Richard Gerea public supporter of Tibethas said hes losing movie roles. And when the director of Seven Years in Tibet, Jean-Jacques Annaud, was recently given a new movie to direct, he published a Chinese-language penitential blog post so obsequious that it could have been written during a show trial. I have always respected the rules of international conventions that acknowledge that Tibet is a part of Chinese territory, Annaud swore.

The artistic harm is not limited to movies. When the Swedish pop star Zara Larsson announced earlier this summer that she had ended her sponsorship deal with Huawei because China is not a nice government, her songs swiftly disappeared from Apple in China. But none of Larssons fellow pop stars came to her rescue. Why should they? Theyve got their own income to protect. Too bad for those other artists who are either so naive or so foolhardy that they dare criticize the country that can fill their bank accounts.

But invisible censorship leads to a life led in fear, not to mention creative paralysis. Partial paralysis has already set in, thanks to the United States own outsized role in cultural production. Last year, the majority of the 20 top-grossing movies were American. Stars of music and film alike are adopting American themes, expressions, and language. Wang Ju, known as Chinas Beyonc, raps in Chinese and English. The Eurovision Song Contests top songs are now sung in English even though the United Kingdom is a minimal (and rather embarrassing) presence. The breadth of other countries cultures deserves more attention in pop culture. But Chinas censors are not going to liberate the world from Hollywood creep. On the contrary, theyre a foe mightier even than Hollywood. It is high time for artists to openly publish their views on censorship and offer a manifesto of artistic freedom.

That means: Artists of the world, unite! Unite even though income from China is alluring, especially with the global entertainment market expected to shrink by 6 percent this year. Dont abandon Pooh Bear simply because he happens to look like Xi. Make a movie about Tibet, Hong Kong booksellers, or Uighur reeducation camp inmates if you like, not to demean Beijing but because its compelling cinematic material. Hire Gere if hes right for the role. Speak up for Larsson, who dares to say what everyone should have said. By all means, be apolitical as well when it suits. But kowtowing is no guarantee against eventually finding oneself frozen out.

China may be one of the worlds biggest entertainment markets, but artists in the West are among the biggest creators. If they were to stop showing their movies in Chinese cinemas, performing at Chinese arenas, and selling their songs to smartphone users in Chinaif the NBA were to stop playing in China to point out that Beijing has no right to censor NBA managers views on Hong Kongit would be Beijing that would have to contend with a very large number of unhappy people.

For the past few years, Beijing has singled out Sweden as its favorite bullying victim, with the countrys ambassador to Sweden comparing his host countrys media to a lightweight boxer versus China, the heavyweight, and threatening consequences over a literary reward given to a Hong Kong bookseller with Swedish nationality. But when it comes to pop music, Sweden is the heavyweight boxer. Its many producersthink of Max Martin and Shellbackare the best in the world. Only Paul McCartney and John Lennon have written more Billboard No. 1 hits than Martin. Taylor Swift, Ed Sheeran, and Ariana Grande are all his collaborators. His protg, Shellback, boasts a similarly impressive rsum that includes Katy Perry and the Jonas Brothers.

The West shouldnt lecture other countries or demand that they conform to its way of life. But if the governments of those countries want access to Western societies, the deal includes accepting mentions of free Tibet and images of Winnie the Pooh. Every German leader has to put up with Hitler mustaches drawn onto pictures of them. Even Russian President Vladimir Putin permits Russian translations of books critical of his country. It would be wrong for Western leaders to read Xi the Riot Act on freedom of expression, but if artists unite rather than trying to maximize their individual advantage, they have a chance of succeeding. If it were Martin versus Xi, its clear who people would root for.

Read the rest here:
Artists of the World, Unite Against Chinese-Driven Cultural Paralysis - Foreign Policy

One aspect of the 2020 presidential campaign that isnt much discussed is the fact that both candidates want to end the internet as we know it. Both President Trump and Joe Biden have called for the end of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects tech companies in most cases when their users post something illegal on their platforms.

Trump brought the subject up today when a Twitter account with fewer than 200 followers posted an obviously doctored image of Senate Majority Mitch McConnell dressed up in Soviety military garb, with the caption reading Moscow Mitch.

Why does Twitter leave phony pictures like this up, but take down Republican/Conservative pictures and statements that are true? the president wanted to know. Mitch must fight back and repeal Section 230, immediately. Stop biased Big Tech before they stop you!

He then tagged Republican senators Marsha Blackburn and Josh Hawley, who reliably step up to lodge baseless complaints about systematic bias against their party whenever called upon. (In fact, they introduced something called the Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act on Tuesday, the point of which seems to be to stop social networks from doing so much moderating.)

The reason Twitter (usually) leaves phony pictures like that up is that the United States permits its citizens to speak freely about politicians even to say mean things about them. Repealing Section 230 would likely have no impact on the tweet in question, because the Twitter users speech is protected under the First Amendment.

It might, however, make Twitter legally liable for what its users post which would lead the company to remove more speech, not less. Whatever repealing Section 230 might achieve, it would not be what the president seems to want.

Anyway, all of this is well known to followers of the long-running Section 230 debates and seemingly impenetrable to everyone else. But if theres one important lesson from 2020, its that long-running debates over expression can sometimes result in clumsy but decisive actions ask TikTok! And so its worth spending a few more minutes talking about what smarter people say ought to be done about Section 230.

As it so happens, theres a sharp new report today out on the subject. Paul Barrett at the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights looks at the origins and evolution of Section 230, evaluates both partisan and nonpartisan critiques, and offers a handful of solutions.

To me there are two key takeaways from the report. One is that there are genuine, good-faith reasons to call for Section 230 reform, even though theyre often drowned out by bad tweets that misunderstand the law. To me the one that lands the hardest is that Section 230 has allowed platforms to under-invest in content moderation in basically every dimension, and the cost of the resulting externalities has been borne by society at large.

Barrett writes (PDF):

Ellen P. Goodman, a law professor at Rutgers University specializing in information policy, approaches the problem from another angle. She suggests that Section 230 asks for too little nothing, really in return for the benefit it provides. Lawmakers, she writes, could use Section 230 as leverage to encourage platforms to adopt a broader set of responsibilities. A 2019 report Goodman co-authored for the Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State at the University of Chicagos Booth School of Business urges transforming Section 230 into a quid pro quo benefit. The idea is that platforms would have a choice: adopt additional duties related to content moderation or forgo some or all of the protections afforded by Section 230.

The Stigler Center report provides examples of quids that larger platforms could offer to receive the quo of continued Section 230 immunity. One, which has been considered in the U.K. as part of that countrys debate over proposed online-harm legislation, would require platform companies to ensure that their algorithms do not skew toward extreme and unreliable material to boost user engagement. Under a second, platforms would disclose data on what content is being promoted and to whom, on the process and policies of content moderation, and on advertising practices.

This approach continues to enable lots of speech on the internet you could keep those Moscow Mitch tweets coming while forcing companies to disclose what theyre promoting. Recommendation algorithms are the core difference between the big tech platforms and the open web that they have largely supplanted, and the world has a vested interest in understanding how they work and what results from their suggestions. I dont care much about a bad video with 100 views. But I care very much about a bad video with 10 million.

So whose job will it be to pay attention to all this? Barretts other suggestion is a kind of digital regulatory agency whose functions would mimic some combination of the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and similar agencies in other countries.

It envisions the digital regulatory body whether governmental or industry-based as requiring internet companies to clearly disclose their terms of service and how they are enforced, with the possibility of applying consumer protection laws if a platform fails to conform to its own rules. The TWG emphasizes that the new regulatory body would not seek to police content; it would impose disclosure requirements meant to improve indirectly the way content is handled. This is an important distinction, at least in the United States, because a regulator that tried to supervise content would run afoul of the First Amendment. [...]

In a paper written with Professor Goodman, Karen Kornbluh, who heads the Digital Innovation and Democracy Initiative at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, makes the case for a Digital Democracy Agency devoted significantly to transparency. Drug and airline companies disclose things like ingredients, testing results, and flight data when there is an accident, Kornbluh and Goodman observe. Platforms do not disclose, for example, the data they collect, the testing they do, how their algorithms order news feeds and recommendations, political ad information, or moderation rules and actions. Thats a revealing comparison and one that should help guide reform efforts.

Nothing described here would really resolve the angry debate we have once or week or so in this country about a post that Facebook or Twitter or YouTube left up when they should have taken it down, or took down when they should have left it up. But it could pressure platforms to pay closer attention to what is going viral, what behaviors they are incentivizing, what harms all of that may be doing to the rest of us.

And over time, the agencys findings could help lawmakers craft more targeted reforms to Section 230 which is to say, reforms that are less openly hostile to the idea of free speech. Moscow Mitch will continue to have to take his lumps. But the platforms at last will have to take theirs, too.

Today in news that could affect public perception of the big tech platforms.

Trending down: A video of a man shooting himself with a gun started circulating on TikTok Sunday night, despite the companys attempts to take it down. Creators warned that the clip was being hidden in innocuous videos and shared across the site, making it harder to avoid. (Julia Alexander / The Verge)

The Trump campaign is betting on YouTube as a primary way to reach voters ahead of the November election. It appears to be a move away from the Facebook strategy that helped propel him to victory in 2016. Alex Thompson at Politico tells the story:

Many digital strategists say YouTubes algorithm is more likely to recommend to viewers channels that are updated regularly with new content. The name of the game with algorithms is to flood the zones, said Eric Wilson, a veteran Republican digital operative. The Trump campaign is putting on a master class in advertising according to algorithms it just rewards the side that will produce more content. [...]

The Trump campaigns YouTube strategy is also the latest example of it becoming its own news publisher, bypassing the established media. Many of the campaigns videos are short news clips or snippets of the press secretarys daily briefing.

The 2020 US election will likely spark violence and a constitutional crisis, according to experts who gamed out possible November scenarios. Unless Biden wins in a landslide, the experts predict significant unrest. Gulp. (Rosa Brooks / The Washington Post)

The Trump campaign launched a series of Facebook ads featuring a manipulated photo of Joe Biden edited to make the former vice president appear older. Its among the latest examples of Trump sharing content that has been deceptively altered to attack Biden. (Jesselyn Cook / HuffPost)

Joe Bidens campaign is taking over a popular Instagram account created by a teen supporter. Formerly a fan account, @VoteJoe account will now serve as the campaigns primary point of grassroots outreach on Instagram. (Makena Kelly / The Verge)

Also: Joe Biden is partnering up with the celebrity video platform Cameo to allow celebrities to earmark payments for his campaign. Andy Cohen, Mandy Moore, Tituss Burgess, Dul Hill, and Melissa Etheridge are lending their support to the campaign on the platform starting this week. (Makena Kelly / The Verge)

Oracles closeness with the Trump administration could prove helpful in its bid to buy TikTok. Oracle founder Larry Ellison is a prominent Trump supporter. (David McCabe / The New York Times)

TikTok and WeChat are being lumped together in the Trumps administrations attempt to crack down on national security threats from China. But WeChat, in addition to being a vital communication channel for the Chinese diaspora, is also a global conduit of Chinese state propaganda, surveillance and intimidation. (Paul Mozur / The New York Times)

Facebooks ban on political ads the week before the US election will muzzle important political speech and disproportionately burden challenger campaigns, this article argues. That could benefit incumbents who have large organic reach on social media platforms. (Daniel Kreiss and Matt Perault / Slate)

Also: Facebooks political ad ban could threaten the ability of election officials to spread accurate information about how to vote. (Jeremy B. Merrill / ProPublica)

Facebooks decision to leave up Trumps post urging people to vote twice angered employees, who called the move shameful and unconscionable. (Craig Silverman and Ryan Mac / BuzzFeed)

Facebook took down an image posted by GOP congressional candidate Marjorie Taylor Greene, a QAnon conspiracy theorist, showing her holding a rifle next to a photo of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. The company said the post violated its policy on violence and incitement. (Eliza Relman / Business Insider)

Misinformation campaigns are likely going to come to online multiplayer games like Animal Crossing. Today, no online multiplayer game has a publicly available policy specifically related to medical or political disinformation in the US. (Daniel Kelley / Slate)

Amazon said it plans to continue protesting the Department of Defenses decision to award the JEDI contract to Microsoft. The DoD recently affirmed its decision, but Amazon said not all the relevant information about the politically corrupted contract has been made public. Cant wait! (Amazon)

Apple is doubling down on its legal battle against Epic Games. The company filed counterclaims alleging Epic breached its contract and seeking an unspecified amount in damages. (Todd Haselton / CNBC)

Apple didnt commit to stop processing requests for user data from Hong Kong authorities in the wake of a national security law imposed by Beijing. Now, the company is opening up about what kinds of data requests it receives. (Zack Whittaker / TechCrunch)

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission opened an investigation into the Apple App Store and Google Play. The commission is looking at competition between the two app stores and how they share data. (Tegan Jones / Gizmodo)

Italys competition authority opened an investigation into cloud storage services operated by Apple, Dropbox and Google. The move comes in response to complaints about how the companies collect user data for commercial purposes. (Natasha Lomas / TechCrunch)

TikTok has been building a vocal contingent of young supporters amid growing uncertainty about the apps future in the US. the company is working behind the scenes to turn creators in the US into superstars, arming them with brand deals and introductions to Hollywood power brokers. Heres Sarah Frier at Bloomberg:

The effort has given TikTok growing influence over American culture, which is not an accident, says Brett Bruen, who served as the White House director of global engagement in the Obama administration. He believes China and ByteDance are playing the long game. Its all a localization strategy, which allows you to not only achieve relevance but respect, he said. The most effective advocates for your company and for policy decisions are those local influencers and local partners.

U.S. President Donald Trump has ordered ByteDance to sell its U.S. TikTok assets and he has threatened to ban the app if a deal doesnt happen in coming weeks. Embedding the business deeply in society, while providing a livelihood for thousands of rising American stars will make it harder to uproot the app from the country. Creators say they havent been asked to make public statements in support of the app, but it comes naturally to some.

ByteDance is giving TikTok employees a half-months salary bonus in an attempt to calm the workforce as the company continues to negotiate a sale. The company said the money is meant to reward employees at a time of unprecedented economic and social upheaval. (Zheping Huang / Bloomberg)

Fan armies are harassing gay and trans people on TikTok. Cut it out, fan armies! (Taylor Lorenz / The New York Times)

A Facebook engineer quit today, saying they could no longer stomach contributing to an organization that is profiting off hate in the US and globally. Its the latest resignation to come amid rising discontent within the company. (Read the resignation letter.) (Craig Timberg and Elizabeth Dwoskin / The Washington Post)

Facebook will now notify third-party developers if it finds a security vulnerability in their code. After a third-party developer is notified, theyll have 21 days to respond and 90 days to fix the issues. (Zack Whittaker and Sarah Perez / TechCrunch)

Facebook gave employees with children extra time off to care for their kids during the pandemic. Some employees without kids thought it was unfair. (Daisuke Wakabayashi and Sheera Frenkel / The New York Times)

Tech companies are changing up their perks to account for remote working conditions. Some are mandating people take time off, and offering childcare support and mental health resources. (Arielle Pardes / Wired)

Amazon announced plans to expand to 25,000 workers in Bellevue, Washington. In a blog post the company said new leases and office-tower development would increase its projected headcount by 10,000. (Matt Day / Bloomberg)

Twitter reenabled the ability to download archives of Your Twitter Data, nearly two months after shutting off the feature as a precaution against hacking. The data could give you insight into what teen hackers could have stolen during the notorious bitcoin scam in July. (Sean Hollister / The Verge)

Brands are paying Twitter users between $20 and $60 to respond to viral tweets with a mention of their company. The move sends people to their sites without having to pay higher fees to advertise on Twitter. (Michael Tobin / Bloomberg)

People are streaming chess games on Twitch. The game might seem like an unlikely contender for the digital era, but its captured peoples attention. (Kellen Browning / The New York Times)

The Social Dilemma, a docu-drama that debuts on Netflix this week, has a simplistic view on the evils of social media platforms. It treats social media as a totally unprecedented threat, dismissing comparisons with radio, television, or any previous mass medium. (Adi Robertson / The Verge)

The pandemic is exacerbating discrimination in the school system, particularly as it relates to suspensions and other disciplinary action. Experts are worried about an uptick in Zoom suspensions. (Aaricka Washington / The New York Times)

Send us tips, comments, questions, and Section 230 reforms: casey@theverge.com and zoe@theverge.com.

Excerpt from:
Trumps latest attack on Section 230 is really about censoring speech - The Verge

The Viewco-host Sunny Hostin alleges that ABC News attempted to remove passages from her forthcoming memoir that reflected poorly on the network, journalist Yashar Ali reports. In his newsletter, Ali published excerpts from Hostins book,I Am These Truths: A Memoir of Identity, Justice, and Living Between Worlds, in which she claims that the news organization tried to censor her memoir months ahead of its release. I didnt want to believe that racism played a part in their revision requests, she writes, per Ali. We were just dotting some is and crossing some ts, right?

According to Ali, who obtained a copy of Hostins memoir from a source,I Am These Truthscontains a forward alleging that ABC News asked her to delete passages that portrayed the network in a negative light. Deleting those passages didnt feel right to me, writes The View co-host and ABC News legal analyst and correspondent. They were all true, and they were some of the battle scars of my experience.

Hostin reportedly does not reveal what passages she was asked to remove, but writes that the request came in early summer, as Americans took to the streets in the wake of George Floyds death. My television agent and my book agent emailed me to express confusion that a news organization would try to censor a Puerto Rican, African American womans story while they were covering global demonstrations demanding racial equity, she claims.

The authors lawyers pushed back, and ultimately, ABC relented. Then, on Friday, June 12th, I got a text from a reporter, she writes. That reporter was Ali, who published a bombshell HuffPost report about senior ABC News executive Barbara Fedida. The exec allegedly made racist comments about various Black employees, including Hostin (sources told Ali that Fedida called her low-rent) and Robin Roberts.

Hostin addressed Fedidas alleged remarks on The View shortly after Alis story was published, but in her memoir, she goes into great detail about the experience. I was floored. I felt incredibly sad, but I also felt relief, writesThe Viewhost. Many of the experiences Ive had at ABC, including several described in these pages that standards and practices at first asked me to delete well, if the allegations were true, all of the dots were connected.

My suspicions that I was treated worse than my white colleagues the fears that I tried to talk myself out of many times maybe they were true, she continues. Had my employer, my home away from home, devalued, dismissed, and underpaid me because of my race? I had just read emails from them directing me to erase evidence of such treatment from my story. And if Im being honest, I wasnt even angry. I was deeply, profoundly shaken and saddened.

In July, The Walt Disney Company, ABC News parent organization, fired Fedida following an investigation into the allegations. The investigation substantiated that Ms. Fedida did make some of the unacceptable racially insensitive comments attributed to her, said Peter Rice, Chairman of Walt Disney Television, in an email sent to ABC News employees. It also substantiated that Ms. Fedida managed in a rough manner and, on occasion, used crass and inappropriate language.

Sunny Hostins memoir,I Am These Truths: A Memoir of Identity, Justice, and Living Between Worlds, hits bookstands on Tuesday, September 22.

Read more:
Sunny Hostin Claims ABC News Tried to Censor Memoir Passages That Reflected Poorly on the Network - Decider

Days after President Donald Trump admitted to knowingly downplaying the Covid-19 pandemic in his statements to the public, new reporting late Friday revealed that Trump political aides have been reviewingand in some cases alteringweekly CDC reports about the deadly virus in an effort to bring them into closer alignment with the president's false narrative and claims.

Politico reported Friday evening that the Health and Human Services Department's politically appointed communications aides, led by former Trump campaign official Michael Caputoa Republican strategist with no medical expertise"have attempted to add caveats to the CDC's findings, including an effort to retroactively change agency reports that they said wrongly inflated the risks of Covid-19 and should have made clear that Americans sickened by the virus may have been infected because of their own behavior."

"Trump CDC is dead to me if they muzzle the MMWR. To kill the MMWR is akin to burning science." Eric Feigl-Ding, Federation of American Scientists

The primary target of the Trump officials' interference, according to Politico, has been the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports (MMWR), a crucial resource for experts, public officials, and members of the public seeking to track the spread of Covid-19. While CDC officials have pushed back on meddling from political appointees,Politico reported that the agency has "increasingly agreed to allow the political officials to review the reports and, in a few cases, compromised on the wording."

According to one internal email obtained by Politico, Caputo aide Paul Alexander accused the CDCan agency directed by Trump appointee Robert Redfieldof "writing hit pieces on the administration" and attempting to use its weekly reports to "hurt the president."

"CDC tried to report as if once kids get together, there will be spread and this will impact school re-opening," wrote Alexander, an assistant professor of health research at McMaster University in Toronto. "Very misleading by CDC and shame on them. Their aim is clear."

Alexander demanded that Redfield allow the HHS aide to personally edit the CDC's reports, which are authored by career scientists.

"The reports must be read by someone outside of CDC like myself, and we cannot allow the reporting to go on as it has been, for it is outrageous. Its lunacy," Alexander, who has also attempted to alter the public messaging of Dr. Anthony Fauci, wrote to Redfield. "Nothing to go out unless I read and agree with the findings how they CDC, wrote it and I tweak it to ensure it is fair and balanced and 'complete.'"

Yale epidemiologist Gregg Gonsalves called the emails "explosive" and said Caputo should resign immediately.

"This is just beyond the pale," Gonsalves tweeted. "Caputo, with acquiescence of Redfield, has started to twist the science to Donald Trump's advantage. It's sick and disgusting."

In one email to CDC officials obtained by POLITICO, a Caputo aide blistered scientists and called for already-published reports to be retroactively altered. pic.twitter.com/QSFhMlU00i

Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) September 12, 2020

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Get our best delivered to your inbox.

According to Politico, attempts by political appointees to alter the MMWR to their liking "began in earnest after a May report authored by senior CDC official Anne Schuchat, which reviewed the spread of Covid-19 in the United States and caused significant strife within the health department."

"HHS officials, including Secretary Alex Azar, believed that Schuchat was implying that the Trump administration moved too slowly to respond to the outbreak," Politico continued. "The HHS criticism was mystifying to CDC officials, who believed that Schuchat was merely recounting the state of affairs and not rendering judgment on the response."

In addition to trying to change the language of CDC scientists to make it fit with the president's rosy depiction of the pandemic, Caputo and his aides have also moved "to halt the release of some CDC reports, including delaying a report that addressed how doctors were prescribing hydroxychloroquine, the malaria drug favored by Trump as a coronavirus treatment despite scant evidence," Politico reported Friday.

"The report, which was held for about a month after Caputo's team raised questions about its authors' political leanings, was finally published last week,"Politico noted. "It said that "the potential benefits of these drugs do not outweigh their risks."

Politico's new reporting represents just the latest evidence of the Trump administration's ongoing interference in the activities of public health agencies, an effort lawmakers and experts have denounced as a deliberate campaign to undermine trust in Covid-19 data and advance the president's political agenda.

"A Trump stooge with a history of racist statements and no medical background is doctoring CDC reports warning Americans on Covid because they make Trump look bad," Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.) tweeted late Friday, referring to Caputo.

Eric Feigl-Ding, an epidemiologist and senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists, said the "Trump CDC is dead to me if they muzzle the MMWR."

"To kill the MMWR," Feigl-Ding added, "is akin to burning science."

Continued here:
'Downright Criminal': Leaked Emails Reveal Effort by Trump Aides to Censor and Alter CDC Covid Reports Behind Closed Doors - Common Dreams

President Donald Trump's threat to pull funding from schools planning to incorporate The New York Times' 1619 Projectwhich aims to reframe American history through an increased focus on slavery and the contributions of Black Americanshas sparked intense criticism.

On Sunday, Trump tweeted that the Department of Education would be "looking at" claims that California is planning to use the 1619 Project to teach students about America's history of slavery.

The president's tweet came on Sunday morning in response to a Twitter user's claim that "California has implemented the 1619 Project into the public schools."

"Soon you won't recognize America," the social media user wrote in a September 1 tweet.

Newsweek subscription offers >

If that is the case, Trump responded, "they will not be funded!"

The president's threat was met with both support and backlash, with a journalist behind the project appearing to accuse the president of censorship.

"Do those concerns about cancel culture and McCarthyism and censorship only apply to the left or do they apply to the POTUS threatening to investigate schools for teaching American journalism?" Nikole Hannah-Jones, a New York Times Magazine journalist who won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary for her essay in The 1619 Project, wrote in a tweet. "Silence is deafening here."

Newsweek subscription offers >

Meanwhile, in a piece written for Forbes, writer Seth Cohen accused the Trump administration of "threatening to censor the way schools teach about the history of slavery and racism in the United States."

The tweet, Cohen wrote, "continues a trend of [the Trump administration's] provocative actions regarding educational approaches to racial injustice in America, with the writer pointing out that it came just days after the Trump administration announced plans to cease diversity training it determines to be "anti-American."

Bernice King, the youngest child of civil rights leaders Martin Luther King Jr. and Coretta Scott King, also condemned Trump's tweet, writing: "We are on the brink of change, family. The highest office in the land is trying to stop teaching that will bring us closer to eradicating racism."

"Millions have aligned themselves and are complicit," King added. "But it's been too long. Justice will win."

While many struck out at the president's threat, others spoke out in support of the decision, with some pointing to the scrutiny the 1619 Project has faced over its historical accuracy.

In a tweet, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz took aim at Hannah-Jones's tweet, asserting that "calling out lies is not silence."

"NYT explicitly admits the 1619 Project is revisionist history," he wrote, quoting the project's own self-proclaimed effort to "reframe our country's history."

"It is filled with serious errorswhich have been called out by top historiansbut the NYT doesn't care," Cruz claimed, adding: "You're not after truth."

The creators of the 1619 Project have been clear that the initiative is aimed at challenging widely accepted interpretations and portrayals of American history by telling the story with a focus on the realities and long-lasting impacts of slavery and on the contributions of Black people in America.

Cruz is correct that a number of historians have questioned and criticized aspects of the historical veracity and fairness of the 1619 project.

In December 2019, for example, five prominent historians, Sean Wilentz, Victoria Bynum, Gordon Wood, James McPherson and James Oakes, wrote a letter to The Times accusing the creators of the project of a "displacement of historical understanding by ideology."

In particular, the letter argued that a claim made in Hannah-Jones' introduction to the project, which asserted that a primary reason that "colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery" was unfounded.

Meanwhile, that same month, a number of scholars and political scientists focused on the American Civil War wrote a letter claiming that the project made the unfair suggestion that slavery is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Eventually, New York Times magazine editor-in-chief Jake Silverstein wrote an update to the project changing Hannah-Jones' essay to say: "protecting slavery was a primary motivation for some of the colonists," rather than all.

While the project has faced some criticism, it has also been praised as a critical endeavor that refocuses the telling of American history on the stories of those affected by the country's history of slavery since it began more than 400 years ago.

Newsweek has contacted the White House and the Department of Education for comment.

See the article here:
After 1619 Project Threat, Trump Accused of Trying to Censor History of Slavery - Newsweek