Mediaboss Marketing

China has censored online all mentions and video clips of a rare protest at a university after the institution dropped the phrase, freedom of thought, from its charter.

The new charter for Fudan University in Shanghai one of Chinas most prestigious now includes a pledge to serving the governance of the Communist Party and pushes academic independence below patriotism, leading to uproar among students and faculty.

The changes came to light Tuesday when the countrys education ministry said it had approved similar alterations for three universities.

Within hours, the Fudan charter amendments were trending online, with at least one hashtag generating at least a million views. Clips also circulated online showing students staging a flash mob protest on campus, singing the schools anthem, which includes the phrase freedom of thought.

Fudan professors also took online to express their alarm. Qu Weiguo, a professor of foreign languages, posted that he was very shocked to learn about the changes, which he said were made without consulting faculty.

But shortly after, such mentions and posts online were all deleted by Chinas active government censors, which routinely block news and information, and scrub the internet clean of any dissenting comments.

View post:
China censors viral clips of a rare university protest after the academy downgrades 'freedom of thought' - The Telegraph

Mondoweiss readers, can you help us meet the challenge weve been offered this month? If we raise $100,000 from you and others by December 31, generous long-standing donors will match it with an additional $100,000.

We have less than two weeks left to unlock these funds. Can you donate today in honor of Elyse Crystall, Rabab Abdulhadi, and others fighting McCarthyism on campus? A gift of $40, $75 or whatever amount you can manage will make a difference!

If youve already donated this month, please accept our thanks! And read on to understand why activist professor Elyse Crystall supports Mondoweisss coverage of ChangeMakers.

As an academic and an activist, I believe justice in Palestine depends on changing minds in the U.S, which is the reason why Mondoweiss is of such value to me and I urge you to join me today in supporting their work.

You are, Im sure, well aware that while repression in Palestine increases, here in the U.S. we see greater awareness of the horrific conditions in Palestine. More people today understand that U.S. policy underwrites and U.S. taxpayer dollars fund the violation of Palestinian human rights. I have personal experience of how Mondoweisss coverage is critical in this process of increased understanding, and thats why Im asking you to contribute today.

Last spring my campus, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, came under attack when the Duke-UNC Consortium on Middle East Studies hosted a conference called Conflict over Gaza: People, Politics, and Possibilities. As the faculty advisor for our campuss chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), I was not entirely surprised. I know how long and hard campus groups have fought to destigmatize support for Palestinian rights and to dismantle the notion that criticism of Israeli state policies equals anti-Semitism.

A pro-Israel blogger generated controversy by distributing to local news media an edited video of a brilliant satirical performance by Palestinian rapper Tamer Nafar. Prompted by a local right-wing legislator, Trumps Department of Education (DOE) launched an investigation. Mondoweiss reported on the results, released in September. The DOE conditioned any future Title VI funds on our providing detailed information about how each activity of our program advances the national security interests and economic stability of the United States.

Obviously, this warning sought to intimidate all area studies programs nationally, and specifically Middle East studies, by making an example of ours. In response to the Trump administrations clampdown on our program, over 350 outraged professors nationwide signed a petition declaring their support for Palestinian rights and their refusal to be silenced. And Mondoweiss spread the word.

These attempts to silence Palestine solidarity in the U.S. have culminated in the Executive Order signed this month, aimed at providing easier legal paths for claims of anti-Semitism on campus. And you know as well as I that neither faculty nor students will go quietly in the face of this repressionand Mondoweiss will help alert the public at large of our resistance.

Over a dozen Israel-aligned groups make it their job to monitor pro-Palestinian academics, many of whom have been fired as a result. Pro-Israel groups tactics include media smears on Israels critics, labeling them anti-Semitic; efforts to rewrite university policies or state laws to penalize criticism of Israel; and pressure on donors and administrators. Im Jewish and still I feel the chill of censorship, and I know that the threat to those of Palestinian descent is much, much greater.

Earlier in the year Mondoweiss shared with you the fight of my friend Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi, who was sued multiple times for creating a threatening environment on her campus. Her own university, San Francisco State University, retaliated against her because of her passionate pro-Palestine positions. At Fordham University, students attempting to form an SJP chapter faced an intense, two-year legal battle.

As campus activism continues to come under attack, more than ever we need you to stand in solidarity with us. They wont stop trying to silence us, leveraging their influence and weaponizing anti-Semitism.

We rely on Mondoweiss to tell the truth loud and clear and to help us track the movement for justice in Palestine in the U.S. and globally.

The students, faculty, and staff at our universities are ChangeMakers because right now U.S. campuses are crucial arenas in the struggle for Palestine. Campus advocates fight effectively with historical facts, critical analysis, and persuasive rhetorical skillsand that inspires others to fight. Thats one of the reasons why those who seek to defend the indefensible focus their efforts on universities.

Universities are under attack, and sometimes we win as the students at Fordham University finally did! These success stories inspire us all, and we are indebted to Mondoweiss for informing us of each others struggles and victories.

Please join me in supporting Mondoweiss, so that thorough coverage read by hundreds of thousands can continue to advance our work for real change. Your donation today makes a difference.

Continue reading here:
They want to silence you and mebut we stand up against the censorship - Mondoweiss

Edward Snowden is not entitled to the profits from his memoir Permanent Record, and any money made must go to the US government, a judge has ruled.

Permanent Record, in which Snowden recounts how he came to the decision to leak the top secret documents revealing government plans for mass surveillance, was published in September. Shortly afterwards, the US government filed a civil lawsuit contending that publication was in violation of the non-disclosure agreements he signed with both the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA), and that the release of the book without pre-publication review by the agencies was in violation of his express obligations. Snowdens lawyers had argued that if the author had believed that the government would review his book in good faith, he would have submitted it for review.

Earlier this week, district judge Liam OGrady ruled that the government is entitled to Snowdens proceeds from the book.

In response, Snowden wrote on Twitter: The government may steal a dollar, but it cannot erase the idea that earned it I wrote this book for you, and I hope the governments ruthless desperation to prevent its publication only inspires you read it and then gift it to another.

Asked by one fan if it was possible to buy the book and donate the same amount to Snowden, as an easy way to stick it to the US government, Snowden recommended that readers donate money to the families who had helped shelter him in Hong Kong after the story broke in 2013, providing a link to the charity that supports them.

Snowden said the book would continue to be sold. The courts ruling is a hack intended to circumvent first amendment limits on what the government can censor, he told his followers. They cant (yet) ban the book, so they ban profit to try and prevent such books from being written in the first place.

Snowdens lawyer, Brett Max Kaufman, told the New York Times that it was far-fetched to believe that the government would have reviewed Mr Snowdens book or anything else he submitted in good faith, and for that reason, Mr Snowden preferred to risk his future royalties than to subject his experiences to improper government censorship.

We disagree with the courts opinion and will review our options, he added.

Excerpt from:
Edward Snowdens profits from memoir must go to US government, judge rules - The Guardian

I dont know about you, dear reader, but I personally have a very long and storied relationship with the Banned Book List. Perhaps it was growing up in Austin, Texas, around well-educated hippies and cause heads who taught me to stand up to someone dictating what is deemed appropriate without asking. Maybe its just that I dont like people telling me what I can and cannot read, and I very strongly feel no one should have dominion over what another person reads. Weve seen it time and again throughout history, this unfathomable attempt to censor works because people deem the message dangerous, or it doesnt fit a comfortable narrative. Its especially damaging when ignorance is dressed up as concern for children.

I dont think I remember a time when someone wasnt talking about the banned book list. One might not think that public schools in Texas would take issue with such a list. One might even presume it would be the librarians bible given the geography, but I found the exact opposite to be true. From the time we were learning to read, the banned book list was a topic of discussion. In every school, with every passing grade it was something to be examined, discussed, and in later years protested. The high school I attended participated in Banned Book Week every year. I vividly remember the librarian, and her assistant picking through the shelves to fill the cart with with materials. Teachers and students alike waited anxiously for the sign-up sheet to be posted, wherein we would select a slot to read aloud. For an entire week from the time the building opened until it closed students, teachers, and staff would pluck a tome from the heaping cart, and read aloud for any passer by. Year after year I was left with one glaring question: Why would anyone want to ban a book?

First, whats the difference between banned and challenged? Challenged is when an individual or group petitions to have a work removed from libraries, school curriculum, or otherwise restrict access based on specific reasons, e.g. contains LGBTQ themes, strong language, etc. A ban is the outright removal of those works. Who are these people? It could be anyone really. Parents, religious groups, staff and faculty, or even the students themselves.

In many cases people or groups challenge a book with the best of intentions. They feel the book depicts negative stereotypes, strong language or sexual content not suitable for age groups, depict social, religious, or political views. Regardless of the reason, perhaps banned is the wrong word for this list. The ALA and various groups on both sides of the issue agree that none of these books are outright banned in the United States, as the legal silence and censorship of any work is a direct violation of the First Amendment. Instead, what these challenges and bans do is seek to limit access to what people deem harmful works. They seek to remove them from public and school library bookshelves, and curricula for grades K12. Lets take a closer look at what these lists show us about the books and their authors.

In researching reasons books are challenged I was most surprised to find that year after year the top books were consistently reported for two things; profanity and sexual references. Some years we see an uptick in reports related to homosexual content, promoting the homosexual agenda, and religious views. Primarily, however, those expressing concerns most often site foul language, and anything involving sexuality and the human body. I found myself further confused when those language reports involved young adult books whose target audience is primarily the 12-18 age group. One could imagine theyve heard more colorful language in popular television, or in school.

I will admit that when I myself was in that age bracket I was particularly foul mouthed. When I hear of a book being reported for sexual content my first instinct is that they would be reporting The Pearl, printed for the Society of Vice in the late 1800s, or perhaps The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty, by A.N. Roquelaure. In both cases I can see why someone may not be particularly keen on young children thumbing through illicit pages of sexual exploration and erotica at an age where Pokemon and Yo Gabba Gabba are still topics of regular conversation. What I did not expect to find is books like The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas or The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, wherein anything related to sex is minimal and by no means the central point of these books.

Even Its Perfectly Normal by Robi Harris is a shock as its a book about what happens to the human body aimed at kids. In one report it was actually sited as being child pornography. My Moms Having A Baby! A Kids Month-by-Month Guide to Pregnancyby Dori Hillestad Butler was similarly hit as being sexually explicit when its intended purpose is to explain the process of pregnancy and birth to children and speak on their level. Nudity, sexually explicit context, or sexual education remains a popular reason to keep books out of the hands of youths, and out of popular media.

You may notice I did not cite inappropriate for age group in my statistics. There is a very specific reason for leaving it out. This applies either via direct citation as a reason, or in the spirit of the report topic to each and every report on the Banned Book list. On the topic of age appropriate content, reported books run the spectrum of available literature. From classic to sci-fi, books are reported right and left because they are perceived inappropriate for an age group on some level.

The most surprising to me on this front are books that are specifically written for an age group. The Captain Underpants Series, by Dav Pilkey is regularly criticized by reports to the list for being anti-family, and unsuited for the age group (711 year olds) for which it was written. To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee, while once was required reading in schools, is now deemed inappropriate for children according to The Banned Book List. I would then pose the question: What is appropriate for an age group if not works specifically written towards a target demographic?

So what do we take away from lists of the most challenged works, and the Banned Books list itself? In this day and age has it outlived its usefulness?

Constitutionally speaking, no book or piece of art can be banned. Based on the numbers, the reports, and that it seems as if just about anything is going to be challenged, including the Christian Bible, should the list be done away with all together? Should it serve as more of a rating capacity like the MPAA film rating system, or the ESRB for video games? Or should it serve as a platform for broader discussions? When we look at challenged books across the board, not just the top ten lists it reflects an unwillingness to have a conversation. Would it be possible to use the banned book list to see oppositional sides, and examine values we may not share in order to better understand another persons perspective? While we all take a look at those questions individuals, schools, and even stores will continue to celebrate Banned Book Week by finding ways to oppose those lists and challenges.

Please note the challenge reasons can vary from year to year. This is only a snapshot of over all challenge reasons.

8 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: This childrens book tells the story of Ray and Silo, two male penguins at the zoo. The zookeeper, Mr. Gramsay, gives the pair an egg to hatch and care for. The female chick hatches and is subsequently named Tango by the zookeepers. Thus their family is complete with the addition of the couples baby girl. This is based on the true story of the authors falling in love at the Central Park Zoo in New York City.

Challenge reasons: anti-family, homosexuality, political viewpoint, religious viewpoint, unsuited for age group, additionally promotes the homosexual agenda

7 times on on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: This story is presented in diary format. Were presented with the story of Junior; a 14-year-old young man growing up on the Spokane Indian Reservation through the course of a year. Junior is a hydrocephalic, small for his age, has a lisp, poor eyesight, and is prone to seizures, which makes him a target for regular bullying on the reservation. In a moment of anger regarding the poverty experienced both by his family and the reservation at large, he throws a book at his teacher. To address his frustrations the teacher suggests he attend a more affluent high school near by. Junior accepts and we follow him for a year as he adjusts to life in a predominantly white school, struggles to maintain his native heritage, faces tragedies on the reservation, and ultimately reconciles with friends on the reservation who felt left behind by his decision to transfer schools.

Challenge reasons: sexual references, profanity, violence, gambling, and underage drinking, and for its religious viewpoint

Note: Sherman Alexie has admitted to allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct against female authors.

7 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: This coming-of-age novel follows Charlie in a series of letters to an unknown party. Through the letters we witness Charlie experience changing friendships, a shift in family dynamics, and the pitfalls of being socially awkward in high school. Charlie examines very serious relationship dynamics in his sisters abusive relationship and her unwillingness to leave her abuser, and in the decline of his friends relationship with a closeted homosexual football player. Through the course of the book Charlie must come to terms with his own trauma and relationships.

Challenge reasons: drugs/alcohol/smoking, homosexuality, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group

6 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: Captain Underpants is the accidental, but really kind of on purpose, alter ego of the ill-tempered principal Mr. Krupp. The series primarily revolves around the misadventures of two 4th graders, George Beard and Harold Hutchins. The boys cause Captain Underpants to go from comic book character they have created to real life by hypnotizing Mr. Krupp.

Challenge reasons: anti-family content, unsuited to age group, violence

5 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: Jerry is a new student at an elite Catholic school, where he must face the hazing practices of the student body. When the teacher Brother Leon commits the school to selling twice as much chocolate, Jerry is coerced by the head of the schools secret society to abstain from selling for ten days. When Jerry decides not to sell past the ten days, he finds himself further pitted against.

Challenge reasons: nudity, offensive language, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group

4 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: In this coming of age story, Callie is a middle school student and theater lover. She works as part of the production crew rather than on stage. Callie struggles with confusing crushes, tween frustrations, and budding friendships.

Challenge reasons: challenged because it includes LGBT characters, was deemed sexually explicit, and was considered to have an offensive political viewpoint

4 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: This father and son story revolves around Amir, the son of a wealthy merchant, and his friend Hazara, the son of his fathers servant. The boys spend their days kite fighting to escape their situation in Kabul. The boys bond is strained as the city falls around them, and ultimately broken. Amir must journey back home to right past wrongs when he learns of tragedies that have befallen his oldest friend.

Challenge reasons: offensive language, unsuited to age group, violence

4 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: Miles Halter transfers in his junior year from his regular high school in Florida to Culver Creek Preparatory High School in Alabama. There, he meets a colorful cast of characters including Chip The Colonel Martin, hip-hop emcee Takumi Hikohito, and the titular Alaska Young. Alaska is a beautiful and emotionally unstable young woman. She is distant and insists she and Miles maintain a platonic relationship. Tragic and beautiful, the book navigates a complex coming-of-age story for our main character Miles.

Challenge reasons: drugs/alcohol/smoking, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group

4 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: Based on true events, Craig and Harry, two 17-year-olds, are taking part in a 32-hour marathon of kissing for the Guinness Book of World Records. While the story revolves around these two young men, it is told by a Greek Chorus of gay men who have died of AIDS.

Challenge reasons: challenged and burned for including LGBTQIA+ content

4 times on the ALA Top Ten Challenged List

Synopsis: Written as a series of IMs complete with send and cancel buttons at the bottom of each page, Angela (SnowAngel), Maddie (mad maddie), and Zoe (zoegirl) take us on an adolescent roller coaster ride beginning in their Sophomore year of high school. Boys, driving lessons, school woes, and other more complicated things life has to offer the girls weather the storm via text based conversation.

Challenge reasons: offensive language, religious viewpoint, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group

More:
The Statistics of Censorship - Book Riot

In late June, the San Francisco Board of Education gathered to resolve a problem that had recently been brought its attention. An 83-year-old, Depression-era mural on the walls of one San Francisco high school had started to bother some people. Painted by left-leaning artist Victor Arnautoff, the 13-panel artwork in George Washington High School had been created through a New Deal art program. Arnautoff had the task of painting Life of Washington, which spanned a whopping 1,600 square feet.

So as not to lionize the first president excessively, Arnautoff painted Washington standing near the body of a dead Native American man, and he also depicts enslaved African Americans. Today, after almost a century, the mural is not as liberal as it once was in the eyes of the public.

Its always an issue when anyone wants to remove or cover or displace art, Board Vice President Mark Sanchez said. But there are countervailing issues we had to look at as well. We believe students shouldnt be exposed to violent imagery that its degrading.

The school board voted unanimously to destroy the mural, though not everyone agreed with its post-woke interpretation. When one teacher asked her freshman English class to write either in favor of or against the mural, 45 out of 49 students supported it. The fresco shows us exactly how brutal colonization and genocide really were and are," one student wrote. "The fresco is a warning and reminder of the fallibility of our hallowed leaders.

Two months later, the opposing sides reached a compromise: The mural would be covered up but not painted over. Still, it will no longer be seen.

But why stop there? Art censors of the world, why not also hide Francisco Goya's The Third of May 1808 or Picasso's Guernica, both startling images of conflict? In fact, a reproduction of Guernica was briefly covered up at the United Nations more than 15 years ago during a speech about the war in Iraq. It used to be that if you censored art, you had something to hide. Now, it means you're not ready to face reality.

After decades of railing against censorship in the arts, some liberals have now fully embraced it. Statues of Southern generals and Christopher Columbus are already pass. Theres a disturbing new development in art criticism among the elites, and it has nothing to do with whether Renoir was sexist in his personal life. Now, its not enough to critique unethical artists or their "problematic" subjects. You must also stand against depictions of bad things because we are supposedly unprepared to see them.

Comedian and actress Sarah Silverman learned this earlier this year. She appeared in blackface during a comedy sketch in 2007 to make fun of overly woke liberals. This year, Silverman said it came back to bite her.

I recently was going to do a movie, two days on a movie, a really sweet part, she said on a podcast this summer. Then, at 11 p.m. the night before, they fired me because they saw a picture of me in blackface from that episode.

It didn't matter that her whole act was meant to make fun of people who might use blackface. Her means were simply too transgressive.

This fashionable frontier in art censorship is also plaguing academia, and not just high schools. At Marylands Washington College, an antiracist play was recently canceled because it depicted some characters dressed in KKK robes. Because the bad guys were Ku Klux Klan members, The Foreigner, a pro-immigrant comedy, was canceled an hour before its last dress rehearsal. Heaven forbid a work of art depict anything actually evil.

Author Joyce Carol Oates recently regretted that Flannery O'Connor's antiracist short story The Artificial N----- was excluded from an anthology because publishers refused it on the grounds of an offensive title. Oates explained that it was futile to explain that O'Connor was excoriating racism, not promoting it.

Art censors may argue, as Sanchez did about the Washington mural, that viewing violent or disturbing imagery is "degrading." But there's another problem that art viewers face, one that is possibly the most degrading of all: ignorance. When you're so afraid of offending people, you lose your ability to make art, and when you refuse to address evil, you lose your ability to stop it.

Visit link:
The year art censorship came back in style - Washington Examiner