Mediaboss Marketing

View of Scott Daniel Williamss Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City (2016) partially installed at the Loisaida Center (image courtesy the artist)

Ifyou visitthe Loisaida Centerin the next month, the firstthing youll notice is the sound of running water and voices some in English, some in Spanish telling stories about the Rio Grande river. Then youll see the rest of El Paso-based artist Zeke Peas collaboration with local musicianEureka The Butcher,River Border, a large graphite drawing on cloth that maps the stretch of the MexicoUS border where a military wallruns along the banks of the Rio Grande in the El Paso del Norte region. The combined effect of the Peas drawing and Eurekas recordingsis powerfully evocative, transporting the visitor to the rivers edge.

The next sound you mightve heard would have come from Albuquerque-based artistScott Daniel Williamss interactive sculpture, Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City which, behind a sign that reads Police Not Welcome, can be toggledby pulling a chainto simultaneously play a recording of Ornette Colemans The Artist in America and audio ofthe killing ofJames Boyd byAlbuquerque Police Department officers in 2014. That workwas originally installed near Loisaidas main entrance by the curators ofFuture Now // Futura Ahora, Atomic Culture(the duo of Matthew and Malinda Galindo), but was removed on February 3, the day before the exhibitions opening. The decision, taken unilaterally by one of Loisaidas directors, was spurred by a fear that the centers CEO, Raul Russi a former Buffalo police officer who was injured in the line of duty would object to the work.This act of censorship repeatedly threatened to undo Atomic Culturesvital exhibition.

Its a very difficult situation for us as artists because this is a community center, and its a Latin Americancommunity center specifically, thats done a lot of really, really incredible work and we want to stand as allies with the center, Williams told Hyperallergic. It was a difficult decision to even take any sort of stand, but at the same time I think we [the artists in the show]feel like thats where we have to start. If were going to talk about expression and social justice we have to start at home, in these places where we should all be most accountable.

Russi who only became aware of the situation after Williams had issued a public statement and protested the exhibition opening, and negotiations between the artist, curators, and Loisaida directors had reached an impasse finally saw Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City and the rest ofFuture Now // Futura Ahoraduring a visit to the center on Saturday. Today, he releaseda public statement about and apologyfor the works removal, paving the way for the reinstallation of Williamss work in a different space at Loisaida tomorrow.

Unfortunately, our team jumped to the wrong conclusion that I would object to the exhibition of one of the pieces without consulting with me in advance, Russis statement reads. I had the opportunity over the weekend to have a dialogue with the Atomic Culture organizers, to clarify all of this and to offer my apologies on behalf of Loisaida, Inc. As CEO, I let Atomic Culture know that the piece can be part of their ongoing exhibit.

Indeed, Williamss work seems especially relevant for an exhibition about social justice at a community center that represents a historically over-policed community and is located directly next to a major NYPDstation. Add to this the fact that all the featured artists in Future Now // Futura Ahoraare based in the southwestern United States, an area poised to become an intensified zoneof activity for the USs militarized border patrols under President Trump, and the show takes on an added sense of urgency.

In addition to Williamss piece, several other works in the exhibition condemn the excessive use of force and systemic abuses of agents paid to uphold the law. For instance, the mural On Both Sides of the Border Women Are Still Being Murdered (2016) a collaboration between Albuquerque-based artist Nani Chacon and author Tanaya Winder highlights the vulnerability of women in both Mexico and the US. And Peas aforementioned map of the Rio Grande and border wall includes a drawing of a threatening US Border Control vehicle alongside the words: You have the right to remain silent.In one of the exhibitions main rooms, a row of small, vintage-looking cell phones emits poetry and displays compass faces that seem to point the viewer north. The work, Transborder Immigrant Tool, is a safety systemdeveloped by San Diego-based artistsRicardo Dominguez and Brett Stalbaumto help disoriented travelers in any desert setting to find their way. The program offers tips for desert survival in the form of poetry recited in several different languages, and logs the coordinatesof known water caches, offering a vital tool for people crossing, for instance, the MexicoUS border in southern California, where the artists developed and tested it between 2009 and 2012.

Atomic Culturehas brought together a powerful group of artists from the southwestern US, many of whom are making work at theconfluence of art and activism, and most of whom are too rarely exhibitedin New York. Fortunately, Loisaida has rectifiedthe earliercensorship of one work and, in doing so, avoided jeopardizing the telling of all the other featured artistsimportant stories. Indeed, the reinstallation of Williamss piece will provide a crucial link between the issues of migrant safety and anti-immigrant infrastructure along the MexicoUS border that many of these artists are addressing. Police brutality often targets the most vulnerable residents in the country, and some US cities situated near the Mexican border are particularly prone to this type of institutionalized violence. The fact that many of the artists here are from Albuquerque is particularly poignant, since the citys police department is under investigation for use of force by the Department of Justice.Future Now // Futura Ahora is a testament to the works artists make not only to cope with such conditions, but to combat them.

Future Now // Futura Ahora continues at the Loisaida Center (710 East 9th Street, Lower East Side, Manhattan) through March 18.

See more here:
Despite Censorship Row, a Show Connecting Immigrant Rights and Police Brutality Goes On - Hyperallergic

As of late, a wave of censorship has swept over this campus. Those who would silence the free speech of UCSB students are not authorities but private individuals. The College Republicans have set up signs around campus in an effort to advertise for their Ben Shapiro event on the topic of Black Lives Matter. They have followed all of the correct procedure. They have been met with vandalism. Their wood signs have been repeatedly painted over and their fliers ripped from sight.

Those who have repeatedly defaced the College Republicans signs are unwilling to reason. This would be obvious to any outsider looking in to the enclosed environment of this UC campus. In a place where one-sided classes on political issues are taught as fact, it is a wonder that there are any students at the university who would challenge the doctrines imposed on them at all.

Art by Sierra Deak / Daily Nexus

When knowledge is transmitted in such a way as it is in the university system, there is little hope for dialogue. I hear those on the left clamoring for a national dialogue, yet they offer nothing but the destruction of property, both private and public. Observe the force employed by the individuals at UC Berkeley in response to the Milo Yiannopoulos event scheduled there. And now, in a small act of what is perhaps imitation of their more violent comrades at Berkeley, leftists of UC Santa Barbara have destroyed the signs advertising the Ben Shapiro event. Nothing else could be expected from those who consider speech violence.

To equivocate speech and violence is to obliterate the distinction between reason and force. Free speech is a principle of this liberal society for one reason: so that thinking individuals may partake in a discussion of their ideas with other individuals. It is the political prerequisite to freedom of the mind that is, the freedom to reason. As humans are thinking, rational animals, such an ability as reasoning is essential for our existence within a society.

Reason is exactly the means that humans use to avoid predation on each other. In the personal sphere, reasoning is absolutely essential. Consider sex, the most personal and intimate of all human relations. Any good persons intuition regarding sex would prescribe a consensual basis for it. Consent requires a state of consciousness and agency. Such a state is the state of reason. Reason demands conscious awareness and the ability to exercise ones volitional faculties, and so it is the heart of consent. When consent is not given by all parties involved, when force is substituted for reason, the interaction becomes rape or sexual assault. Voluntary, willful consent is required in the realm of sex. It is considered most vital in this context but abandoned in others.

If the free expression of our ideas is not protected by a just government, then where is justice in our law?

The person who forces another person to be his or her friend has nothing to offer. Friends help each other. Friends do good to their friends. This is common sense. If force is used, real value and worth is absent. Just as this applies to friendship, so it applies to politics. Particularly, freedom of speech. It is a truth that no one wants something that must be forced on them. Furthermore, no one wants what is theirs to be taken away by force. Ideas are the most intimate kind of possession. They make up our minds and ourselves. If the free expression of our ideas is not protected by a just government, then where is justice in our law? Are we to apply principles of freedom to one area of our life and not the other? I would say the freedom to speak and not necessarily to be heard is more valuable than a friendship. What friendship could survive without being grounded on a firm slab of truth? What truth can be arrived at except by the free expression and exploration of ideas?

When we apply the principle of reason to economic and political relationships, we get a free market. When we apply it to academics, we should get a free market of ideas. If there is any place in the nation to glorify free speech, it should be the university. Knowledge is the business of the university. Knowledge requires truth. Truth is not easy to obtain. To obtain truth, there is only one principle that can be brought to bear. This is reason and its corollary, freedom of speech.

I am an individualist, so I do not believe everyone on the left condones the savage actions of those students who defaced the College Republicans signs. I do not believe even the majority of those on the left are gripped by a fundamentally irrational Marxist ideology that denies the premises of reason and freedom. In the coming weeks, there will be events which promote unpopular ideas. If for no other reason than to affirm that it is okay to hold an unpopular idea, these events are a blessing. With regards to the administration of this university, the vandals who ruined the College Republicans signs should be found and punished. Their punishment should not be minimal. They should serve as an example so the university can assure its students that freedom of speech will be protected.

Connor Pardini believes in the right to hold an opinion, popular or not.

Go here to read the rest:
Unwilling to Reason: Why Censorship is the Wrong Answer - Daily Nexus

Just remember, when an authoritarian government expresses interest in your opinions, its not necessarily with your best interests at heart.

Thats what the Chinese government has been doing over the last few years, according to a study by researchers in Hong Kong, Sweden, and the United States.

The study found that the regime has been selectively loosening its grip on social media censorship and allowing users to discuss some sensitive topics but its doing this in part to better track dissent and nip potential protest movements in the bud.

For the study, titled Why Does China Allow Freer Social Media? Protests versus Surveillance and Propaganda and published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, researchers analyzed more than 13 billion posts made to Sina Weibo, a Chinese-language microblogging platform akin to Twitter, and correlated these with 545 collective protest events.

They discovered that online censors often allowed free discussion of controversial topics including official corruption and pollution, in many cases accompanied by calls for protests and strikes, apparently with an eye to preventing or limiting the latter.

advertisement

advertisement

Overall, around three million posts relating to protests or social conflict and another 1.3 million relating to strikes were allowed to remain by censors.

Towards that end, the authors state we find that social media can be very effective for protest surveillance, as Most of the real-world protests and strikes that we study can be predicted one day in advance based on social media content.

In one case, the city government of Chengdu simply canceled the weekend, requiring workers to show up at their workplaces and students to be in school, in order to head off a protest over a planned toxic chemical factory.

In fact, users seem to assume that their social media is being monitored, and use it as a channel to circumvent local officials and communicate directly with the central government.

In one interesting example, the user wrote: Billions of money went into the pockets of local officials and their business partners! President Xi, Premier Li, and Secretary Wang in the Central Discipline Inspection Department, do you read our microblogs? Can you hear our voice? Please eradicate these corrupt officials! Right now!

See the original post here:
China Loosens Social Media Censorship To Uncover Dissent - MediaPost Communications

The company we keep Elvis Presley, Big Bird, South Park, Lena Dunham have all been censored. Composite: Michael Ochs Archives/Getty; Scott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly/Alamy; Chris Buck for the Guardian

If Lena Dunham had her way, one episode of Girls would have featured a shot of freshly-ejaculated sperm looping through the air. This was brought up during a recent oral history of the show ahead of its last ever series as well as the fact that HBO stepped in and stopped it from happening on the grounds of basic taste.

With its money shot that never was, Girls has now entered the hallowed halls of censored TV shows. Heres a potted history of the company it keeps.

When Elvis Presley waggled his pelvis on the Milton Berle Show in 1956, an appalled New York Daily News described the performance as being tinged with the kind of animalism that should be confined to dives and bordellos. So, when Elvis appeared on the Steve Allen Show some months later, nervous executives forced him to tone down his sexually suggestive dance moves by making him perform Hound Dog to a dog in a hat on a plinth.

One evening, Tonight Show host Jack Paar told a long and rambling anecdote that contained several references to the term WC as a euphemism for toilet. NBC censors, outraged at the filth inherent in discussing water closets on television, cut the anecdote without informing Paar. The following night Paar close to tears walked off set mid-episode and refused to return for a month.

An episode entitled The Fix saw Hutch get addicted to heroin, and the BBC refused to broadcast it. The episode would eventually air during a special Channel 4 Starsky and Hutch night 24 years later. Note: this video is a fan-made montage, although the original would have arguably been more traumatic had it also been soundtracked by How to Save a Life by The Fray.

A first-series episode entitled The Klansmen has never been broadcast in the UK. This could be because it deals with a violent white power organisation and is therefore full of racial epithets. Or it could be because Bodie one of the good guys, remember repeatedly outs himself as a racist in fairly graphic terms. Or it could be down to its big reveal: the leader of the racist organisation was black. Either way, ick.

No footage from the episode Snuffys Parents Get a Divorce exists, because it has never been aired in any form. The story was meant to deal with the breakup of Mr Snuffleupagus family, but test screenings revealed the litany of unintentionally negative effects the episode had on children. Reports suggested that the kids who watched it were in tears, adding They thought nobody loved Snuffy. They worried their own parents were going to get divorced. As a result, the episode was canned forever.

Although it may appear placid to the point of tedium, an episode of the plodding American sitcom Everybody Loves Raymond entitled Maries Sculpture has never been broadcast on British television. Why? Perhaps because this is the episode where Raymonds mother unwittingly creates a giant (and fairly graphic) statue of a female sexual organ. And, since Everybody Loves Raymond only airs at 8am in the UK, its likely the channel decided that a colossal ceramic vagina shouldnt be the last thing kids see before they leave for school of a morning.

When Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad in 2005, the outrage was such that South Park was bound to weigh in at some point. The episode Cartoon Wars Part II was initially supposed to show another depiction of Muhammad, but ended up running a black title card reading Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Mohammed on their network in its place.

Between 2001 and 2006, Fear Factor was a modestly diverting dare show, like Im a Celebritys Bushtucker Trials stretched out over an hour. However, when NBC revived it in 2011, Fear Factor became a programme where girls in skimpy outfits drank donkey semen while men watched and vomited. After viewing the episode in question, NBC chose not to air it in America. Still, its good to know where the line of decency is. That line is donkey sperm.

Visit link:
South Park to Sesame Street: the TV censorship hall of fame - The Guardian

plus55 (blog)

BRAZIL'S PRESIDENT IMPOSES CENSORSHIP OVER CASE INVOLVING FIRST LADY plus55 (blog) Brazil's First Lady Marcela Temer has been a victim of extortion. A hacker entered into her phone and e-mail accounts, threatening to pull President Temer's name through the mud. The First Family reacted quickly. The State Court in Braslia, at the ... Brazil's Two Largest Newspapers Forced by President and Judge to Delete Reporting; We're Publishing It HereThe Intercept Brazilian judge censors O Globo and Folha for publishing first lady's conversations with blackmailer; entities protestKnight Center for Journalism in the Americas (blog) Judge Censors Folha Article about an Extortion Case Related to the First Lady, Marcela TemerFolha de S.Paulo teleSUR English all 8 news articles »

More here:
BRAZIL'S PRESIDENT IMPOSES CENSORSHIP OVER CASE INVOLVING FIRST LADY - plus55 (blog)