Interesting Discussion of Free Speech

[theguesser]

Public letter in Harper's sparks furor

BY JONATHAN EASLEY - 07/11/20 01:45 PM EDT 1,971

2,581

   

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/506846-public-letter-in-harpers-sparks-furor

 

An open letter published in Harper’s this week has revved up the debate over free speech and cancel culture.

 

The letter, which was signed by 153 mostly liberal writers and academics, including J.K. Rowling and Salman Rushdie, drew attention to a battle that has been building in academia, journalism and on social media amid a divisive political landscape and extraordinary civil unrest.

 

The letter warned about an effort on the left to “weaken our norms of open debate.” The authors argued that imposing limits on speech is dangerous and has created an atmosphere of paranoia that leaves people afraid to share their views over fears they will be fired from their jobs.

 

The letter was met with a swift and intense backlash. Two people who signed the letter later expressed regret for joining the effort. A rebuttal letter circulated accusing the signers of defending the old guard.

 

Critics said publishers and influential social media figures should consider the consequences of their speech and whether it endangers or demonizes historically marginalized groups of people.

 

That debate is unfolding as the nation is convulsed by protests and a national reckoning over institutional racism and policing. It raises thorny questions about whether there should be limits on speech or consequences for offensive remarks.

 

The Harper’s letter was spearheaded by Thomas Chatterton Williams, a columnist for Harper’s and a contributor to New York Times magazine.

 

The signers include left-wing luminaries like Noam Chomsky, writers Malcolm Gladwell, Martin Amis and Margaret Atwood, journalists George Packer, David Frum and Fareed Zakaria, and scores of other historians, psychologists, linguists, poets and academics.

 

African American intellectual leaders such as Williams, Nell Irvin Painter, Reginald Dwayne Betts, Gregory Pardlo and John McWhorter also signed on.

 

All or most of the signers are stridently anti-Trump. The letter is explicit in its support of police reform and peaceful protests to address systemic racism.

 

“We tried to make it clear that the greatest threat to democracy is the extraordinarily incompetent, unqualified and possibly deranged president. We’re all opposed to police brutality and support the protests rising up,” Williams told The Hill.

 

“But a big problem arises when you try to overcorrect for a wrong and you reach a solution that becomes a kind of coercive dogma that has a chilling effect. This happens outside of official channels when a social media mob turns on you and there’s no mechanism for appeal. We’re just saying this can’t be the way our human resources departments make employment decisions.”

 

The letter expressed alarm over the “intolerance of opposing views” and “public shaming and ostracism” aimed at those who challenge liberal ideas.

 

The authors said this phenomenon has “steadily narrowed the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal.”

 

“It is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought,” the letter states. “More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms. … We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement.”

 

The authors are drawing attention to so-called cancel culture, in which people have lost their jobs after social pressure for offensive or controversial remarks.

 

A rebuttal letter, spearheaded by journalists of color, was published Friday morning.

 

The reporters accused the Harper’s signers of ignoring the systemic racism in media that has contributed to the current efforts to level the playing field.

 

“The irony of the piece is that nowhere in it do the signatories mention how marginalized voices have been silenced for generations in journalism, academia, and publishing,” they write.

 

“Their words reflect a stubbornness to let go of the elitism that still pervades the media industry, an unwillingness to dismantle systems that keep people like them in and the rest of us out.”

 

Rowling’s signature on the letter provoked widespread anger. The author of the beloved “Harry Potter” series has misgendered transgender women in Twitter posts. She has said that she “wants trans women to be safe,” but that she’s worried about ensuring the safety of “natal girls” in bathrooms and changing rooms. 

 

In a lengthy statement released in early June, Rowling said she believes it is too easy for trans people to change their gender identification. She has made the case that trans people oftentimes do not need surgery or hormones to be granted a gender confirmation certificate.

 

“I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones — then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside,” Rowling wrote. “That is the simple truth.”

 

Author Jennifer Finney Boylan, a trans woman, apologized for signing the Harper’s letter, saying she did not know that Rowling was a part of the effort.

 

“[The signers] appear to be asking for freedom from consequences for their own speech,” wrote Mike Masnick, an editor at TechDirt. “Please don't publicly shame us or make our bosses rethink our employment for our speech, no matter how bad it is. That is not a pro-free speech stance. It is a anti-consequences stance, and it's truly disappointing to see many of the signatories endorse this.”

 

The signers said the letter was not an endorsement of each other’s views, but rather an example of how a broad coalition of people could agree on the need for the free flow of ideas.

 

Other critics pointed to the massive platforms and influence the signers have, saying their claims that people are being silenced are overstated.

 

The signers acknowledge this, saying they wrote the letter because they have enough social and professional capital to not have to worry about being silenced or fired.

 

They said their concern is protecting individuals who don’t have the same amount of power. For many private citizens, the signers said, it is easier for their employers to cut them loose to avoid the headache of dealing with a public relations problem.

 

“We weren’t claiming to be victims,” Zaid Jilani, a liberal reporter who signed the letter, told The Hill. “It was a way for some of those who signed the letter to use their influence to argue for a new set of norms for workers.”

 

Both Williams and Jilani pointed to a case involving 28-year-old David Shor, a former data analyst at the political firm Civis Analytics and a veteran of President Obama’s 2012 campaign.

 

In late May, Shor tweeted out a study from Princeton professor Omar Wasow, a black man, whose research found that it can be detrimental to the cause of protesters when their movement becomes associated with violence.

 

Shor did not express an opinion on the study but social media users accused him of undermining the nonviolent protesters. Some of his colleagues and clients at Civis complained. Shor apologized publicly but was fired a few days later.

 

The other watershed moment came earlier this year when The New York Times published an op-ed from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) calling on Trump to deploy troops into U.S. cities dealing with protests over the police killing of George Floyd.

 

A number of reporters in the Times newsroom expressed deep anger, arguing that the op-ed endangered the lives of their black colleagues. Editorial page director James Bennet, who had already been under scrutiny over previous missteps, resigned under pressure. 

 

Critics accused the Times of setting a dangerous precedent by firing an employee for publishing commentary the paper’s reporters or readers might disagree with. Those who defended the firing said Cotton has plenty of platforms to get his views out and the Times shouldn’t be amplifying his message if it could lead to real-world harm.

 

Those battle lines have become brighter and more complex in the age of Trump.

 

Newsrooms are debating how to present Trump’s divisive rhetoric on race and his untruthful remarks. Democrats are hyper-sensitive to the spread of misinformation on Facebook following Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 election.

 

The prominence of ugly and racially motivated online attacks are a major problem for the social media giants. Employers are dealing with tough questions about the path back to redemption for workers ensnared in social media controversies or viral instances of rage.

 

 

Academia is reckoning with diversity and inclusion within their ranks. Newsrooms are undergoing generational change, as young millennials with different values leave campuses and achieve positions of power in the media.

 

“No one is pretending that [speech] is the gravest concern in the world,” said Williams.

 

“There’s a global pandemic and millions of people are out of work. Trump is a real threat to democracy and we all believe that we need to stand up for marginalized groups," Williams added. "But there’s also a perverse logic to mob punishment and the old impulse to burn the heretic. There’s a discernible pleasure people get in seeing someone torn apart publicly and I think it’s disingenuous to deny that.”

[theguesser]

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/506775-dozens-of-journalists-writers-fire-back-at-the

 

 

Dozens of journalists, writers fire back at the Harper's Letter on 'cancel culture'

More than 150 people have signed.

 

By

Anagha Srikanth | July 10, 2020

 

Story at a glance

 

Hundreds of prominent writers and scholars, many in academia, signed an open letter “on justice and open debate.”

The letter has been criticized on social media by other writers, including journalists.

In response, more than 150 others have signed “A More Specific Letter on Justice and Open Debate.”

Editor’s note: Three employees of The Hill are signatories of “A More Specific Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” published on The Objective. 

 

From its title, there’s no question what an open letter signed by more than 150 journalists, writers and scholars is about. “A More Specific Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” is a clear response to an open letter published just days earlier, titled “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate.”

 

True to its name, the response letter is more specific than the original, naming people and publications directly and taking a point-by-point approach to its rebuttal. 

 

 

If you haven’t followed the back-and-forth, the original letter was published online on Tuesday and intended to run in Harper’s Magazine’s October issue. It condemns a general culture of intolerance, public shaming and ostracism of an unnamed community, which is assumed to be those on the left of the political spectrum, in response to “opposing views.” 

 

Much of the body of the response letter is used to specifically address six examples cited in the original letter to portray an atmosphere of censure and restricted speech. 

 

"What the signatories are describing are things that have happened to journalists, academics, and authors marginalized by their respective industries for years — just not in the ways the signatories want to highlight. The problem they are describing is for the most part a rare one for privileged writers, but it is constant for the voices that have been most often shut out of the room. When Black and brown writers are hired by prominent media institutes, NDAs and social media policies are used to prevent them from talking about toxic workplace experiences," the response letter said. "The letter talks about none of this.”

 

 

One of the more prominent signatories of the original letter was J.K. Rowling, who has recently been criticized for her statements criticizing medical treatments for transgender people. The response criticizes her and other signatories, including Jesse Singal, who have made transphobic comments, even calling some of them out for hypocrisy. 

 

"In fact, a number of the signatories have made a point of punishing people who have spoken out against them," said the letter, calling out Bari Weiss, Katha Pollitt, Emily Yoffe, Anne-Marie Slaughter and Cary Nelson. "What gives them the right to use their platforms to harass others into silence, especially writers with smaller platforms and less institutional support, while preaching that silencing writers is a problem?"

 

Unlike the original letter, not all of its signatories are named however, which the letter acknowledged.

 

"Many signatories on our list noted their institutional affiliation but not their name, fearful of professional retaliation. It is a sad fact, and in part why we wrote the letter," said the letter, which is credited to a group effort spearheaded by journalists of color. 

 

The response also notes that “contributions were seen by all the collaborators and accepted through consensus.” One of its criticisms of the original letter was that signatories were not told who other signatories were — a fact that led one author to withdraw their support after its publication. 

 

Since its publication, Roy Tsao, a professor and teacher at the Pratt Institute, has accused the organizers of the original letter of being dishonest with its intent. 

 

 

 

 

Another, Lucia Martinez Valdivia, said in a Medium post that she was selectively shown the names of signatories of color and not others. 

 

Thomas Chatterton Williams, the editor who led the original effort, has since defended the letter, continuing a conversation on “cancel culture” that shows few signs of abating. 

[sleepy]

This bullshit will only get worse with Biden in charge.

 

This is a big reason why we must vote Trump in November!

[tailsyoulose]

nothing about this is interesting. pretty fuckin boring actually. 

 

TLDR liberals are dogshit.

[RaiseThese]

Yes,,more lefties CRYING for fairness when THEY get attacked by mob....

[FairWarning]

And people wonder why Trump doesn’t poll well. This has gone on for a while now, there cancel culture spotlight only made it an issue. Funny how JK Rowing really didn’t have a problem with it until it was flipped on her involving Trans.

[theguesser]

Yes,,more lefties CRYING for fairness when THEY get attacked by mob....

As usual, you idiots can't read.   

[RaiseThese]

As usual, you idiots can't read.  

Okay then could you please provide a summary for us idiots.

[theguesser]

Today, a Great, probably the best, NBA reporter in the biz,  was suspended because of shit he said:  You Idiots think it's only one side.   And I'm sure most of you hypocrites are thrilled Woj is suspended.  

 

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/espn-suspends-adrian-wojnarowski-profane-email-hawley-reports

 

ESPN suspends NBA reporter Adrian Wojnarowski after profane email to Sen. Hawley: reports

[theguesser]

Okay then could you please provide a summary for us idiots.

Nope, I posted the articles, a nice, 2 sided discussion of the Issue.   Take some time to read them.   Or not, and just bitch and moan about "the left".  .Seems to be your thing.     

[RaiseThese]

 

Today, a Great, probably the best, NBA reporter in the biz,  was suspended because of shit he said:  You Idiots think it's only one side.   And I'm sure most of you hypocrites are thrilled Woj is suspended.  

 

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/espn-suspends-adrian-wojnarowski-profane-email-hawley-reports

 

ESPN suspends NBA reporter Adrian Wojnarowski after profane email to Sen. Hawley: reports

 

Yes Pick one Way OVER the top example vs scores of normal people with an opinion  who gets fired and death threats  for speaking out.

Dude was way out of line and completely unprofessional.   ESPN HAD to make a move just to keep semblance of being fair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And NBA along with millionaire players still dont give a shit about human rights..its all a farce

 

[tailsyoulose]

And I'm sure most of you hypocrites are thrilled Woj is suspended.  

 

we never wanted to play this game. we tried to opt out at every turn. but you fucks insisted on those rules and forced us to play by em. the alternative to fighting back is just to let you cowards steamroll us.

 

fuck that. fire everyone then - both sides. prisoners dilemma. it appears thats the only way you fucks will learn and change - when some of your own start getting the bullet too. 

 

dont believe me? look at the story YOU posted - the people signing the original letter are basically all shitlibs who had absolutely NOTHING to say about this until it started affecting THEIR team. good. fuck em. keep at it.

[theguesser]

Yes Pick one Way OVER the top example vs scores of normal people with an opinion  who gets fired and death threats  for speaking out.

Dude was way out of line and completely unprofessional.   ESPN HAD to make a move just to keep semblance of being fair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And NBA along with millionaire players still dont give a shit about human rights..its all a farce

 

As predicted.   Just once, I'd like to see one of you idiots take a principled stand.  If youre against something, you're against it, no matter who does it, no matter who it's done to.  

[RaiseThese]

As predicted.   Just once, I'd like to see one of you idiots take a principled stand.  If youre against something, you're against it, no matter who does it, no matter who it's done to.  

What are you babbling about?

 

What principled stand are you referring to..specific please.

[theguesser]

What are you babbling about?

 

What principled stand are you referring to..specific please.

Woj's suspension.   Are you for it or against it?   

[tailsyoulose]

Woj's suspension.   Are you for it or against it?   

 

For it.

 

Fire everyone - its the only thing that will make your team learn. You didnt give a shit when it was just us getting it, did you?

[RaiseThese]

Woj's suspension.   Are you for it or against it?   

I dont really care because it was just optics.

He got off pretty easy !!

 

Are you suggesting his OVER THE TOP response and suspension is the same as

people getting fired and life threatened for voicing their opinions?

[theguesser]

For it.

 

Fire everyone - its the only thing that will make your team learn. You didnt give a shit when it was just us getting it, did you?

Of course.   Hypocrite Hypocritin, as usual.  

There's no team in this stuff.  But far be it from an idiot kid Cultist to get it.   

[theguesser]

I dont really care because it was just optics.

 

Are you suggesting his OVER THE TOP response and suspension is the same as

people getting fired and life threatened for voicing their opinions?

Of course.   Exactly as I expected.  

No one should have their life threatened for voicing their opinion.  Like Kathy Griffin's was.  

[tailsyoulose]

Of course.   Hypocrite Hypocritin, as usual.  

There's no team in this stuff.  But far be it from an idiot kid Cultist to get it.   

 

In principle, 100% opposed. But real life ain't principle.

 

You'd think that by the age of a dinosaur you'd have learned that by now. 

[tailsyoulose]

A pacifist aint much use in a foxhole.

[theguesser]

In principle, 100% opposed. But real life ain't principle.

 

You'd think that by the age of a dinosaur you'd have learned that by now. 

If you're for it, you're for it.  If you're against it, you're against it.  

I have learned over my long life that principles are not elastic.  You have them or you don't.   You don't.  Hopefully when you grow up and see some life, you may.   There's always hope.  

[tailsyoulose]

If you're for it, you're for it.  If you're against it, you're against it.  

I have learned over my long life that principles are not elastic.  You have them or you don't.   You don't.  Hopefully when you grow up and see some life, you may.   There's always hope.  

 

pacifist in a foxhole. lmao. 

[theguesser]

pacifist in a foxhole. lmao. 

Yep, same exact thing as ESPN suspending their best NBA reporter because he dared to speak up and curse our a wingnut wacko.  

[tailsyoulose]

Yep, same exact thing as ESPN suspending their best NBA reporter because he dared to speak up and curse our a wingnut wacko.

Good. God willing it won't stop till every one of you letfy nutjobs is unemployed and living in poverty. Prisoners dilemma. You wanted it you got it.