Commentary

One more word to avoid: “Woke”

This entry was posted in Commentary and tagged usage vocabulary on by

Let me start by admitting I had tried to use the word “woke” in a meaningful way. To me it meant the bullying aspect of the left: shouting down speakers, kicking people out of conventions for expressing unpopular views, calling people who disagree “fascists” or “racists,” mobbing people on Twitter (sorry, “X”) for writing on topics not permitted to their skin color, calling for the firing of lawyers who take on disliked defendants, etc. The ones who declare “silence is violence” or “saying all lives matter makes you a Nazi.” In retrospect, I’m not so sure that was ever the predominant meaning of the term. Since authoritarian Republicans have started using the term, it’s become useless even if it had any value before.

This puts me in the weird position of agreeing with Donald Trump: “And I don’t like the term woke because I hear woke, woke, woke. You know, it’s like just a term they use. Half the people can’t even define it. They don’t know what it is.” He’s used the term a great deal himself, but for a passing moment he was right.
(more…)

The EU Media Freedom Act and a two-tiered Internet

This entry was posted in Commentary and tagged EU Europe Internet law liberty on by

A language gripe which I haven’t mentioned lately is the treatment of “media” as a singular. I’ve given it up as a lost cause, but it damages discourse. People often think of “the media” as one thing. Obviously there are many media. This blog is a medium for information, no less than CNN is. But in common use, you don’t qualify as a medium unless either you’re a big corporation or a fortune-teller. Similarly, there’s a tendency to count people as “journalists” only if they work for a “medium” (or is it “a media”)? This leads to the idea that freedom of the press applies only to properly credentialed and accredited journalists and media.

This trend appears in Article 17 of the EU’s proposed Media Freedom Act, which the Electronic Frontier Foundation has strongly criticized.
(more…)

Chinese censorship in America

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship China on by

The other day I found a report by PEN America called “Made in Hollywood, Censored by Beijing.” There’s no visible date on it, but there are references to 2023, so it’s either recent or recently revised. It goes into detail about how American movie makers bend to the Chinese government’s will. It’s not the threat of arrest or property seizure that impels them, but economic and social pressure. “The Chinese Communist Party, in fact, holds major sway over whether a Hollywood movie will be profitable or not — and studio executives know it.”

Well-known actors can be affected even by what they say and do outside movies.
(more…)

Banning book bans in Illinois

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged books Illinois law libraries on by

Illinois has enacted a law which many articles have characterized as “outlawing book bans.” More precisely:

Illinois public libraries that restrict or ban materials because of “partisan or doctrinal” disapproval will be ineligible for state funding as of Jan. 1, 2024, when the new law goes into effect.

Here’s the full text. It encourages libraries to adopt the American Library Association’s “Library Bill of Rights.” This sounds like a good idea on the face of it, but it may accomplish less than expected and have unintended consequences.
(more…)

(Un)banning the Bible in Utah

This entry was posted in Commentary News and tagged books censorship education religion on by

The Davis school district in Utah has reversed an earlier decision removing the Bible from middle and elementary schools. Few people thought it should be banned; the challenge to it was supposed to be a reductio ad absurdum of the policies that led to the removal of other books. Unfortunately, the appeal committee and the district officials missed the point. They said that “the Bible has significant, serious value for minors which outweighs the violent or vulgar content it contains.” Of course it does. The point is, so do many other books. Violence and vulgarity, even outright immorality, aren’t a sufficient reason to exclude books from school libraries.

The Bible is a horrible book. The Old Testament presents a sadistic, murderous God who drowns nearly the entire world population, firebombs cities, orders the extermination of every man, woman, and child in other cities, and decrees death penalties for many kinds of actions. In the New Testament, this sadist comes to us, not to beg for forgiveness for his crimes, but to say that he’ll forgive us, on the condition that we believe he turned himself into a human in order to be executed. People who don’t believe that claim will be tortured forever.
(more…)

Chengdu Worldcon GoH gets Putin appointment

This entry was posted in Commentary News and tagged China fandom Russia science fiction on by

Congratulations to Sergei Lukianenko on being (probably) the first person ever to be both a guest of honor at a Worldcon and an appointee of Vladimir Putin. Putin appointed the loyal advocate of the war of aggression against Ukraine to Russia’s Civic Chamber. He’s also a guest of honor at the 2023 Chengdu Worldcon.

In an interview for the occasion he recommended “the establishment of some kind of federal structure that would publish books that are niche, but useful, educating the reader in the right values and the ability to think.” In other words, a government bureau to publish propaganda books. I’m sure he’d be glad to write some of them.

The Snow Forest cancelled because of review bombers

This entry was posted in Commentary News and tagged books Internet Russia Ukraine on by

War and Peace. Crime and Punishment. We the Living. Are all of these classic novels now unacceptable? Based on reactions to Elizabeth Gilbert’s no longer forthcoming The Snow Forest, it appears so. They’re set in Russia, and to a certain online mob such novels can’t be endured.

Elizabeth Gilbert was set to release her next novel, The Snow Forest. It has become, according to Time, “the target of review bombing, a practice where online users post multiple negative reviews on social media and review sites.” Faced with that reaction, she has pulled it from the publication schedule.

What was the problem? “The historical novel, which centers around a family in the 1930s that finds refuge from the Soviet government in the woods of Siberia, received backlash online from Ukrainian readers who criticized her for publishing a book set in Russia amid the Russian war in Ukraine.”
(more…)

Racially discriminatory typography

This entry was posted in Commentary and tagged racism typography writing on by

A disturbing number of major websites have adopted a double standard in typography. Skin-color terms are capitalized or not, based on what color is in question. I’ve seen sentences where the typographical standard is changed in mid-sentence, even in mid-phrase, capitalizing “Black” and putting “white” in lower case. I haven’t seen a consistent pattern in other color terms, such as “brown” (or is it “Brown”?).

Authors aren’t to blame for this, except when they’re running their own websites. The site sets the typographic standard (or lack of one), and the authors have to live with it or find other outlets.
(more…)

The thug’s veto in Lancaster, New Hampshire

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship libraries New Hampshire on by

The Weeks Memorial Library in Lancaster, a small town in northern New Hampshire, was going to put on a “drag queen story hour,” then it cancelled the event because of alleged threats of violence. A WMUR news article says,

Linda Hutchins, board chair of Weeks Memorial Library, said the library has a non-discrimination policy when it comes to renting out their room, but when they started receiving violent threats and word of multiple protests, safety became a top priority.

However, an NHPR news article makes it doubtful whether these threats were real:
(more…)

CUNY misrepresents American freedoms

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship education law on by

The bogus claim that there’s a “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment of the US Constitution usually comes from a left-wing position, but anyone can use it. The Board of Trustees of the City University of New York claimed that the speech made by student Fatima Mousa Mohammed at the May 12 Law School commencement constituted “hate speech.” The statement asserts that “hate speech … should not be confused with free speech and has no place on our campuses or in our city, our state or our nation.” Presumably the university plans or has already engaged in some action penalizing the speaker, though I haven’t been able to find out what it did or is going to do.

This case is particularly interesting because it doesn’t follow the usual script of people holding a left-wing view claiming that positions they don’t like are unprotected “hate speech.” According to an article on FIRE’s website, Ms. Mohammed “accused Israel of ‘indiscriminately raining bullets and bombs’ on Palestinians, criticized CUNY for working with the ‘fascist’ New York City Police Department and military, and expressed disdain for ‘capitalism, racism, imperialism and Zionism.'” Those sound more like the positions of someone who’d fling “hate speech” accusations rather than being on the receiving end.
(more…)