An editor at one of America's largest newspapers has lost his job just days after a "deeply offensive" headline triggered a mass staff walkout

A top editor at a newspaper in the US has resigned just days after apologising for a "deeply offensive" headline. 

Stan Wischnowski, the top editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, resigned today, four days after  the headline “Buildings Matter, Too” prompted mass walkouts from staff.

The headline was a play on the “Black Lives Matter” slogan and was put on an article discussing the damage done to the city’s buildings.

Mr Wischnowski apologised on Wednesday, the day the article was published, but the apology did not stop dozens of staff from calling in sick the next day as part of a mass walkout.

“The Philadelphia Inquirer published a headline in Tuesday’s edition that was deeply offensive. We should not have printed it,” the paper’s top editors wrote.

“We’re sorry, and regret that we did. We also know that an apology on its own is not sufficient.

“The headline offensively riffed on the Black Lives Matter movement, and suggested an equivalence between the loss of buildings and the lives of black Americans. That is unacceptable.”

SOURCE 

CrossFit CEO Greg Glassman loses Reebok sponsorship after insensitive US protest post

Combining black deaths and the Coronavirus is wrong, apparently

A firestorm has erupted in the fitness world, with gym owners and influencers deserting an exercise boss after he fired off an insensitive tweet.

CrossFit is a high-intensity interval training program which has gyms across the world

Its highly popular form of exercise has also spawned the CrossFit Games as well as making a slew of its devotees into bonafide CrossFit stars.

But over the weekend the fitness company’s US-based CEO Mr Glassman sparked fury when he tweeted in response to a tweet by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation which said racism and discrimination were “critical public health issues”.

“Floyd-19,” Mr Glassman wrote in response, referencing the killing of black man George Floyd, whose death in police custody has sparked the worldwide Black Lives Matter movement.

The backlash against Mr Glassman was swift, with followers calling out his tweet as ”tone deaf” and “disgusting”.

SOURCE 

Fox News is forced to apologize after airing a chart linking the deaths of George Floyd, Martin Luther King Jr. and Michael Brown to the stock market

The chart showed that the death of George Floyd was GOOD for the stockmarket!  No wonder that reality was unpopular!



Fox News apologized Saturday for how it displayed a chart correlating the stock market's performance with the aftermath of the deaths of George Floyd, Martin Luther King Jr. and Michael Brown.

The graphic that aired Friday to illustrate market reactions to historic periods of civil unrest 'should have never aired on television without full context' the channel said.

'We apologize for the insensitivity of the image and take this issue seriously,' they added in a statement.

The chart stirred outrage at a time when thousands of people nationwide have taken part in mass protests against racism and police brutality following the death of Floyd at the hands of a white officer.

The chart included on 'Special Report with Bret Baier' illustrated gains made by the S&P 500 index after King´s assassination in 1968; the Ferguson, Missouri, police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in 2014, and the May 25 death of Floyd while in Minneapolis police custody.

It also measured the financial yardstick against the 1991 acquittal of Los Angeles police officers in the beating of Rodney King.

SOURCE 

J.K. Rowling Speaks Truth About Transgenderism; Will She Be Canceled?

Less than six months after getting in hot water for showing support for a researcher who was fired after pointing out that people can’t change their biological sex, author J.K. Rowling is once again in the crosshairs of the radical left for comments deemed “transphobic.”

On Saturday, Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter series, mocked a headline that used the phrase “people who menstruate.”

“‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

The outrage machine quickly sprung to life, but Rowling stood her ground. “I’ve spent much of the last three years reading books, blogs and scientific papers by trans people, medics and gender specialists. I know exactly what the distinction is. Never assume that because someone thinks differently, they have no knowledge.”

Outrage nevertheless persisted, and Rowling addressed the blowback in a series of tweets. “If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”

GLAAD, a gay rights group, slammed her tweets, accusing her of continuing “to align herself with an ideology which willfully distorts facts about gender identity and people who are trans. In 2020, there is no excuse for targeting trans people.”

I suspect there is little that J.K. Rowling and I agree on, but her standing up for biology and scientific fact is one area we agree upon, and I’m glad she isn’t allowing herself to be bullied into submission over it.

The radical left’s response to differences in opinion is not a desire for debate, but the shaming and silencing of opposition. Rowling won’t be bullied. I hope others refuse to be bullied over standing up for biological facts.

SOURCE 

After staff uproar, New York Times rethinks 'Send in the Military' op-ed

What began as an undercurrent of newsroom grumbling built into an unusual Twitter tidal wave of public outrage among journalists at the New York Times over their newspaper's decision to publish an opinion column by Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, calling for military intervention in US cities wracked by protests over police violence.

But after 24 hours of debate and acrimony - during which both the paper's publisher and editorial-page editor and publisher strongly defended the need to showcase diverse and controversial viewpoints - the paper late on Thursday abruptly announced that Cotton's op-ed was the result of a "rushed editorial process" and "did not meet our standards."

The statement from a Times spokesperson and shared online by a Times staff writer did not apologise for the op-ed nor explain if it would be marked with a correction.

One by one, dozens of Times reporters, columnists and editors had rebuked the paper's editorial page on Wednesday night for publishing the op-ed, in which Cotton of Arkansas stated that "rioters have plunged many American cities into anarchy" and that an "overwhelming show of force" is needed to "restore order to our streets."

Several staffers tweeted a message that became a kind of rallying cry: "Running this puts Black @nytimes staffers in danger."

The outcry reflected the tensions that have long existed between news and opinion sections of newspapers - separate and distinct staffs, run independently of each other while coexisting under the same brand. In less than 24 hours, both the Times publisher and editorial page editor wrote messages explaining and justifying the decision to publish Cotton's piece.

"I believe in the principle of openness to a range of opinions, even those we may disagree with, and this piece was published in that spirit," publisher A.G. Sulzberger wrote in a letter to staff on Thursday morning.

But he acknowledged that many staffers had raised concerns about many aspects of the story and promised to hear them out "with an open mind."

James Bennet, who is often mentioned as a possible successor to Times executive editor Dean Baquet, wrote in a column that, "the public would be better equipped to push back if it heard the argument and had the chance to respond to the reasoning.

Against that backdrop, several Times staff members viewed Cotton's essay as an ominous "call for military force against Americans," as Times opinion columnist Jamelle Bouie put it.

"I'll probably get in trouble for this, but to not say something would be immoral," tweeted Nikole Hannah-Jones, who recently won the Times a Pulitzer for her 1619 project. "As a black woman, as a journalist, as an American, I am deeply ashamed that we ran this."

SOURCE 

Alex Berenson Book Exposing Coronavirus Myths Censored by Amazon?

On Wednesday evening, former New York Times reporter and author Alex Berenson attempted to self-publish his book, Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates, through Amazon’s self-publishing platform, Kindle Direct Publishing. On Thursday morning, he reported that he’d submitted it and was waiting for the book to go through Amazon’s approval process.

“Last night I submitted my first coronavirus facts booklet (“Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns”) for sale to @amazon,” he tweeted. “Normally the review/publishing process does not take long. Hopefully that will be the case this time and I won’t have to scream about censorship.”

That turned out to be wishful thinking. An hour after that tweet, Berenson reported that Amazon rejected his book. “Today @amazon refused to publish my booklet about the coronavirus because it ‘did not comply’ with their (undisclosed) guidelines,” he reported. “This is outrageous censorship from a company that has gained hugely from lockdowns – and dominates the US book market, especially with stores closed!”

In response to this censoring of his book, Berenson noted that Amazon has previously sold a how-to guide for pedophiles on their site, only removing it after being forced to by public outrage.

Amazon also allows other questionable books to be sold on its platform:

Berenson recently published an op-ed at Fox News noting how YouTube and Facebook “are trying to control information about COVID.”

YouTube has pulled videos from scientists and physicians, even those with top-tier credentials. Meanwhile, Facebook has blocked efforts to organize protests against lockdowns.

Facebook’s stance is particularly problematic because as the largest social media network, it may gain from lockdowns, which force friends or community groups to rely on virtual gatherings instead of real-life meetings.

Investors certainly seem to believe the lockdowns have not hurt Facebook. Its stock rose 5 percent to an all-time high on Wednesday. Shares in Google’s parent company, which also owns YouTube, also are near an all-time high.

SOURCE 

Trump’s social media order violates free speech, claims lawsuit

In one of the first lawsuits challenging the executive order on preventing online censorship signed by US President Donald Trump, a digital rights group has claimed that the order violates the rights to free speech of all online platforms and individuals.

The lawsuit was filed by nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday.

CDT said that the executive order which was issued after Twitter added a fact-checking label to one of Trump's tweets about mail-in voting was "plainly retaliatory".

The May 28 executive order "violates the first Amendment in two fundamental respects: Frist the order is plainly retaliatory: it attacks a private company, Twitter, for exercising its First Amendment right to comment on the President's statements," said the lawsuit.

"Second, and more fundamentally, the Order seeks to curtail and chill the constitutionally protected speech of all online platforms and individuals...," it added.

Trump's executive order seeks to blunt Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act which generally protects internet companies from legal liability for user comments.

Section 230 states that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

SOURCE 

Zuckerberg defends no action on Trump post

Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg is standing by his decision not to challenge inflammatory posts by US President Donald Trump after staff members staged a rare public protest.

A group of Facebook employees - nearly all of them working at home due to the coronavirus pandemic - walked off the job on Monday.

They complained the company should have acted against Trump's posts about protests containing the phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".

Zuckerberg told employees Facebook had conducted a thorough review and was right to leave the posts unchallenged, a company spokeswoman said.

On Friday, Twitter attached a warning label to a Trump tweet about widespread protests over the death of African-American man George Floyd in Minnesota that included the same phrase.

Twitter said the post violated its rules against glorifying violence but was left up as a public interest exception, with reduced options for interactions and distribution.

Facebook declined to act on the same message, and Zuckerberg sought to distance his company from the fight between the president and Twitter.

He maintained that while he found Trump's remarks "deeply offensive", they did not violate company policy against incitements to violence.

SOURCE 

NBA announcer fired over controversial ‘All Lives Matter' tweet

Grant Napear was fired by his radio station and resigned as the play-by-play announcer for NBA franchise the Sacramento Kings after his tweet that said “All Lives Matter” was met with backlash amid the George Floyd protests.

Napear tweeted “All Lives Matter … Every Single One!” after former Kings star DeMarcus Cousins asked the 60-year-old for his view on the Black Lives Matter movement.

The phrase “All Lives Matter” is associated by some as mocking the Black Lives Matter movement, which began in 2013 as a campaign against systematic racism and violence toward black people.

Black Lives Matter has become the focal point of police brutality and racial injustice protests all over America after Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, died in Minneapolis last week when a police officer kept a knee on his neck for more than eight minutes.

The parent company of KHTK, the station at which Napear hosted his show, said “the timing of Grant’s tweet was particularly insensitive”. Napear had been placed on leave by the station Monday.

The Kings didn’t address the tweet in their statement, only saying that they wished Napear the best and thanked him for his service to the organisation, who he has worked for since 1988.

In an apology posted by the Sacramento Bee newspaper, Napear said he was “not as educated on BLM as I thought. I had no idea that when I said ‘All Lives Matter’ that it was counter to what BLM is trying to get across”.

SOURCE 

The NYT Headline That Has Liberals Outraged

Some very sensitive souls on the Left

The New York Times was skewered by the left over its front-page headline about President Trump’s Rose Garden address to the nation on Monday about the riots that are taking place in cities across the U.S. in the wake of George Floyd’s death in police custody.

“As Chaos Spreads, Trump Vows to ‘End it Now’” read the apparently too-sympathetic-to-the-president headline.

"You’ve got to be kidding me," New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez commented, sharing the story on Twitter.

"The New York Times headline writers are going to Both Sides the country to death," remarked Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.

“This headline represents the absolute failure by the NYT to defend democracy in her time of need,” former Hillary Clinton senior adviser Zac Petkanas wrote.

SOURCE 

Three British teenagers who mocked George Floyd's death in sick online video are ARRESTED on suspicion of committing a hate crime

No free speech in Britain

Three British teenagers who mocked the murder of George Floyd in a Snapchat video have now been arrested on suspicion of committing a hate crime.

The trio, all from Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, caused outrage after a photo of them recreating how the unarmed 46-year-old black man died at the hands of police in Minnesota was shared on social media. 

Mr Floyd was killed after police Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for several minutes, with the death leading to riots across the US and protests at cities around the world including London, Manchester and Cardiff.

Despite the fury, the three teenagers posted the mocking Snapchat video last week, though they were forced to shut down their social media profiles after it quickly spread.

They have also reportedly started receiving death threats and are now thought to be in police protections.

Northumbria Police did not confirm this, though a spokesperson did reveal that the trio had been arrested, with the Snapchat video now being treated as a hate crime.  

A police statement said: 'We can confirm we are investigating after an image was shared on social media which showed two men imitating the recent death of US citizen George Floyd.

'An investigation was launched and yesterday (Sunday) officers arrested two males aged 19 and another male aged 18 on suspicion of sending communications causing anxiety and distress.

'They have since been released on bail. We understand that this social media post has caused significant upset and we want to reassure the public it is being investigated robustly and is being treated as a hate crime.' 

SOURCE 

People hear what they want to hear

They hear what she said as about police violence in Australia.  But she was not talking about that.  She was saying that Australians don't know much about the situation IN AMERICA

A clip from The Today Show has gone viral after an Australian reporter claimed that Aussies don't have the same understanding of a "history of police violence" as Americans do.

The comment came as the reporter thanked a black man for speaking to her during the protests — saying: "I really appreciate you giving your perspective mate, because people in Australia don’t have the understanding of the history of police killings and things here."

But Australians were quick to point out that, in reality, we have a long, tragic and ongoing history of police violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia.

SOURCE  

San Antonio City Council unanimously passes resolution denouncing COVID-19 hate speech

City Council unanimously passed a resolution that denounces the use of terms like 'Chinese virus' and 'Kung Fu Virus' as San Antonio continues to fight against the spread of COVID-19.

Anti-hate speech resolution passed by City of San Antonio city council (City of San Antonio)

The resolution condemns any hate speech, violent action and the "spread of misinformation related to COVID-19."

In a letter to council members, Mayor Ron Nirenberg says the city must take a stand against COVID-19 hate speech.

"This coronavirus has held no regard for race, religion, creed, or political boundary. As such, our efforts must meet the indiscriminate nature of COVID-19 with empathy and compassion for all our neighbors," writes Nirenberg. "I ask that you consider adopting the attached resolution - which declares that our COVID-19 response efforts will be free of hate and discrimination - at the next Council A-Session."

Nirenberg's letter adds that terms like 'Chinese virus' and 'Kung Fu Virus' only encourage hate crimes and incidents against Asian communities; and that the Jewish community has also been targeted with blame and conspiracy theories regarding coronavirus.

SOURCE 

Extreme feminist Clementine Ford shouldn’t be censored

Leave political censorship to the Left

Joe Hildebrand

There is an old fable of various forms, known most famously as “The Frog and the Scorpion”.

The scorpion, who cannot swim, asks the frog to carry him across a river. The frog politely declines because, well, it’s a scorpion.

But the scorpion reasons with the frog. “If I sting you we both die,” he says. “So why on earth would I do that?”

The logic is inarguable and so the frog agrees. Then, when they are halfway across, the scorpion stings the frog and they both sink to their deaths.

“Why did you do that?” asks the frog with his dying breath.

The scorpion shrugs. “It’s in my nature.”

The same might be said of Clementine Ford, a firebrand feminist who seems programmed to self-destruct at every opportunity – usually in an attempt to destroy someone else in the process.

Strangely, perhaps even refreshingly, she does not present as a martyr. Indeed she often seems surprised when her fury implodes. She is like an out-of-control heat-seeking missile that lands upon a target only to realise too late that it is the end of them both.

I have been targeted by Clementine on more than one occasion and it is both a derailing and damaging experience.

The first time was several years ago when she generated a Twitter storm around her enthusiastic use of the C-bomb, a word I – like her – have never had a problem with.

The bizarre part was that while she was flying thick and fast with it in the public exchanges she was privately messaging me joking about how silly the whole thing was.

Much like the frog, I mistakenly thought we were friends.

This was underscored by the fact that we had a friend in common, someone very dear to me. We even bumped into each other at his wedding a year or two ago and exchanged cheery hellos.

I was therefore a little surprised but not particularly concerned when Clementine pitched a column to Ten Daily, my own network’s news website, to rebut some comments I’d made on Studio 10. She would not, she assured the editor, be disrespectful.

Indeed, the same editor ran the pitch by me as a matter of courtesy and of course I did not object – censorship is hardly in my nature – however that doesn’t mean I was happy with what was to follow.

By way of background, there had been a horrible killing in Melbourne and the Victoria Police response had been to say that this was “absolutely about men’s behaviour”. I described the comment as “nonsensical”. It quickly emerged there were far more salient factors in the case, including homelessness and mental illness. Maleness seemed the least of the accused’s problems.

But let us leave that to one side.

Clementine’s opening line was “Joe Hildebrand is trending again” and every part of it was directed specifically towards me. To be fair, the piece was not disrespectful – at least not by Clementine’s colourful standards – but it was certainly personal.

And the vitriol, abuse and threats it provoked from her followers was both limitless and acute.

Last week it was Clementine Ford who was trending and, as she well knows, this is rarely a good thing. She had tweeted the words “Honestly, the coronavirus isn’t killing men fast enough” and the response was everything you might expect.

Of course, medically speaking, she could not have been more wrong. In fact the coronavirus kills far more men than women and kills them quickly – as has been repeatedly reported.

Perhaps Clementine was aware of this and joking about it. Let us hope not.

And of course it is a pretty dumb thing to say, but the whole “kill all men” routine is a pretty staple part of Clementine’s act. I’d be less surprised if I’d found out the guy who ate the bat in Wuhan was Ozzy Osbourne.

And of course it is tempting to say that karma is a bi**h, another word which Clementine has become familiar within the sewer of social media, where she is both violator and victim.

But if you believe in freedom of expression you either support it or you don’t. You either believe in the right to be provocative and profane no matter how much it offends or up-ends you or you believe in censorship and sanitisation.

Here in Australia we have no explicit document or law to uphold that right – it exists only in the hearts of those who believe in it. And holding on to that belief is often tough and ugly and agonisingly frustrating.

There is nothing more hypocritical than screaming thought police trying to deplatform free discourse while defending the most appalling abuse. And there is nothing more nauseating than people who claim to be on the side of tolerance and compassion spitting out the most violent language imaginable – including threats of violence itself.

But calling for Clementine Ford to be shut down or sacked is hardly the answer. If Melbourne City Council wishes to be associated with her, that is their right and voters can deliver their verdict on it at the next election.

More importantly, if Clementine herself wants to be associated with the extreme and often ridiculous views she puts on social media that should be up to her, not the government or the Twitter mob.

Deplatforming people isn’t just a pastime of the new authoritarian left, it is their very ideology – a backwards and bone-chilling belief that only certain views should be permitted.

Cancel culture for them is not just a weapon, it is a world view, and it is a view that must be utterly rejected by anyone who values diversity and liberty.

So when the moderate left or libertarians or conservatives seek to censor the censors they are not using the woke left’s weapons against them, they are becoming them. Idiotic and even evil opinions need to be exposed, not expunged.

There is a big difference between shutting down debate and winning the debate and it is those of us in the rational world who are supposed to understand that.

Yes, it is frustrating, but frustration is the price of freedom. We fight for those we love but we must still protect those we hate.

And that means taking the scorpion on our back even though we know we might get stung.

SOURCE  

Ted Cruz Explains the Need for Trump's Executive Order in a Single Tweet

Earlier this week, President Trump signed an executive order calling for social media companies to be stripped of their “liability shield” if they engage in censorship or political content.

“Today, I am signing an Executive Order to protect and uphold the free speech and rights of the American people,” Trump declared. “Currently, social media giants like Twitter receive an unprecedented liability shield based on the theory that they’re a neutral platform, which they are not, not an editor with a viewpoint.”

“My executive order calls for new regulations under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to make it so that social media companies that engage in censoring or any political conduct will not be able to keep their liability shield. My executive order further instructs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prohibit social media companies from engaging in any deceptive acts or practices regarding commerce.”

Naturally, there has been a lot of debate about this action, and whether Twitter is violating Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The mainstream, naturally, is siding against Trump.

“In the same event where the president said Twitter is inappropriately cracking down on free speech, he says he would be willing to shut Twitter down if he could,” claimed Maggie Haberman of the New York Times.

In response to this tweet, Charles Cooke of National Review rebutted, “But this is false. Twitter is immune from being sued for things that *third parties* say on its website; Twitter is not immune from being sued for things *Twitter* says. This is also true for CNN, which can be sued for its speech, but not its commenters’.”

And then Cruz explained it in black and white:

"Ok, Charles, you want a legal debate. Cool. 

If you (3rd Party) write an op-ed in NYT & it’s defamatory, NYT can be sued.

If you post identical defamatory op-ed on Twitter or FB, they can’t be sued—that’s sec 230.

Congress did that bc they were “neutral.” Now, they censor."

Cruz’s point here is that once Twitter gets in the business of curating content, it should be treated just like any other publisher. Cooke, however, persisted, claiming the New York Times can be sued only  “if it commissions, reads, edits, and then publishes your op-ed” but not “if you write the same words in its comments section.”

But, Cruz followed up, pointing out that all the New York Times has to do to be liable “is make the editorial judgment to publish” a piece to be liable for its content.

Big Tech used to be neutral, allowing free speech. Now, they shadow ban & decide what to publish …

Considering Cruz’s background, I suspect he knows what he’s talking about. Cruz is arguing that Twitter is making an editorial judgment by selectively curating content. Twitter’s bias against conservative content is well documented, and based on that his argument that Twitter should be treated like a publisher and not just a platform.

This won’t end the debate, for sure, Cooke continued to argue against Cruz’s assertion, but that is, in a nutshell, the justification. Twitter isn’t simply removing abusive content, they are essentially assuming editorial control over the content published on their site by selectively fact-checking and censoring tweets. Mark Zuckerberg, for his part, seems to understand this.

SOURCE 

More cultural appropriation nonsense

All sorts of people braid their hair

Fitness influencer Sarah Stevenson has pulled her activewear collection from shelves after a picture launching the campaign was slammed on social media.

Ms Stevenson, who goes by her handle 'Sarah's Day' online, said she had spent three months working on the campaign and released the image to fans as a 'sneak peak' on Thursday.

However, commenters on the post for fashion brand White Fox Boutique swiftly accused the 27-year-old from Sydney of cultural appropriation.

The image features Ms Stevenson dressed in her activewear label in front of vintage television screens with her hair in two long, blue coloured braids.

'This screams cultural appropriation' one person said.

'Yeah this is problematic. I'm disappointed in her,' another said.

'Your lack of awareness and belief that you can just delete comments of people trying to educate you, is disrespectful and concerning.' added a third.

The commenters claimed that Ms Stevenson's style of two braids with hair extensions was appropriated from the African American community who adopted the look as a way to maintain their hair.

Ms Stevenson, who is from Sydney, has since issued a lengthy apology over the campaign, saying she had never intended to offend anyone and would re-do the photoshoot.

SOURCE 

Portland Settles Free Speech Lawsuit With Preacher

Preacher‌ ‌Mark‌ ‌Mayberry‌ ‌was‌ ‌the‌ ‌sole‌ ‌plaintiff‌ ‌in‌ ‌a‌ ‌lawsuit‌ ‌filed‌ ‌last‌ ‌October,‌ ‌which‌ ‌alleges‌ ‌he‌ ‌was‌ ‌unjustly‌ ‌kicked‌ ‌out‌ ‌of‌ ‌‌Tom‌ ‌McCall‌ ‌Waterfront‌ ‌Park‌ ‌for‌ ‌preaching‌ ‌anti-abortion‌ ‌rhetoric.‌ ‌ ‌
‌
 ‌Hacke,‌ ‌an‌ ‌attorney‌ ‌with‌ ‌the‌ ‌‌Pacific‌ ‌Justice‌ ‌Institute‌,‌ ‌which‌ ‌specializes‌ ‌in‌ ‌cases‌ ‌related‌ ‌to‌ ‌religious‌ ‌freedom,‌ ‌filed‌ ‌a‌ ‌suit‌ ‌challenging‌ ‌the‌ ‌orders‌ ‌of‌ ‌a‌ ‌lone‌ ‌Portland‌ ‌park‌ ‌ranger.‌ ‌ ‌
‌
According‌ ‌to‌ ‌the‌ ‌complaint,‌ ‌Mayberry,‌ ‌a‌ ‌Christian‌ ‌evangelist‌ ‌and‌ ‌anti-abortion‌ ‌activist,‌ ‌was‌ ‌preaching‌ ‌at‌ ‌Portland’s‌ ‌Waterfront‌ ‌Park‌ ‌last‌ ‌June‌ ‌with‌ ‌an‌ ‌anti-abortion‌ ‌sign‌ ‌and‌ ‌passing‌ ‌out‌ ‌gospel‌ ‌tracts.‌ ‌The‌ ‌views‌ ‌expressed,‌ ‌according‌ ‌to‌ ‌the‌ ‌filing,‌ ‌were‌ ‌“undoubtedly‌ ‌controversial‌ ‌to‌ ‌some,”‌ ‌but‌ ‌his‌ ‌conduct‌ ‌was‌ ‌“civil,‌ ‌peaceful,‌ ‌and‌ ‌by‌ ‌no‌ ‌means‌ ‌incendiary.”‌ ‌

An‌ ‌officer‌ ‌with‌ ‌the‌ ‌city’s‌ ‌park‌ ‌bureau‌ ‌ordered‌ ‌Mayberry‌ ‌to‌ ‌leave.‌ ‌He‌ ‌refused.‌ ‌ ‌‌

The‌ ‌officer‌ ‌issued‌ ‌him‌ ‌a‌ ‌citation‌ ‌that‌ ‌dictated‌ ‌he‌ ‌couldn’t‌ ‌return‌ ‌to‌ ‌the‌ ‌park‌ ‌for‌ ‌a‌ ‌month, according to the filings.‌ ‌In‌ ‌the‌ ‌lawsuit,‌ ‌Mayberry‌ ‌alleged‌ ‌the‌ ‌action‌ ‌violated‌ ‌his‌ ‌freedom‌ ‌of‌ ‌speech‌ ‌and‌ ‌religion‌ ‌and‌ ‌sought‌ ‌more‌ ‌than‌ ‌$307,000‌ ‌in‌ ‌damages.‌ ‌ ‌
‌
During‌ ‌a‌ ‌vote‌ ‌on‌ ‌the‌ ‌settlement‌ ‌agreement‌ ‌this‌ ‌Wednesday,‌ ‌Randy‌ ‌Stenquist,‌ ‌the‌ ‌city’s‌ ‌‌general‌ ‌and‌ ‌fleet‌ ‌liability‌ ‌manager,‌ ‌told‌ ‌the‌ ‌council‌ ‌the‌ ‌city‌ ‌believes‌ ‌Mayberry’s‌ ‌rights‌ ‌were‌ ‌violated,‌ ‌as‌ ‌a‌ ‌previous‌ ‌injunction‌ ‌issued‌ ‌‌by‌ ‌the‌ ‌9th‌ ‌U.S.‌ ‌Circuit‌ ‌Court‌ ‌of‌ ‌Appeals‌ ‌specifically‌‌ ‌allowed‌ ‌evangelical‌ ‌Christian‌ ‌preachers‌ ‌to‌ ‌espouse‌ ‌their‌ ‌views‌ ‌at‌ ‌Waterfront‌ ‌Park‌.‌ ‌The‌ ‌council‌ ‌unanimously‌ ‌voted‌ ‌to‌ ‌pay‌ ‌the‌ ‌$50,000.‌ ‌ ‌

SOURCE  

An attack on free speech in Finland

Finland continues to persecute parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen for publicly defending the biblical view of homosexuality. On March 2, police interrogated the Finnish MP about a booklet she wrote in 2004 detailing and defending the Lutheran church’s position on sexual ethics. It was titled “Male and Female He Created Them: Homosexual relations challenge the Christian concept of humanity.” Räsänen, a physician and member of the Finnish Christian Democrats, had written the booklet to explain the Christian position.

Her interrogation lasted five and a half hours. “The booklet is not simply about the defense of marriage between a man and a woman,” she told the police, “but about how and on what basis we are eternally saved through belief in the Bible, the Word of God.” Räsänen's husband, Niilo, is a Lutheran pastor and doctor of theology.

Räsänen’s booklet was already investigated last autumn, at which time the police concluded that the contents were not criminal. Despite that, the Prosecutor General has reopened the case and directed the police to conduct another preliminary investigation of the booklet—along with fresh criminal investigations.

SOURCE  

YouTube Deletes Comments Critical of China’s Communist Party

YouTube has been deleting comments critical of China’s ruling party due to a software flaw, the company said on Tuesday in response to criticism of the practice.

Users of the online video giant, a division of Alphabet Inc.’s Google, flagged that certain comments posted below videos critical of the Chinese Communist Party were quickly deleted.

“This appears to be an error in our enforcement systems and we are investigating,” a YouTube spokesperson said in an email.

The spokesperson said the issue was not the result of a policy change. Some comments posted in Chinese language, such as “communist bandit” and “50-cent party,” a derogatory term for the ruling party, were deleted within seconds. YouTube’s automatic filters eliminate comments that violate company policies. The Verge reported the issue earlier Tuesday.

YouTube pulls comments that violate its Community Guidelines, such as spammy, hateful or harassing posts. Human moderators, who are often contractors, help with this. But during the Covid-19 lockdown, these workers have not been coming to the office, leaving YouTube relying more on automated systems to filter out the dross. The company warned in March there would be less content moderation and slower customer support.

SOURCE  

Outrage After Leading Academic Association Awards Professor Who Engaged in Hate Speech Against ‘Zionist’ Students

Outrage over the weekend greeted the decision by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) to give an award to a San Francisco State University professor who engaged in hate speech and violent rhetoric against “Zionists” and Jewish students who support Israel.

Rabab Ibrahim Abdulhadi, founding director of SFSU’s Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies (AMED) program, was given the 2020 Georgina M. Smith Award for “a person or persons who provided exceptional leadership in a given year in improving the status of academic women or in academic collective bargaining and through that work improved the profession in general.”

The AAUP said in a statement that it gave Abdulhadi the award because she “exemplifies courage, persistence, political foresight, and concern for human rights.”

The organization also praised Abdulhadi’s work to “advance the agenda for social change in Palestine.” Part of that agenda includes promoting ferocious hatred of Zionist and pro-Israel students.

In response to the announcement, famed UCLA professor and Turing Award winner Judea Pearl called for the IRS to investigate the AAUP’s tax exempt status.

SOURCE