Melinda Ferguson is the bestselling author of her addiction trilogy: Smacked, Hooked and Crashed. She is also an award-winning publisher.

To escape the pandemic, Ferguson finds her dream house on a private nature reserve, secluded in the otherworldly Cedarberg. A week before it's registered, a beautiful high-powered exec is brutally murdered next door. How could heaven have transformed into hell in an instant?

Written in her no-holds-barred signature style, Bamboozled is set in an age of fear, on a dystopian planet floundering in a maze of deception. In her search for sanity, Ferguson tries to untangle herself from a masked world gone mad, in which the media are controlled by the Invisible, Big Tech are mining our lives, where truth-tellers are mercilessly hunted and where, in certain countries, there are now Ministries of Loneliness.

Driven by an ancient human yearning to connect, the author must go on a deep journey into the unknown if she is to find her garden of songbirds and her torch of freedom and joy. The book is also about losing money and finding magic, while trying to work out who killed the woman next door.

Identifying academic freedom as a major casualty of rapid and extensive reforms to the governance and practices of academic institutions worldwide, this timely Handbook considers the meaning of academic freedom, the threats it faces, and its relation to rights of critical expression, public accountability and the democratic health of open societies. An international cohort of leading scholars discuss the historical conceptualisations of academic freedom and explore the extent of its reconfiguration by neoliberalism and economic globalisation. Chapters examine the threats posed to academic freedom by interventionist government, economic fundamentalism, political conservatism and extremism. The Handbook finds that these threats endanger the intellectual ambitions at the core of academic freedom: contesting established 'truth' and holding power to account. Examining a matter of urgent social and political importance which is crucial to the future of democracy and intellectual autonomy, this Handbook is an invigorating read for students and scholars researching academic freedom, free speech and democratic governance in higher education institutions.

The Most Dangerous Man in the World is the definitive account of WikiLeaks and the man who is as secretive as the organisations he targets. Through interviews with Julian Assange, his inner circle and those who fell out with him, Fowler tells the story of how a man with a turbulent childhood and brilliance for computers created a phenomenon that has become a game-changer in journalism and global politics. In this international thriller, Andrew Fowler gives a ringside seat on the biggest leak in history. He charts the pursuit of Assange by the US and Sweden and how in the eyes of many Assange had become, according to the Pentagon Papers whistleblower, Daniel Ellsberg, 'the most dangerous man in the world'. This title is only for sale in the UK and Republic of Ireland.

Many scholars have endured the struggle against rising anti-Israel sentiments on college and university campuses worldwide. This volume of personal essays documents and analyzes the deleterious impact of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement on the most cherished Western institutions. These essays illustrate how anti-Israelism corrodes the academy and its treasured ideals of free speech, civility, respectful discourse, and open research. Nearly every chapter attests to the blurred distinction between anti-Israelism and antisemitism, as well as to hostile learning climates where many Jewish students, staff, and faculty feel increasingly unwelcome and unsafe. Anti-Zionism on Campus provides a testament to the specific ways anti-Israelism manifests on campuses and considers how this chilling and disturbing trend can be combatted.

Edward Snowden, the man who risked everything to expose the US government’s system of mass surveillance, reveals for the first time the story of his life, including how he helped to build that system and what motivated him to try to bring it down.

In 2013, twenty-nine-year-old Edward Snowden shocked the world when he broke with the American intelligence establishment and revealed that the United States government was secretly pursuing the means to collect every single phone call, text message, and email. The result would be an unprecedented system of mass surveillance with the ability to pry into the private lives of every person on earth. Six years later, Snowden reveals for the very first time how he helped to build this system and why he was moved to expose it.

Spanning the bucolic Beltway suburbs of his childhood and the clandestine CIA and NSA postings of his adulthood, Permanent Record is the extraordinary account of a bright young man who grew up online – a man who became a spy, a whistleblower, and, in exile, the Internet’s conscience. Written with wit, grace, passion, and an unflinching candor, Permanent Record is a crucial memoir of our digital age and destined to be a classic.

This book is about Freedom of Speech and public discourse in the United States. Freedom of Speech is a major component of the cultural context in which we live, think, work, and write, generally revered as the foundation of true democracy. But the issue has a great deal more to do with social norms rooted in a web of cultural assumptions about the function of rhetoric in social organization generally, and in a democratic society specifically. The dominant, liberal notion of free speech in the United States, assumed to be self-evidently true, is, in fact, a particular historical and cultural formation, rooted in Enlightenment philosophies and dependent on a collection of false narratives about the founding of the country, the role of speech and media in its development, and the relationship between capitalism and democracy. Most importantly, this notion of freedom of speech relies on a warped sense of the function of rhetoric in democratic social organization. By privileging individual expression, at the expense of democratic deliberation, the liberal notion of free speech functions largely to suppress rather than promote meaningful public discussion and debate, and works to sustain unequal relations of power. The presumed democratization of the public sphere, via the Internet, raises more questions than it answers-who has access and who doesn't, who commands attention and why, and what sorts of effects such expression actually has. We need to think a great deal more carefully about the values subsumed and ignored in an uncritical attachment to a particular version of the public sphere. This book seeks to illuminate the ways in which cultural framing diminishes the complexity of free speech and sublimates a range of value-choices. A more fully democratic society requires a more critical view of freedom of speech.

This book is about Freedom of Speech and public discourse in the United States. Freedom of Speech is a major component of the cultural context in which we live, think, work, and write, generally revered as the foundation of true democracy. But the issue has a great deal more to do with social norms rooted in a web of cultural assumptions about the function of rhetoric in social organization generally, and in a democratic society specifically. The dominant, liberal notion of free speech in the United States, assumed to be self-evidently true, is, in fact, a particular historical and cultural formation, rooted in Enlightenment philosophies and dependent on a collection of false narratives about the founding of the country, the role of speech and media in its development, and the relationship between capitalism and democracy. Most importantly, this notion of freedom of speech relies on a warped sense of the function of rhetoric in democratic social organization. By privileging individual expression, at the expense of democratic deliberation, the liberal notion of free speech functions largely to suppress rather than promote meaningful public discussion and debate, and works to sustain unequal relations of power. The presumed democratization of the public sphere, via the Internet, raises more questions than it answers-who has access and who doesn't, who commands attention and why, and what sorts of effects such expression actually has. We need to think a great deal more carefully about the values subsumed and ignored in an uncritical attachment to a particular version of the public sphere. This book seeks to illuminate the ways in which cultural framing diminishes the complexity of free speech and sublimates a range of value-choices. A more fully democratic society requires a more critical view of freedom of speech.

Mark Tushnet presents a concise yet comprehensive overview of free expression law, understood as a form of constitutional law. Confronting the major issues of free expression - speech critical of government, libel law, hate speech regulation, and the emerging challenges posed by new technologies - he evaluates the key questions and potential difficulties for future generations. Contrasting the United States with current law in Europe and elsewhere, Tushnet argues that freedom of expression around the world should reflect deference to legislative judgements, unless those judgements reflect inadequate deliberation or bias, and that much of the existing free expression law is consistent with this view. Key features include: Comprehensible for both students of law and non-specialist readers interested in freedom of expression from a legal perspective Viewpoints from multiple legal systems including analysis of decisions made by the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights Explains the two legal doctrinal structures: categorical, rule-bound approaches and standards-based approaches List of key references for further reading, allowing readers to extend their knowledge of the topic past the advanced introduction. This Advanced Introduction will be an essential foundational text for students of law, as well as those from a political science background who can view freedom of expression from a legal perspective.

In 2005, the Australian Federal Police referred eight Islamic books to the Australian Classification Board. The goal was to secure a ban of the books, all of which were alleged to advocate 'terrorist acts'. After nearly a year of review, and intense public debate, two of the books were refused classification and effectively banned in a move that would have severe repercussions for librarians, scholars, authors and the state of free speech in Australia. Banning Islamic Books in Australia examines the cultural and political contexts that led up to the ban, and the content of the books themselves in an attempt to determine what it was that made them seem so dangerous. It also documents the unintended consequences of the ban on library collections and academic freedom, and how this in turn affects free speech in contemporary Australia.

Who has the right to speak? How is this right acquired? What happens when this right is denied or inhibited? These are the questions examined by Michel de Certeau in this foundational exploration of political expression and participation.

In The Capture off Speech, de Certeau moves beyond formal or legal definitions of rights. He argues that to "communicate" in a contemporary political system means not only having the abstract possibility of utterance, but possessing the conditions that allow being heard. De Certeau emphasizes that all too often free speech is upheld in the abstract while social institutions work in such a way as to deny access to effective communication.

The book's title essay was written in response to the revolutionary events of May 1968. Almost thirty years later, these essays remain a central resource for exploring de Certeau's political thought.

Media power is a crucial, although often taken for granted, concept. We assume, for example, that the media are 'powerful'; if they were not, why would there be so many controversies over the regulation, control and impact of communicative institutions and processes? Further, we assume that this 'power' is somehow problematic; audiences are often treated as highly susceptible to media influence and too much 'power' in the hands of one organization or individual is seen as risky and potentially dangerous. These concerns have been at the heart of recent controversies involving the relationships between media moguls and political elites, the consequences of phone hacking in the UK, and the emerging influence of social media as vital gatekeepers. Yet it is still not clear what we mean by media power or how effective it is. This book evaluates contrasting definitions of media power and looks at the key sites in which power is negotiated, concentrated and resisted - politically, technologically and economically. Combining an evaluation of both previous literature and new research, the book seeks to establish an understanding of media power which does justice to the complexities and contradictions of the contemporary social world. It will be important reading for undergraduates, postgraduates, researchers and activists alike.

With the ubiquitous nature of modern technologies, they have been inevitably integrated into various facets of society. The connectivity presented by digital platforms has transformed such innovations into tools for political and social agendas. Politics, Protest, and Empowerment in Digital Spaces is a comprehensive reference source for emerging scholarly perspectives on the use of new media technology to engage people in socially- and politically-oriented conversations and examines communication trends in these virtual environments. Highlighting relevant coverage across topics such as online free expression, political campaigning, and online blogging, this book is ideally designed for government officials, researchers, academics, graduate students, and practitioners interested in how new media is revolutionizing political and social communications.

The history of Latin American journalism is ultimately the story of a people who have been silenced over the centuries, primarily Native Americans, women, peasants, and the urban poor. This book seeks to correct the record propounded by most English-language surveys of Latin American journalism, which tend to neglect pre-Columbian forms of reporting, the ways in which technology has been used as a tool of colonization, and the Latin American conceptual foundations of a free press. Challenging the conventional notion of a free marketplace of ideas in a region plagued with serious problems of poverty, violence, propaganda, political intolerance, poor ethics, journalism education deficiencies, and media concentration in the hands of an elite, Ferreira debunks the myth of a free press in Latin America. The diffusion of colonial presses in the New World resulted in the imposition of a structural censorship with elements that remain to this day. They include ethnic and gender discrimination, technological elitism, state and religious authoritarianism, and ideological controls. Impoverished, afraid of crime and violence, and without access to an effective democracy, ordinary Latin Americans still live silenced by ruling actors that include a dominant and concentrated media. Thus, not only is the press not free in Latin America, but it is also itself an instrument of oppression.

Dangerous Talk examines the "lewd, ungracious, detestable, opprobrious, and rebellious-sounding" speech of ordinary men and women who spoke scornfully of kings and queens. Eavesdropping on lost conversations, it reveals the expressions that got people into trouble, and follows the fate of some of the offenders. Introducing stories and characters previously unknown to history, David Cressy explores the contested zones where private words had public consequence. Though "words were but wind," as the proverb had it, malicious tongues caused social damage, seditious words challenged political authority, and treasonous speech imperiled the crown.
Royal regimes from the house of Plantagenet to the house of Hanover coped variously with "crimes of the tongue" and found ways to monitor talk they deemed dangerous. Their response involved policing and surveillance, judicial intervention, political propaganda, and the crafting of new law. In early Tudor times to speak ill of the monarch could risk execution. By the end of the Stuart era similar words could be dismissed with a shrug. This book traces the development of free speech across five centuries of popular political culture, and shows how scandalous, seditious and treasonable talk finally gained protection as "the birthright of an Englishman." The lively and accessible work of a prize-winning social historian, it offers fresh insight into pre-modern society, the politics of language, and the social impact of the law.

Modern Power and Free Speech explores the complicated relationship between the First Amendment and culturally disempowered and groups within the United States. By focusing on hate speech, Internet pornography, and political dissent, Chris Demaske analyzes First Amendment discourse and doctrine and questions the role of the concept of the autonomous individual. Demaske asserts that the presupposed equality of so-called "autonomous individuals" does not exist and goes on to show how these specious claims to equality only serve to further silence those marginalized members of American society. Combining legal analysis, First Amendment theory, feminist theory, and political theory, Chris Demaske addresses the inadequacies of current free-speech doctrine and provides a possible solution to remedy them.

This book is about people whose beliefs and affiliations have opposed powerful interests in the present-day United States. This eclectic group of people and controversial issues, from climate-change scientists who have been censored by the Bush administration to Muslims accused of terrorism, have one thing in common. All of them straddle the limits of what Noam Chomsky has called permissible debate as defined by dominant political and economic institutions and individuals. The central thesis is that restriction of free inquiry is harmful to our culture because it inhibits the search for knowledge. Johansen presents case studies in the borderlands of free speech in a Jeffersonian cast-an intellectual framework assuming that open debate-even of unpopular ideas-is essential to accurate perception of reality. This book is about people whose ideological circumstances have found them opposing established beliefs in our times-scholars advocating the Palestinian cause in a very hostile intellectual environment, for example, as well as climate scientists defending themselves against the de-funding of their laboratories by defenders of fossil-fuel interests; opponents of creation science under assault for teaching what once was regarded as household-variety biology (a.k.a. Darwinism); Marxists in a political system dominated by neoconservatives. The central thesis that unites this diverse array of controversies is that shutting down free inquiry-most notably for points of view deemed unpopular-dumbs us all down by restraining the search for knowledge, which demands open inquiry. We have been told when going to war, as in Iraq, that freedom isn't free, the unstated assumption being that our armed forces are fighting and dying to safeguard our civil rights at home and abroad. During recent years, however, freedom to inquire and debate without retribution has been under assault in the United States. This assault has been carried out under a distinctly Orwellian cast, under Newspeak titles such as the Patriot Act, parts of which might as well be described more honestly as the Restriction of Freedom of Inquiry Act. The information gathered here will interest (and probably anger) anyone who is concerned with protecting robust, free inquiry in a nation that takes seriously its freedom to speak out, and to define truth through open debate.

"This is a thought-provoking and well-written book."
-- "American Political Science Association"

"Passavant's argument depends on stablising a paradoxical tension between two principles conventionally involved in an adversary relationship."
--"Journal of American Studies"

"Passavant challenges the dichotomous approach to the relationship between liberalism and communitarianism. Overall, "No Escape" offers new insight on the relationship by critcally delving into historical events, sociopolitics, and legal developments. It challenges the conventional wisdom regarding the inherent confloict between expanding liberal rights while embracing communitarian values. Some readers will find considerable value in his judiciously documented and forceful argument."
--"The law and Politics Book Review"

Conventional legal and political scholarship places liberalism, which promotes and defends individual legal rights, in direct opposition to communitarianism, which focuses on the greater good of the social group. According to this mode of thought, liberals value legal rights for precisely the same resason that communitarians seek to limit their scope: they privilege the individual over the community. However, could it be that liberalism is not antithetical to social group identities like nationalism as is traditionally understood? Is it possible that those who assert liberal rights might even strengthen aspects of nationalism?

No Escape argues that this is exactly the case, beginning with the observation that, paradoxical as it might seem, liberalism and nationalism have historically coincided in the United States. No Escape proves that liberal government and nationalism canmutually reinforce each other, taking as its example a preeminent and seemingly universal liberal legal right, freedom of speech, and illustrating how it can function in a way that actually reproduces nationally exclusive conditions of power.

No Escape boldly re-evaluates the relationship between liberal rights and the community at a time when the call has gone out for the nation to defend the freedom to live our way of life. Passavant challenges us to reconsider traditional modes of thought, providing a fresh perspective on seemingly intransigent political and legal debates.