Your cart is empty
Does the Labour Government's commitment to Freedom of Information mean the end of excessive secrecy in the UK? Why has Britain finally decided to join the many other countries that enjoy a "right to know"? This book places the UK debate over open government in its political context. Robertson argues that just as secrecy reflected the interests of the powerful, so too does freedom of information. This is a radical and challenging alternative to the conventional view that open government is concerned with empowering "the people".
Winner of the Vic Premier's Award for Indigenous Writing. I'm Aboriginal. I'm just not the Aboriginal person a lot of people want or expect me to be. What does it mean to be Aboriginal? Why is Australia so obsessed with notions of identity? Anita Heiss, successful author and passionate campaigner for Aboriginal literacy, was born a member of the Wiradjuri nation of central New South Wales, but was raised in the suburbs of Sydney and educated at the local Catholic school. She is Aboriginal; however, this does not mean she likes to go barefoot and, please, don't ask her to camp in the desert. After years of stereotyping Aboriginal Australians as either settlement dwellers or rioters in Redfern, the Australian media have discovered a new crime to charge them with: being too "fair-skinned" to be Australian Aboriginal. Such accusations led to Anita's involvement in one of the most important and sensational Australian legal decisions of the 21st-century when she joined others in charging a newspaper columnist with breaching the Racial Discrimination Act. He was found guilty, and the repercussions continue. Am I Black Enough for You? is a deeply personal memoir, told in her distinctive, wry style. Anita Heiss gives a first-hand account of her experiences as a woman with an Aboriginal mother and Austrian father, and explains the development of her activist consciousness. Read her story and ask: what does it take for someone to be black enough for you?
Zinnophobia offers an extended defense of the work of radical historian Howard Zinn, author of the bestselling A People's History of the United States, against his many critics. It includes a discussion of the attempt to ban Zinn's book from Indiana classrooms; a brief summary of Zinn's life and work; an analysis of Zinn's theorizing about bias and objectivity in history; and a detailed response to twenty-five of Zinn's most hostile critics, many of whom are (or were) eminent historians. 'A major contribution to bringing Zinn's great contributions to even broader public attention, and exposing features of intellectual and political culture that are of no little interest.' Noam Chomsky
From Gossip Girl to The Kite Runner a completely updated look at the history of censorship in world literature. Throughout history, nations, peoples, and governments have censored writers and their works on political, religious, sexual, and social grounds. Although the literary merit of the majority of these books has been proven time and time again, censorship efforts are still in place today. From Animal Farm to The Grapes of Wrath, The Koran to The Talmud, Ulysses to the Harry Potter series, The Canterbury Tales to The Bell Jar, this revised edition examines the many struggles these books faced in order to be read. Tracing the censorship histories of 120 works from across the world, 120 Banned Books, Second Edition provides a summary of each work, its censorship history, and suggestions for further reading. Many new titles have been added to reflect some of the controversies in recent years, and updates have been made to existing entries on such classic books as Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird. New entries include: The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian by Sherman Alexie (banned on social grounds) The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown (banned on religious grounds) Girls of Riyadh by Rajaa Alsanea (banned on political grounds) Gossip Girl series by Cecily von Ziegesar (banned on sexual grounds) His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman (banned on religious grounds) The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini (banned on social grounds) and many more.
Since its first publication in 1859, few works of political philosophy have provoked such continuous controversy as John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, a passionate argument on behalf of freedom of self-expression. This classic work is now available in a new edition that also includes essays by distinguished scholars in a range of fields. The book begins with a biographical essay by David Bromwich and an interpretative essay by George Kateb. Then Jean Bethke Elshtain, Owen Fiss, Judge Richard A. Posner, and Jeremy Waldron present commentaries on the pertinence of Mill's thinking to current debates. They discuss, for example, the uses of authority and tradition, the shifting legal boundaries of free speech and free action, the relation of personal liberty to market individualism, and the tension between the right to live as one pleases and the right to criticize anyone's way of life.
Just how much freedom of speech should high school students have? Does giving children and adolescents a far-reaching right of expression, without joining it to responsibility, ultimately result in an asylum that is run by its inmates?
Since the late 1960s, the United States Supreme Court has struggled to clarify the contours of constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech rights for students. But as this thought-provoking book contends, these court opinions have pitted students and their litigious parents against schools while undermining the schools necessary disciplinary authority.
In a clear and lively style, sprinkled with wry humor, Anne Proffitt Dupre examines the way courts have wrestled with student expression in school. These fascinating cases deal with political protest, speech codes, student newspapers, book banning in school libraries, and the long-standing struggle over school prayer. Dupre also devotes an entire chapter to teacher speech rights. In the final chapter on the 2007 Bong Hits 4 Jesus case, she asks what many people probably wondered: when the Supreme Court gave teenagers the right to wear black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War, just how far does this right go? Did the Court also give students who just wanted to provoke their principal the right to post signs advocating drug use?
Each chapter is full of insight into famous decisions and the inner workings of the courts. "Speaking Up" offers eye-opening history for students, teachers, lawyers, and parents seeking to understand how the law attempts to balance order and freedom in schools.
Unavailable for more than fifty years, EIMI finally returns. While sometimes termed a "novel," it is better described as a novelistic travelogue, the diary of a trip to Russia in the 1930s during the rise of the Stalinist government. Despite some contempt for what he witnesses, Cummings's narrator has an effective, occasionally hilarious way of evoking feelings of accord and understanding. As Ezra Pound wrote, Cummings's Soviet Union is laid "out there pellucidly on the page in all its Slavic unfinishedness, in all of its Dostoievskian slobberyness....Does any man wish to know about Russia? 'EIMI' "
A stylistic tour de force, EIMI is a melange of styles and tones, the prose containing many abbreviations, grammatical and syntactical shifts, typographical devices, compounds, and word coinages. This is Cummings's invigorating and unique voice at its finest, and EIMI is without question one of his most substantial accomplishments."
This book examines the history of the legal discourse around political falsehood and its future in the wake of the 2012 US Supreme Court decision in US v. Alvarez through communication law, political philosophy, and communication theory perspectives. As US v. Alvarez confirmed First Amendment protection for lies, Robert N. Spicer addresses how the ramifications of that decision function by looking at statutory and judicial handling of First Amendment protection for political deception. Illustrating how commercial speech is regulated but political speech is not, Spicer evaluates the role of deception in politics and its consequences for democracy in a contemporary political environment where political personalities, partisan media, and dark money donors bend the truth and abuse the virtue of free expression.
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.
Never in human history was there such a chance for freedom of expression. If we have Internet access, any one of us can publish almost anything we like and potentially reach an audience of millions. Never was there a time when the evils of unlimited speech flowed so easily across frontiers: violent intimidation, gross violations of privacy, tidal waves of abuse. A pastor burns a Koran in Florida and UN officials die in Afghanistan. Drawing on a lifetime of writing about dictatorships and dissidents, Timothy Garton Ash argues that in this connected world that he calls cosmopolis, the way to combine freedom and diversity is to have more but also better free speech. Across all cultural divides we must strive to agree on how we disagree. He draws on a thirteen-language global online project - freespeechdebate.com - conducted out of Oxford University and devoted to doing just that. With vivid examples, from his personal experience of China's Orwellian censorship apparatus to the controversy around Charlie Hebdo to a very English court case involving food writer Nigella Lawson, he proposes a framework for civilized conflict in a world where we are all becoming neighbours.
In January 2012, millions participated in the now-infamous "Internet blackout" against the Stop Online Piracy Act, protesting the power it would have given intellectual property holders over the Internet. However, while SOPA's withdrawal was heralded as a victory for an open Internet, a small group of corporations, tacitly backed by the US and other governments, have implemented much of SOPA via a series of secret, handshake agreements. Drawing on extensive interviews, Natasha Tusikov details the emergence of a global regime in which large Internet firms act as regulators for powerful intellectual property owners, challenging fundamental notions of democratic accountability.
In twenty-first century Japan there are numerous instances of media harassment, intimidation, censorship and self-censorship that undermine the freedom of the press and influence how the news is reported. Since Abe returned to power in 2012, the recrudescence of nationalism under his leadership has emboldened right-wing activists and organizations targeting liberal media outlets, journalists, peace museums and ethnic Korean residents in Japan. This ongoing culture war involves the media, school textbooks, constitutional revision, pacifism and security doctrine. This text is divided into five sections that cover: Politics of press freedom; The legal landscape; History and culture; Marginalization; PR, public diplomacy and manipulating opinion. Press Freedom in Contemporary Japan brings together contributions from an international and interdisciplinary line-up of academics and journalists intimately familiar with the current climate, in order to discuss and evaluate these issues and explore potential future outcomes. It is essential reading for anyone wishing to understand contemporary Japan and the politics of freedom of expression and transparency in the Abe era. It will appeal to students, academics, Japan specialists, journalists, legal scholars, historians, political scientists, sociologists, and those engaged in human rights, media studies and Asian Studies.
At the bottom of every controversy embroiling the university
today--from debates over hate-speech codes to the reorganization of
the academy as a multicultural institution--is the concept of
academic freedom. But academic freedom is almost never mentioned in
these debates. Now nine leading academics, including Henry Louis
Gates, Jr., Edward Said, Richard Rorty, and Joan W. Scott, consider
the problems confronting the American University in terms of their
effect on the future of academic freedom.
This book offers a unique exploration of the current state of freedom of speech as a basic right available to everyone. The research focuses on the different development stages of the concept of freedom of speech and the use of modern indicators to depict the its treatment in different legal cultures, including the obligations under international treaties and the effects that the globalising and digitalising environment have had on it. The authors conduct a broad survey of freedom of speech around the world, from Europe over Russia and both Americas to Africa, Asia, and Australia. The aim of this survey is to identify safeguards of freedom of speech on both a national and an international level, violations and threat scenarios, and in particular challenges to freedom of speech in the digital era.
This book addresses the question: "What should be the appropriate limits to free speech?" The author claims that it is the state, rather than abstract principles, that must provide the answer. The book defends a version of Hobbesian absolutism and rejects the dominant liberal idea that there is a right (human or civil) setting the boundaries of free speech. This liberal view can be known as the "principled defence of free speech", in which speech is established as a constitutional principle that has priority over the state. The author instead offers an "unprincipled approach to free speech", suggesting that the boundaries of speech must necessarily be set by the state, which in liberal democracies means through social and political contestation. The final chapter applies the argument to the topic of hate speech and argues that it is appropriate to limit such speech when it causes harm and offense. The book will be of use to students and scholars across political theory, political science, sociology, philosophy and law.
Pauli Murray (1910-1985) played pivotal roles in both the modern civil rights and women's movements. In the 1950s, her legal scholarship helped Thurgood Marshall to shift his course and attack segregation frontally in Brown v. Board of Education. In the 1960s, Murray persuaded Betty Friedan to help her found an NAACP for women, which Friedan named NOW. In the early 1970s, Murray provided Ruth Bader Ginsburg with the argument Ginsburg used to persuade the Supreme Court that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution protects not only blacks but also women - and potentially other minority groups - from discrimination. A mixed-race orphan, Murray grew up in the segregated schools of North Craolina, before escaping to New York, where she attended Hunter College and became a labor activist in the 1930s. Applying to graduate school at the University of North Carolina, where her white great-great-grandfather had been a trustee, she was rejected on account of her race. Deciding to become a lawyer, she graduated first in her class at Howard Law School, only to be rejected for graduate study at Harvard University on account of her sex. Undaunted, Murray forged a singular career in the law, directly impacting one of the landmark Supreme Court cases. Appointed by Eleanor Rossevelt to the President's Commission on the Status of Women in 1962, she advanced the idea of Jane Crow, arguing that the same reasons used to attack race discrimination could be used to battle gender discrimination. In 1965, she becanme the first black person to earn a JSD from Yale Law School and the follow year persuaded Betty Friedan to found what became the nation's most famous feminist organization. Most importantly, her concept of Jane Crow propelled Ginsberg to her first Supreme Court victory for women's rights. By that time, Murray was a tenured history professor at Brandeis, a position she left to become the first woman ordained a priest by the Episcopal Church in 1976. Murray accomplished all of this as someone who would today be identified as transgender but who, at a time when no social movement existed to support this identity, focused her attention on systematic attacks on arbitrary distinctions of all sorts, transforming the idea of what equality means.
Two weeks after the United States declared war on Germany in 1917, the town of Lewistown, Montana, held a patriotic parade. Less than a year later, a mob of 500 Lewistown residents burned German textbooks in Main Street while singing "The Star Spangled Banner." In Lewistowns nationalistic fervor, a man was accused of being pro-German because he didnt buy Liberty Bonds; he was subsequently found guilty of sedition. Montanas former congressman Tom Stout was quoted in the towns newspaper, "The Democrat-News, "With our sacred honor and our liberties at stake, there can be but two classes of American citizens, patriots and traitors!
"Darkest Before Dawn" takes to task Montanas 1918 sedition law that shut down freedom of speech. The sedition law carried fines of up to $20,000 and imprisonment for as many as twenty years. It became a model for the federal sedition act passed in 1918. Clemens Work explores the assault on civil rights during times of war when dissent is perceived as unpatriotic. The themes of this cautionary tale clearly resonate in the events of the early twenty-first century.
This is history at its exciting, human best. Clemens Work tells the little-known story of how Americans were punished for what they said during World War I: imprisoned, brutalized, lynched. It is a crucial part of the American struggle for freedom of speech.Anthony Lewis, columnist for the "New York Times" and author of "Gideons Trumpet" and "Make No Law"
Clem Work has written a colorful and engaging account of a rough-and-tumble era when exercising your right of free speech could get you tossed into jail, or worse. Works description of the frenzied and often irrational reaction to dissent duringwartime is truly timeless, disturbingly reminiscent of our own world, post-9/11/01. This book reminds us just how fragile Americans allegiance to the First Amendment can be.Jane E. Kirtley, Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law, University of Minnesota
Work offers a new way of thinking about a broader topicseditionand one in which new insights are provided. That, in my mind, is the essence of scholarship.--Charles N. Davis, executive director of The National Freedom of Information Center at the University of Missouri, Columbia, and associate professor of journalism
""Darkest Before Dawn" makes an important contribution to the literature of the history of free speech in America. No future study of sedition laws could hope to be complete without drawing on this well researched and well written work. Clem Work has made his mark--and what a marvelous mark it is!"--Ronald K. L. Collins, scholar, The First Amendment Center
Book Details Montana's Attack on Dissent in World War I Era (article by Charles S. Johnson, chief of the Lee Newspapers State Bureau in Helena, Montana):
"As U.S. troops fight in Iraq, Montanans heatedly debate whether we should be engaged in that war. This robust discussion is exactly as it should be in a country that has enshrined the right to free speech in its Constitution's Bill of Rights.
"But the ability to comment candidly, in speech and writing, on this country's policies should never be taken for granted. Clemens P. Work's excellent new book, "Darkest before Dawn: Sedition and Free Speech in the American West," describes in absorbing detail one of the darkest eras in Montana history in which dissenting voices were stifled.
"During World War I, some Montanans opposing U.S. involvement in the war and those immigrants expressing pro-German, anti-American sentiments in beer halls found themselves arrested. Seventy-four Montanans all but one of them men-were convicted of sedition. Forty of these men and the one lone woman served sentences of up to 20 years at Montana State Prison in Deer Lodge and faced fines of up to $20,000.
"Montana's frightening Sedition Act, enacted by a special legislative session and becoming law Feb. 22, 1918, became a model for the Federal Sedition Act, which was enacted May 16, 1918. The language defining sedition in the federal law is identical to the Montana law except for three words.
"It is a shameful, frightening yet fascinating story. Yet it's one many Montanans know nothing about. It should be taught in our schools at all levels so we dont repeat the mistakes of our past.
"The book, published this fall, is a well-written, fully documented history of the period. It sets the stage for what happened here, describes the terrifying events and puts the Montana era in a national context. Work, director of graduate studies at the University of Montana School of Journalism, weaves a compelling story about what led to the dissenting voices.
"Western Montana's two major industries then were mining and timber, which faced an insurgent labor movement upset over unsafe working conditions and low wages. The radical labor group, the Industrial Workers of the World, or Wobblies, helped stir the pot. Miners walked off the job at the Anaconda Copper Mining Co.'s Speculator Mine in 1917 after a fire killed 168 workers and exposed dangerous, illegal working conditions.
"The powerful Anaconda Copper MiningCo. dominated Montana economically and politically as few corporations ever have nationally. Its copper was a critical product in the war effort. The Company had the ears, if not the souls, of most of the state's leading politicians. It also either owned, or had in its pocket, most of Montana's major daily newspapers.
"The United States entered the war in 1917. By no means did all Montanans embrace the idea. Many German immigrants saw no reason for the United States to fight against their homeland, nor did all Irish immigrants support this country bailing out Great Britain.
"Dissent was not tolerated in Montana as a wave of super-patriotism spread. Besides passing the Sedition Act, a special legislative session emboldened the Montana Council of Defense, previously a minor group urging people to grow gardens and buy bonds. The Legislature granted the council the extraordinary power to pass virtual statewide laws.
"The council soon banned German books and forbade the use of the German language here, even in the pulpit, driving Mennonites into Canada. The council encouraged neighbor spying on neighbor, with the full encouragement of spineless politicians, with a few exceptions such as U.S. Attorney and later Sen. Burton K. Wheeler and U.S. District Judge George M. Bourquin.
"The Montana press followed the council in lockstep, with a few courageous exceptions such as William F. Dunn, fiery editor of the "Butte Bulletin," a labor paper.
Work said most sedition convictions in Montana were based on "offhand outburst, often in saloons," usually by blue-collar workers, many of them immigrants, often using foul language.
"As part of his research, Work created the Montana SeditionProject (Web site: http: //www.seditionproject.net/), and, with students' help, has tracked down relatives of some of those convicted and seeks to learn more about others. As Work wrote on the Web site, 'Those caught in Montana's sedition net were hardly heroes, but they should not have been scapegoats either.'
"Among those reading Work's book with keen interest is Gov. Brian Schweitzer, whose grandparents were German-Russian farmers who immigrated to Montana nearly a century ago.
"'What made this country great is the melting pot because we accept a lot of different nationalities, ' Schweitzer said. 'They came here because they wanted to be here. Most were like my grandparents. They came here because they had nowhere else to go.'"Asked if he might issue posthumous pardons to some Montanans convicted of sedition nearly 90 years ago, Schweitzer said he hadn't thought of it. Then he said, 'Why not? I will look into pardons. This was a time of some pretty mass hysteria. Why not clear the names of some of the people?'"
For more information go to www.seditionproject.net/
Does America have a free press? Many who answer yes appeal to First Amendment protections against government censorship. But in this comprehensive history of press freedom as it has existed in theory, law, and practice, Sam Lebovic shows that, on its own, the right of free speech has been insufficient to produce a free press. Exploring persistent worries about the quality and diversity of news in the modern American press, Lebovic recovers a mid-century vision of unfettered public access to information and a "right to the news." Yet as the meaning of press freedom was contested in various arenas-Supreme Court cases on censorship, efforts to regulate the newspaper industry, state secrecy and freedom of information law, unionization of journalists, rise of the New Journalism-Americans defined freedom of the press as nothing more than the right to publish without censorship. The idea of a right to all the news was forgotten. Free Speech and Unfree News compels us to reexamine what freedom of the press means in a democratic society-and helps us make better sense of the crises that beset the press amid corporate consolidation in media industries, a secretive national security state, and the daily newspaper's decline.
Few virtues are as celebrated in contemporary culture as openness.
Rooted in software culture and carrying more than a whiff of
Silicon Valley technical utopianism, openness--of decision-making,
data, and organizational structure--is seen as the cure for many
problems in politics and business.
A collaboration between an attorney and an animal protection advocate, this work utilises the extremely controversial and high-profile "crush video" case, US v. Stevens, to explore how American society attempts to balance the protection of free speech and the prevention of animal cruelty. Starting from the detailed case study of a single prominent ruling, the authors provide a masterful survey of important issues facing society in the area of animal welfare. The Stevens case included various "hot topic" elements connected to the role of government as arbiter of public morality, including judicial attitudes to sexual deviance and dogfighting.
The Telescreen is the pervasive media screen put in front of, and injected into, the eyes and ears of humans in the American electronic techno-culture. This begins from birth, and moulds consciousness throughout life: not a genuine human consciousness, but rather is a less-than-human, despiritualized semi-consciousness. People today continually flood their consciousnesses with images and impressions from television, videogames, church, radio, billboards, textbooks, magazines, newspapers, etc.- the "telescreen world" of Orwell's 1984. The Telescreen is about how this pseudosphere destroys consciousness and society as humans give their attention, consciousness, and vital spirit to the telescreen. The result is a society of unholy subhumans, who no longer act like they have souls: They cannot turn off the telescreen world even to have dinner and talk to each other or to their children. When they do talk it is mostly about impressions from the telescreen world. Their inner subjective consciousness is constructed and formed by the telescreen, leading to a world of despiritualization and warmongering by hordes of conformist, petty, unhappy troll-like "yes-men." -- Jeff Grupp The telescreens of 1984 substituted fiction lives for the empty ones of a brainwashed population, as in Plato's cave. Grupp drives it home that this is our world now. Some features of this dream-world of The Telescreen: Materialism and consumerism make people into robots, shallow stooges. Degrading self-images, down-dumbing education of drills, not thinking skills. War propaganda fed on pure fakery and repetition by the media, censored of truth and filled with non-news, gossip and cant. Brainwashing underpinned by fallacious reasoning. Example: Iran and Iraq slandered as murderously planning to unleash WMDs, while the US really has and uses them for genocide against target nations. Information warfare: The bias of "educational" TV shows like the "History Channel." Trusted figures hired to peddle suspect messages. Journalists who stray from the party line into real issues are fired. Exploiting the herd instinct to impose conformity. Psychological tyranny is more effective than brute force. An artificial consciousness is dinned into people by constant electronic stimuli. They depend on it -- and on pharmaceutical drugs too -- for a feeling of well-being: they are addicts. Appendix -- Infowars articles: the NWO is taking over the patriot and truth movements, seemingly attacking itself. We need Jeffersonian militias, not gun control. -- J-P Leonard
You may like...
Edward Snowden Hardcover (1)
In Defence of Open Society - The…
George Soros Hardcover (1)
The Trials of Portnoy
Patrick Mullins Paperback
Principled Spying - The Ethics of Secret…
David Omand, Mark Phythian Hardcover
The Diversity Delusion - How Race and…
Heather MacDonald Paperback
Scrambling for Protection - The New…
Patrick Garry Paperback R813 Discovery Miles 8 130
Sport on Trial
Jo Glanville Paperback R222 Discovery Miles 2 220
In Defence of Open Society - The…
George Soros Paperback
Countdown to Socialism
Devin Nunes Paperback
Unfreedom of the Press
Mark R Levin Hardcover