Free speech organizations including the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) have begun to speak out in defense of Simon & Schuster after a book deal the publisher’s Threshold Editions imprint made with controversial Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos spurred widespread backlash, including calls to boycott S&S and to not review S&S titles. Read the full article
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]As organisations dedicated to protecting freedom of expression, we write to comment on the calls for a boycott against Simon & Schuster because Threshold Editions, one of its imprints, has contracted to publish a book by Milo Yiannopoulos, a provocateur and self-described “supervillain,” whose views and statements are highly controversial and deeply offensive to many.
Calls for boycotts have become a familiar response to the publication of controversial books. Typically, such online campaigns go viral at lightning speed, instantly igniting a firestorm of criticism. We are aware of at least seven other similar situations involving threats or fears of boycotts, four of which were successful in having books withdrawn, delayed, revised, or not reprinted.
In the present case, the calls for a boycott stem not from the content of a book, which has not been published, but because of previous statements by the author which critics characterize as hate speech. The Chicago Review of Books has announced its intent to protest the publisher’s decision by refusing to review any books published by Simon & Schuster, even though that would deprive its readers of information about books from more than two dozen Simon & Schuster imprints, including Salaam Reads, which focuses on books with Muslim characters.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row content_placement=”top”][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” align=”right”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”The suppression of noxious ideas does not defeat them; only vigorous disagreement can counter toxic speech effectively” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]This kind of response will have a chilling effect on authors and publishers, which is undoubtedly the goal of those who support such boycotts. However, the suppression of noxious ideas does not defeat them; only vigorous disagreement can counter toxic speech effectively. Shutting down the conversation may temporarily silence disfavored views, but does nothing to prevent them from spreading and resurfacing in other ways.
Readers are of course free to criticize any book for any reason. They are likewise free to choose not to read any book that they think contains objectionable material, or to urge a boycott. Because other readers may disagree, however, publishers and writers need the freedom to express and disseminate ideas, even if they are controversial and offensive to some. We need not endorse the ideas contained in a book to endorse the right to express them.
That is the essence of freedom and democracy. As the Supreme Court observed 90 years ago:
Freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; … without free speech and assembly, discussion would be futile; … with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine.
Endorsed by:
American Booksellers Association
Association of American Publishers
Authors Guild
Comic Book Legal Defense Fund
Index on Censorship
National Coalition Against Censorship
National Council of Teachers of English
January 5, 2017[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
On 7 January 2015, two gunmen entered the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo and murdered 12 people, including most of the senior editorial staff. The attack was in reprisal for the satirical magazine’s publishing of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed.
In defiance of this affront to free speech, the front cover of the “survivor’s edition” of Charlie Hebdo – which sold 3 million copies in 25 countries – depicted Mohammed crying and holding a Je Suis Charlie placard with the headline: Tout est pardonné (All is forgiven).
Two years on from the attack, we have compiled a reading list of articles published by Index on Censorship about Charlie Hebdo, including not just the 2015 attack but the 2011 firebombing of the publication’s previous office on the day a “sharia” edition was to hit news stands.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”28598″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
On the anniversary of the brutal attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo Index joined others in reaffirming our commitment to the defence of the right to freedom of expression.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”63894″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Threats against freedom of expression come in all shapes and sizes. We need to stand up to the bullies together.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”62817″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship condemnsed this appalling attack on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, and any attempt to silence a free press.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”62956″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
People around the world show solidarity with the French satirical magazine.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”66140″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, freeDimensional, Pen America, FreeWord, Reporters Without Borders, Article 19 and English PEN called on all those who believe in the fundamental right to freedom of expression to join in publishing the cartoons or covers of Charlie Hebdo on 8 January 2015. We believe that only through solidarity – in showing that we truly defend all those who exercise their right to speak freely – can we defeat those who would use violence to silence free speech.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”62867″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
You can’t kill an idea by killing people. The sickening attack on Charlie Hebdo has shown that to be true. As France mourns her dead, millions around the world are discovering the work of her bravest satirists. Nous sommes Charlie.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”63040″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Playwright and poet Meltem Arikan penned a poem reflecting on the Charlie Hebdo attack. How can thoughts be free?
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”62991″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Cartoonists were among the most visual in their reaction to the attack on French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Musa Kart and Xavier Bonilla, who have both been targeted by their governments, shared their thoughts.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”63036″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
The decision by six authors to withdraw from a Pen American Centre gala in which Charlie Hebdo was honoured with an award once again emphasised the dangerous notion that some forms of free expression are more worthy than others.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”83459″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
When the Charlie Hebdo killings happened in Paris in early 2015, attention swivelled to the way that terror and accusation are being used to try and stifle debate. But these are discussions that are not only being held in France, so I asked writers around the world to write short essays exploring the ways that journalists and artists have been threatened over the years, for exploring themes that others would rather they had not tackled.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”28286″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
The office of French satirical Magazine Charlie Hebdo was firebombed as a result of its decision to publish a front cover satirising Mohammed. Here, Sara Yasin and Myriam Francois-Cerrah discuss the background and motivations behind the attack, and ask why some Muslims feel entitled to answer offence with violence.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”28597″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
The smoke had barely cleared from the burned-out office of Charlie Hebdo magazine back in 2011 when Time magazine’s Bruce Crumley chose to criticise the satirists over the terrorists. James Kirchick denounces this all-too-familiar tendency.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”71736″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
In the months following the 2015 attack on Charlie Hebdo, a graphic novel exploring challenges to press freedom across Europe and the impact of limitations on journalists was released by the European Youth Press.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
The Times journalist who uncovered the Rotherham child abuse scandal has said under Section 40 it would be “inconceivable” that the paper would have run its front-page story naming one of the abusers. Read the full article