Joint statement on Facebook’s draft charter for content oversight board

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Mark Zuckerberg at TechCrunch Disrupt 2012. Credit: JD Lasica

Mark Zuckerberg at TechCrunch Disrupt 2012. Credit: JD Lasica

 

We, the undersigned, welcome the consultation on Facebook’s draft charter for the proposed oversight board. The individuals and organisations listed below agree that the following six comments highlight essential aspects of the design and implementation of the new board, and we urge Facebook to consider them fully during their deliberations.

The board should play a meaningful role in developing and modifying policies: The draft charter makes reference to the relationship between the board and Facebook when it comes to the company’s content moderation policies (i.e. that “Facebook takes responsibility for our (…) policies” and “is ultimately responsible for making decisions related to policy, operations and enforcement” but that (i) Facebook may also seek policy guidance from the board, (ii) the board’s decisions can be incorporated into Facebook’s policy development process, and (iii) the board’s decisions “could potentially set policy moving forward”. As an oversight board, and given that content moderation decisions are ultimately made on the basis of the policies which underpin them, it is critical that the board has a clear and meaningful role when it comes to developing and modifying those underlying Terms of Service/policies. For example, the board must be able to make recommendations to Facebook and be consulted on changes to key policies that significantly impact the moderation of user content. If Facebook wishes to decline to adopt the board’s recommendations, it should set out its reasoning in writing. Providing the board with such policy-setting authority would also help legitimize the board, and ensure it is not viewed as simply a mechanism for Facebook to shirk responsibility for making challenging content-related decisions.

To ensure independence, the board should establish its own rules of operation: Facebook’s final charter is unlikely to contain all of the details of the board’s internal procedural rules and working methods. In any event, it should be for the board itself to establish those rules and working methods, if it is to be sufficiently independent. Such rules and working methods might include how it will choose which cases to hear, how it will decide who will sit on panels, how it will make public information about the status of cases and proceedings, and how it will solicit and receive external evidence and expertise. The final charter should therefore set out that the board will be able to develop and amend its own internal procedural rules and working methods.

Independence of the board and its staff: The draft charter makes reference to a “full- time staff, which will serve the board and ensure that its decisions are implemented”. This staff will therefore have a potentially significant role, particularly if it is in any way involved in reviewing cases and liaising between the board and Facebook when it comes to implementation of decisions. The draft charter does not, however, set out much detail on the role and powers that this staff will have. The final charter should provide clarity on the role and powers of this staff, including how Facebook will structure the board to maintain the independence of the board and its staff.

Ability for journalists, advocates and interested citizens to raise issues of concern: At present, issues can only be raised to the board via Facebook’s own content decision- making processes and “Facebook users who disagree with a decision”. This suggests that only users who are appealing decisions related to their content can play this role. However, it is important that there also be a way for individuals (such as journalists, advocates and interested citizens) to be able to influence problematic policy and raise concerns directly to the board.

Ensuring diverse board representation: According to the Draft Charter, “the board will be made of experts with experience in content, privacy, free expression, human rights, journalism, civil rights, safety and other relevant disciplines” and “will be made up of a diverse set of up to 40 global experts”. While it is important for this board to reflect a diversity of disciplines, it is also integral that it reflects a diversity of global perspectives including different regional, linguistic and cultural perspectives from the various countries in which Facebook operates. The exact board composition will also be dependent upon the agreed scope of the board.

Promoting greater transparency around content regulation practices: Given that the board is a newfound mechanism for regulating content on Facebook and enforcing the company’s content policies, it should similarly seek to demonstrate transparency and be held accountable for its content-related practices. According to the Draft Charter, panel “decisions will be made public with all appropriate privacy protections for users” and “the board will have two weeks to issue an explanation for each decision.” In addition to providing transparency around individual board decisions, Facebook should issue a transparency report that provides granular and meaningful data including statistical data on the number of posts and accounts removed and impacted.

Organisational Signatories

AfroLeadership Center for Democracy & Technology Center for Studies on Freedom of Expression CELE Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi Committee to Protect Journalists Derechos Digitales Digital Empowerment Foundation Fundación Karisma Global Partners Digital Index on Censorship International Media Support Internet Sans Frontières Internews IPANDETEC New America’s Open Technology Institute Paradigm Initiative PEN America R3D: Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales Ranking Digital Rights SMEX Software Freedom Law Center, India Trillium Asset Management, LLC

Individual Signatories

Jessica Fjeld Meg Roggensack Molly Land

Notes to editors

For further information, please contact Charles Bradley, Executive Director at Global Partners Digital ([email protected]). [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1557483094212-3285f4a4-f83a-5″ taxonomies=”136″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Spotlight on threats against journalists in Malta in European report (The Shift News, 10 May 2019)

“Burned in effigy. Insulted. Menaced. Spat at. Discredited by their nation’s leaders. Assaulted. Sued. Homes strafed with automatic weapons. Rape threats. Death threats. Assassinations.” This is the landscape faced by journalists throughout Europe over the last four years, according to the report ‘Demonising the Media’ released by the Mapping Media Freedom project. Read the full article.

Museum of Dissidence: Cuba’s new constitution does not represent us as Cubans, intellectuals or humans

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Cuban artists Luis Manuel Otero Alcantara and Yanelys Nuñez Leyva, members of the Index-award winning Museum of Dissidence

Yanelys Nuñez Leyva and Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, members of the 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Award-winning Cuban artist collective the Museum of Dissidence, have been putting themselves on the line in the fight for free expression in Cuba, from being harassed by the authorities to their numerous arrests for protesting Decree 349, a vague law intended to severely limit artistic freedom in the country.

Cubans voted overwhelmingly for a new constitution that upholds the one-party state while claiming to bring about some economic and social reform, but the Museum of Dissidence took a more critical stance to the referendum. Index caught up with Nuñez Leyva and Otero Alcántara to talk about the current situation in Cuba and what they’ve been up to recently.

Index on Censorship: Why did the Museum of Dissidence and its members come out so strongly against the new Cuban constitution?

Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara: The constitution imposed by the regime is an aberration that goes against the freedom of the Cuban and does not represent us as Cubans, intellectuals or humans. The Magna Carta should not be written to control and cut my freedom, it must represent a balance of citizen welfare especially for the immediate future.

Index: Decree 349 will see all artists prohibited from operating in public places without prior approval from the Ministry of Culture. How does this impact the work you do?

Otero Alcántara: The campaign against the 349 was a great victory, the regime had to admit that it was wrong. The country’s leaders had to face and make political moves to placate countless artists, intellectuals and ordinary people concerned about Cuban culture and who joined in the demands to the regime.

Given this, the 349 helped to make visible all the repression and censorship that the government has been carrying out against culture and art for 60 years. As a legacy, we left the movement of San Isidro, a group of artists and intellectuals that has the mission to overcome all the inhumane repression of the regime, to be vigilant and proactive over freedom of Cuban art and culture. The most important project of the post-campaign movement 349 will be the Observatory of Cultural Rights in Cuba.

Index: What sort of training did Yanelys Nuñez Leyva receive while in Prague as part of the Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship and how will it be useful in Museum of Dissidence?

Yanelys Nuñez Leyva: The training covered tools I can use for work, such as video editing. It also offered insight into new topics such as feminism, a social movement that is not yet as strong in Cuba but should be.

Index: What did Museum of Dissidence do while in Mexico at the Oslo Freedom Forum and how will this help further your cause?

Otero Alcántara: The MDC joined several independent institutions in Cuba such as the Matraca Project, or the Endless Poetry Festival, so that each one, from his or her experience, would demand freedom of expression for all Cubans in a forum.

In all the presentations, we emphasised the unjust detention of two Cuban musicians, Maikel Castillo and Pupito, who are imprisoned for opposing Decree 349.

Index: How did attending Libertycon in Washington DC reinforce or re-inspire your fight for artistic freedom in Cuba?

Luis Manuel: All these events we have been a part of, such as Forum 2000, or the Index award, or the residency in Metal, have helped to create a platform where contemporary art ceases to be an ornament in a house but an exercise of pressure and a true link of change within Cuba.

Index: Although nearly 87% of voters in the referendum voted yes to the new constitution, there was an unprecedented display of ballot-box dissent, with more than 700,000 people voting no. What do you think this is a result of and do you think this signifies changing times for the Cuban population and government?

Otero Alcántara: In a totalitarian regime like the one in Cuba, where it controls all the information, international observers and legal transparency systems are not allowed, those percentages are strategies of the regime to simulate a less critical state than the one that exists. Those numbers are a joke but the interesting thing is to see how the political opposition handles that ‘no.’ Making ordinary people see that they are not alone, that other thousands of people feel and voted just like them, is something that contributes to encouraging dissent.

Index: What makes you remain so steadfast in your fight for artistic expression in Cuba when the oppression of artists continues, including the recent arrest of members of the Museum of Dissidence?

Otero Alcántara: Love binds me, wherever I want to escape, from the shelter of the pillow in the darkness of my room; going through a luxurious hotel in Miami or in a bucolic countryside in the UK, the suffering of Cuba and the human is shaking my head and the only way I can free myself from that ghost is to fight and know that I am doing something.

Last December when the government promised to implement the 349, I felt that my spirit was imprisoned in the body of a regime, so I took responsibility for the life of my body through a hunger strike to the regime. It would be they who would decide if I was still breathing my body or not but my spirit would be free.

Luckily, we got a reaction from the government. They appeared on Cuban television, and that was because of the union that was achieved among all the artists.

Index: What are the main goals that you’ll be working toward throughout 2019?

Otero Alcántara: 2019 is the year of the official state-sponsored Havana biennial and a year of preparation for the #00 Biennial of 2020, which are two interesting scenarios for the future of Cuban culture right now. The other thing is to continue working for overall freedom in Cuba.

Index: How has the Museum of Dissidence benefitted from its time on the Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Fellowship?

Otero Alcántaral: Being Index Fellows was one of the best things that has happened to the museum in its history as a work of art and an institution. It was a prize that gave visibility to the Musem of Dissidence and gave us thousands of contacts. It gave us protection against the repression of the regime and its discredit toward political art in Cuba. But above all we met people like Perla Hinojosa and the rest of the Index team, also Mohamed Sameh from ECRF, Julie Tribault, the promoters of the Metal artistic residency and another large number of projects and platforms that, with their example, have encouraged us to continue the struggle, especially in the moments of greatest loneliness.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1583501159250-00b68107-bcde-1″ taxonomies=”7874″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Is the end of free speech a natural solution to the hatred shared online? (Metro, 8 May 2019)

The internet has a problem with hate speech. So wouldn’t it be easier to just turn it all off? Would limiting what people can say really stop the hate?

‘You don’t just end up scooping up the violent communications, but also essential public interest information that individuals might need to know,’ says Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of Index On Censorship. ‘It’s a very blunt tool response that often ends up potentially causing more harm than it does good.’

Read the full article

UK tax researcher fired from think tank for tweeting that ‘men cannot change into women’ (Christian Post, 8 May 2019)

For saying that males who identify as trans are not women, an internationally renowned tax expert was fired and is contesting her termination in court after being accused of “offensive and exclusionary” language.  Index on Censorship, a campaigning publishing organization for freedom of expression, is supporting Forstater. Read the full article.

From A Turkish Prison To Tate Modern: The Story Of Zehra Doğan, The Kurdish Artist And Journalist Endorsed By Banksy And Ai Wei Wei (Run Riot, 7 May 2019)

Zehra Doğan was released from prison on 24 February 2019. She was jailed over a painting she adapted from a Turkish army photograph where she depicted armored vehicles devouring civilians in her hometown, Nusaybin. She was denied access to painting materials while imprisoned and began making paint from fruit, spices, and blood, and used newspapers, letters and bed sheets as canvasses. She used feathers and her hair as paintbrushes. Zehra also taught other prisoners to paint and use alternative materials. Her situation was noticed by acclaimed artists: Banksy who painted a large mural for her in New York and Ai Wei Wei who sent her a letter in solidarity. Doğan recently won the Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Arts Award and is a Writer in Residence with English Pen. Read the article in full.

Eric Gill / The Body: Terminology

One of the issues addressed in the exhibition Eric Gill: The Body is the sexual abuse of his teenage daughters Betty and Petra. The way in which we address these issues and explain them to our audiences and visitors is extremely sensitive and should be treated with respect. We will be addressing the abuse frankly and openly, and would prefer not to use terms that downgrade the acts or sidestep the issue.

If you find yourself engaged in conversation with members of the public and the subject crops up, please make sure that you are familiar with the appropriate terms and vocabulary so that no offence is caused when discussing Gill’s conduct.

If a visitor wishes to engage with you on the subject and you are uncomfortable with doing so, please refer the visitor to another available member of staff.

Finally, this can be a difficult subject to absorb – if you are affected by any of the terms used below, please talk to a staff member who will offer advice.

PREFERRED TERMS TERMS TO AVOID
Sexual abuse of his daughters Paedophile (he was not, as the girls were teenagers at the time)
Incestuous sexual abuse Peccadillos/  strange goings on/ funny business
Acts of sexual abuse Unusual sexual tastes / particular preferences
Familial sexual abuse Strange/bizarre/outrageous personal life
Subjected to sexual abuse Pervert
Child sexual molestation Controversial behavior

(it is not controversial, it did occur)

Child sexual abuse Bad behavior (it is but this could be used to minimize)
Perpetrator of sexual abuse
Child sexual assault
Domestic abuse
Victim/survivor

This is a grey area – these terms are used frequently but can cause offence – the more preferable term is ‘people who have been subjected to sexual abuse’.

Reprehensible
Disturbing
Distressing

Eric Gill / The Body: Q&A for visitor services

Why has the issue of Gill’s abuse not been addressed by the museum before?

The issue has always been something that has been addressed, but always privately and 1-1. This is the result of almost two years of discussing how a more consistent and open conversation with our audiences might look.

Why does the museum feel it is ethically okay to continue to promote and celebrate the work of a child abuser?

The Museum’s charitable mission is to share the contents of its collection for public benefit – for learning, inspiration and enjoyment. Eric Gill is central to the museum’s story and narrative and is internationally regarded for his contribution to art, craft and design. We do not think it appropriate, nor helpful, to censor his work and have instead taken the decision to have an open and honest conversation with our visitors rather than brush this story under the carpet or turn a blind eye.

What do Gill’s descendants think about this exhibition?

We are now three or four generations away from Eric Gill and so it is invariably a big family, and like any large group their views vary hugely. We have had long, difficult but open conversations with many descendants and they are supportive of our decision to do the exhibition, and looking forward to seeing the extraordinary sculptures and drawings which we have brought together for the exhibition.

What do the inhabitants of the village think about this exhibition?

I think that when Fiona McCarthy’s book was published the village was surprised by the revelations, and I am sure it was discussed at length in houses and pubs across the village. Now nearly 30 years later I am sure that there will be no revelations in the exhibition rather it is an opportunity to really examine the question we always come back to: how much can we separate the artist from the work that they produce.

Why do you feel it’s necessary for people to know about Gill’s past? Why can’t audiences just enjoy his art?

We do hope that there will be works of art on display which audiences can enjoy, some of his most spectacular sculptures and drawings are included within the exhibition. However we do need to provide the information to our visitors that helps them to interpret and understand the works. I am sure that some visitors will object to us raising the biography again, the same as I know that some visitors will object to us failing to publicly acknowledge the abuse.

How do you think it will make museum visitors who have been subjected to sexual abuse feel?

From working with Brighton Survivors Network, National Association fort the Protection of Abused Children and Stop it Now, we are told that 1 in 4 women have experienced some sort of sexual abuse. Our interpretation is sensitive to this, and our publicity material is all clear about the content of the exhibition so visitors will be aware of what they are coming to see. All visitors will be signposted to authorities who will be able to help those who need to talk further, and we are grateful to these charities for their support and advice.

What measures do you have in place to help any visitors affected by the exhibition?

Referral information will be provided to all visitors with their tickets, as well as posters within the building. Staff and volunteers have received training from NAPAC and Wellcome Collection.

How can you sell a commercial show on the back of such an awful subject?

The museum is a registered charity and makes no profit from the exhibition; admission ticket income supports the ongoing costs of running the museum. Our primary objective is educational and this exhibition is part of our educational remit to interpret our collection and tell the stories associated with the artists in our collection and integral to our narrative.

How do you think this exhibition will affect families with children coming to visit the museum, especially over the summer holiday months?

The majority of the exhibition is appropriate to audiences of all ages, as is our permanent collection which occupies the majority of the museum. Across the 80 works on show we have four works which contain sexually explicit material. This will be clearly signposted in an age restricted area of the exhibition. We will be providing plenty of appropriate material for children and families within and beyond the museum walls during the exhibition.

What if visitors come to your museum just expecting to see some nice art (or not knowing what to expect) and are faced with this difficult subject?

The exhibition is being well promoted and all marketing material explains the narrative of the exhibition. The quality of the works on display is exceptional as is the permanent collection which is always the centerpiece of the museum’s displays. Museums are places to learn, discover and think … as well as enjoy. This exhibition will certainly inspire thought and discussion, but there is plenty of beauty  

What do you say to those who believe that Gill’s public works should be removed?

We have a duty to preserve and maintain our collection, and to interpret it for our visitors. I don’t think that removing and censoring Gill’s work serves anyone, and the victim/survivor organisations which the museum is working with share the belief that opening up the conversation increases the likelihood of preventing and stopping abuse.

Ditchling is a quaint, rural museum celebrating a man who committed monstrous acts – how can visitors enjoy your museum and its exhibits in full knowledge of this history?

Not all art is to be enjoyed; some art is powerful for other reasons. Many people still do enjoy Gill’s work as wonderful examples of many craft forms. We also have many other artist’s work within our permanent collection and temporary exhibition programme. If visitors choose not to visit Eric Gill: The Body then I hope they will enjoy one of our future displays.

Why are Petra, Betty and Joan not represented in the museum?

We have work in our permanent collection by or of all four of Gill’s children and are actively collecting their work. We are particularly interested in their childhood drawings produced in the village and how these relate to their father’s work. Petra’s work as a weaver is also represented in our collection.

Did other members of the Guild and Ditchling community know about the abuse?

Although it was probably very clear to many people that Eric Gill was interested in sex and the body, this is very different from knowledge of any sexual abuse of his children. There is no evidence that anyone knew of this which would not be uncommon with interfamilial sexual abuse which relies on absolute secrecy.

Is Gill a significant enough artist to celebrate anyway?

Gill is unquestionably an important artist who had a significant impact on carving, lettercutting, typography and wood engraving. His work is held in the permanent collections of museums across the world including Tate, V&A and British Museum in London. The typeface he designed is one of the most commonly used in the Western world and his sculptures grace the buildings of the BBC, Westminster Cathedral and the United Nations. Whether or not his work is celebrated is a more personal one and is integral to the question that we are asking our audiences.

How will the museum talk about Gill and display his work after this exhibition? Where does it leave the museum/what’s the legacy?

After this exhibition, and the learning that we have undertaken as a result, we will reflect on how the permanent collection displays can incorporate this information so that the museum does not turn a blind eye to Gill’s more disturbing biography again. This will more than likely take the form of including within our revolving permanent collection displays works by Eric Gill where knowledge if Gill’s abuse is critical to understanding the work. We will then provide this information in the correct context without sensationalizing.

Is the abuse continued/perpetuated by showing these works?

We have consulted with the Brighton Survivors’ Network, NAPAC and other charities who work with people who have been abused and we all believe that to stop future abuse it is better to talk openly rather than turn a blind eye and censor. We can well understand that for some these works are particularly hard to enjoy and appreciate. This is an issue explored in more depth within the exhibition.

Why show images of naked women who have been abused by their artist father?

These images are significant works of art and are part of our permanent collection which we have a duty to preserve, display and interpret. We have taken significant steps to present them in an open and honest way for people to make their own minds up as to whether the knowledge of the abuse affects our appreciation and enjoyment of the works of art.

Why is Petra the focus of the exhibition and not Betty?

Images of Petra and Elizabeth are included in the exhibition. Eric Gill made the carved wooden doll for Petra, and gave it to the museum, it is this object which particularly caught the attention of Cathie Pilkington and the inspiration for her new work Doll for Petra.

Aren’t you really drawing attention to Gill’s appalling private life in order to attract additional publicity and visitor numbers?

Fiona McCarthy’s biography on Gill was published nearly 30 years ago so the information has been in the public domain since then. Since the museum became dedicated to the art and craft of the village in 2014 the need to confront this central issue of whether we can separate the art and life of the artist has become more important. The Museum has spent two years consulting on the development of this exhibition and we believe it is our public duty to talk about the subject openly and honestly. It is not without financial or reputational risk for a museum to embark on a controversial subject such as this so is not programmed lightly.

Have you timed this exhibition now as ‘historic sex abuse’ is such a hot topic?

We have been working for the last few years to develop a way of talking more publicly about the issue within the museum, although superficially it may be easy to link Eric Gill to Rolf Harris or Jimmy Saville, in fact his was the harder to confront issue of interfamilial abuse which rarely goes detected or reported.

What warnings are you giving to alert visitors that some of the exhibits and what you call the ‘narrative’ may be disturbing or offensive, if they are?

All visitors will be given a leaflet with their tickets explaining the content of the exhibition, it will include a warning of sexually explicit material. This material will be in a separate area with additional age barriers.

Are all your Trustees comfortable with this exhibition and the approach you are adopting?

The museum’s staff and trustees have all been part of the process of developing this exhibition.

What about Dame Vera Lynn – does she even know the exhibition is taking place?  Not her sort of thing, surely?

Dame Vera Lynn has just celebrated her 100th birthday and we were delighted to congratulate her on this. Understandably she is little involved with the day to day operations of the museum now but we are very grateful for her support in the past and her ongoing Patronage of the museum.

How does the wider artistic community in the UK see Gill in the light of the comparatively recent disclosures about his past?

I am sure that artists, like our wider visitors and audience, will take differing views on this issue. It is for this reason that the exhibition is framed as a question to ask how much our knowledge of Gill’s abuse affects our enjoyment and appreciation of the work he produced.

Do you regard Fiona McCarthy’s biography as authoritative? Has she been approached to attend and/or comment?

Other books have been published on Gill since Fiona’s biography but none question her discoveries. Our director is often in contact with her but, nearly 30 years after her biography on Gill, she is understandably working on new projects now.

Have you had any formal or informal; protests from feminist and/or victim support groups?

We have been working closely with Brighton Survivors Network, NAPAC and Stop it Now in preparation for this exhibition.

Has any of Gill’s work been removed from places where it was previously exhibited now that awareness of and attitudes towards incest and child abuse have changed?

We don’t know of any examples of Gill’s work being removed and his reputation as an extraordinary craftsman and designer continues to this day.

Do you believe that sexual behavior now regarded as abhorrent was much more over-looked or even accepted – particularly amongst artists – in the 1920s?

There is no evidence that anyone knew of Gill’s sexual abuse during his life. We think that Gill’s sexual abuse of his daughters was unacceptable – then or now.

What value is placed on Gill’s work commercially in the art market today?  Does knowledge of an artist’s proclivities increase or decrease the value of their work?

There are many factors which influence the art market and as a public museum more concerned with artistic rather than monetary value, this is not an area in which we have expertise. Certainly Gill continues to be popular and prices have rised, but the cause of this is probably much more complex than the revelations in a biography almost 30 years ago.

What percentage of the permanent collection at Ditchling is by Gill?

We hold a large collection of Gill’s work in the museum’s permanent collection, but we also hold a large body of work by other great artists including David Jones, Frank Brangwyn, Ethel Mairet, Edward Johnston and others.

Do you think there is a risk once awareness of the exhibition builds your visitors to Ditchling may include voyeuristic abusers and paedophiles?

I think this is highly unlikely. The museum is a treat of a destination for any lover of art and craft across a broad range of crafts from silversmithing to weaving and natural dyeing. The work we are showing are extraordinary carvings, drawings and wood-engravings; this is not a sleazy voyeuristic exhibition but a thoughtful and considered analysis of Gill’s artistic output.

Gill was supposedly Catholic.  Has there been any reaction to your exhibition from the Catholic Church?

We have not been working with the church on this exhibition. Although Gill was Catholic, and a founding member of the Guild of St Joseph and St Dominic, the sexual abuse which he perpetrated was unconnected to the church and was interfamilial abuse between a father and his teenage daughter.

It is said Leonardo da Vinci abused the young students in his care – has anyone suggested his work should not be seen on this basis?

Our art historical expertise is probably too niche to be able to make comment on this. As far as we know da Vinci never visited Ditchling.

Will you be devoting any of your profits from this exhibition to any charities working with the victims of abuse?  If not, don’t you think you should?

As a register charity we do not collect money on behalf of other charities but we are working closely with charities who work with people who have been abused. We hope that these will be long-lasting relationships with these charities and we would be more than happy to help them in their fundraising.

Aren’t some of Gill’s work simply frightening and upsetting? Shouldn’t your exhibits be uplifting and joyous?

The works on display are not frightening but the stories behind them might well be upsetting it is for this reason that we think correctly interpreting the works is necessary. Not all art is to be enjoyed; some art is powerful for other reasons. Many people still do enjoy Gill’s work as wonderful examples of many craft forms and that many of Gill’s depictions of the body are very beautiful and uplifting.

How do the women on the staff of the Museum feel about this exhibition?  The Women’s Views on News website talks about ‘moral blindness’ surrounding Gill’s work today?

The staff team have worked closely together on developing this exhibition, and have absolutely not been morally blind in developing this exhibition. With any one member of the team, on any one day, I am sure we all feel different about Gill and particular works. This is why it felt appropriate to curate an exhibition such as this so that each work displayed is approached with the same question in mind: is the biography affecting my enjoyment and appreciation of the work. Sometimes the answer may be yes, at other times, it may be no.

Isn’t it true that Gill’s daughters did not regard themselves as ‘abused’?  They are reported as having normal happy and fulfilled lives and Petra at almost 90 commented that she wasn’t embarrassed by revelations about her family life and that they just ‘took it for granted’.  Aren’t we all perhaps making more of this than the people affected?

Elizabeth was no longer alive when Fiona McCarthy’s book was published, and those who met Petra certainly record a calm woman who managed to come to terms with her past abuse, and still greatly admired her father as an artist. I don’t think that we should try to imagine her process to reaching this acceptance as we know too little about her own experiences.

If you had bought a picture by Rolf Harris before revelations about his behavior came out, would you keep it or sell it?

We hope the exhibition will generate debate around these kinds of questions. I personally am not that familiar with Rolf Harris’s work as an artist so I am afraid I couldn’t comment further.

Eric Gill / The Body: Statement from the Director

Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft is an award-winning museum in a picturesque Sussex village, yet its charm belies a deeper conflict. For some time, the staff, trustees and our colleagues outside the institution have been engaged in a difficult and at times emotional process of deciding how we should present and interpret the work of Eric Gill – an artist central to our narrative and whose importance to art and design history in the UK and around the world is impossible to ignore, but whose diaries record that he sexually abused his daughters as well as other disturbing sexual acts.

A museum has duties which are outlined in the Museums Association Code of Ethics, including to:

  • treat everyone equally, with honesty and respect
  • provide and generate accurate information for and with the public
  • support freedom of speech and debate
  • use collections for public benefit – for learning, inspiration and enjoyment

By not publicly acknowledging Eric Gill’s sexual abuse of his daughters we have been failing in these obligations; and that in many instances visitors’ understanding or enjoyment of Gill’s art would have been affected by having been given this information. Failure to provide acknowledgment of the abuse risks damaging our visitors’ trust in the museum, fails to fully interpret objects, and stops us from showing large areas of Gill’s work and our permanent museum collection. However uncomfortable it might be, we need to study the very prevalent themes of sex and the human body to really understand Eric Gill’s work. Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft exists to tell the story of the artistic and craft community of the village, the lives of the individuals, how they worked, were educated and interacted. We therefore do not, and cannot, see their work in isolation from their biography.

In addition to these reasons, we believe there are wider ethical or moral reasons around why we should share this story publicly with our visitors. As a trusted, public space and an organisation with education and wellbeing at its heart, we believe that museums (and other cultural organisations) have an opportunity to engage with and contribute to difficult societal issues. As Director of the museum, I do believe that we have a part to play in opening up a conversation around sexual abuse and not being complicit in a culture of turning a blind eye towards abuse.

The museum operates within these two positions: we condemn Eric Gill’s abuse of his daughters with no attempt to hide, excuse, normalise or minimise, yet we also have a duty to protect, display and interpret the art work we hold in our collections. Through this exhibition we are attempting to address that fundamental question at the heart of this discussion: is it possible to appreciate Gill’s depiction of the human form when we know the disturbing nature of some of his sexual conduct?

This exhibition is the result of two years of intense discussions both within the museum and beyond, including contributing to an article in The Art Newspaper in July 2015, hosting #museumhour twitter discussions on 22 February 2016 on ‘tackling tricky subjects’, a workshop day with colleagues from museums across the country hosted at the museum with Index on Censorship, and a panel discussion at 2016 Museums Association Conference in Glasgow. Through these discussions Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft feels compelled to confront an issue which is unpleasant, difficult and extremely sensitive. It has by no means been an easy process yet we feel confident that not turning a blind eye to this story is the right thing to do. This exhibition is just the beginning of the museum’s process of taking a more open and honest position with the visitor and we already have legacy plans in place including ensuring there will continue to be public acknowledgement of the abuse within the museum’s display.

I fully understand that there will be people who want to reject and forget the work that Eric Gill produced as a result of his sexual violence towards his children; although it is not a position that I share, it is one which I can easily understand. My hope is that from those who do take this position, there is also an understanding as to why this museum has decided that we should not hide the story, and that some public good can result from openly and publicly having a difficult conversation.

Nathaniel Hepburn, Director and CEO, Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft

Eric Gill / The Body: Training Day Schedule

Eric Gill: The Body

Training Day Schedule

10.00 to 13.30, 10 April, Clore Learning Space

Please arrive promptly, refreshments served from 9.30

Please rsvp if you haven’t already done so to [email protected]

SCHEDULE

10.00 NH:  Welcome and introduction to exhibition – short version of talk and Q&A

10.30 RD: Front of House and gallery invigilation routine explained – Q&A

10.45 LJ/RD: Workshop on disclosure process and staff support.

      • Staff support and Info Packs
      • Disclosure procedure
      • Complaints procedure

11.00  RD /GW: Workshop on language to be used.

      • Discuss use of humour
      • Discuss terms and those that are good and not

11.15  Tea break

11.30  Peter Saunders, NAPAC, National Association of People Abused in Childhood (napac.org.uk)

      • Key facts and figures
      • Myth busters
      • How an abused person might feel on visiting the exhibition

12.00  Presentation by Wellcome Collection staff, Georgia and Eleanor (wellcomecollection.org)

      • How to respond to visitor comments on difficult subject matter and make sure that you feel comfortable doing so
      • How to close down conversations and signpost
      • What to do if people are emotional – angry or upset
      • Looking after yourself and team working
      • How to ask for written feedback and complete surveys

 

    1.  NH/GW:  Answers to Frequently Asked Questions and dealing with press

13.00    Q&A

13.30 Close

Exploring queer identity in Brazil

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”106683″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]It should come as no surprise that, when opening an exhibition exploring queer identity, there will be critics. 

In Brazil, where LGBTQI+ concerns were removed from the country’s human rights ministry’s purview earlier this year, when the death threats come in relentlessly, attitudes toward gay rights pose a significant worry — particularly when one of the people making those threats happens to be the president.

For Gaudêncio Fidelis, curator of Queermuseu, this is the crushing reality he faces. Back in 2017, Fidelis launched the exhibition celebrating queer artists. Applauded by the creative community, it was soon shuttered after a backlash from the religious right – amongst them now-President Jair Bolsonaro, who at the time was a federal deputy for Rio de Janeiro.  

“Bolsonaro said I should be killed when he was not even a candidate, just a few hours after Queermuseu was shut down,” said Fidelis. “He didn’t mention my name because he didn’t know it, I guess. He referred to me as the ‘author of that exhibition’.

“In the first two months I got more than 100 death threats to a point where I had to have security, I had to be careful. Very few people I know, and I know some brave people, could handle that situation. I never slept for a year.”

One of Fidelis’ main detractors were far-right group Free Brazil Movement (MBL), who attacked Queermuseu persistently for two days during its opening. MBL alleged the exhibition, which included 214 works from 82 artists, promoted paedophilia, zoophilia and blasphemy, subsequently leading to its closure.

“They took the painting of two teenagers having sex with a goat, but this is a painting about people’s habits and the colonisation of Brazil,” Fidelis said. “They cropped this image and put it on the internet as if it was the picture. They were also putting up pictures that were not in the exhibition. A lot of fake news.”

In the aftermath of its sudden demise, Queermuseu drew support from artists and academics, leading to more than 3,500 people to protest outside the Santander Cultural centre in Porto Alegre, which is owned by the Santander bank.

“It turned into a huge campaign of not only reopening the exhibition, but in favour of free expression and human rights, because people’s rights were attacked,” he said. “It was not just an attack against the exhibition, it was a whole campaign against free expression.

“It was the largest ever protest in Brazil in the field of art and culture. This became a very contemptuous debate, or fight you could say – it was an intense battle that lasted for more than 12 months.”

However, Fidelis says what followed was one of the most successful crowdfunding campaigns in Brazil, raising over $1 million. Fidelis said he was even more surprised by the  the mainstream media, which backed his campaign, allowing him to counter the fake news around the exhibition.

“I’ve never seen that with the press, they always keep some critical distance,” he said. “They were engaged throughout the process in defending the exhibition. The press understood that they would be next to be attacked, and that’s what happened two months later.”

After a visit from the public prosecutor’s office, who declared the defamatory allegations made against Queermuseu to be false, the exhibition was officially reopened to the public in 2018. Despite his success, Fidelis remains fearful for the future of free expression in his country – particularly for queer people.

Bolsonaro removed LGBTQI+ concerns from Brazil’s human rights ministry in January, while openly gay congressman Jean Wyllys quit his position and left the country later that month. He explained how he had been inundated with death threats and that violence had increased since Bolsonaro’s election.

“We were in plain democracy, so much so, that we could appeal to the Supreme Court – I did it twice,’ said Fidelis. “We could go to the normal institutions of democracy, but we can’t do that now. It’s a whole new world in Brazil and that’s why people are leaving.” [/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1557304208972-adcd0337-5d35-7″ taxonomies=”15469″ exclude=”105410, 105403, 105408, 105400″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Tax expert Maya Forstater fired for saying trans women aren’t women (The Times, 5 May 2019)

An internationally renowned researcher on tax avoidance is believed to be the first person in Britain to lose her job for saying that transgender women are not women. Maya Forstater, 45, was told by her managers that she had used “offensive and exclusionary” language.

Index on Censorship CEO Jodie Ginsberg commented: “From what I have read of her writing, I cannot see that Maya has done anything wrong other than express an opinion that many feminists share — that there should be a public and open debate about the distinction between sex and gender.”

Read the full article.