censorship – Informed Comment

Tech Giants criticized for Silencing Pro-Palestinian Narratives

Global Voices — Sun, 01 Sep 2024 04:06:21 +0000

The fight against censorship on social media is a fight for the future of democratic debate itself.

Read this post in Malagasy, українська, عربي, English, Ελληνικά

( Globalvoices.org ) – The ongoing suppression of Palestinian voices on social media platforms has sparked significant concerns about freedom of expression and the integrity of democratic debate. Organizations like SMEX and 7amleh have been at the forefront of documenting these digital rights violations, revealing the extent to which platforms like Meta (the owner of Facebook and Instagram) are complicit in silencing Palestinian content.

In October 2023, a collective of human rights and civil society organizations, including Oxfam, Access Now, and others, urged “tech companies to immediately take strict measures to protect their users from harm in light of the escalating events in the region.” The collective accused platforms like Meta of consistently over-moderating Arabic content, misinterpreting it as violent, even when it merely critiques Israeli policies. Meanwhile, Hebrew content that incites violence against Palestinians frequently escapes scrutiny, exposing a glaring double standard in content moderation practices.

In a July campaign, 7amleh stated, “Meta and Facebook have not adequately protected Palestinians from hate speech in the last decade, which has manifested in millions of conversations inciting violence and genocidal rhetoric during the last nine months of the Israeli war on Gaza.”

In 2021, Human Rights Watch accused Facebook of suppressing Palestinian voices calling for more transparency in how content is evaluated and deleted. In 2022, SMEX described how social media companies, under pressure from governments, disproportionately target Palestinian narratives and how Israeli authorities often request the removal of content they find unfavorable, and platforms tend to comply without transparency or due process.

“Censoring Palestine,” Digital, Dream / Dreamworld v3, 2024.

Broader implications

This issue extends beyond digital spaces, with real-world consequences. In February 2024, a coalition of human and digital rights organizations warned that Meta’s policies prevent Palestinians from sharing their experiences, and hinder efforts to combat real antisemitism. The petition titled “Meta: We Need to Talk about Genocide,” and signed by over 52,000 people reads:

The powerful voices of Palestinians and allies on social media have been a lifeline during the Israeli government’s genocidal war on Gaza — and often the only way for Palestinians to tell their stories, document human rights abuses, and seek international solidarity during this time of utter horror.

As Palestinians in Gaza face plausible genocide (according to the International Court of Justice) it is disturbing that Meta is choosing this moment to consider a policy that would further silence criticism of the Israeli military, Israeli government, and Zionism by shutting down conversations involving the term “Zionist.” Meta is proposing to treat “Zionist” as a proxy for “Jew” or “Jewish” — but this won’t make any of us safer. Instead, it will undermine efforts to dismantle real antisemitism and all forms of racism and bigotry.

Palestinians should be able to name the political ideology that impacts their survival without fearing reprisals. Anti-Zionist and non-Zionist Jews should be able to criticize the ideology that claims to represent them. And human rights defenders should be able to hold the Israeli military and government accountable — now, more than ever.

This censorship has broader implications for democratic debate. As social media platforms have become modern public squares, they are essential for the exchange of ideas and the shaping of public opinion. When these platforms selectively silence certain viewpoints, they distort the democratic process and hinder the free exchange of ideas. Critics argue that this censorship not only affects Palestinians but also has a chilling effect on discussions about human rights and social justice, as activists and journalists fear repercussions and begin self-censoring.

In the case of Palestine it is also part of a larger crackdown, especially in Europe and the US, on protest and Palestine solidarity, one that has been documented by human rights organizations.

The role of tech companies

The censorship of pro-Palestinian voices on social media is more than just a localized issue; it is part of a broader problem concerning the role of digital platforms in regulating speech and shaping public discourse. As these platforms continue to grow in influence, the need for transparency and accountability in their content moderation processes becomes increasingly urgent.

The tech sector, in general, has been complicit in discriminatory policies against Palestinians for years, a trend that has intensified since the onset of the war on Gaza. Microsoft, for example, has faced criticism for its decision to block Palestinian accounts, cutting them off from crucial online services. In July 2023, the BBC reported that “Palestinians living abroad have accused Microsoft of closing their email accounts without warning — cutting them off from crucial online services.”

In response, 7amleh’s campaign highlighted the impact of these actions: “By blocking its services, Microsoft is effectively cutting Palestinians off from social, professional, and financial opportunities during a time of immense suffering and devastation.” Microsoft’s decision to restrict its services has further compounded digital rights violations, especially in the context of telecommunications blackouts in Gaza, which are often imposed by Israeli authorities.

The broader trend of censorship extends to other platforms as well including X (formerly Twitter) which has recently faced criticism for platforming far-right accounts and LinkedIn, typically seen as a platform for professional networking, which has been accused of censoring pro-Palestinian content, and restricting or removing accounts that advocate for Palestinian rights.

Indeed, one of the most troubling aspects of this censorship is the inconsistency in how social media platforms handle content moderation. While pro-Palestinian accounts are frequently targeted, far-right and racist content often remains visible and thrives on the same platforms.

Organizations like Access Now, 7amleh, and SMEX are leading the call for change, urging social media companies to adopt fair and transparent policies that do not disproportionately target marginalized communities, ensuring that digital spaces remain open and accessible.

The fight against censorship on social media is a fight for the future of democratic debate itself. Without a commitment to protecting free expression, the very foundations of democracy are at risk.

This post is part of Advox, a Global Voices project dedicated to protecting freedom of expression online. All Posts

Written byWalid El Houri

Via Globalvoices.org

Rebuking New York University for trying to Outlaw Criticism of Israel by Conflating Zionism with Judaism

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sat, 31 Aug 2024 04:02:30 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Linda G. Mills

President, New York University

linda.mills@nyu.edu

Georgina Dopico

Provost, New York University

georgina.dopico@nyu.edu . . .

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about the updated Guidance and Expectations for Student Conduct which the administration of New York University (NYU) circulated to the university community on 22 August 2024. Some of the provisions of this new policy statement impose unacceptable limits on the right of students and faculty to freedom of speech and assembly, and the guidelines also threaten academic freedom. They thereby infringe on the values of open inquiry and freedom of expression that are foundational to higher education and to citizenship in a democracy.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

The new policy purports to clarify the meanings of discrimination and harassment as stipulated in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which defines discrimination as adverse treatment based on protected characteristics such as race, color or national origin. We find it disturbing that the policy’s explanation of what constitutes discriminatory or harassing behavior asserts, among other things, that “Using code words, like ‘Zionist,’ does not eliminate the possibility that your speech violates the NDAH [Non-discrimination and anti-harassment] Policy” because “For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity.” The implication that the term “Zionist” is self-evidently or always a “code word” whose use and interpretation can and should be policed by university administrators is dangerous. It is rooted in the improper conflation of criticism of Israel and of Zionism – a political ideology – with antisemitism, which we have criticized on many occasions.

We call your attention to alternative perspectives on the relationship of Judaism and Zionism, for example, the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which has been endorsed by hundreds of eminent scholars of Jewish studies and Holocaust history. This statement rejects the conflation of Zionism with Judaism, clearly distinguishes between the two and establishes that criticism of the former (and of the actions and policies of the State of Israel) must be regarded as legitimate. We also note that equating Zionism with Judaism, as the NYU policy statement does, effaces the many Jewish students for whom Zionism is not part of their religious nor ethnic identity.

We are further concerned that the new policy gives administrators power over what goes on in NYU’s classrooms. Offering the hypothetical example of a professor teaching a class on international politics, it states that while discussing a particular country’s policies does not violate university rules, “if conduct that otherwise appears to be based on views about a country’s policies or practices is targeted at or infused with discriminatory comments…then it would implicate the NDAH.” We find this language vague and obfuscatory, and we are concerned that its intention or effect may be to shield Israeli government policies from open discussion in the classroom. The policy also undermines a bedrock principle of academic freedom: the right of faculty to determine what and how to teach their students, without interference from university administrators or external pressure groups.

We note as well that the new policy severely restricts how students may engage in protest activity on campus, but it also seems intended to apply well beyond the university campus. It asserts that student protestors have latitude to express themselves in public spaces, only to turn around and warn them that “protesting at an off-campus location does not immunize your conduct from University policies.” The new policy threatens consequences if protests have “continuing adverse effects on campus or in any NYU activity,” a dangerously vague formulation.

In short, in its explicit provisions but also in its elisions, contradictions and ambiguities, the new policy is likely to undermine the ability of students to exercise their First Amendment right to freedom of speech and assembly, while also threatening the academic freedom of NYU faculty by subjecting them to monitoring and sanctions by administrators. Regrettably, this is exactly the kind of revised policy designed to suppress student and faculty activism against which the American Association of University Professors warned in its 14 August 2024 statement.

In an earlier version of its NDAH policy, issued in 2021, NYU declared that “The University also recognizes that a critically engaged, activist student body contributes to NYU’s academic mission. Free inquiry, expression, and free association enhances academic freedom and intellectual engagement.” We find it distressing that NYU seems to have forgotten the principles to which it once claimed to adhere. We therefore call on NYU to rescind the new NDAH policy guidelines and to invite all members of the university community to engage in a transparent, collective and democratic process to develop a policy that will truly foster non-discrimination and combat all forms of racism, including antisemitism, while safeguarding academic freedom, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly on campus.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Denouncing the University of Pennsylvania’s collaboration with the House Education Committee investigation of Faculty Members

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 28 Aug 2024 04:02:15 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Larry Jameson

Interim President, the University of Pennsylvania

president@upenn.edu

John Jackson

Provost, the University of Pennsylvania

provost@upenn.edu . . .

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about the apparent cooperation of the University of Pennsylvania (Penn) with the witch-hunt which the Republican majority on the House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce is conducting against several members of its faculty, as well as faculty and students at other institutions of higher education. Your failure to resist the committee’s improper demands and resolutely defend your faculty makes a mockery of your university’s avowed commitment to academic freedom.

In a letter to the president of the University of Pennsylvania and the chair of its board of trustees dated 24 January 2024, Representative Virginia Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, alleged that the university had failed to address antisemitism on campus or protect its Jewish students, and she requested that the university turn over to the committee a very broad range of documents that would ostensibly enable the committee to investigate these allegations. The letter falsely accused three members of Penn’s faculty — Associate Professor of Arabic Literature Huda Fakhreddine, Dr. Ahmad Almallah, an artist-in-residence at Penn’s Creative Writing Program, and Professor of Political Science Robert Vitalis – of making “antisemitic remarks and statements of support for Hamas.” As we noted in a 9 November 2023 letter calling on Penn’s administration to defend its faculty against vicious attacks on social media, “[t]hese allegations are based on the tendentious conflation of criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza and its well-documented violations of Palestinian rights and aspirations with antisemitism.”

Unfortunately, it appears that since January 2024 Penn has provided the committee with some of the materials it requested – even though no subpoena has been issued with which the university is legally obligated to comply. On 20 August 2024 the university’s counsel informed Professor Fakhreddine and Dr. Almallah that it had received a request from the committee to provide it with their c.v.s, their syllabi since the fall 2022 semester, “all course-wide communications for courses since the fall 2023 semester, and any communications since 8/1/23 relating to the Gaza Solidarity Encampment, Faculty for Justice in Palestine, and/or the Palestine Writes Festival.” Penn has agreed to turn over Professor Fakhreddine’s and Dr. Almallah’s c.v.s and syllabi. The extent to which it will comply with the committee’s other demands is not clear, but it has apparently placed holds on Professor Fakhreddine’s and Dr. Almallah’s university email accounts, which indicates that it may give the committee access to their email messages.

As we noted in a 7 May 2024 letter to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, “[t]hrough its recent investigations and public hearings, the committee has threatened the freedoms essential to university life and learning, including academic freedom, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly. As a result of this campaign, the committee has made our campuses less safe for students, faculty and staff alike. These efforts shock the conscience and violate the First Amendment in ways that are reminiscent of the now-disgraced House Un-American Activities Committee hearings in the late 1940s and 1950s.” The letter went on to note that “the framing and content of [the committee’s hearings and investigations] make it clear that many committee members are less concerned with combatting invidious discrimination than with suppressing and punishing pro-Palestine speech.”

That the University of Pennsylvania would collaborate with the committee’s politically motivated investigations, at the cost of sacrificing the academic freedom and right to free speech of members of its faculty, is deeply troubling. We must remind you of the statement on “Academic Freedom in Times of War” issued by the AAUP on 24 October 2023, which is directly relevant to the current circumstances: “It is in tumultuous times that colleges’ and universities’ stated commitments to protect academic freedom are most put to the test. As the Israel-Hamas war rages and campus protests proliferate, institutional authorities must refrain from sanctioning faculty members for expressing politically controversial views and should instead defend their right, under principles of academic freedom, to do so.”

We therefore call on the University of Pennsylvania to immediately desist from any form of cooperation with the witch-hunt which the House Committee on Education and the Workforce has launched against members of its faculty. We further call on you to affirm your commitment to protect the academic freedom of your faculty, students and staff, and to vigorously defend them against all forms of governmental harassment and intimidation. Finally, we urge you to offer a public apology to the Penn faculty members whose information you chose to turn over to the committee.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

cc:

aaup.penn@gmail.com

sigalbp@upenn.edu

lisa.bellini@pennmedicine.upenn.edu

Letter to Florida State University System Protesting the Policing and Censorship of course Materials relating to Israel/Palestine

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sat, 17 Aug 2024 04:06:43 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Letter to the Chancellor of the Florida State University System regarding the policing and censorship of course materials relating to Israel/Palestine

Raymond Rodrigues
Chancellor, State University System of Florida
chancellor@flbog.edu

Dear Chancellor Rodrigues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about recent measures announced by the State University System of Florida that will police and censor teaching about Israel, Palestine, the Middle East and related topics at the state’s public universities and colleges. While the State University System has framed these measures as combatting “antisemitism” and “anti-Israeli bias,” we regard this new policy directive, along with other recent measures taken by the state and its officials, as a politically motivated attack against First Amendment-protected speech and academic freedom at Florida’s public institutions of higher education.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

According to reporting in the Chronicle of Higher Education, during the week of 29 July 2024 you and Emily Sykes – the State University System’s interim vice chancellor for academic and student affairs – sent messages to, and held calls with, leaders of all twelve Florida public universities and colleges, instructing them to review course descriptions, syllabi, and test banks for “antisemitic material or anti-Israeli bias.” In an email to university presidents on 2 August 2024 you instructed presidents of Florida state universities and colleges that “any course that contains the following keywords: Israel, Israeli, Palestine, Palestinian, Middle East, Zionism, Zionist, Judaism, Jewish, or Jews [should] be flagged for review;” that “[t]his review should flag all instances of either antisemitism or anti-Israeli bias identified and report that information to [your] office;” and that the review should be “completed by the conclusion of the Fall Semester.” Your email also asserted “the need to implement a process for each faculty member to attest that they have reviewed all resources (textbooks, test banks, online materials, etc.) for each course that they teach.”

As reported by the Chronicle, your email did not define “antisemitism” or “anti-Israeli bias,” nor did it make clear what would happen to the courses or those who teach them should they purportedly manifest either form of discrimination. Nonetheless, the intent and consequences of the new policy are quite clear. Indeed, leading First Amendment advocacy organization FIRE has described the State University System directive as “Orwellian” and cautioned that it, and “the censorship that will follow, leaves students and faculty unsure about whether their discussions of course materials addressing current events – from terrorism, to the war in Gaza, to international relations more broadly – will land them in trouble with elected officials or campus administrators.” The measure also undermines a foundational aspect of academic freedom:, namely that faculty, who are experts in their fields, are exclusively responsible for the content and materials taught in university courses – —not university administrators, state officials, or politicians.

This directive is only the latest in a series of assaults that the State of Florida has launched against First Amendment-protected speech and academic freedom in its public universities and colleges, with the apparent aim of promoting pro-Israel viewpoints while censoring criticism of Israel and support for Palestinians. These efforts include the Florida legislature’s recent adoption of the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which includes “examples” of antisemitism that are in fact First Amendment-protected critiques of the State of Israel. We also note that, in October 2023, you issued a memo “deactivating” all chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), a pro-Palestine student group active at Florida public universities and colleges, because National SJP had allegedly provided material support to Hamas – a measure you were forced to rescind after the decision was challenged in court for violating the First Amendment.

Over the last few years, the state has also adopted a series of politically motivated laws and policies aimed, amongst other things, at eliminating DEI programs and so-called “Woke” ideology” at its public universities and college. These developments led the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) to conduct a special investigation of Florida’s higher education system, which concluded that “[a]cademic freedom, tenure, and shared governance in Florida’s public colleges and universities currently face a politically and ideologically driven assault unparalleled in US history, which, if sustained, threatens the very survival of meaningful higher education in the state, with dire implications for the entire country.” Combatting antisemitism and other forms of bias and racism are laudable goals, but it is clear from Florida’s track record that your recent directives are an additional instance of political interference in the state’s higher education system masquerading as anti-discrimination measures.

Instead of doing further damage to the standing and reputation of Florida’s higher education system, we urge you, in your capacity as chancellor, to heed the AAUP’s statement on “Academic Freedom in Times of War,” issued on 24 October 2023: “It is in tumultuous times that colleges’ and universities’ stated commitments to protect academic freedom are most put to the test. As the Israel-Hamas war rages and campus protests proliferate, institutional authorities must refrain from sanctioning faculty members for expressing politically controversial views and should instead defend their right, under principles of academic freedom, to do so.”

We therefore call on the State University System to rescind its recent politically motivated directives regarding Israel-Palestine and related topics, and to refrain from further action that threatens or undermines speech protected by the First Amendment and academic freedom at the state’s institutions of higher education.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Did Turkey Ban Instagram over Shadowbanning Palestine? Why did it Lift the Ban?

Volkan Isbasaran — Tue, 13 Aug 2024 04:06:17 +0000

Istanbul (Special to Informed Comment; feature) – On August 2, Turkey blocked Instagram, the country’s most popular social network.

Although Turkey’s Information Technologies and Communication Authority (BTK) did not officially state the reason for the ban, the move came after Fahrettin Altun, the Presidential Communications Director, criticized Instagram for preventing users from sharing content related to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas and a close ally of President Erdoğan.

Altun said on X: “I strongly condemn the social media platform Instagram for blocking people from posting condolence messages regarding Haniyeh’s martyrdom without providing any justification. This is an apparent and obvious attempt at censorship.”

In a similar incident, Meta, Instagram’s parent company, removed social media posts by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim expressing condolences for Haniyeh. Meta designates Hamas as a “dangerous organization” and prohibits content that praises the group.

Ismail Haniyeh was killed in Tehran on July 31, where he had been attending the inauguration ceremony of Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian.

Historical Context of Social Media Bans in Turkey

Under Erdoğan, Turkey has previously blocked several social media platforms, including YouTube, Threads, EksiSozluk, Wikipedia, and X (formerly Twitter).

YouTube was first banned in Turkey in 2007 and again between 2008 and 2010, due to videos insulting Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the modern Republic of Turkey. The platform was briefly banned again in 2014 and 2015.

X (formerly Twitter) was banned in 2014 following the circulation of alleged leaked recordings implicating government officials in corruption.

Wikipedia was banned in Turkey from 2017 to 2020 due to entries that accused the country of having links to terrorist organizations.

Additionally, the government has imposed bans on social media and broadcasting in response to disasters, terrorist attacks, and social unrest.

In 2024, the number of blocked web pages in Turkey surpassed one million. Meanwhile, Hüseyin Yayman, head of the Turkish Parliament’s Digital Media Commission, claimed that many Turkish people want TikTok to be banned. “People who see me on the street say, ‘If you shut down TikTok, you will go to heaven,’” Yayman added.

Impact of the Instagram Ban

Following the Instagram ban in Turkey, online searches for VPN services surged. In response, pro-government media began publishing articles warning people about the risks associated with free VPN services.

Professor Yaman Akdeniz, co-founder of the Freedom of Expression Association (İFÖD) and a law professor, said: “This ban must have been requested by either the presidency or a ministry. The BTK is required to obtain approval from a criminal court.”

Akdeniz added, “The censorship imposed on Instagram is arbitrary and cannot be explained or justified. No judge should approve such a request.”

Human Rights Watch and İFÖD stated that the block on Instagram violates the rights to freedom of expression and access to information for millions of users. With 57.1 million users, Turkey ranks fifth worldwide in the number of Instagram users.

The ban had a significant impact on the Turkish economy, as Instagram plays a crucial role in Turkey’s e-commerce landscape, with approximately 10% of the nation’s total online sales being conducted through social media platforms.

According to Buğra Gökçe, head of the Istanbul Planning Agency (IPA), the ban also disrupted the service sector, including tourism, hospitality, and restaurants in reaching customers. The IPA projects that the ban could lead to a weekly economic loss of approximately USD 396 million.

On August 5, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan criticized opponents of the ban and used a racial slur to describe them. He claimed they care more about Western interests than Turkey’s sovereignty, stating: “The only purpose of the existence of ‘house negroes,’ who are both opportunists and losers, is to please their owners.”

Less than a week after the Instagram ban, Turkish authorities also prohibited access to the online video game platform Roblox. Ekrem İmamoğlu, the Mayor of Istanbul and a prominent opposition figure criticized the bans on Instagram and Roblox, stating: “Those who made this decision are ignorant of the new world, the economy, and technology.”

Israeli Response to Turkey’s Instagram Ban

Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz criticized Erdoğan, accusing him of turning Turkey into a dictatorship by blocking Instagram. Katz also tagged İmamoğlu in his comments, seemingly attempting to exploit the political polarization in Turkey to his advantage.

İmamoğlu responded by saying: “We have no need to receive lessons on democracy and law from those responsible for the suffering and deaths of countless innocents, including children.”

Katz’s attempt backfired, as despite the political polarization in Turkey, both sides of the spectrum largely voice support for Palestine, though in different ways—Islamists tend to back Hamas, while secularists in Turkey are more aligned with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) or other left-wing Palestinian groups.

How Was the Ban Lifted?

On Saturday, Transport and Infrastructure Minister Abdulkadir Uraloğlu announced that Instagram had accepted Turkey’s conditions. The ban on Instagram was lifted after Meta reportedly agreed to comply with Turkish law and remove content related to certain crimes or terrorist propaganda.

The independent news website YetkinReport noted that Meta had already been publishing transparency reports indicating that Instagram was implementing these measures even before the ban. The latest report was published on July 31, just two days before the platform was blocked.

The nine-day ban was Turkey’s longest on a major social media platform in recent years. Since Instagram still continues to ban pro-Hamas content, it appears that little has changed. It remains unclear why Instagram was banned in Turkey in the first place, why the ban was lifted, and what problem, if any, was resolved by imposing the ban.

—–

France 24 Video: “Turkish president slams social media ‘fascism’ amid Instagram battle • FRANCE 24 English ”

Pro-Palestinian protesters slam U of Michigan for asking Michigan AG to press Charges against Students

Michigan Advance — Tue, 02 Jul 2024 04:06:08 +0000

By: Jon King –

A coalition of student groups at the University of Michigan say Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel is now looking into possible charges against students involved in pro-Palestinian protests on the Ann Arbor campus, which her office has confirmed for the Michigan Advance.

The TAHRIR Coalition, made up of more than 80 student groups, held a press conference on the grounds of the First United Methodist Church of Ann Arbor, where they continued to press their case that the university should divest itself, both financially and academically, from the state of Israel over its ongoing military campaign in Gaza.

“[University President Santa] Ono and the regents are materially supporting horrifying crimes against humanity, and they are doing it in the name of profit,” said Jaredo Eno of the Graduate Employees Organization, one of the coalition members. “The campus community has spoken on this over and over and over and has said time and again, we do not want to profit from mass murder.”

The efforts of the protesters have included a sit-in last November at Ono’s office, which resulted in felony charges being brought against four individuals, and an encampment that was broken up by campus police in May that led to four arrests.

Rhiannon Willow, a PhD student and research assistant in the Physics Department, speaks at TAHRIR Coalition “Call to Action”. July 1, 2024. Photo by Jon King

While no charges were filed by Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit’s office in the encampment confrontation, Eno said the university was not deterred in seeking to “repress and silence” them, including asking Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel to press charges against protesters.

“We do not know how many people they have asked for charges against or what those charges are, but we have confirmed that U of M’s police department has requested warrants for criminal charges from the state AG’s office against people who are trying to stop the university from funding genocide,” said Eno. “It’s clear that Ono and the regents will use any tool that they can grasp at to silence those who refuse to be complicit in this. This is shameful, and this is dangerous behavior from our supposed leaders.”

Danny Wimmer, a spokesperson for the AG’s Office, confirmed that they are looking into the activities of students in Ann Arbor and elsewhere.

“Our department is reviewing a number of cases involving protest activity around the University of Michigan,” Wimmer told the Advance. “As has been reported in the media, protesters have engaged in similar activities in multiple southeast Michigan counties and prosecutorial venues, and our office is uniquely situated to review multijurisdictional cases in their totality.”

U of M graduate Simrun Bose speaks at TAHRIR Coalition “Call to Action”. July 1, 2024. Photo by Jon King

A request for comment was also sent to the University of Michigan, but has yet to be returned.

Protesters actions have also included coalition members appearing outside the homes of U of M’s Board of Regents, including Chair Sarah Hubbard and Regent Jordan Acker.

Acker’s office was also the target of vandalism in early June, although the coalition did not take credit for it and no suspects in that case have been identified.

Rhiannon Willow, a PhD student and research assistant in the physics department, was one of the students arrested during the clearing of the encampment, saying officers had “slammed my forehead and chin forcefully against the ground, which caused a long lasting and extremely debilitating concussion as well as injuries to my neck and jaw, which have still not fully healed.”

While no charges were filed against Willow, she was banned from campus for a year, which she says will complicate efforts at finishing her PhD dissertation. However, Willow told the Advance that she too is now concerned about state-level charges.

“I believe what’s happening is that, knowing that the Eli Savit’s office declined those charges, I think that’s why they’re going to the AG’s office,” she said. “They’re trying to make it harder for us to keep going, and it seems that the campus bans are unfortunately pretty effective because now so many of us literally can’t set foot on campus or we’ll get arrested immediately.”

Also speaking was Simrun Bose, who graduated in May, but says she was among more than two dozen students notified in mid-May that the university was pursuing disciplinary action against them for participating in either the Nov.17 sit-in.

Bose said the university “flagrantly violated their own procedures” when she alleges they forced the Office of Student Conflict Resolution (OSCR) to start disciplinary proceedings without a formal complaint having been received, and that when one was finally submitted, it was weeks after the six-month deadline.

“Weirdest of all, the university representative who submitted the complaint was not a student, staff, or faculty member, once again violating OSCR’s own procedural guidelines,” said Bose. “Instead, the complainant was a California-based consultant who does not seem to have any knowledge of the events of Nov. 17. Hiring this consultant to do the regent’s dirty work is a cowardly move to avoid responsibility, and possibly is in violation of federal privacy laws.”

Jaredo Eno of the Graduate Employees Organization speaks at TAHRIR Coalition “Call to Action”. July 1, 2024. Photo by Jon King.

The coalition contends the consultant, Omar E. Torres of Grand River Solutions, was not a student, faculty, or staff member, violating the university’s own policy about who can file a formal complaint. However, they allege only after the fact was he then added to the faculty. An online check shows a listing for Omar Estrada Torres in the university’s human resources department.

A message was also sent to Torres for comment that has not been returned.

Bose says OSCR is forcing students to either “accept responsibility” or be subject to a formal hearing.

“I haven’t made my decision yet,” Bose said. “I have a lot of questions about how this consultant even got this information in the first place that I would hope to be answered before I’m able to make a decision.”

Meanwhile, Eno urged the community to show their support for the coalition’s efforts and keep up the pressure on the university to change its policies.

“We cannot endure continued support for this genocide,” he said. “So, we will keep fighting for divestment, and we will keep fighting to keep each other safe, because as you’ve heard from folks, that is exactly the type of world that we are trying to build and nurture through this coalition and its work. So, we’ll keep fighting.”

————–

Jon King

Jon King is the Senior Reporter for the Michigan Advance and has been a journalist for more than 35 years. He is the Past President of the Michigan Associated Press Media Editors Association and has been recognized for excellence numerous times, most recently in 2022 with the Best Investigative Story by the Michigan Association of Broadcasters. He is also an adjunct faculty member at Cleary University. Jon and his family live in Howell.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

Published under a Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Opposing a Bill Proposed by National Union of Israel Students to make Criticizing Israeli Gov’t a Firing Offense

Committee on Academic Freedom — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 04:04:21 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | =

Elhanan Fellheimer
Chairman, National Union of Israeli Students

Prof. Arie Zaban
President of Bar-Ilan University
Chairperson of Association of University Heads – VERA

President Zaban, Chairman Fellheimer,

We write on behalf of the Committee on Academic Freedom (CAF) of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) to express our profound concern over the National Union of Israeli Students’ proposed bill and billboard smear campaign against faculty in Israeli higher education institutions who are critical of Israeli government’s actions and policies. The proposed bill and billboard smear campaign appear to target, in particular, Professor Anat Matar and Professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian (about whom we sent letters on 9 November 2023, 21 March 2024, and 6 May 2024).

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, MESA publishes the International Journal of Middle East Studies and has close to 2800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and the freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and elsewhere.

Contrary to the principles of academic freedom and freedom of expression, the National Union of Israeli Students’ vaguely worded draft bill of 19 May 2024 proposes that: “Academic institutions will be obliged to immediately fire a lecturer, a teacher or researcher who expresses or acts in a manner that includes denial of the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, incitement to racism, violence or terrorism and/or support for an armed struggle or an act of terrorism against Israel.” The draft bill also stipulates that even tenured faculty can be terminated immediately without compensation and that any institution refusing to abide by the proposed law by not firing a faculty member could lose state funding. To promote this bill, the National Union of Israeli Students has also funded what appears to be an expensive public campaign, which includes posters and billboards placed in various parts of Tel Aviv and its vicinity with quotes from Matar and Shalhoub-Kevorkian and which call for such faculty to be fired without compensation.

This flagrant disregard for the basic values that underpin academic scholarship is detrimental to Israeli academia in general and its struggle to remain relevant globally. On 21 May 2024, the Committee of University Heads of Israel (VERA) published a detailed, five-page letter to convince Spanish institutions not to boycott Israeli institutions, in which they argue that they share the “commitment to peace and justice in the region and […] agree with you that the situation in Gaza is tragic.” If VERA wishes for its claims to be taken seriously, campaigns promoting undemocratic, fascist policies against academics and students must be strongly and publicly resisted.

While it was indeed important that VERA published a letter on 3 June 2024 opposing the bill and calling on members of Israel’s parliament to reject it, further actions are required to protect academic freedom and the freedom of speech. VERA must stand behind faculty and students who are being attacked on campuses and in the public sphere. Furthermore, opposition to the war or any other Israeli policy must remain legal if, indeed, the academic sphere is to be described as liberal and democratic, committed to peace and justice in the region. Students, staff, and faculty, both Jewish Israeli and Palestinian, must be permitted to express themselves regarding the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, which is far more than simply “tragic.”

We call upon the National Union of Israeli Students to stop threatening critical voices at the country’s universities, thereby exacerbating student and faculty fears for their safety on and off campus, and instead promote open, democratic academic settings. Further, we urge VERA to be true to its own words and stand behind the effort to block the National Union’s dangerous proposed bill. A pluralistic political environment that ensures academic freedom for all requires nothing less.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli
MESA President
Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting the U of Minnesota Reneging on Job offer to Genocide Specialist Raz Segal over Gaza

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 04:02:17 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Jeff Ettinger

Interim President
University of Minnesota

upres@umn.edu . . .

Dear President Ettinger and colleagues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about your decision to rescind the offer which the University of Minnesota (U of M) made to Dr. Raz Segal to assume the directorship of its Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies (CHGS). This action, the result of your capitulation to political pressure from groups based outside the university which had attacked Dr. Segal for his assessment of Israel’s war in Gaza, starkly contravenes your administration’s avowed commitment to academic freedom and to respect for the integrity of the faculty hiring process.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

Dr. Segal, Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies and Endowed Professor in the Study of Modern Genocide at Stockton University, is widely regarded as a leading scholar in the academic fields in which he works. After a thorough search conducted in full accord with U of M procedures and policies, he was deemed the most qualified candidate for the directorship of CHGS and offered the position. Two members of the CHGS board resigned in protest, citing an October 2023 article in which Dr. Segal had described Israel’s actions in Gaza as “a textbook case of genocide.” Organizations and media outlets based outside the university, including the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, then launched a campaign to block Dr. Segal’s appointment.

Rather than defend academic freedom and the principle that faculty should make hiring decisions based exclusively on scholarly criteria, without interference by individuals or organizations pursuing their own political agenda, your administration first “paused” and then rescinded the offer to Dr. Segal. The video recording of President Ettinger’s 14 June 2024 report to the Board of Regents explaining his decision, available here (starting at 19:23), clearly indicates that the university surrendered to the campaign against Dr. Segal.

We note the statement issued by the U of M chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) on 12 June 2024 expressing alarm at the withdrawal of the offer to Dr. Segal and declaring that “the central administration has rewarded the brinkmanship of two faculty members acting outside the norms of acceptable faculty conduct, overruled a comprehensive faculty-led process of evaluating candidates for this position, and violated established policy and precedent regarding collegiate hiring practices.” The statement went on to characterize your action as “an appalling violation of academic freedom and a stain on the U’s record. If it goes uncorrected it will have a chilling effect on academic freedom at this institution, not only for faculty but also students and staff, by showing that our central administration will side with outside groups when they demand actions that violate academic freedom.” We also call your attention to the open letter signed by nearly a thousand faculty at universities across the United States and beyond, which noted that “by overruling the faculty experts who selected Dr. Segal, the University of Minnesota’s administrators have effectively issued a vote of no confidence in its own faculty. This move endangers the University’s reputation as an internationally-renowned research institution.”

We must remind you of the statement on “Academic Freedom in Times of War” issued by the AAUP on 24 October 2023, which is directly relevant to the current circumstances:

“It is in tumultuous times that colleges’ and universities’ stated commitments to protect academic freedom are most put to the test. As the Israel-Hamas war rages and campus protests proliferate, institutional authorities must refrain from sanctioning faculty members for expressing politically controversial views and should instead defend their right, under principles of academic freedom, to do so.”

We therefore call on you to immediately reinstate the offer made to Dr. Segal and apologize to him for surrendering to the smear campaign against him. We further urge you to publicly and forcefully reaffirm your commitment to the principles of academic freedom and to the integrity and independence of your institution’s faculty hiring process.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting San José State University’s Suspension of Professor Sang Hea Kil, Advisor of Students for Justice in Palestine

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 05 Jun 2024 04:06:33 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Cynthia Teniente-Matson

President,

San José State University

sjsupres@sjsu.edu . . .

Dear President Teniente-Matson and colleagues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern at the decision of the San José State University (SJSU) administration to suspend Professor Sang Hea Kil of the Department of Justice Studies from all faculty duties. There is good reason to believe that this action constitutes an egregious violation of Professor Kil’s academic freedom as well as of her right to free speech.

Professor Kil served as faculty advisor to SJSU’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and has acted as a liaison between the students and your administration. On 25 April 2024 SJSU’s Title IX Office informed Professor Kil that she was being investigated because she had allegedly “engaged in behavior that disrupted the university’s business operations and encouraged students to do the same” at a 19 February 2024 protest event organized by SJP. On 24 May 2024 Professor Kil received an amended “notice of investigation” citing another alleged instance of potential misconduct, on 8 May 2024. Neither notice provided any details or evidence of the alleged misconduct. Nonetheless, on 24 May 2024 – the very same day on which SJSU issued its amended notice – Senior Associate Vice President for University Personnel Joanne Wright informed Professor Kil that she had been placed on administrative leave with pay and barred from her office, “for reasons related to the disruption of programs and/or operations, the safety of persons or property, and investigation for formal notice of disciplinary action.”

Professor Kil has vigorously denied that she engaged in what your administration characterized, in its letter suspending her, as “unprofessional and exploitative conduct towards students and others…engaging in harassing and offensive conduct and comments directed towards colleagues individually and as a group, targeting at least one colleague and/or a group of colleagues for engaging in their work duties by publicly posting their picture and/or group description with inflammatory comments and creating a risk of harm to them; and activities with and/or directives to students for your own personal interest or gain.” Article 17 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California Faculty Association and the California State University system requires “strong and compelling evidence” to justify the suspension of a faculty member, yet no such evidence, or even specific details of what Professor Kil is alleged to have done, have been adduced. The allegation that Professor Kil somehow manipulated the members of SJP with whom she worked as faculty advisor to serve her own ends is also disturbing. We are therefore led to conclude that your decision to suspend Professor Kil, without a full and transparent investigation of the allegations against her conducted in accordance with commonly accepted norms and procedures, constitutes a violation of her academic freedom and of her right to speech.

In these fraught times university leaders have a heightened responsibility to protect the freedom of speech, academic freedom, and physical safety of all members of the campus community. We call your attention to the statement issued by MESA’s board of directors and its Committee on Academic Freedom on 6 May 2024 which denounced actions by university leaders to delegitimize and repress campus advocacy opposing Israel’s war in Gaza. We also remind you of the statement on “Academic Freedom in Times of War” issued by the American Association of University Professors on 24 October 2023, which is directly relevant to your disciplinary action against Professor Kil:

We therefore call upon you to immediately rescind Professor Kil’s suspension, formally apologize to her for the abusive treatment to which she has been subjected, and publicly reiterate your commitment to protect the academic freedom and the free speech rights of all members of the SJSU community.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California