We have been discussing how student publications are firing writers and editors who write columns espousing dissenting views on police abuse or other subjects. This pattern has repeatedly itself at Wisconsin, Syracuse, and other schools. Student columnists have been formally condemned at schools like Georgetown and both faculty and students have sought to eliminate whole publications at schools like Dartmouth as “incubators of hate.” Now, the editor-in-chief at a student newspaper at Oklahoma State University, Maddison Farris, says that she was forced out due to her writing a column criticizing a mask mandate on campus.
Farris wrote a column for The O’Colly after she was removed from a classroom for not wearing a mask. She noted that Senate Bill 658, affirms that a mask cannot be required within a school setting in Oklahoma. She said that her stance was based on individual choice:
“If I believed that it was just a mask, then, of course, I would simply wear it for an hour or two and then go about my day. But it is more than a mask. It’s control. It’s control over my choices, desires and body. I will not allow any institution to take away my right to decide for myself what is best and to make my own decisions, or to take away the rights and decisions of others.”
One can clearly disagree with this view and courts have upheld school mandates, though state laws can trump such policies or rules. However, this is all part of a larger debate that has deeply divided this nation.
It is the reaction to the column that is so disconcerting. First, the O’Colly’s editorial board added a “correction” to the article that is more of a rebuttal. It states that the column did not tell the “whole story” and proceeds to give the other side. As a practice, such views (signed by the other editors) would have been more properly included in a separate editorial. However, the editors picked up on the trend in social media to use “flags” and “corrections” to label opposing views as misinformation.
I have no problem with the content of what the other editors wrote. Indeed, I believe that it offered a valuable counter perspective on this issue. However, it is not a correction. Moreover, I doubt that all of the newspaper’s past columns were “complete” in presenting the entirety of opposing views. The selective treatment of this column is, for that reason, concerning.
However, the greatest concern is what allegedly occurred next. Farris says that she was confronted in a meeting and effectively forced off the newspaper. She submitted a letter of “forced resignation.”
The “correction” seems ripped from the pages of the New York Times. When Sen. Tom Cotton published an opinion column calling for the use of national guard troops to quell rioting in Washington, he cited a long history in the deployment of such troops by Democratic and Republican presidents. The column was factually correct. However, journalists denounced the column and the protest ultimately led to the removal of the editor as well as a cringing apology from the Times. Notably, the newspaper claimed the same unexplained inaccuracies or errors in the column. It never bothered to respond to some of us who noted that, while we disagreed with Cotton on the policy, the column contained a fair accounting of the history of the use of the underlying law.
Former New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones was one of the journalists who pushed the New York Times to denounce its own publication and promise to curtail columns in the future. In so doing, she railed against those who engage in what she called “even-handedness, both sideism” journalism. Hannah-Jones however later tweeted out an utterly absurd anti-police conspiracy that lacked any factual support. She suggested that the destruction by protesters was actually the work of the police. That type of ridiculous claim (later deleted) by Hannah-Jones did not lead to a call for her resignation or any statement of condemnation from the newspaper or her colleagues. Hannah-Jones now teaches journalism.
Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views. Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll has denounced the “weaponization” of free speech, which appears to be the use of free speech by those on the right. So the dean of one of the premier journalism schools now supports censorship. It is part of a widespread anti-free speech movement. As millions of students are taught that free speech is a threat and that “China is right” about censorship, these values are shaping a new society in their own intolerant images.
The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on left applaud such censorship. A new poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.”
I was also disappointed that the university did not issue a statement over the need for greater tolerance for opposing or dissenting opinions. However, as we have seen in other recent cases, universities are often silent in defense of free speech when conservative students are harassed or sanctioned by other students.
The students of Oklahoma State appear to have learned from professional writers and editors who are now actively excluding or expelling those with dissenting views. There was a successful effort to push writer Andrew Sullivan out of New York Magazine and Vox. Sullivan noted:
And maybe it’s worth pointing out that “conservative” in my case means that I have passionately opposed Donald J. Trump and pioneered marriage equality, that I support legalized drugs, criminal-justice reform, more redistribution of wealth, aggressive action against climate change, police reform, a realist foreign policy, and laws to protect transgender people from discrimination. I was one of the first journalists in established media to come out. I was a major and early supporter of Barack Obama. I intend to vote for Biden in November.
It did not matter. Sullivan reported that colleagues said that they felt unsafe working in the same building with him because he questioned aspects of current protests or demands. As we previously discussed, Bari Weiss was also the victim of such a campaign at the New York Times and now writes on Substack.
As professional journalists embrace advocacy journalism, it is not surprising to see student journalists adopting the same self-destructive values. However, it is disheartening to see the lack of sensitivity or protection for opposing values and views by students. Given the faux correction and later removal, it rings rather hallow when these editors declare:
We welcome any and all opinions offering rebuttal of this column, and do not wish to diminish any opinion. As American citizens, we affirm our belief in the First Amendment and the right as journalists to express our personal opinions no matter if our viewpoint is different from those around us.
Someone please cite the Constitution wherein local, state or federal governments obtain any power to compel any form of healthcare provision, or any so-called “emergency powers.”
The fact is, the Constitution provides near-infinite rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities to individuals while it severely limits and restricts government.
When you all play Monopoly, you read the “Rules.”
When you play America, please read the “Rules.”
“The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on left applaud such censorship.”
Book burning is a part of that. Where have we seen that before? Who in our country is calling for book burning and the like? What does one associate with book burning?
S. Meyer– “What does one associate with book burning?”
***
Moving on to burning people.
This has to be stopped.
Those Commie/Nazi type Authoritarians can’t stand it millions of Americans across the US can’t stand their mask type insanity that in places like Oklahoma’s elected govt, by it’s people, voted in SB 658 legally to stop the pro Mask/Mandatory Vaccines/Vaccine Passports idiots.
And if you don’t think those Commie/Nazi ahole are completely out of their mind nuts just try keeping up a bit with what they are attempting to do to our livestock biz/food supply nation with their old tried Climate Charge/CO2 BS.
Bear in mind Okla exports huge amount of beef, hogs, chickens, etc., & grain crops. And OSU has a rather large agriculture dept.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.RxqYLdqZsKyNiOJG89_awQHaEc%26pid%3DApi&f=1
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=pictures+of+regulating+co2+in+cow+farts&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2FasVdzXLFnJrnkkgXIiIy9VbASh6nx8_Dq6ZjPJMfM_6FkZJd0u0EcW3nHHrE84G08S0ciwJyUvh_3gGpRKcY4AViVrCcUm0k%3Ds0-d&t=lm
Tell that to 700,000 Americans dead from covid. Have you been vaxed?
Inoculation is a bit off topic, but since representations such as yours drawn from CDC data can take on an aura of indelible fact if left unchallenged, I will note that the CDC is unreliable and has grossly overstated Covid-caused death and hospitalisation in order to portray an emergency in need of a far reaching government intervention. See the attached analyses. One effectively makes the case for the absurdities of Covid morbidity and hospitalisation tallies; the other skewers CDC assessment of adverse effects from mRNA inoculation. The systems have been corrupted. Political agendas are controlling the information you mostly consume.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/19/sharyl_attkisson_serious_questions_about_the_way_covid_deaths_have_been_counted.html
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/confirmation-of-vaccine-associated
It is worth remembering that scientific censorship was strong in ‘climate science’ before it became a trend in masks, vaccines, and treatment.
“Activists Get A Recent Paper That Threatens Climate Alarm Narratives Removed From Journal”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/10/01/activists-get-a-recent-paper-that-threatens-climate-alarm-narratives-removed-from-journal/
Cardinal Bellarmine was a piker compared to modern leftist censors.
At least we don’t have Savonarola yet–but they are working on it.
I feel unsafe living on the same planet with unhinged people who feel unsafe working in the same building as Andrew Sullivan. How do we go about cancelling them?
Sauce for the gander ….
Senator Rand Paul Schools HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra (who is neither a doctor nor a scientist:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4979775/senator-paul-asserts-natural-immunity-good-covid-19-vaccine
LOL;) Who is that Sen Rand Paul guy Mike Tyson’s cousin?
I have to be honest, I think we’re all used to the typos in this blog but today outdid itself. When the errors start to outnumber the words that are correctly spelled, it interferes with comprehension.
The the science is not settled on the efficacy of masks.
https://www.city-journal.org/do-masks-work-a-review-of-the-evidence
More than the theoretical efficiency of masks has to be taken into consideration. The full setup is Masks +Human Behaviour. In some circumstances masks can increase infection by other pathogens.
Absolutely spot on and for further analysis please note the following Swiss analysis which covers similar ground and shreds the CDC’s politicised approach of cherry-picked data to support an agenda.
https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/
Here’s another well written article on masking/non-masking. https://www.aier.org/article/the-year-of-disguises/
Thanks for linking this article. Well written by a guy with the appropriate credentials to be making these assessments. Occupational and environmental safety experts are more appropriate sources with respect to masking efficacy than are healthcare experts.
In the attached link, a video of such an expert at a school board meeting on masking makes similar points.
https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/08/must-see-masks-dont-work-foremost-subject-matter-expert-breaks-it-down-video/
👍👍👍
Analysis of the Effects of COVID-19 Mask Mandates on Hospital Resource Consumption and Mortality at the County Level
Abstract
Objectives: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) threatens vulnerable patient populations, resulting in immense pressures at the local, regional, national, and international levels to contain the virus. Laboratory-based studies demonstrate that masks may offer benefit in reducing the spread of droplet-based illnesses, but few data are available to assess mask effects via executive order on a population basis. We assess the effects of a county-wide mask order on per-population mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and ventilator utilization in Bexar County, Texas.
Methods: We used publicly reported county-level data to perform a mixed-methods before-and-after analysis along with other sources of public data for analyses of covariance. We used a least-squares regression analysis to adjust for confounders. A Texas state-level mask order was issued on July 3, 2020, followed by a Bexar County–level order on July 15, 2020. We defined the control period as June 2 to July 2 and the postmask order period as July 8, 2020–August 12, 2020, with a 5-day gap to account for the median incubation period for cases; longer periods of 7 and 10 days were used for hospitalization and ICU admission/death, respectively. Data are reported on a per-100,000 population basis using respective US Census Bureau–reported populations.
Results: From June 2, 2020 through August 12, 2020, there were 40,771 reported cases of COVID-19 within Bexar County, with 470 total deaths. The average number of new cases per day within the county was 565.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 394.6–736.2). The average number of positive hospitalized patients was 754.1 (95% CI 657.2–851.0), in the ICU was 273.1 (95% CI 238.2–308.0), and on a ventilator was 170.5 (95% CI 146.4–194.6). The average deaths per day was 6.5 (95% CI 4.4–8.6). All of the measured outcomes were higher on average in the postmask period as were covariables included in the adjusted model. When adjusting for traffic activity, total statewide caseload, public health complaints, and mean temperature, the daily caseload, hospital bed occupancy, ICU bed occupancy, ventilator occupancy, and daily mortality remained higher in the postmask period.
Conclusion:
There was no reduction in per-population daily mortality, hospital bed, ICU bed, or ventilator occupancy of COVID-19-positive patients attributable to the implementation of a mask-wearing mandate.
South Med J. 2021 Sep; 114(9): 597–602.
Published online 2021 Sep 3. doi: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001294
Hello JT students
Today’s experiment involves burning sulfur in oxygen. The only place where 96% pure sulfur is found, is the land of Sodom & Gomorrah.
Oak La Homa!
Where the sun comes shooting down the plain.
The people are neat.
Their homes look sweet.
The town ships like to remain sane!
No science support mask mandates
She’s not anti-mask (e.g. plausible cause, consensus, legal idemnity), but rather anti-mandate, perhaps pro-respirator, and pro-science and physics (i.e. probable cause). Pro-immunity, but not pro-therapeutics (e.g. leaky “vaccines” with short-term and marginal safety data).
For those at risk (condition and environment), a respirator and protective clothing. Anything less is a placebo and viable legal indemnity. #HateLovesAbortion
To the first poster, you provided a quote of what she did , where she searched for her information, the differences between the state law, and what the judge , by name , did differently. Assumed all factual in account and you call that a Dog Whistle? You the start your post labeling her something, assuming her intent, make the great “liberal label” that she aligns with Trump, and is ignorant even though the state law was in her factual favor.
I’m stunned you actually believe your own vindication’s with lathering of hypocrisy you so smuggly layout.
I point all of this to simply to say to you that if you want to wear a mask and get vaccinated , please do so. As for me and my family, I am vaccinated and I choose not to wear a mask.
I won’t judge you or form dog whistling opinions for wearing a mask, even the ones (this is a dog whistle) who wear them in their cars while driving alone or while riding a bicycle. Is their information the same as what you have relied on?
Germany 1933.
Everyone was fine with book burnings, imprisonment of dissident journalists, and “undesirables” until they weren’t.
Does this not sound familiar to the direction we’re headed:
–Closing down or taking over anti-Nazi newspapers; (government doesn’t have to do this because the WH outsources propaganda/censorship to the MSM)
–Controlling what news appeared in newspapers, on the radio, and in newsreels (yup. Add social media to that list. YouTube are modern-day newsreels.)
–Banning and burning books that the Nazis categorized as un-German; (yup. Even To Kill a Mockingbird is in the crosshairs to be banned)
–Controlling what soldiers wrote home during World War II. (we have a current example of what happens when a soldier speaks out)
…and it seems more than half the country are fine with all of that, certainly more than half the clueless millennials.
Source: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda-and-censorship
All this censorship, forcing people out, and firing is intolerable! Where do I live? Not in the country I was born.
I feel like a stranger
In the land where I was born
And I live like an outlaw
And I’m always on the run
It took a while, but JT finally got the word “chilling” in yet another story about censorship.
The hallow with the halo rang hollow, since his head had been replaced with a jack o’lantern, ooh.
“it is the lawgiver most of all who should attend to the education of the young; for if this is not done in states, their governments are harmed”. – Aristotle
Apparently said at a time when lawgivers were better educated and weren’t corporatist. From what I’ve seen, lawgivers are about the last people I want doing anything with education. Leave it to the people in their own communities.
“The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on left applaud such censorship. A new poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.”
********************************
Seems the Devil has “turned ’round”:
Holy men like Saint Thomas More are desperately needed. His final words before being beheaded:
The King’s good servant, but God’s First.
Besides law and the Classics, More read the Fathers with care, and he delivered, in the Church of St. Lawrence Jewry, a series of lectures on St. Augustine’s De civitate Dei, which were attended by many learned men, among whom Grocyn, the rector of the church, is expressly mentioned. For such an audience the lectures must have been prepared with great care, but unhappily not a fragment of them has survived. These lectures were given somewhere between 1499 and 1503, a period during which More’s mind was occupied almost wholly with religion and the question of his own vocation for the priesthood.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14689c.htm
Chilling is an understatement
“I feel unsafe ” is code for “I hate what you stand for and will fight to destroy you”.
And there is the crux of the matter.
For Lefties, disapproval leads to personal hatred of their opponents and destruction of their careers.
If allowed to continue, who knows where that hatred leads?
Certainly to the destruction of our republic.
They are an evil lot.