Opportunity. You may or may not know that tulsa is one of six chapters throughout the country to host a pen america chapter, we have pen america tulsa, im really proud to say im the leader of that group and its been a relationship that just gets better and better. We had the opportunity to do several events with pen, probably even prior to our affiliation as an actual chapter. It really started laying the groundwork for this relationship moving forward. Its something that if you dont know the work that penn does, its a very inextricably linked to what we are talking about tonight in many ways. Pen is an organization that advocates for authors, for freedom of the press, for all kinds of important things that are tied to the mission we have through magic city books and the tulsa literary coalition. If you dont know their work i would invite you to go to pen. Org and see every thing they are doing. There is so much going on with limitations to press freedoms, every day something is happening that we didnt probably know about, at least i wouldnt know about were it not for the work thats happening at pen. We have a special membership promo going tonight so if you go to the website pen. Org you can use the code auntran9a friend. Support pen friend. Tonight we will talk talk with the ceo of pen america, Suzanne Nossel is a friend and someone who i very much look up to as a leader in this, this world that i somewhat take part in. Ive had the chance to talk to some of the other authors of this past months and im always thrilled when someone else wants to take that opportunity away from me. [laughter] i actually get to watch and enjoy it instead of having to run it. My friend doctors john shuman is not only a longtime friend of suzanne, they will probably get into how they know each other at the beginning but john is also a board member of the tulsa literary coalition. Huge advocate for the work we do through tlc and magic city books. Its a great allaround guy and advocate for the arts and culture here in tulsa. Jonathan take the reins. If you guys have a question we invite you to put those into the q a on zoom and will incorporate as many as you can. If you dont have this look yet dare to speak conflict we will be talking about tonight. The book, by the way, does something that i love when a book can do, it has something in it that hisses off everybody in the best possible way. If you think you are on one side of the issue, theres something to be in here that will challenge what you believe and what you think you believe and to me that is a really powerful thing to do, make us question what we think of as freedom and what we believe in as the tenants at the core of all of this. If you havent had a chance to get the book we will post links to buy the book through magic city directly, we will do that several times to the talk tonight. I want to say a big big welcome and thank you to Suzanne Nossel and doctors john shuman. Thank you jeff. Welcome suzanne. Thanks for having me, its fun to be in tulsa even though im not in tulsa, which i work. We wish you were here. At some point when the pandemic receives we definitely want to get you here. I really like the book. It really made me think and, congratulations, i was so impressed with the thoroughness. Im not in any way a lawyer or scholar but you are, and in some ways the second half of the book reads to me you cite many many famous Supreme Court cases but i thought where we could start, because i lead a college campus, thats one area you focus on a little bit in the book is College Campuses. And freedom of speech and hollow culture. I can start by saying, you taught me something, which i sort of knew but i didnt realize there was this term call in, could you differentiate between callout culture and what you hope people do with call in . Sure. Weve done a lot of work on campuses of pen america over the last four or five years. Its become somewhat alarmed by the witnessing that a rising generation seems to be increasingly skeptical about free speech. I can understand why. For them they tend to hear free speech principles invoked in relation to speech that is hateful or menacing or derogatory in some way and the professor the other students says, its free speech and the university protects it because its free speech. If you hear free speech invoked only in that context he can see why someone might become dubious of the idea of free speech. Its actually one of the reasons i wrote the book was out of this concern that we are at risk of losing a rising generation when it comes to believing in the principle of free speech which i grew up seeing is a bedrock of the u. S. Constitution and our culture and to what makes this society rates. I think its extremely important we find ways to reach this rising generation and when it comes to callouts and collins, i would say just to grounded a little bit my interpretation of a lot of controversies that go on on campus is that there is a tension between the drive that students and many faculty have to render the campus more equal, inclusive just ato eradicate the legacies of discrimination addicts that are so stubborn in this country are now rocketing with avenue level of this amid the protests over the last few months. Sometimes the effort can kind of year across the double yellow line into the degree of abwhen it comes to seem that the best thing to do to foster a sense of belonging among students from marginalized groups or to combat bigotry would be to ban or punish speech that you can understand why that idea comes up. In my analysis of calling out and calling in really has to do with how you respond to the speech that you find offensive. If a professor, this is a common scenario that if professor will verbalize the nword in class. We just had this in the calendar year in the university of oklahoma. It happens all over the country. They might be quoting James Baldwin that might be quoting mark twain. They might be teaching a Law School Class about the doctrine of fighting words and trying to give an example thats gonna rile people up a little bit. We find this increasingly that students have a very strong reaction and think its objectionable no matter what. It doesnt matter that it was a aof the processes is mean any defense. The question in a situation like that doesnt have to be the nword, what you do . A callout is to publicly shame the person. Can be through petition or social media or facetoface confrontation but it is something thats visible to everyone. A call in is a different approach. Its the behindthescenes, approaching someone privately, your goal is to tell them, you offended me or you offended other people may not realize how your words came across but not to shame. It really depends on the circumstance whether you think you can get through to the person, was this intentional or unintentional or where people hurt other words and they need to hear your ally ship that public demonstration of support . I sort of outline here are the criteria you can use to determine which of these approaches makes more sense depending on the circumstances. Dimension apologies, you have a pretty short chapter on that includes apologies. What are the components of a good apology or true apology . I think our culture and media our politicians in sincere apologies. One of the results of that is that there is very little space for apology and forgiveness in some of these freespeech battles. To me a convincing apology is one that really accept blame for what you did. You are not apologizing just because someone else was hurt or bothered but rather because you acknowledge that you did something wrong. It has to be encompassing it cant be parsimonious where you are clearly delineating and drawing short lines around what you accept blame for and what you dont, it needs to be more encompassing, it has to be sort of searching in the sense that willing to acknowledge that what you said, even if you didnt intend it to be racist, maybe it does reflect your up bringing or background or certain abin some instances it may entail outreach to a group with which you have limited contact. You dont really know much about the Lgbt Community and theres work to be done to get to know it better so you dont stumble into the same mistakes in the future. One example in recent days of what i call pseudoapology is Alexander Ocasio cortez was called a very nasty misogynist spooler by representative from florida he purported to apologize but in so doing he denied having said it when their witnesses and went on and on about the fact that he has a daughter and a wife so he is someone who is good to women. So she skewered that in her apology rebuttal on the floor of the congress. That was an important speech. Lets broaden some Campus Culture and talk more about the broader culture and when we talk about call outcome others eyes idea of cancel culture. Where we have these tools of social media, twitter in particular but others, facebook, where somebody does Say Something offensive or somebody unintentionally said something that doesnt does ab very quickly there can be something what feels like a storm of protest where essentially theres a cry out to cancel that person and some of this of course is involved from the me too movement. Theres been legitimate legal calls to try people. There are many examples you cite in the book. I was wondering if you could broaden and talk about cancel culture and how we can protect free speech but also be mindful. One of the problems with cancel culture as the term is used so elastically. It can be invoked to report everything from, as you say, instances in the me too movement, like Harvey Weinstein or bill cosby, they been convicted of crimes. They do get exiled from the culture and nobody takes much issue with that. Then there are other instances where someone tweets out something that is seen as contrary to defund the police or construed as toward transgender individuals when that might not have been the intent that singular act of speech and discretion can in turn evoked this huge backlash and you could become the person that becomes untouchable and not only are they stigmatized anybody who engages with them the stigma carries over. It societally enforced isolation that extends to concentric social circles and professional circles and i think that phenomenon is destructive. Its excessive. Its draconian. Theres a kind of enforcement where if you dont adhere to it, you may become tainted and put your own reputation at risk as well. I think thats the level of cancel culture that concerns people. Its also indefinite duration it may be one mistake that for example an editor makes publishing a piece the new york review of books publishing a piece on me too that was highly controversial and then all of a sudden not only was the out as editor in a couple days but publications which he contributed three years suddenly said, we cant publish you anymore, you became untouchable. In his case i dont think its permanent and i also think its incumbent on institutions when that does happen to after a period of time create on ramps so people arent effectively silenced and marginalized forever particularly on the basis of a single active expression or decision. That doesnt warrant such a harsh and lasting response. We have a very Current Situation in tulsa id like to ask you about. I think its going on in other places as well but around the time of juneteenth President Trump was going to hold a rally that was controversial because of the pandemic. The idea of the large public gathering. What happened was there were many people in the black community and allies who painted black lives matter of a stretch of greenwood avenue, the historic area where the toll celebrates massacre occurred almost 99 years ago. Its been there for two months now and its been a place of healing and gathering for many people until recently the head of the Tulsa Republican Party said that he or the party wanted to paint, back to the blue, baby lives matter and if you allow one instance of free speech you have to allow others. Then it went on with her is actually some defacement of the black lives matter what a blue line and then people came out to clean that up and repainted and counter protest. The city council is stuck in the mayor with what to do. If you could help us sort through that ticket, its obligated. It is a ticket. It connects to these protests that have happened around the country with connection with monuments and names. For example, at el where i know you went the debate over whether to rename houses. What messaging, city or institution, should be putting forward collectively . And how the statements of values are, who gets to decide what the statements or values are and when they should change . Whats up for debate . I generally think those questions are not nearly what matters of Free Expression that a community can change its mind if they decide they no longer want to have a statue of robert e lee, thats perfectly within their rights. Its not infringing on anyones expressive rights. The question, i take it with a municipal decision, not sure i know it wasnt other cities, new york citys theres black lives out in front of trump tower. In washington its probably on the street there. Whoever is in charge of municipality, the mayor, city council, should have the right to decide what the expression is going to be conveyed in those public spaces under their control. If the contingent is saying the messaging you chosen neglects the role or importance of another institution in the city we want that reflected in some way, i dont think thats Free Expression right they are asserting but it might be a right of a sort to be recognized and acknowledged. It might make sense to try to find a way of doing that and to show respect and thats a discussion here in new york as well. But you want a level of equilibrium between black lives matter but not completely undercutting the role of the police. Perhaps theres another part of town where an alternative message could be conveyed, perhaps the discussion, often times on all of these issues which we find is that is comforted by the pandemic. If you can get people in a room, and a conversation to explain, here is why painting that blueline do our message was not something thats acceptable, heres what that signified to us, talk to what it is they are trying to achieve. Sometimes, not always, but sometimes you can find a solution that will be acceptable. Its definitely of the moment and i think that our mayor and city council are somewhat paralyzed. Some city council have come up strongly in favor of maintaining it. Others not so much. The city lawyer has actually declared in a legal form of street art of graffiti. I think thats where in some of the trouble lies the city ordinance. Thats a different situation then in the other cities if it was not something that was officially authorized. Nonetheless, the city may want to decide, this is not in the moment, even though it mightve violated the ordinance, this is not the moment to paint over that message and symbolically given the history of talk center where you are, thats not the right answer for this moment. I want to turn to this whole idea of information and state control and you talk both your work at pen america and also in the book in dare to speak you talk a little bit about china. Interestingly, i wasnt aware of the fact that china in its constitution does ato free speech. But as you point out in practice that there could be further from that. That pen america you have, you published the list of i think 80 or so examples of how china oppresses people, artists, journalists, people who try to tell the truth. You dont see that really Getting Better anytime soon. No, its getting much worse. This morning i was woken up by a message, last night in hong kong they arrested a major media tycoon whose known prodemocracy advocate jimmy law. As part of this crackdown happening in hong kong with the inaction of a new National Security law, that wants democratic very open, how many people in the audience had been to hong kong. If you went there a few years ago, it feels like a very open place. Its got wonderful universities, human rights lawyers, a vibrant media scheme. Lots of journalists. Its been the place where all the western media organizations and newspapers would have their staff headquartered because with so much freer than in china. Beijing right now is just cramping down abclamping down in a harsh way. They are rounding people off and i was called about how journalists could get lawyers in International Legal assistance. Its a very sad situation and what it reflects is beijings one arm getting longer and longer. We issued a report last week on the influence that china wields in hollywood because beijing the Chinese Government has through semi fatal investors that now are a major power brokers in hollywood as well as through Access Control of access of the Chinese Market which is become a huge market. The world second and soon to be the Worlds Largest so Hollywood Studios want their movies to be shown in china and they are willing to give up a lot in exchange for that. That means surrendering the right to criticize the chinese or pick the chinese negatively, thats a bargain they are willing to make and document this in a report. Its just one example. There are the people of britain, talking about the same thing that goes on in the gaming industry and academia here and they say too much Chinese Student to pay full freight to become a major source of revenue for u. S. Universities and their strength attached to that. The question of chinas, not just what goes on inside china, which at pen america we been concerned with for a long time and remain so. And its getting worse. But they are growing influence around the world as a superpower and economic force. In bringing with them this approach to Free Expression that really takes the words on the page of their own loss and International Law and discounts on meaning from them. Sticking for a second with china example, he mentioned how the hollywood movie studios are willing to make that compromise in order to access the Chin