The White House, under President Trump’s direction, has released a list of objectionable exhibits and artwork at various Smithsonian museums, claiming the institution is too “woke.” The list, published with the headline “President Trump Is Right About the Smithsonian,” targets content related to race, slavery, immigration, and transgender identity. White House officials stated the administration aims to remove “divisive ideology.” The Smithsonian, in response, maintains its commitment to factual historical presentation.
Read More
HarperCollins is removing claims about Melania Trump and her relationship with Jeffrey Epstein from future editions of Andrew Lownie’s book, “Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York.” The decision was made to mitigate potential legal risks, following Melania’s threat to sue Hunter Biden over similar allegations. This action comes after the book had already been published in around 60,000 copies. The book also contains claims about Prince Andrew’s relationship with Epstein.
Read More
A federal judge has invalidated significant portions of a Florida law enabling parents to remove objectionable books from schools, siding with publishers and authors who challenged the legislation. Judge Carlos Mendoza found the law’s ban on material describing sexual conduct to be overly broad and its interpretation unconstitutional. Consequently, schools are instructed to adhere to a U.S. Supreme Court standard for assessing whether a work is obscene. The ruling comes after the removal of numerous books, including literary classics, spurred by the law passed by the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature.
Read More
The White House has mandated a comprehensive review of the Smithsonian museums and exhibitions in preparation for the nation’s 250th birthday, aiming to align the institution’s content with the President’s interpretation of American history. This review encompasses all public-facing content, including social media and educational materials, to ensure alignment with the President’s vision of celebrating American exceptionalism and removing any divisive narratives. The Smithsonian, while reaffirming its commitment to factual presentation, will collaborate with the White House, Congress, and its Board of Regents on this matter. The review, which will initially focus on eight museums, will require the submission of materials and corrective actions to replace what is deemed “divisive” language with “unifying” descriptions.
Read More
Senator Mike Lee’s Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), which seeks to criminalize all pornography, has moved to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The bill redefines “obscenity” and could potentially criminalize content that appeals to prurient interests. Critics have raised concerns that the broad definition could encompass various media and have unintended consequences, including impacting adult content creators and even seemingly innocuous media. The bill is similar to a proposed pornography ban outlined in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025.
Read More
Recently, several sections of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution were found to be missing from the official U.S. government website, as discovered by internet users and confirmed by TechCrunch. The Wayback Machine indicates these changes occurred within the last month, with Section 8 partially removed and Sections 9 and 10 entirely deleted. These missing sections detail the powers of Congress, limitations on state authority, and protections for citizens, including those related to habeas corpus. According to the Library of Congress, the omissions are due to a “coding error” and will be rectified soon; however, the White House has declined to comment further.
Read More
A new pornography taskforce plans to propose legislation this autumn targeting “barely legal” content, prompted by the Channel 4 documentary, “1000 Men and Me: The Bonnie Blue Story.” The documentary, which follows performer Bonnie Blue, has faced criticism for potentially glamorizing extreme pornography and failing to adequately challenge her assertions of harmlessness. The proposed legislation, spearheaded by Baroness Gabby Bertin, aims to address the regulatory gap where harmful pornography, like adults role-playing as children, is not prohibited online. The film is also being reviewed by Ofcom, with the potential of an investigation.
Read More
Buried within the Paramount/CBS merger is the concerning installation of a “bias monitor” by the Trump administration, viewed by some as a tool for censorship and ideological control. This monitor promises self-censorship to align with the administration’s preferences, effectively stifling dissenting voices, as evidenced by the cancellation of Stephen Colbert. This suppression of critical voices mirrors authoritarian tactics and poses a threat to the cultural sphere, aiming to control our imagination and ability to envision alternative perspectives. The article emphasizes the revolutionary power of art and encourages continued creative resistance against these attempts to silence expression.
Read More
Senators are poised to vote on a bill that would allow members of Congress and their staff to demand the removal of personal information from websites. This legislation, introduced by Senators Amy Klobuchar and Ted Cruz, aims to enhance member security amidst rising political threats. However, watchdogs and media advocates express concerns that the bill could hinder journalistic efforts and limit accountability. They argue that despite the inclusion of a carve-out for journalists, the legislation may still empower Congress with censorship, potentially impacting public discourse.
Read More
The cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s show due to pressure from Donald Trump highlights escalating concerns regarding First Amendment rights. According to David Enrich, Trump’s administration actively attempts to intimidate media outlets critical of his actions and rhetoric. This aggressive stance reflects a broader pattern of suppressing dissenting voices and controlling the narrative. The situation underscores the potential dangers of political interference in the media and its chilling effect on free speech.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker