RSS
Should We Impose a Fairness Doctrine on Academia?
Signs cover the fence at a pro-Palestinian encampment at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. on April 28, 2024. Photo: Max Herman via Reuters Connect.
JNS.org – One of the most pressing questions facing the United States, and especially the American Jewish community, is what should be done about academia.
The issue has become a lightning rod because of the eruption of genocidal antisemitism and anti-Americanism on campus in the wake of Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre. This renewed neo-Nazism, spearheaded by the Red-Green Alliance between progressive leftists and Islamic supremacists, revealed something decidedly ugly: American academia has become little more than a totalitarian state, a dictatorship of the professoriate determined to impose its radical leftist ideology not only on students but the entire nation. And this regime has now collapsed into the inevitable nadir of all totalitarian regimes—antisemitism. It is, in other words, an existential threat to the most basic values of the republic.
It is particularly disturbing because these institutions are the manufacturing center of the American ruling class. For this reason alone, something clearly has to be done.
The question is: what? There are numerous possibilities, but the best solution has yet to be mentioned: the imposition of a “fairness doctrine” on academia.
The fairness doctrine was a policy applied to media outlets by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for much of the 20th century. Put simply, it required media outlets to present diverse views on any issue of public interest or controversy.
In 1949, the FCC formalized the doctrine via a report on “editorializing by broadcast licensees.” In it, the agency based its decision on the “relationship” between the private interests of those who own media outlets and the public interest in open debate and a fully informed citizenry.
The report stated: “One important aspect of this relationship, we believe, results from the fact that the needs and interests of the general public with respect to programs devoted to new commentary and opinion can only be satisfied by making available to them for their consideration and acceptance or rejection, of varying and conflicting views held by responsible elements of the community. And it is in the light of these basic concepts that the problems of insuring fairness in the presentation of news and opinion and the place in such a picture of any expression of the views of the station licensee as such must be considered.”
“If, as we believe to be the case, the public interest is best served in a democracy through the ability of the people to hear expositions of the various positions taken by responsible groups and individuals on particular topics and to choose between them, it is evident that broadcast licensees have an affirmative duty generally to encourage and implement the broadcast of all sides of controversial public issues over their facilities, over and beyond their obligation to make available on demand opportunities for the expression of opposing views,” the FCC held.
The fairness doctrine lasted until the late 1980s when it was finally done away with by the Reagan administration. Nonetheless, left-wing activists and politicians have consistently demanded its reinstatement, seeing it as a weapon against right-wing media outlets, particularly talk radio. Thus far, they have failed in their efforts.
The basis for imposing such a doctrine on academia should be obvious. First, the FCC’s justification for it clearly applies to the universities.
Whenever it is criticized, the professoriate regime always resorts to the “academic freedom” argument, holding that any curbs on its power amount to suppression of the right to free expression. But this claim is based on a fundamental distortion of the role of academia.
These institutions do not exist in a vacuum; as noted, they are the manufacturing center of the American ruling class. And so, they have a massive impact on the lives of every American. All Americans thus have a stake and a say in how academia conducts itself. The universities are institutions with social responsibilities that are obligated to act in the public interest. If they do not fulfill these responsibilities—and they won’t—then the public has the right to take measures to change those institutions.
Moreover, the implementation of a fairness doctrine would be a simple matter: For example, when a leftist professor or administrator is hired, a conservative professor or administrator must be hired next. When a left-wing teach-in is held, a right-wing speaker must be invited to speak at it. When a protest or demonstration takes place, opponents of it must be given the resources necessary to hold their own event. If campus media outlets opine on an important issue, solicitation of a response must be mandatory. When academic publications advocate a specific ideology, they must give equal space to a rebuttal.
A fairness doctrine would have a distinctly positive effect on campus. First, it would neutralize the professoriate regime’s strongest weapon: the imposition of an intellectual blockade on students, denying them the opportunity to hear any opposing point of view. It would foster genuine diversity of thought and tamp down campus tensions by forcing students to entertain, rather than demonize, opposing ideas. It would restore some measure of integrity to faculty and administration because each side of the ideological divide would automatically become a check on the power of their opponents.
The professoriate regime will oppose a fairness doctrine with everything it has. Nonetheless, it will almost certainly fail because it has already conceded the argument. As a cabal of progressive leftists, it has consistently advocated for the reimposition of the fairness doctrine on the media. It can hardly complain when the same is demanded of itself.
This will be a supreme irony, but a welcome one. It might even save the republic from the cancer it has allowed to fester in its own ruling class for far too long.
The post Should We Impose a Fairness Doctrine on Academia? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
CENTCOM Chief in Mideast to Mobilize Against Iranian Attack
Illustrative: File photo: A F/A-18E Super Hornet fighter, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, Red Sea, February 13, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed
JNS.org – Gen. Erik Kurilla, commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), arrived in the Middle East on Saturday amid sky-high tensions as Israel prepares for an imminent attack by Iran and its terrorist proxies.
The trip by the general in charge of American forces in the region was already planned. However, in light of Tehran’s pledge to retaliate for the targeted killing of Hamas terrorist leader Ismail Haniyeh on its soil on July 31, his visit will focus on building a multilateral defensive alliance similar to the one that fended off the vast majority of the more than 300 missiles and explosive drones Iran fired at the Jewish state in mid-April.
Hezbollah, Iran’s Lebanese terror proxy, has separately vowed revenge for the targeted killing of senior member Fuad Shukr in Beirut on July 30.
Israel took responsibility for the Shukr killing, which occurred after Hezbollah murdered 12 children on a soccer field in the Druze Golan town of Majdal Shams on July 27. Jerusalem has not commented on the Haniyeh hit.
Kurilla is expected to visit several Gulf states, Jordan and Israel. Amman is an important stop because King Abdullah II played a pivotal role during the April 13 onslaught.
Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman al-Safadi will visit Tehran on Sunday to discuss the security escalation in the Middle East following the Haniyeh assassination, the Qatari newspaper Al-Arabi Al-Jadid reported.
US increases defense posture in the region
Meanwhile, the Pentagon said on Friday that the US is boosting its defense posture in the Middle East in preparation for an expected attack against Israel by Iran and its terror proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin “has ordered adjustments to US military posture designed to improve US force protection, to increase support for the defense of Israel, and to ensure the United States is prepared to respond to various contingencies,” the Pentagon statement from deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh said.
Austin ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group to replace the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group. In addition, destroyers and cruisers capable of ballistic missile defense will be sent to the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East.
“The secretary has also ordered the deployment of an additional fighter squadron to the Middle East, reinforcing our defensive air support capability,” said Singh.
CENTCOM forces destroy Houthi missile and launcher
CENTCOM reported on Saturday that its forces had destroyed a missile and launcher of Iran’s Yemen proxy the Houthis in an area of Yemen controlled by the terrorist group.
“It was determined these weapons presented an imminent threat to US and coalition forces, and merchant vessels in the region. These actions were taken to protect freedom of navigation and make international waters safer and more secure,” CENTCOM said.
Iran planning larger attack
The Houthis could join the Iranian attack along with Tehran’s other regional terror proxies, with US officials expecting an attack “potentially larger in scope” than in April.
Three US and Israeli officials who talked to Axios reporter Barak Ravid said they expect Iran to attack Israel as early as Monday.
Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei ordered a direct attack on Israel following the killing of Haniyeh in Tehran, The New York Times reported on July 31.
Iranian officials said that the drones and missiles would aim for “military targets in the vicinity of Tel Aviv and Haifa, but would make a point of avoiding strikes on civilian targets,” the Times reported.
However, Tehran said on Saturday that it expects Hezbollah to expand its scope beyond just military targets.
“We expect … Hezbollah to choose more targets and [strike] deeper in its response,” Iran’s mission to the United Nations said, as quoted by the official IRNA news agency.
“Secondly, that it will not limit its response to military targets.”
Report: Mossad hired Iranian agents to kill Haniyeh
Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency hired Iranian agents to plant explosive devices in the room where Haniyeh was staying in Tehran for the inauguration of President Masoud Pezeshkian, according to Iranian sources who spoke to British newspaper The Daily Telegraph.
According to the report, the original plan was to kill Haniyeh in May when he visited Tehran for the funerals of Iran’s President Ibraham Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian, who died in a helicopter crash on May 19. However, that plan was postponed after a large crowd gathered in the building where Haniyeh was staying.
Instead, the Mossad hired two Iranian agents who planted explosives in three rooms where Haniyeh was expected to stay at an IRGC guesthouse in the north of the capital, according to the report.
The agents, who were captured on CCTV entering and leaving the room, immediately fled the country, but left behind a source in Iran, according to the Telegraph. The regime in Tehran arrested dozens of suspects in connection with Haniyeh’s death, the Times reported on Saturday, including senior intelligence officers, military officials, and staff workers at the guesthouse.
“They are now certain that Mossad hired agents from the Ansar al-Mahdi protection unit,” an IRGC official told the Telegraph from Tehran, referring to the IRGC unit responsible for protecting high-ranking officials.
A second IRGC official told the Telegraph that “this is a humiliation for Iran and a huge security breach.”
“It’s still a question for everyone how it happened, I can’t make sense of it. There must be something higher up in the hierarchy that no one knows about,” the second official said.
“There is now an internal blame game taking over the IRGC, with different sectors accusing each other of the failure,” the first official said, adding that Quds Force commander Esmail Ghaani has been summoning people for questioning, arrests and possible execution.
“The breach has humiliated everyone,” said the IRGC official. “The supreme leader has summoned all the commanders several times over the past two days, he wants answers. For him, addressing the security breach is now more important than seeking revenge,” he added.
The post CENTCOM Chief in Mideast to Mobilize Against Iranian Attack first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Biden-Netanyahu Talk Turns Heated Over Gaza Truce Deal
US President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, June 28, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
JNS.org – President Joe Biden became worked up during a heated conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday regarding ceasefire talks, with the president raising his voice and saying “move on a deal now.”
The president expressed concerns that last Wednesday’s targeted killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, which has been blamed on Israel, would sabotage ongoing negotiations to reach a hostages-for-terrorists-and-ceasefire deal in Gaza.
Listening in on the conversation without Israel’s knowledge was Vice President Kamala Harris, Channel 12 reported.
“Israel is making progress with the negotiations, [an Israeli] delegation [to the talks] will go out,” Netanyahu reportedly said, according to leaked and unconfirmed reports.
“Stop bullsh**ting me,” Biden said at the end of the conversation, telling Netanyahu not to take the presidency for granted.
The Prime Minister’s Office did not confirm or deny the conversation, only saying that it would not comment on closed conversations between the prime minister and the US president.
The PMO added: “The Prime Minister persists in his desire to release all of our abductees, the living and the dead alike. The Prime Minister does not interfere in American politics and will work with whoever is elected president, as he also expects the Americans not to interfere in Israeli politics.”
According to The New York Times version of the conversation, based on an anonymous Israeli official, Netanyahu said he was not trying to block a deal and the Haniyeh assassination would delay the talks by at most a few days.
“Netanyahu argued that it would ultimately hasten the finalization of an agreement by putting more pressure on Hamas,” the Times reported, citing the Israeli official.
Biden said the the assassination of Haniyeh was poorly timed, as it came at what the Americans considered the endpoint of the negotiation process.
Biden also expressed concern that killing Haniyeh in Tehran could trigger a wider regional war, which his administration has been endeavoring to prevent, the Times reported.
Biden referred to his conversation with Netanyahu, speaking to reporters on Thursday night at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland.
“I’m very concerned about it,” the president said of the Middle East situation. “I had a very direct meeting with the prime minister today—very direct. We have the basis for a ceasefire. He should move on it and they should move on it now.”
Of the Haniyeh assassination’s impact on a hostage deal, Biden said, “It’s not helped. That’s all I’m going to say right now.”
The post Biden-Netanyahu Talk Turns Heated Over Gaza Truce Deal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jordan’s Safadi Urges De-Escalation of Regional Tensions in Rare Iran Visit
Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Al Safadi attends a press conference after a meeting on the Gaza situation in the government’s representation facility in Oslo, Norway, Dec. 15, 2023. Photo: NTB/Stian Lysberg Solum via REUTERS
Jordan‘s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi concluded a rare visit to Iran on Sunday with a plea for an end to the escalation of violence and for the region to be able to live in “peace, security and stability.”
Safadi’s visit to Iran follows continued diplomatic contacts by the United States and its partners including France, Britain, Italy and Egypt to prevent further regional escalation following the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.
Iran and Jordan are also seeking to improve their relations following recent tensions related to Amman accusing pro-Iranian militias in Syria of smuggling narcotics into the country, and its taking part in the interception of Iran’s first-ever direct attack on Israel last April.
“My visit to Iran is to consult on the serious escalation in the region and to engage in a frank and clear discussion about overcoming the differences between the two countries with honesty and transparency,” Safadi said at a press conference in Tehran alongside his Iranian counterpart.
“Jordan has always been proactive in defending the Palestinian cause and the rights of the Palestinian people. It has condemned the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and rejected all of Israel’s escalating measures that prevent achieving security, stability, and a just peace,” he said.
Safadi condemned the assassination of Haniyeh last Wednesday, calling it “a heinous crime and an escalatory step that constitutes a violation of international law and humanitarian law, and an infringement on state sovereignty. We reject it entirely.”
“We demand effective action to stop the Israeli aggression on Gaza, to halt such illegal Israeli measures, and to prevent crimes against the Palestinian people, in order to protect the entire region from the consequences of a regional war that would have a devastating impact on everyone,” he said.
“We want our region to live in peace, security, and stability, and we want the escalation to end.”
Regional tensions have spiked following Haniyeh’s killing, which came a day after an Israeli strike in Beirut which killed Fuad Shukr, a senior military commander from the Iran-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah.
Hamas and Iran have both accused Israel of carrying out the assassination of Haniyeh and have pledged to retaliate. Israel has not claimed responsibility for the death or denied it.
The post Jordan’s Safadi Urges De-Escalation of Regional Tensions in Rare Iran Visit first appeared on Algemeiner.com.