Brad, What you are doing is not only fundamental to the protection of free speech in Canada but is also extremely important to repairing the damage brought about by false allegations and reckless behaviour by some in Canada's literary community. Keep it up! I found your acceptance of Sierra Skye Gemma's apology particularly gracious.
I have read all of your posts on the Galloway file, which I commend you for, though commend seems a weak word to say just how much of a service you have provided to everyone in these horrible culture wars. Both those of us who decry outrageous attacks against people like Galloway and those who offered their support (count me in) to Galloway (and you), and those who have engaged in those attacks can learn much from your reporting. The latter, one hopes, might have learned that freedom of speech doesn't permit defamation, especially those that are based on palpable and provable lies.
I did not know that you were also under attack. First I've heard of it. Galloway's case and yours reveal the most unfortunate aspect of the "attackers" mental state. Stupidity. Utter and abysmal. I think it is safe to say that the stupid will always be more inclined to join herds. The herd of the stupid will always stampede under the lash of the mendacious or the vengeful, and those who get caught up in it never stop to examine the facts that are subject to a proper legal, ethical or moral weighing.
I concur with what Ian wrote, Brad. Too many in Canada's literary and academic communities (and beyond) enthusiastically perpetuate this illiberalism, and many more, I suspect, cower in fear before their apparent hegemonic power. Challenging it requires fortitude, and I salute you for taking on this work.
It saddens me how stupid people in CanLit are. You'd think writers would be trained to be critical thinkers. I'm sorry you've gone through this - but am grateful you and others are holding people to account. Is there a brighter future ahead? Is the problem the writing world is just too damn small?
Thanks for this article, Brad. As a journalist, I've some idea of how much work went into it.
The issue of blacklisting is insidious and pervasive and is not only happening to successful artists but also to emerging ones.
I’ve learned enough over the fifty years I’ve been reporting that the public’s perspective, heavily influenced by the zeitgeist of the times, is usually not based on facts and if not entirely wrong, then heavily biased.
This has been the case with my investigation into the assumption that marginalized authors are underrepresented in Canadian literature. However, when I present my findings (without prejudice) I’ve been labelled a racist, bigot and it’s frequently suggested that my motivation is because of the lack of success I’ve had as a writer which is true, not the part about my motives, but my lack of success as a writer.
Most recently, I was banned from Canada Writes Facebook group (affiliated with CBC) for suggesting that special considerations for marginalized groups are not only discriminatory but unnecessary and blind judging is a way of removing prejudice so work can be judged on merit alone.
This may seem trivial and besides, I have no career to jeopardize, but it still isn’t fair or right.
If this is something you’re interested in, I’d be happy to provide you with my research.
Otherwise, thanks for this blog and please keep fighting for what I consider the good fight.
Brad, What you are doing is not only fundamental to the protection of free speech in Canada but is also extremely important to repairing the damage brought about by false allegations and reckless behaviour by some in Canada's literary community. Keep it up! I found your acceptance of Sierra Skye Gemma's apology particularly gracious.
Great article. Keep fighting the good fight.
I have read all of your posts on the Galloway file, which I commend you for, though commend seems a weak word to say just how much of a service you have provided to everyone in these horrible culture wars. Both those of us who decry outrageous attacks against people like Galloway and those who offered their support (count me in) to Galloway (and you), and those who have engaged in those attacks can learn much from your reporting. The latter, one hopes, might have learned that freedom of speech doesn't permit defamation, especially those that are based on palpable and provable lies.
I did not know that you were also under attack. First I've heard of it. Galloway's case and yours reveal the most unfortunate aspect of the "attackers" mental state. Stupidity. Utter and abysmal. I think it is safe to say that the stupid will always be more inclined to join herds. The herd of the stupid will always stampede under the lash of the mendacious or the vengeful, and those who get caught up in it never stop to examine the facts that are subject to a proper legal, ethical or moral weighing.
You've always given me hope, friend.
Thank you, Brad, for your ceaseless efforts.
I am grateful for your contributions. I will feel less crazy talking about CanLit blacklists now.
I concur with what Ian wrote, Brad. Too many in Canada's literary and academic communities (and beyond) enthusiastically perpetuate this illiberalism, and many more, I suspect, cower in fear before their apparent hegemonic power. Challenging it requires fortitude, and I salute you for taking on this work.
It saddens me how stupid people in CanLit are. You'd think writers would be trained to be critical thinkers. I'm sorry you've gone through this - but am grateful you and others are holding people to account. Is there a brighter future ahead? Is the problem the writing world is just too damn small?
Suing people for defamation in the name of protecting free speech is like having sex in the name of preserving your virginity.
Thanks for this article, Brad. As a journalist, I've some idea of how much work went into it.
The issue of blacklisting is insidious and pervasive and is not only happening to successful artists but also to emerging ones.
I’ve learned enough over the fifty years I’ve been reporting that the public’s perspective, heavily influenced by the zeitgeist of the times, is usually not based on facts and if not entirely wrong, then heavily biased.
This has been the case with my investigation into the assumption that marginalized authors are underrepresented in Canadian literature. However, when I present my findings (without prejudice) I’ve been labelled a racist, bigot and it’s frequently suggested that my motivation is because of the lack of success I’ve had as a writer which is true, not the part about my motives, but my lack of success as a writer.
Most recently, I was banned from Canada Writes Facebook group (affiliated with CBC) for suggesting that special considerations for marginalized groups are not only discriminatory but unnecessary and blind judging is a way of removing prejudice so work can be judged on merit alone.
This may seem trivial and besides, I have no career to jeopardize, but it still isn’t fair or right.
If this is something you’re interested in, I’d be happy to provide you with my research.
Otherwise, thanks for this blog and please keep fighting for what I consider the good fight.