Deplatforming is a complex issue and an explosive one. I'm a poet, and my poems about my rape strip me naked. I have published a couple, which were treated with respect, and my only quibble is that at least one was received with an exaggerated respect, as if the crime defined me, the poet, not the quality of the poem. But the issues of sexual abuse, drugs, mental health, and what-have-you challenged by trolls aren't the deeper problem. We write about what moves us, not just pretty things like skylarks, or even existential questions. Things that threaten us or the world. This means writers write about political issues as well as personal issues that could potentially bring on attack. What would happen if the Supreme Court made a wonky decision about freedom of speech and the press that enabled attacks from every individual or group or government bureau feeling threatened by some writer's view? Maybe an unpopular view? A person perhaps having had an anaphaleptic shock that nearly killed them after a vaccine, and wrote a poem about it-and who knows what response--a pharmaceutical company, or the NIH-- attacked with both barrels? An essay or poem is not a law court, it is an expression of opinion and emotion and nuance. We appear to be on our way to having to put our anguish in code in order, like the ancient Chinese in imperial times, to dodge the Imperial Censor. Or, short of this, editors need to immediately form a protective group with liability insurance, or an agreement with the ACLU. Lit mags should then close ranks. This is the question: is freedom of speech worth fighting for?
My answer to your question 'Should editors of special theme issues like this make sure they have the necessary legal knowledge and resources before accepting this sort of work?' is a clear 'Yes'.
I know nothing of the details of this particular case and I strongly endorse the principle of believing victims but publishing material that makes untested allegations against a clearly recognisable individual and/or contains potentially slanderous or libelous content is not the role of lit mags or any other publishers.
I believe verifiable truth should be the only defence needed against being sued for defamation. How a small lit mag could believe that they have the knowledge or the resources to mount such a case doesn't say a lot about their intelligence or their willingness to take responsibility for what they publish.
You write: "Is it just business for editors to look out for themselves and their magazines when trouble hits? Or do editors have a strong responsibility to fight for their contributors?" The Accomplices showed what they were made of when they pulled DiFranco's essay. Did they reach out for pro bono legal assistance? Did they consult with DiFranco? Do magazines, online and otherwise, understand that when they behave in this way they are not just deplatforming the author but also opening a wound in the fabric of free speech? No is likely the answer to all these questions. I used to work for big magazines like Time and Sports Illustrated. We had a passel of lawyers that went over every word that went into the magazines and that advised us regarding marketing campaigns, publicity, and so on. Anyone can start an online magazine now, but most of these platforms fail to have the least idea of their legal position should such a challenge arise and authors should know that they are amateurs who will not defend the First Amendment or their writers if a challenge is brought. Thanks to folks like you though, The Accomplices profile is now known to may. Perhaps all online magazines should be required to do better by signing a contract with their writers that spells out what they will and will not do to defend and publicize their authors' work. Perhaps we writers should require them to do so.
You mentioned in another post that you’re on your way to France… Paris? You don’t have to know French to appreciate the bookstores (librairies.). For example, if you’re near Les Deux Magots — Cafe de Flore on Blvd St Germain (Saint-Germain-des-Pres), L’Ecume des Pages has a section of blank journals.
I love that square — Place Sartre-Beauvoir. Those cafes are classics and attract a lot of tourists, prices are outrageous yet... it’s appealing to people watch & or write! Debra 🇫🇷
Deplatforming is a complex issue and an explosive one. I'm a poet, and my poems about my rape strip me naked. I have published a couple, which were treated with respect, and my only quibble is that at least one was received with an exaggerated respect, as if the crime defined me, the poet, not the quality of the poem. But the issues of sexual abuse, drugs, mental health, and what-have-you challenged by trolls aren't the deeper problem. We write about what moves us, not just pretty things like skylarks, or even existential questions. Things that threaten us or the world. This means writers write about political issues as well as personal issues that could potentially bring on attack. What would happen if the Supreme Court made a wonky decision about freedom of speech and the press that enabled attacks from every individual or group or government bureau feeling threatened by some writer's view? Maybe an unpopular view? A person perhaps having had an anaphaleptic shock that nearly killed them after a vaccine, and wrote a poem about it-and who knows what response--a pharmaceutical company, or the NIH-- attacked with both barrels? An essay or poem is not a law court, it is an expression of opinion and emotion and nuance. We appear to be on our way to having to put our anguish in code in order, like the ancient Chinese in imperial times, to dodge the Imperial Censor. Or, short of this, editors need to immediately form a protective group with liability insurance, or an agreement with the ACLU. Lit mags should then close ranks. This is the question: is freedom of speech worth fighting for?
My answer to your question 'Should editors of special theme issues like this make sure they have the necessary legal knowledge and resources before accepting this sort of work?' is a clear 'Yes'.
I know nothing of the details of this particular case and I strongly endorse the principle of believing victims but publishing material that makes untested allegations against a clearly recognisable individual and/or contains potentially slanderous or libelous content is not the role of lit mags or any other publishers.
I believe verifiable truth should be the only defence needed against being sued for defamation. How a small lit mag could believe that they have the knowledge or the resources to mount such a case doesn't say a lot about their intelligence or their willingness to take responsibility for what they publish.
On a somewhat similar thread, but nothing as serious as assault, Ann Beattie wrote a short story in Granta called “How It Ends”.
The narrator finds a photograph of herself in a lit mag, with a piece written by a former friend.
“As I began to flip through a literary magazine, I was stopped by a photograph of myself as a young girl…”
The first nine words was enough to hook me in… 🤗
You write: "Is it just business for editors to look out for themselves and their magazines when trouble hits? Or do editors have a strong responsibility to fight for their contributors?" The Accomplices showed what they were made of when they pulled DiFranco's essay. Did they reach out for pro bono legal assistance? Did they consult with DiFranco? Do magazines, online and otherwise, understand that when they behave in this way they are not just deplatforming the author but also opening a wound in the fabric of free speech? No is likely the answer to all these questions. I used to work for big magazines like Time and Sports Illustrated. We had a passel of lawyers that went over every word that went into the magazines and that advised us regarding marketing campaigns, publicity, and so on. Anyone can start an online magazine now, but most of these platforms fail to have the least idea of their legal position should such a challenge arise and authors should know that they are amateurs who will not defend the First Amendment or their writers if a challenge is brought. Thanks to folks like you though, The Accomplices profile is now known to may. Perhaps all online magazines should be required to do better by signing a contract with their writers that spells out what they will and will not do to defend and publicize their authors' work. Perhaps we writers should require them to do so.
You mentioned in another post that you’re on your way to France… Paris? You don’t have to know French to appreciate the bookstores (librairies.). For example, if you’re near Les Deux Magots — Cafe de Flore on Blvd St Germain (Saint-Germain-des-Pres), L’Ecume des Pages has a section of blank journals.
I love that square — Place Sartre-Beauvoir. Those cafes are classics and attract a lot of tourists, prices are outrageous yet... it’s appealing to people watch & or write! Debra 🇫🇷
Bon Voyage!