Bar Crobar

Texas teacher sacked after reading Anne Frank's "Diary" to pupils

The teacher was dismissed after reading an extract adapted as a graphic novel.

UNITED STATES - At school, you may have read the Journal Anne Frank in class, the diary of a young Jewish girl exiled to the Netherlands during the Nazi regime. But in early September, a teacher in Texas was fired for reading extracts from the novel to his pupils in the fourth grade. According to the school district concerned, this version of Journal contains pornographic material.

The controversial extract is taken from a graphic novel adapted from the original work, which includes passages cut from other editions. And one of these passages concerns, among other things, a description of the clitoris written by Anne Frank. The teenager also mentions her attraction to another girl.

After parents complained about these passages being read " inappropriate "The teacher was dismissed, reports the television channel KFDM. This is not the first time that this adaptation has been contested: last year in Texas, the book was withdrawn from certain libraries.

However, the Anne Frank Fund, which manages the copyright for the various editions of the newspaper, had already defended the content of this graphic novel, explaining that a book written by a 12-year-old girl was perfectly appropriate for her peers.

A worrying wave of censorship

But the controversy doesn't stop there: the graphic novel has also been banned in several districts of Florida. This is just one of many examples in the United States, where school libraries have been facing a growing wave of censorship since 2021. A growing number of restrictive laws have been passed by Republican elected representatives, and unsurprisingly it is books about marginalised communities and dealing with subjects such as discrimination, gender and sexuality that are being banned.

Examples abound, particularly in conservative states: in one district in Florida, a book about two male penguins raising a baby penguin together was banned from nursery and primary schools. In South Carolina, it was Ta-Nehisi Coates' memoir on systemic racism, Black anger, which had been singled out by students who had managed to censor the book at their school.

The controversy is growing, to the point that on Tuesday 19 September, 175 artists and activists, including Ariana Grande, Roxane Gay and Mark Ruffalo, signed an open letter condemning this wave of censorship. " Soon these regressive ideologues will turn their attention to other forms of art and entertainment, persisting in their attacks that scapegoat marginalised communities, particularly racialised people and those from the LGBTQ+ community, "The text also calls for the defence of artistic freedom.

Text by huffingtonpost.fr /Émilie Rappeneau

Chloé Zhao's victory censored by China

While the historic victory of Chloé Zhao, who won the Oscar for Best Director for her film Nomadland, was reported in all the media in America, in China, her country of origin, there was no trace of her success. Experts attribute this reaction to China's desire to "erase" the filmmaker, who dared to criticise the Beijing regime eight years ago.

On Sunday evening, Chloé Zhao became the first woman of colour to be named best director for her feature film Nomadlandwhich itself won the Oscar for Best Film. A double victory celebrated here as in the United States in the name of diversity, which has been called for for years on both the small and the big screen. But in China, his country of origin, his victory was greeted with a repressive silence.

On Chinese social networks, articles and messages about the ceremony and M^meZhao were quickly silenced. A keyword entitled "Chloé Zhao wins the Best Achievement Award" was censored from digital platforms. When users typed in the keyword, they were met with an error message stating that "in accordance with the laws, regulations and policies in force, the page cannot be found". The two state media, CCTV and Xinhua, also remained silent about his victory.

Not by chance

For researcher Gabrielle Gendron, of the Raoul-Dandurand Chair's Observatory of Multidimensional Conflicts, it is no coincidence that this event is taking place just a few months before the 100th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.^e anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, on 1^erJuly.

"In the run-up to the centenary, China has set in motion a series of political defences to strengthen the loyalty and unity [of its citizens] around the Communist Party", explains Mr. Kouchner.^meGendron. For example, the Chinese authorities have ordered cinemas to show at least two propaganda films a week by the end of the year. They have also encouraged the public to denounce "malicious defamation, attacks and distortions" against China.

On the one hand, Beijing is much quicker with its repression and censorship, and on the other, Chloé Zhao represents treachery in China's eyes.

Researcher Gabrielle Gendron

She is referring to the controversy caused by the director last March. Remarks she made to the American magazine Filmmaker in 2013, describing China as a country "where there are lies everywhere", resurfaced in the midst of the promotional campaign for his film.

"I suddenly went to England and relearned my history. Studying political science at a liberal university was a way for me to understand what was real," she told Filmmaker.

The initial release date of Nomadland in China was 23 April, but the film was never released in cinemas.

"It could have been China's child prodigy. It only took one criticism for it to become a political tool to rally the Chinese people under the Communist government", notes M^meGendron.

Deleted from social networks

Beijing's reaction comes as no surprise to Guy Saint-Jacques, Canada's former ambassador to China. It is part of a decade of authoritarian repression, marked by Xi Jinping's rise to power. "Before 2013, citizens could still express personal opinions. Today, the government would make their lives unbearable", says the diplomat.

And that's what he believes happened to Chloé Zhao. Not only has she become a persona non grata in the eyes of the Chinese government, but the latter has completely erased it from social networks.

A post announcing the director's victory published by the film magazine Watch Movieswhich has over 14 million followers on the Weibo social network, was censored a few hours after it was published on Monday morning. Doubanan application popular with film fans, has banned searches for Nomadland, stating that "the search results could not be displayed in accordance with the laws and regulations in force".

The Chinese regime is extremely authoritarian, but it is also very effective. It can literally wipe out a person's existence.

Guy Saint-Jacques, former Canadian ambassador to China

On social networks, users were creative in congratulating the filmmaker. Some used the initials "zt" (Zhao Ting, her full name in Chinese) to evade the censors.

Tense Sino-American relations

During her acceptance speech on the stage set up at Los Angeles' Union Station, Chloé Zhao quoted a line from a poem she had memorised with her father when she was a child, which translates as: "People, at birth, are good."

For London-based journalist and China specialist Amy Hawkins, M^meZhao testifies that a dialogue between the United States and China is still possible. "The Chinese government and the recent Trump administration have pushed China and the West into increasingly polarised political spheres. Chloé Zhao's success in the West and her adoption by Hollywood undermine the Chinese government's claim that America is fundamentally hostile to the Chinese people," she says.

In this regard, the Global Timesa conservative Chinese newspaper, broke the media silence on Monday by urging Mr. M^meZhao to play a "mediating role" between China and the US and "avoid being a point of friction". "We hope that she can become increasingly mature", wrote the newspaper in an editorial that is no longer accessible.

LÉA CARRIER
THE PRESS

Judge refuses to block release of John Bolton's explosive book on Trump

In his book, excerpts of which have been published in newspapers, the former national security adviser criticises the US President's decisions, which are "motivated by re-election calculations".

The White House's efforts to prevent the publication of John Bolton's book, scheduled for 23 June, will have been in vain. On Saturday 20 June, a US judge refused to block the release of the explosive book by Donald Trump's former adviser, John Bolton, in which he flays the president-candidate, who is already under pressure just a few months before the presidential election.

The American president reacted by saying that his former adviser would pay a price "very strong for publishing his book without White House authorisation.

John Bolton "put the national security of the United States at risk". and "has put his country in dangerIn his decision, Washington federal court judge Royce Lamberth emphasised this point. But "The government has failed to establish that a ban would prevent irreparable damage. Its claim is therefore dismissed".he concluded.

Judge Lamberth pointed out that the book had already been widely circulated and that it was now "An open secret. According to the publisher, over 200,000 copies have already been sent to bookshops across the country.

"Today we welcome the Court's decision rejecting the government's attempt to eliminate the book". commented his lawyer Charles Cooper.

The image of an incompetent and mocked President

The judge acknowledged that John Bolton did not appear to have asked for a"written authorisation to the White House prior to publication, which would have certified that none of the elements "Classified did not appear in the book. He implied that a separate lawsuit, also brought by the government, could result in Mr Bolton losing the $2 million advance he had received to write the book, due to breaches of confidentiality agreements. The magistrate is also in charge of this other case.

"The Government intends to hold Bolton to account for honouring his agreements and ensure that he receives no benefit from his shameful decision to place his desire for money and attention above his commitment to protecting national security."insisted the White House.

Title The Room Where it Happened (The Room Where It Happened) chronicles the author's seventeen months as National Security Advisor to the occupant of the Oval Office in 2018-2019.

In this vitriolic book, the former White House adviser fuels the image of an American president who is incompetent on the international stage, mocked by senior members of his own administration and who puts his thirst for re-election on 3 November before the interests of the country.

"SUPER JUDICIAL VICTORY against Bolton. Obviously, as the book had already been circulated and leaked to many people and the media, there would have been nothing the highly respectable judge could have done to stop it."Donald Trump reacted on Twitter.

"Bolton broke the law and has been exposed and blamed for doing so and will pay a very high price. He likes to drop bombs on people and kill them. Now bombs will fall on him", threatened the American President, referring to his ex-advisor's war-mongering diplomatic stance.