A Muzzle Award to Brown University, which investigated a student for committing journalism

Sayles Hall at Brown University. Photo (cc) 2021 by Chris Rycroft.

Recalcitrant administrators, emails and phone calls that go unreturned, and complaints from the people they write about — student journalists have a hard time, just as journalists do everywhere.

What happened to Brown University student Alex Shieh, though, went well beyond that. According to Jeremy W. Peters of The New York Times, Shieh was investigated to determine whether he had violated the school’s code of conduct. Shieh’s offense was committing journalism by sending an email to 3,805 administrators in March and asking them, DOGE-like, “what tasks you performed in the past week.”

As Dominic Coletti wrote for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which took up Shieh’s cause, Shieh was accused of misrepresenting himself by claiming that he was a reporter for The Brown Spectator, a conservative student publication — except that he was telling the truth. (The Spectator had gone on hiatus but was revived recently, so it’s possible that particular accusation was technically accurate. Not that it matters. You don’t need a news outlet to exercise your First Amendment rights.)

Two other students were also investigated. Though the Times reports that all three were cleared, the university administration has earned a New England Muzzle Award for its censorious approach to journalists who ask tough questions. After all, none of those administrators who were emailed had to respond, and reportedly many of them didn’t. FIRE’s Coletti writes:

Brown’s response here flies in the face of its due process and free expression guarantees, and threatens to chill student reporting on campus. Due process is essential not just to guarantee defendants a fair shake, but to uphold the legitimacy of campus disciplinary proceedings. It also acts as a bulwark protecting students’ individual liberties.

By the way, Shieh is an occasional contributor to The Boston Globe, and Globe columnist Carine Hajjar reported on his plight several weeks ago. She noted that one of Shieh’s fellow students at the Spectator criticized him because he “sorted scores of administrators, by name, into pejorative categories … all before having conducted a single interview.”

That’s pretty poor journalistic practice. It’s also protected by the First Amendment, especially at an independent publication like the Spectator, which has no ties to the university. Indeed, the administration is trying to force the paper to drop “Brown” from its name.

“Instead of chilling dissenting takes inside its community, Brown should be keener than ever to cultivate them,” Hajjar wrote. “Otherwise it’s asking for the Trump administration to swoop in with instructions.”

AI roundup: The WashPost eyes robot-edited op-ed pieces, while Chicago and Philly execs speak out

Jeff Bezos. Painting (cc) 2017 by thierry ehrmann

The Washington Post’s plan to bring in a plethora of outside opinion writers, edited by artificial intelligence, is being widely mocked, as it should be. But the idea is not new — at least the non-AI part.

A decade ago, the Post started publishing something called PostEverything, which the paper called a digital daily magazine for voices from around the world.” Here’s how the 2014 rollout described it:

In PostEverything, outsiders will entertain and inform readers with fresh takes, personal essays, news analyses, and other innovative ways to tell the stories everyone is talking about — and the ones they haven’t yet heard.

PostEverything went PostNothing sometime in 2022, but now it’s back. According to Benjamin Mullin of The New York Times (gift link), the revived feature, known internally as Ripple, will comprise opinion writing from other newspapers, independent writers on Substack and, eventually, nonprofessional writers. Ripple will be digital-only and will be offered outside the Post’s paywall.

Become a supporter of Media Nation for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive commentary, a roundup of the week’s posts, photography and even a song of the week.

What’s hilarious is that Mullin contacted several of the partners the Post is considering, such as The Salt Lake Tribune and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and was told they’re not interested. Another potential partner was identified as Jennifer Rubin, who quit the Post over owner Jeff Bezos’ meddling and started her own publication called The Contrarian. Mullin writes: “When told that she had been under consideration at all, Ms. Rubin burst out in laughter. ‘Did they read my public resignation letter?’ she said.”

Continue reading “AI roundup: The WashPost eyes robot-edited op-ed pieces, while Chicago and Philly execs speak out”

AI embarrassment aside, Business Insider faces huge challenges in the post-SEO environment

Former masters of the universe Henry Blodget, founder of Business Insider, and Nick Denton, founder of Gawker. Photo (cc) 2012 by the Financial Times.

There was a time when Business Insider’s digital strategy was among the most widely admired and emulated in publishing. But that was then.

Last week, the outlet announced it was laying off 21% of its staff and doubling down on artificial intelligence, a sign of how drastically the business model for digital news has changed over the past few years. I’ll get back to that. But first, an AI-related embarrassment.

Become a supporter of Media Nation for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content as well as my undying thanks.

On Sunday, Semafor media reporter Max Tani revealed that, last May, Business Insider management distributed to staff members a list of books it recommended so that its employees could learn about the vision and best practices of leading figures in business and technology. The list included such classics as “Jensen Huang: the Founder of Nvidia,” “Simply Target: A CEO’s Lessons in a Turbulent Time and Transforming an Iconic Brand” and “The Costco Experience: An Unofficial Survivor’s Guide.”

As it turned out, those books and several others either don’t exist or have slightly different titles and were written by authors other than the ones cited in what managers called “Beacon Books.” In all likelihood, Tani reports, the book titles were generated by AI. At least Business Insider didn’t recommend them to readers, as two daily newspapers did recently with a list of summer books generated by a third-party publisher.

Business Insider is owned by Axel Springer, a German-based conglomerate that also owns Politico and Morning Brew, neither of which faces layoffs, according to Corbin Bolies of The Daily Beast.

Henry Blodget founded Business Insider in 2007, and the publication quickly established itself as a success in the world of SEO, or search engine optimization. In 2016, I interviewed The Washington Post’s then-chief technologist, Shailesh Prakash, for my book “The Return of the Moguls.” He told me that BI was one of several outlets the Post studied to see how it used a variety of factors to get its journalism in front of as many eyeballs as possible. Here’s part of what he said:

We have built our own crawlers, so we have crawlers go and crawl a bunch of other sites — USA Today, New York Times, Business Insider — and we go and grab their content and bring it in-house, strip out all the branding, only have the headline, image and a blurb, and put it in front of 500-plus users every month as a test. And the question that’s asked is, “Would you read this story?” And you don’t know whether it’s a Business Insider story or a Washington Post story or a Huffington Post story or a USA Today story. All you see is an image, a headline and blurb. And based on the results of that, we compare our content to these different sites. Are we better than The Huffington Post in politics content for women? Are we better than Business Insider in business content for men?

Back then, Business Insider and HuffPost were offering their journalism for free and paying for it by building huge audiences and selling them advertisers. The Times and The Washington Post were in the early stages of building their paywall strategy.

Eventually, the free model collapsed as Google drove the value of digital advertising through the floor. Today, HuffPost is a greatly diminished outlet owned by BuzzFeed, which itself is a shadow of what it used to be. And Business Insider has a paywall.

Now, I have nothing against for-profit news organizations charging for their journalism. But who would take out a paid subscription to Business Insider? That’s not a comment about the quality. But readers are dealing with subscription fatigue, and even the most hardcore news junkies might pay for one national paper (perhaps The Wall Street Journal in the case of BI’s target audience), one regional paper and a few newsletters.

BI isn’t going to make the cut for more than a handful of readers.

There’s an additional factor. BI still relies on Google to attract readers who might be enticed into buying a subscription — and now a Google search gives you an AI-generated result. There’s no need to click through, even though the AI summary might prove to be wildly inaccurate.

In an interview with Andy Meek of Forbes, Blodget said he was “very sad” to learn about the layoffs at BI, and he offered his thoughts on how digital publishers can survive in the current environment. “Direct distribution and subscriptions,” he said. “That model will support thousands of excellent publications, big and small. And audio and video are still growing as we move from TV/radio to digital.”

But Business Insider already has a paywall and newsletters. At best, the publication faces a smaller, less ambitious future. And turning over some of what it produces to AI is not going to help it maintain a relationship of trust with its readers.

How local news outlets are covering the antisemitic terror attack in Colorado

The Pearl Street Mall in Boulder, Colo. Photo (cc) 2009 by Lee Coursey.

The FBI got ahead of the story on Sunday, claiming that an outburst of antisemitic violence in Boulder, Colorado, was a “targeted terror attack,” even as local police were saying it was too soon to tell.

As it turned out, the suspect, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, really did appear to be motivated by his hatred of Jews. But it wasn’t a good sign that Trump’s shoot-from-the-hip FBI was claiming to know what was behind the attack even as Boulder Police Chief Stephen Redfearn was holding a news conference in which he said it was too soon to ascribe any motives.

Boulder Police: “we are not calling it a terror attack yet.” They say they are still identifying motive and would be irresponsible to say motive at this point FBI already claimed it’s a “targeted terror attack.”

News Breaking LIVE (@newsbreakinglive.bsky.social) 2025-06-01T22:09:30.046Z

Soliman is accused of using what Chief Redfearn called “a makeshift flamethrower” to burn people who were walking in support of the Israeli hostages still being held by the terrorist group Hamas. The walks, a regular event in Boulder, are sponsored by an organization called Run for Their Lives.

Soliman reportedly yelled “Free Palestine!” as he carried out his assault at the Pearl Street Mall. Eight people were injured, ranging in age from 52 to 88. I haven’t seen much in the way of details yet, but The Colorado Sun reports that one of those injured is in critical condition.

When local news goes national, it’s always worthwhile to check in on what is being reported on the ground by journalists who really know the area. Here’s a quick roundup, starting with two news outlets in the city of 106,000 as well as a few statewide media organizations.

• The Daily Camera of Boulder is the city’s paper of record. It is also owned by Alden Global Capital, a cost-slashing hedge fund that has consolidated much of its operations at The Denver Post, the state’s major metro; Denver and Boulder are separated by about 30 miles. The Camera and the Post covered the story with a team of four reporters, three from the Post and one from the Camera. Their story was updated at 6:52 a.m. Colorado time. Notable:

Videos showed people rushing to pour water on one victim while others lay collapsed nearby.

“It’s almost like it was a gun of fire,” said Lynn Segal, who witnessed the attack. “It’s like a line of fire.”

• The Boulder Reporting Lab, a nonprofit newsroom, also reported on the attack. The story says it was updated today, but there is no time stamp on it. Notable:

Henry Bonn-Elchoness, 18, was inside Into the Wind, a toy store at 14th and Pearl, when the attack occurred.

“We walked by the crime scene right when it happened,” he said. “We saw smoke…. I didn’t see any fire, but I know that there was fire. They were clearing out people really fast and no one knew what happened for a while.”

He and his friends left and returned about 30 minutes later.

“We saw three older women being put in ambulances,” Bonn-Elchoness said. “It looked pretty bad. They were all awake and coherent, but it seemed worrisome. It was very scary. It was a shock.”

• The Colorado Sun, a large statewide nonprofit based in Denver, posted an updated story today at 6:47 a.m. local time. Notable:

Aaron Brooks, a Jewish Boulder resident, arrived at the Run for their Lives demonstration late Sunday — just moments after the attack. He found a grisly scene.

“I saw smoke on the ground. I saw blood on the ground. I saw smoke coming from a person — literally a human being burning,” he said.

• Colorado Public Radio, a network of stations that reaches about 80% of the state, posted the most recent version of its coverage at 11:06 p.m. Notable:

Boulder City Councilwoman Tara Winer has participated in past Run For Their Lives events and said several of the victims were friends of hers.

“The Boulder Jewish community is close,” she said Sunday. “We’re not monolithic, but we support each other and we’re close.”

Winer said she’s been cursed at and called a ‘Jewish supremacist’ during city council public comment sessions and that the level of vitriol has increased over the past six months.

On Sunday she planned to go ahead with a preplanned event that night marking the Jewish holiday of Shavuot, on the topic of “How our lives have changed since Oct. 7.”

• Axios started a Boulder newsletter late last year, and its story has a good roundup of what people are saying on social media — including a claim by President Trump’s deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, that Soliman had “illegally overstayed” a tourist visa.

We are in the midst of a frightening outburst of high-profile terrorist attacks in the U.S. As The New York Times notes, the Colorado incident follows arson on the residence of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and the murder of two Israeli embassy aides in Washington.

Regardless of your position on the war between Israel and Hamas, it is textbook antisemitism to use it as a pretext to assault people who are Jewish. We will see whether FBI Director Kash Patel has any intention of fighting this wave effectively — or if he is content to preen about it on social media.

More: This post has been updated to add Axios Boulder.

Feds indict alleged ringleader in NHPR harassment case; plus, public media lawsuits, and trouble for Musk

Photo from the Middlesex County district attorney’s office via NHPR

It’s been a major loose end in a frightening story about harassment and threats directed at journalists.

Four men have been sentenced to federal prison for carrying out a campaign of terror against New Hampshire Public Radio journalist Lauren Chooljian, her parents and her editor, Dan Barrick. All four appeared to be motivated by Chooljian’s reporting on Eric Spofford, the founder of several addiction treatment centers, who, according to Chooljian’s reporting, had engaged in sexual abuse and harassment.

Become a supporter of Media Nation for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive commentary, a roundup of the week’s posts, photography and a song of the week.

Yet Spofford denied any involvment and was not charged. He even turned around and sued Chooljian and NHPR for libel, a suit that was dismissed by a New Hampshire state judge.

Now, according to a story by WBUR and posted at NHPR, federal authorities are charging Spofford with orchestrating a conspiracy to vandalize the homes of Chooljian, her parents and Barrick — vandalism that included threatening and offensive graffiti. The story says in part:

Prosecutors say Spofford paid his close friend, Eric Labarge, $20,000 in two installments to vandalize the homes in 2022. Spofford allegedly provided the addresses and specific instructions on what to do. Labarge then found three others to carry out the attacks.

Spofford reportedly lives in Salem, New Hampshire, and in Miami. He was arrested Friday and will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in Boston on Monday. According to a press release from the U.S. attorney’s office, Spofford, 40, was indicted by a grand jury on four counts of conspiracy and stalking. If he’s found guilty, he could face a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to $250,000 on each of the four counts.

Continue reading “Feds indict alleged ringleader in NHPR harassment case; plus, public media lawsuits, and trouble for Musk”

Trump’s cuts force the elimination of Mass. library access to academic databases and The Boston Globe

Photo via PickPik

The Trump administration’s war on access to knowledge will result in the end of public library access in Massachusetts to a number of academic databases and The Boston Globe. The cuts take effect on July 1.

The dispiriting news is reported in a memo issued May 20 by the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners that is weirdly titled “MBLC Maintains some Databases, Support for eBooks, and ComCat.” I don’t mean to be critical of the commissioners, since Trump’s perversity is not their fault. But the news here is what’s being cut, not what’s being saved.

The cuts are the result of an executive order issued by Trump on March 14 titled “Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy.” The order eliminates a number of agencies and programs, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services, which in the current fiscal year provided $3.6 million for library services in Massachusetts as well as grants to local libraries. The MBLC spent about $2.2 million of its federal allocation on access to various online databases. MBLC director Maureen Amyot said in a statement:

The federal impact cannot be overstated. In Massachusetts, over 1,600 school, public, academic and special libraries from across the state benefit from federal IMLS funding. Millions of people rely on federally funded library services. Developing a plan for services in an environment of almost daily federal change has been challenging, but our goal has remained constant: to maintain services that are integral to the functioning of our system and heavily relied on by the people of the Commonwealth.

The MBLC was able to preserve access to some databases. The decisions about what to cut and what to keep were based on usage, according to the MBLC. In addition, the statewide program that funds access to e-books and audiobooks will continue, as well the Commonwealth Catalog, or ComCat, which provides access to items that a local library may not have.

Needless to say, there is no reason for any of this. Trump inherited a strong economy that continues to perform reasonably well despite his efforts to take a wrecking ball to it. These cuts call to mind his infamous outburst in 2016: “I love the poorly educated.” It appears that he wants to keep them that way.

What’s being cut

  • Boston Globe Article Archive
  • Britannica Moderna
  • Gale Academic OneFile Select
  • Gale General OneFile
  • Gale Health and Wellness
  • Gale in Context: Biography
  • Gale in Context: Elementary
  • Gale in Context:Environmental Studies
  • Gale in Context: Global Issues
  • Gale in Context: Middle School
  • Gale in Context: Science
  • Gale in Context: US History
  • Gale in Context: World History
  • Gale Interactive: Science
  • GaleLegalForms
  • HeritageQuest Online
  • Peterson’s Career Prep
  • Peterson’s Test Prep
  • Science Database (ProQuest)
  • Transparency Language Online

What’s being saved

  • Britannica Escholar
  • Britannica Library
  • Britannica School
  • Gale Academic OneFile + OneFile Collections
  • Gale in Context: Opposing Viewpoints
  • PebbleGo

What’s the Colorado angle in the NPR lawsuit?; plus, a Muzzle for Quincy’s mayor, and an AI LOL

Kevin Dale, executive editor of Colorado Public Radio. Photo (cc) 2021 by Dan Kennedy.

I haven’t seen any explanation for why three public radio outlets in Colorado joined NPR in suing the Trump administration over its threat to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. I’m glad they did, but it seems to me that all 246 member stations ought to sign on, including GBH and WBUR in Boston.

The Colorado entities, according to Ben Markus of Colorado Public Radio, are CPR (which reaches 80% of the state through a network of transmitters and translators), Aspen Public Radio and KSUT Public Radio of Ignacio, a Native American station that serves the Southern Ute Tribe.

Support this free source of news and commentary for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a weekly newsletter with all sorts of exclusive goodies.

When I was in Colorado several years ago to interview people for the book that Ellen Clegg and I wrote, “What Works in Community News,” CPR was perhaps the largest news organization in the state, with a staff of 65 journalists. (I say “perhaps” because executive editor Kevin Dale thought one or two television stations might be bigger.) Some cuts were made last year as business challenges hit a number of public broadcasting outlets as well as NPR itself.

The basis of the lawsuit, writes NPR media reporter David Folkenflik, is that CPB is an independent, private nonprofit that is funded by Congress. The suit claims that the president has no right to rescind any money through an executive order; only Congress can do that. Moreover, the suit contends that this is pure viewpoint discrimination, as demonstrated by Trump’s own words — that NPR and PBS, which also relies on CPB funding, present “biased and partisan news coverage.”

Continue reading “What’s the Colorado angle in the NPR lawsuit?; plus, a Muzzle for Quincy’s mayor, and an AI LOL”

Northeastern’s Rahul Bhargava talks about his innovative approach to making sense of data

Professor Rahul Bhargava’s approach to data storytelling includes forks and Brazilian drumming.

It’s an all-Northeastern podcast this week as Ellen Clegg and I talk with Rahul Bhargava, a colleague at Northeastern University. Rahul is a professor who crosses boundaries: the boundaries of storytelling and data, the boundaries of deep dives into collaborative research and interactive museum exhibits and plays.

He holds a master’s degree in media arts and science from MIT and a bachelor’s degree in electrical and computer engineering from Carnegie Mellon University. But he also minored in multimedia production. He brings the power of big data research to the masses, through newsroom workshops, interactive museum exhibits and more.

Bhargava has collaborated with groups in Brazil, in Minnesota and at the World Food Program. He helps local communities use data to understand their world, and as a tool for change. There’s more to data than just bar charts. Sometimes it involves forks! His recently published book, “Community Data: Creative Approaches to Empowering People with Information,” unlocks all sorts of secrets.

Keeping with our all-Huskies theme, Ellen and I also talk with Lisa Thalhamer, a longtime TV journalist who is now a graduate student at Northeastern. Lisa realized that like many fields, journalism suffers from a gap between academic research and its implementation in workplaces. She is finding ways to bridge that gap, and urges an Avenger’s-style team to lift up the work of a free press.

Ellen has a Quick Take on a recent visit to Santa Barbara, California, and the efforts to revive a legacy paper, the Santa Barbara News-Press.

My Quick Take is about the latest developments from the National Trust for Local News. It involves a chain of weekly papers in Colorado — their very first acquisition dating back to 2021. And it’s not good news at all for the journalists who work at those papers and the communities they serve.

You can listen to our conversation here, or you can subscribe through your favorite podcast app.

SCOTUS won’t consider a teen’s failed attempts to wear an anti-transgender T-shirt to school

Liam Morrison wearing the second of his banned T-shirts in the spring of 2023. Handout photo via Nemasket Week.

Last October, I wrote that I would be surprised if the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a middle school student’s appeal of a ruling that local officials had a right to ban him from wearing an anti-transgender T-shirt. But the way this court is heading, I have to say that maybe I am a little surprised.

The court declined to hear the case, reports Lawrence Hurley for NBC News. That should be the end of the line for Liam Morrison, who in the spring of 2023 — when he was a seventh-grader — was sent home from school by authorities in Middleborough, Massachusetts, for wearing a T-shirt that said “There Are Only Two Genders” and then again for wearing a shirt that said “There Are Only (Censored) Genders.”

Here is the post I wrote last October, when he and his high-profile supporters appealed to the court. It’s got all the background that you need. Meanwhile, let me explain how close a call this is.

About a month ago, the court ruled against an online Catholic school in Missouri that sought to become the country’s first religious charter school — that is, a public school. As Amy Howe reported for SCOTUSblog, the vote was 4-4, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett recusing herself. If Barrett had taken part and voted with the majority, the Catholic school would have won.

Likewise, Morrison’s case has been cloaked in the garb of religious freedom, and he was being represented by a Christian-right law firm. It only takes four justices to agree to hear a case, a process known as granting a writ of certiorari, or “granting cert.”

Thus all it would have taken to get Morrison’s case before the court was the support of the same four justices who ruled in favor of the Catholic school in the Missouri case. As for whether Morrison could have won, Barrett herself has some pretty strong ties to the religious right, though she’s also emerged as something of an independent thinker.

What that suggests is that Morrison’s case was exceptionally weak, and the Supreme Court has no interest in overturning precedents leaving disciplinary decisions in the hands of public school authorities.

More: I initially failed to note that Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said they would have heard the case. Because of course they would.

Public broadcasting giant WNET doesn’t want you to see this Art Spiegelman cartoon

WNET, the New York public broadcasting giant, doesn’t want you to see this cartoon — at least not on public television.

The New York Times reports (gift link) that 90 seconds have been butchered out of a documentary about the artist Art Spiegelman that is scheduled to be shown as part of the “American Masters” series on PBS. It is, as you can see, wildly unflattering to President Trump, and it comes at a moment when Trump is trying to eliminate all funding for public media.

WNET vice president Stephen Segaller told Times reporter Marc Tracy that the 9-year-old drawing of Trump, with feces and flies on his head and a swastika superimposed over the image, was a “breach of protocol,” adding, “I don’t think we’d have made a different decision if it had been a year earlier.” Yeah, probably not. Last year at this time, Trump was leading President Joe Biden in the polls, so the incentive not to antagonize him was just as strong then as it is now.

Spiegelman was quoted as saying, “It’s tragic and appalling that PBS and WNET are willing to become collaborators with the sinister forces trying to muzzle free speech.”

But at least you can see Spiegelman’s cartoon in the Times. And here.