Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Full Version: Did Chicago-area libraries give in to 'heckler's veto'? (controversial film showing)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Parody Alcove: The film Israelism seems to be centered around two American Jews who learn more about the decades-long tensions. Consequently converting their views to pro-Palestinian, or least becoming more critical of the Israeli narrative and its propaganda. (I.e., any degree of anti-Zionism can tumble into the "new antisemitism context these days.) 

Many might find it surprising that Chicago libraries would introduce an obstacle for a documentary that was praised by the Woke Left. But costs for security would have cut into the pocketbook of the library system. Thus, the fees that were tacked on, which ultimately got the event cancelled. Even crusader establishments must be financially conscious and responsible, if their institutions are to survive.

And obviously there seems to be a part of the Jewish community in the area that may still be lagging in whatever enlightenment the film highlights. In contrast to the ideologically rehabilitated Jews featured in said movie, and those who organized the attempted showing. The Chicago Jewish Alliance contends that it was not the source of concern with regard to public safety -- that such was prompted by the disruptive habits of anti-Israeli groups. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Did Chicago-area libraries give in to 'heckler's veto'?
https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2024/1...klers-veto

EXCERPT: Earlier this month, the ACLU of Illinois sent letters to the boards of Northbrook and Highland Park public libraries...

[...] “In short, due to the angry reaction to the film’s ideas, the library imposed a fee that ultimately prevented the film from being shown,” wrote Rebecca Glenberg, chief litigation counsel for the First Amendment at the ACLU of Illinois. “The library’s handling of the controversy encourages members of the public who are unhappy about a group’s use of a library to shut down the event by creating a sufficient hue and cry.”

Now the libraries say they will evaluate their room rental policies after a canceled screening of a documentary on Israel earlier this year in Northbrook led to outcry from First Amendment advocates.

[...] The letters were in response to a planned September screening of the documentary “Israelism” at the Northbrook Public Library, which opponents have called antisemitic.

The event was organized by groups including Jewish Voice for Peace and the Chicagoland Jewish Labor Bund. Organizers canceled the event when the library requested $3,000 in security and insurance fees up front after staff received scores of emails and calls demanding the event be canceled.

The library has said it supports everyone’s constitutional rights [...] Northbrook police were unable to provide security for the event and had recommended a security firm instead, library officials said.

[...] The opposition to the “Israelism” screening was organized by the Chicago Jewish Alliance.

The documentary “explores how Jewish attitudes towards Israel are changing dramatically, with massive consequences for the region and for Judaism itself,” according to its website. It won several awards at film festivals last year, but sparked renewed controversy in the wake of the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks.

When the screening was initially announced, the Chicago Jewish Alliance asked its followers on social media to “email Northbrook library and let them know this shouldn’t be happening in our own backyard.”

The Chicago Jewish Alliance decided to show up to the event at Northbrook Public Library and participate in the Q&A to provide a different viewpoint, said Josh Weiner, member of the group.

“We simply wanted to attend to provide viewpoint diversity on the film in order to facilitate a free and full conversation about the topic. The security requirements are not really because of us, but it’s precisely because anti-Israel groups have a history of disrupting free speech when certain ideas are introduced that conflict with their narrative,” he said.... (MORE - missing details)