La Trobe Vice Chancellor invokes Bondi killings to defend festival censorship

Vice Rector La Trobe University He used the murder of 15 Jews at Bondi to publicly absolve himself of any wrongdoing related to the attempted censorship of writers who would speak at the session. Bendigo Writers Festival I returned in August.

In an article published online by Australian On Saturday, December 20, Theo Farrell He wrote that he challenged ‘Ensuring that public discourse does not drift into hate speech…’ has been brought into sharp focus’ When is La Trobe? ‘Developed a code of conduct for university-hosted sessions’.

Claiming that La Trobe has ‘He expressed his regret’ Regarding how the festival was destroyed, Farrell later talked about what happened at Bondi. 14 December:

But what is even more troubling, especially in light of Sunday’s attack, is that the fundamental imperative to avoid anti-Semitic and Islamophobic rhetoric has triggered such opposition in the first place.

…reveals a wider failure to recognize the high risk of hate speech and the real harm it does to communities already facing intimidation and violence.

According to Farrell, his actions in August showed leadership, and now it seems he is right as he is Vice-Chancellor. ‘to draw[ing] Hard lines against hate.

Unfortunately, the history of what actually happened in the run-up to the Bendigo Writers Festival does not support the narrative told by Theo Farrell in his opinion piece.

Following receipt of an insulting letter to a festival guest Randa Abdülfettah from a group called 5A – Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism – Farrell issued an order to remove the Abdel Fattah session from the university-sponsored part of the program.

I am trying to manage the university’s demands targeting co-curator Professor Abdel Fattah Clare Wright and Bendigo Council proposed a code of conduct for all speakers similar to those used at some festivals. Such rules spell out the responsibilities of management and speakers to protect the laws against libel and the rights of everyone involved.

This was rejected by La Trobe; instead, a Code of Conduct was designed in collaboration with Bendigo and sent to La Trobe session participants without Professor Wright’s input. It included a sentence demanding speakers meet the University’s definition of antisemitism (here ‘Using the word ‘Zionist’ instead of Jew does not eliminate the possibility that the expression is anti-Semitic.’).

Fifty writers, including Abdel Fattah and Wright, withdrew, most the day before the Festival opened. The University claimed that the code of conduct request was not a response to the 5A letter criticizing Abdel Fattah’s inclusion in the Festival programme, but rather, as stated in the Festival media: ‘A useful reference point to guide expectations for respectful discussion, especially when exploring difficult, distressing and traumatic world events, past and present.’.

Farrell’s December 20 opinion piece doubled down on his refusal to acknowledge how and why the Code was created.

The disastrously late intervention in the Bendigo Writers Festival program was a bold choice, according to the Vice-Chancellor:

‘We are setting the parameters that will allow an important and legitimate debate to proceed with the necessary safeguards.’

Despite multiple requests from ABC Central Victoria, this is the first time Farrell has spoken publicly about his university’s role in damaging the reputation of the Bendigo Writers Festival.

In Farrell’s words, an academic in such a prestigious and responsible position would find it appropriate to do this after the Jewish people were killed by terrorists. ‘disturbing’.

If Farrell really thinks this situation is, in his words, disturbing ‘basic need’ It was the avoidance of racist hate speech that provoked opposition from writers who saw the Code of Conduct as an imposition of demands for censorship of criticism of Israel, an opposition he did not understand.

It is wrong to suggest that those who react do not support laws and rules banning hate speech. It is appalling then to justify this mistake by retrospectively claiming that this was done to draw a line against the terrorist attack in Bondi.