Skip to main content

Forwarding facebook posts: Cultures of mistrust



Professor Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt is a Professor of postcolonial literature and theory, feminist theory and creative writing at Linfield College. Reshmi is a vocal critic of the cultures of Whiteness in academia and the ways in which the norms of civility held up by Whiteness erase possibilities of articulation from the gendered, raced, classed margins.

I came to know Reshmi and learn about her work when my mentor and cousin Professor Shampa Biswas, the Paul Garrett Professor of Politics at Whitman College and a scholar of postcolonial nuclear politics introduced us to each other because of our mutual interests in critically interrogating civility norms. Reshmi was editing a collection on academics being targeted with the civility regime and I contributed a chapter to her collection on the weaponization of the incivility trope to maintain raced colonial hegemony.

Reshmi has been a vocal presence in academe in theorizing the academe, interrogating the habits of the university that are steeped in Whiteness. Because of her vocal criticism of Whiteness, she has been systematically targeted by the regimes of White privilege at Linfield and outside.

As she experienced her struggles at Linfield and fought back, Professor Dutt-Ballerstadt accounted the repressive strategies deployed by the University on Facebook. What follows is a chilling account of how a facebook snitch forwarded her Facebook posts to the University administrators.

I have myself been targeted with this behavior and so have many other faculty.

Reshmi's letter to the faculty assembly at Linfield brings to the fore how the culture of facebook snitches is toxic to the very idea of the University.

"So here is the email that I wrote to our faculty assembly today. Many of my colleagues are quite disgusted as they should be that this has happened.

Dear Colleagues,

I am writing this email to you not as a member of the Faculty Executive Council or the chair of the Arts and the Humanities division, but as a fellow faculty member. I was informed yesterday by my attorney that someone took a screen shot of one of my Facebook postings (where I was critical of our administration) and forwarded it to our administration. I have also been informed that our college administration is not pleased about my said posting. I have informed our college President about my concerns and he has directed me to follow procedure if legal or ethical standard has been breached. I find these round about manner of addressing issues not productive. If anybody, administration should know who took a screen shot of my FB posting and turned it to them.

Irrespective of whether administration is pleased or not, I find such veiled threats disturbing during a time when many of us have a variety of opinions and perceptions about our administration -- both within our college and at a national level (positive, negative, critical, neutral) based on our various affiliations. Such veiled threats (that my postings are setting a wrong tone with administration) are a form of tone policing, silencing and censorship of what we can or cannot say on our own personal social media platforms like the Facebook. Such messages are particularly damaging to the rights of our more vulnerable and untenured faculty, underrepresented faculty, women and other faculty that are not afraid to speak up on their own social media platforms.

Whether administration is pleased or not about what we say on our own Facebook pages is beside the point. I am concerned that my social media account, and perhaps other accounts of our colleagues are being monitored by "friends" lurking on our pages and then reporting them to our administration. It is undisputable that this is what happened in my case. I have now heard from staff that have left Linfield that their Facebook accounts were being monitored too. Disappointing to say the least. While I am less interested in knowing who has the time or energy to monitor my social media account, or those of others (who are more vocal faculty members) I do find such acts to be "hostile" -- serving as a veiled threat to silence me and others who are critical of our administration. Such acts of reporting to our administration our activities on Facebook can and does have a chilling effect on both free speech, our faculty right to be critical of our administration, and extramural speech for faculty.

Our faculty use their personal Facebook page or other social media platforms for a variety of reasons -- social, personal or political. Also, many faculty colleagues comment on each other's posts. I do not believe we owe any explanation to our administration, or a justification for what we post on our personal FB page, nor should we tolerate methods of surveillance via screen shots to be taken and then these screenshots funneled to administration. If such acts are being carried out by administrators themselves, then this is even more concerning.

Finally, I believe strongly that it is NOT in our best interest to have our social media accounts be monitored for the reasons stated above. Furthermore, given that our institution faces a dire financial crisis, administrative time and resources ought to be spent in our enrollment and recruitment efforts and not monitoring faculty Facebook pages.

In the meantime, it may be useful for faculty who are not familiar to familiarize themselves with AAUP policies on extramural speech. I am enclosing a few articles that may be worth reading, if you are inclined. The one attached is an FAQ for "Faculty in the Wake of the 2016 Election."

Here is another one on civility:
https://www.aaup.org/issues/civility

This article is particularly on "Social Media Harassment Targets Academics of Color" from Diverse Issues in Higher Education.
https://diverseeducation.com/article/100806/

Here is a blog post that talks more specifically about Facebook screen shots and captures:
https://culture-centered.blogspot.com/…/strategies-of-autho…

I suggest that our Dean of Faculty, create an archive where more of these articles about social media and faculty rights and protections can be archived and faculty have access to it.
  
Thank you for your time. I have nothing more to say beyond being deeply disappointed.

Best,

 Reshmi"

Popular posts from this blog

The whiteness of binaries that erase the Global South: On Communicative Inversions and the invitation to Vijay Prashad in Aotearoa

When I learned through my activist networks that the public intellectual Vijay Prashad was coming to Aotearoa, I was filled with joy. In my early years in the U.S., when learning the basics of the struggle against the fascist forces of Hindutva, I came in conversation with Vijay's work. Two of his critical interventions, the book, The Karma of Brown Folk , and the journal article " The protean forms of Yankee Hindutva " co-authored with Biju Matthew and published in Ethnic and Racial Studies shaped my early activism. These pieces of work are core readings in understanding the workings of Hindutva fascism and how it mobilizes cultural tropes to serve fascist agendas. Much later, I felt overjoyed learning about his West Bengal roots and his actual commitment to the politics of the Left, reflected in the organising of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), a political register that shaped much of my earliest lessons around Global South resistance, collectivization, and orga...

Libertarianism, the Free Speech Union, and the Life of Disinformation

The rise of the far-right globally is intertwined with the globally networked power of libertarian think tanks, funded at the base by the global extractive industries . In this blog post, through an analysis of the disinformation-based campaign I have personally experienced since October 2023 mobilised by the communicative ecosystem of the Free Speech Union (FSU), I will attend to the lifecycle of disinformation in libertarian networks, arguing that the disinformation ecosystem is invested in upholding both white supremacy and extractive capital. The FSU’s investment in disinformation I argue that the FSU is invested in producing and circulating disinformation. In response to my analysis of the hypocrisy of the Free Speech Union (FSU) that positions itself as a champion of free speech in Aotearoa while one of its co-founders, council members and spokespersons David Cumin (who is also one of the key actors representing Israel Institute of New Zealand) actively targets the freedom of a...

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute ...