DONATE

Speech

Blog

“And the Oscar for politicizing everything goes to…”

/

Staying out of politics used to be good business in Hollywood. Now it can get you canceled. It was a stunning headline: “Director Ignites Backlash with Non-Political Post” How could a non-political post be a source of controversy? Damien Leone, director of the slasher-film Terrifier franchise, found out earlier this month when he responded to some of his cast’s politically-charged X posts. After explaining that he was “all for freedom of speech and expression,” Leone asserted that “Terrifier is NOT in any way shape or form a political franchise. I did not get into filmmaking to become a politician or promote any political agendas or ideologies, especially through a killer clown movie. “If this doesn’t sit well with any fans or cast/crew members that is your right and I respect it,” he concluded. And yet fans retaliated, with some on X saying they “do not feel comfortable supporting the series anymore” and that making a neutral statement was in “bad form.” One elaborated that it was “insanely disappointing to see a certain horror director dismiss the impact of the political climate on horror and act like horror and politics aren’t related at all. That is an extremely shallow view on the genre.” For years, the Left has been quick to condemn celebrities, athletes, and public figures who express conservative viewpoints. Now, it seems even staying out of it won’t keep you safe anymore. Chris Pratt, too, received backlash from his op-ed in the Sunday Paper titled “Win or Lose, My Hope Is We Show Up for Each Other.” Written in the stretch just before the 2024 election, Pratt reminded readers that “we are fellow countrymen,” and that “starts with remembering no matter who wins or loses, there are still going to be people who need help in this country.” Who could be opposed to that? Unfortunately, a lot of people. A wave of social media hate ensued. One commenter berated: “Coward…if you’re gonna tell us to take a stand on our own political beliefs but you don’t do the same but want us to take your ‘stupid political advice’ — shut up and sit down.” Other celebrities who have chosen to remain neutral have received similar criticism — even those with a history of supporting left-wing causes. Chappell Roan, a self-described member of the LGBT community and an open supporter of the Hamas regime in Gaza, received intense backlash when she stated in an interview: “I have so many issues with our government in every way…There are so many things that I would want to change. So I don’t feel pressured to endorse someone. There’s problems on both sides.” Negative reaction was swift, with one fan commenting, “How are you queer, an ardent defender of the drag community and somehow a ‘both sides are bad’ person,” while another snapped, “White girl unaffected syndrome at play…she’s just not been paying attention.” Today, it seems only full-fledged, vocal support of the Left is safe from censure. Taylor Swift, for instance, announced in September 2024 that she was voting for Kamala Harris “because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them” and received vast praise from the Left for toeing the line. Megan Thee Stallion, too, was applauded for her performance at a Kamala Harris rally, where she encouraged America to elect its “first black female president” while twerking for a braying crowd. The Left’s message is clear: choose a side — or we’ll choose one for you. The question is: will Americans push back, or will they allow this cultural policing to continue unchecked? Because in today’s climate, even saying nothing might just get you canceled.

Past Campaigns

Thank UMich for Standing Up for Free Speech

/

When pro-Hamas activists at the University of Michigan tried to silence Israeli Doctor Nadav Davidovitch’s lecture, Dr. Belinda Needham, the school’s Chair of the Department of Epidemiology, refused to cave to the pressure. In the name of “health equity and justice,” students demanded Davidovitch be disinvited, saying his appearance would be tantamount to an endorsement of “deliberate genocidal actions.” Instead of giving in to the cancel-culture mob, Needham upheld the principles of free speech and academic freedom by ensuring the event went on as planned. At a time when viewpoint diversity is increasingly under attack at colleges and universities, it is crucial to recognize those who are willing to stand firm. When you sign the petition at right, NTC will add your name to a letter telling Dr. Belinda Needham “THANK YOU for staying true to the stated values of the University of Michigan and supporting freedom of speech!” The letter demanding Davidovitch’s lecture be canceled received more than 220 signatures — let’s dwarf that number with hundreds more names of Americans from coast-to-coast who stand in support of free speech and against cancel culture! [Photo credit: Mike Morland, University of Michigan, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons]

Blog

Black Santa: Diverse or Divisive?

/

Does DEI’s reach extend all the way to the North Pole? Can — or should — Santa Claus be black? What about his wife? Earlier this month, UK retail and health company Boots caused a stir with an advertisement depicting Mrs. Claus as African American. It’s not the first time Kris Kringle and his missus have been portrayed as black, but nonetheless is a departure from the white mythological figure from Norway upon which traditional depictions are based. The concept of “Black Santa” isn’t new — the character has long been seen in books, on television, and at greeting stands in shopping malls. But does the motif conjure more diversity or division? Christmas, and the Holiday Season writ large, is not a racial nor political occasion. In fact, it’s one of the few glimpses into what a unified American public looks like. A Gallup survey conducted in 2019 found 93% of the American population — across all genders, races, and incomes — celebrate Christmas. Whether gathering at the town square for Christmas tree lightings, exchanging gifts in celebration of the holiday, or attending church services in religious observance, the fact that this time of year is about joy and appreciating the irreplaceable things in life seems an understood and unwritten truth. Santa himself stands as a symbol of unity for Christmas time. A 2011 study in the Journal of Cognition and Development indicated that 83% of children believe in Santa Claus. Being on your best behavior to avoid ending up on Santa’s “Naughty List,” writing a “wish list” of toys and hopes to Old Saint Nick and setting out milk and cookies for the jolly man on Christmas Eve have been a shared experience for millions of American children for more than a century. Politics and race do not even play a factor. And it’s not all tidings of comfort and joy where Black Santa is concerned, either. Black Santa originated as an image used in minstrel shows to mock African Americans during the Jim Crow era in the United States. Why elevate a symbol born of such nastiness? According to a YouGov survey, the overwhelming majority of Americans (79%) prefer the traditional depiction of Santa as white — but 67% of those same respondents were also okay with depictions of Santa as black. When it comes to race debates over depictions of Father Christmas, there isn’t much of an appetite for Santa Claus culture wars. It seems most Americans agree: there are better things to worry about at this time of year. Santa Claus: the great unifier.

Blog

Star Power in Politics: Hot or Not?

/

When celebrities weigh in on elections, do they win hearts or lose fans? Pharrell Williams said he “doesn’t really do politics.” The famed musician made the statement during an interview when asked if he would be supporting any candidates in the 2024 election. Williams is fast becoming an outlier among his peers. In recent days, Vice President Kamala Harris hosted events featuring Beyoncé, Bruce Springsteen, Usher, and Lizzo. Pop stars Katy Perry, Jessica Alba, and Taylor Swift have also lent their support. Musician Kid Rock has made no secret of his support for President Trump, even performing a raucous concert at the 2024 Republican National Convention (RNC). Who’s in the right? Does public support of candidates help or hurt a celebrity’s brand? For Swift, the move seems to have been a net-positive: in the time since publicly endorsing Harris on September 10, the pop singer gained 1.85 million followers on the Spotify music streaming service, 260,000 Instagram followers, and 3.9 million new YouTube subscribers. Fans who disagreed with the endorsement didn’t abandon the songstress, preferring instead to keep dissent within the fanbase: “Swifties for Trump” emerged soon after Swift took a side. Not all celebrities have fared as well. Katy Perry’s most recent album tanked following her Harris endorsement. Jessica Alba faced similar backlash: a YouTube short Alba filmed with Harris shows VP Harris stating Latina small businesses are the fastest growing in the country, to which Alba replies with snapping fingers, “Yes they are! Yes they are!” Fans called the move “super creepy.” Others expressed their disappointment, saying they would unfollow her and stop buying her products because of the endorsement of the Harris/Walz ticket. On the other side of the aisle, stars staking out a spot in the GOP nominee’s corner include Azealia Banks, Hulk Hogan, and Russell Brand. Banks (who was outspoken in her support for Trump in 2016) attended a Trump rally in Florida in July. Hogan made headlines as a speaker at the 2024 Republican National Convention when he ripped his shirt in two to reveal a Trump-Vance tee underneath. “The Hulkster” told Fox News that he’d seen an “outpouring of support” for the move as he traveled the country in the weeks following. Brand also attended the RNC — and, despite blowback, he’s sticking with his horse in the race. Celebrities bring headlines to campaigns, but do they bring votes? Vote.gov traffic surged after Swift announced her endorsement of Harris on Instagram. Megan Thee Stallion sang and twerked on stage at a Kamala rally in Atlanta urging the estimated 10,000 people in attendance vote to “make history with the first black female president.” Kid Rock was the headlining act at a Log Cabin Republicans “GOP Unity” event on September 29 and hosted a MAGA-centric music festival in August. Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker announced his endorsement of Trump at a get-out-the-vote rally in Missouri. And former NASCAR driver Danica Patrick was a featured speaker at a Trump campaign event in September. A Harvard study published in August 2024 found that famous endorsers can have a substantial effect on promoting participation in elections, particularly in efforts encouraging voter turnout. “Celebrities have a unique ability to connect with younger generations in ways that mainstream media and other get-out-the-vote efforts may not be able to,” the analysis states. One thing is clear: whenever a celebrity wades into the world of campaigns, they’re putting their brand at risk. It’s why Dolly Parton has steered clear of politics for the entirety of her decades-long career. “I’ve got as many Republican fans as Democrats,” Parton said in a 2017 interview. “And I don’t want to make any of them mad at me, so I don’t play politics.” Advice for celebrities pursuing career longevity: Don’t quit your day job.   [Photo credits: Kid Rock: Rich Girard, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons (cropped, flipped horizontal). Taylor Swift: Cosmopolitan UK, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons (cropped)]

Past Campaigns

Stand Up for Religious Freedom & NFL Star Harrison Butker

/

NFL star Harrison Butker is in hot water — all because he delivered a commencement speech to a Catholic school in line with Catholic teachings. On May 11, the Kansas City Chiefs kicker addressed the graduating class at Benedictine College. His remarks criticized pro-abortion activists, called out what he felt was the shallow theology of some in Church leadership, and ribbed LGBTQ activists who celebrate the “deadly sin sort of Pride that has an entire month dedicated to it.” In other words, he underscored his commitment to Catholic doctrine and encouraged the religious school’s graduates to do the same. Now, the Super Bowl champion is being pilloried from all sides. The NFL was quick to distance itself from his words. Nonprofit organization Faith in America racked up over 10,000 signatures on a petition demanding he apologize. And more than 200,000 people added their names to a Change.org petition demanding Butker lose his job. Harrison Butker had every right to express his religious convictions in his private capacity to an audience in agreement with his values. The NFL cannot bend to pressure from activists to boot him from the league. Add your name to our petition: Tell the NFL and Kansas City Chiefs not to cave to the cancel-culture mob — Harrison Butker has nothing to apologize for!

Blog

The School for Scandal

/

When educators are ignorant of history, history is in danger of being rewritten.  Earlier this month, the Gadsen flag — a symbol that represents rebellion against tyranny — was ironically at the center of controversy. Jaiden Rodrigez, a 12-year-old student attending the Vanguard School in Colorado Springs, was kicked out of his seventh-grade classroom by administrators for wearing a Gadsden flag patch on his book bag. A surreptitiously recorded video released by Connor Boyack shows Jaiden and his mother having a discussion with the school’s vice principal, who declares that the reason the flag cannot be displayed is “due to its origins of slavery and the slave trade.” This is, of course, entirely false — and a gross rewriting of the Gadsden flag’s history. The iconic yellow flag, depicting a rattlesnake with the phrase “Don’t Tread On Me” below it, was designed by South Carolina soldier and delegate Christopher Gadsden in 1775 during the Revolutionary War. Soon after its creation, the first United States’ Naval commander-in-chief, Commodore Esek Hopkins, hoisted the flag from his ship, the USS Alfred. In February 1776, the flag was submitted to the Provincial Congress of South Carolina by delegate Gadsden as a pro-freedom symbol and a warning to the British not to violate the liberties of Americans. Being ignorant of the Gadsden flag’s origins is one thing, but for an educator to assert an entirely rewritten its history while simultaneously attempting to erase its display is unacceptable. The video of the exchange, filmed by Jaiden’s mother, quickly went viral, amassing eight million views in one hour and racking up tens of millions of views across all social media platforms. Online outrage soon exploded — and it was channeled into action. People across the country sent messages to Vanguard School administrators lambasting their poor decision and lack of historical knowledge. It worked. Within hours, the Vanguard School board of directors called an emergency meeting and issued a statement siding with Jaiden asserting the institution’s stated values. “From Vanguard’s founding we have proudly supported our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the ordered liberty that all Americans have enjoyed for almost 250 years. The Vanguard School recognizes the historical significance of the Gadsden flag and its place in history. This incident is an occasion for us to reaffirm our deep commitment to a classical education in support of these American principles. At this time, the Vanguard School Board and the District have informed the student’s family that he may attend school with the Gadsden flag patch visible on his backpack.” The next day, Jaiden posted a video on social media sharing that kids were “hyped up” by the attention he gained for standing his ground. Some even put Gadsden flag stickers on their lockers as a new trend. Jaiden’s story is doubly instructive: it illustrates the courage required to combat virtue-signaling bullies with a superiority complex — even under threat of getting canceled, losing a job or friends, or getting kicked out of school. This incident also showed the power that grassroots action has to hold institutions accountable. It wasn’t just Vanguard School students and parents pushing back; it was the people, and the people got results. If Jaiden and his mother hadn’t taken a stand, the Gadsden flag would have been another piece of culture surrendered to the revisionists. Instead, their resolve provided a valuable lesson: When faced with woke bullies, don’t let them tread on you. [Photo credit: Connor Boyack / @cboyack (screenshot of video on X)]

Blog

NTC Fast-Tracks Action by Oversight Board Following Facebook Suspension

/

Last month, NTC supporter Ryan M. had his Facebook account suspended. His crime? A post recommending action against the infamous Chinese spy balloon surveilling the United States from January 28 to February 4 — specifically, a call for the U.S. military to “shoot it down.” Facebook responded by suspending Ryan’s account for going “against community standards on coordinating harm and promoting crime.” After bringing the situation to the attention of NTC, President Gregory T. Angelo contacted the Facebook Oversight Board directly to demand answers. “Ryan wasn’t advocating harm to any living thing; he simply advocated for a course of action that was regularly discussed on the news, by elected officials, etc. — and that was ultimately taken by the U.S. military,” Angelo wrote. “When I didn’t know where else to turn, the New Tolerance Campaign had my back — and they get results.” —Ryan M. A representative from the Facebook Oversight Board responded with word that Ryan’s case was fast-tracked: “I will alert our shortlisting team,” the Oversight Board rep stated. Soon after, Ryan’s account was reinstated. “When I didn’t know where else to turn, the New Tolerance Campaign had my back — and they get results,” Ryan said.

Blog

Speech Police Partner with Puffin Books to Censor Classic Children’s Stories

/

On February 18, Puffin Books announced it would be revising and issuing new versions of classic children’s stories by Roald Dahl such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Matilda, and James and the Giant Peach. Dahl has been dead since 1990. The decision was the result of a partnership between the Roald Dahl Story Company (which controls the rights to Dahl’s books) and an organization called “Inclusive Minds,” a company that pairs so-called “Inclusion Ambassadors” with authors to “help identify language and portrayals that could be inauthentic or problematic.” Inclusive Minds claims not to “edit or rewrite texts,” but their actions say otherwise. The changes to the books include modifying the description of Augustus Gloop, the gluttonous child in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, from “enormously fat” to “enormous”; the famed Oompa Loompas are now gender-neutral “small people” instead of “small men”; the tractors described in The Fabulous Mr. Fox are no longer “black, murderous, brutal-looking monsters” but now “murderous brutal-looking monsters.” In the novel Witches, a woman masquerading as a “cashier in a supermarket or typing letters for a businessman” is now a “top scientist or running a business.” In James and the Giant Peach, Aunt Sponge, who was once “terrifyingly fat / And tremendously flabby at that” is now merely “a nasty old brute.” Public outcry in response to the news was loud and swift, from everyday American to British royalty. Queen Consort Camilla Parker Bowles said, “Please remain true to your calling, unimpeded by those who may wish to curb the freedom of your expression or impose limits on your imagination.” Comedian Ricky Gervais pondered “whether they’ll change any of the words I’ve used in my work after I’m dead, to spare those who are fragile and easily offended.” Salman Rushdie, an author who was stabbed at an August 2022 book event, said of the censorship, “Roald Dahl was a bigot and he never supported me, but really?” On February 24, Puffin Books backtracked, announcing they would print two versions of Dahl’s books: new, revised, and censored versions and unchanged “classic” editions. …unless you have the e-book versions of the Dahl tomes. On March 14, news broke that Puffin Books would be forcing e-book readers to accept and download the updated editions altered by their “inclusive” sensitivity editors. The Foundation for Individual Rights (FIRE), which has collaborated with the New Tolerance Campaign in the past, rightly stated: “Let’s leave Dahl’s words the way he intended them to be read. Let the work speak for itself, so we can all speak freely about the work.” We agree.

Blog

New Tolerance Campaign Announces 2022 “Worst of the Woke” Awards

/

WORST OF THE WOKE 2022 “The Great Unwokening” The Top 10 most hypocritical institutions of the year — and one “Champion of Tolerance”  In the past year, there was no shortage of institutions pushing phony tolerance under the banners of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and “environmental, social, and governance” initiatives. But 2022 was also notable for the American public pushing back on institutions and their double-standards. Here are the 10 worst offenders: Award Winner: Disney* Reason: In 2022, now-ousted CEO Bob Chapek gave a master class on how not to respond to woke demands. Following the passage of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill (erroneously yet ubiquitously branded by the media as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill), Chapek demurred when Disney employees demanded the company condemn the legislation, rightly asserting that “corporate statements do very little to change outcomes or minds.” Weeks later, Disney did an about-face, declaring the company would support organizations seeking to “replace” the law or have it “struck down in the courts.” Florida legislators and Governor Ron DeSantis responded by stripping Disney of special taxation and self-governance perks it’s enjoyed for decades. The public wasn’t buying Disney’s activism either — quite literally. Following a string of box office bombs, in November Disney abruptly announced Chapek would be stepping down as CEO, making way for his predecessor Bob Iger to return. Iger stepped back into the role of chief executive committing to “quiet” the obsession with cultural issues at the entertainment powerhouse and “respect” consumers of their content. Award Winner: BlackRock* Reason: When you follow the ESG money trail, almost all roads lead to BlackRock. The financial behemoth manages $10 trillion dollars, and has been prioritizing investments in “socially conscious” companies and those dedicated to “environmental sustainability” — except in China, a nation notorious for its rampant industrial pollution and human rights abuses. When called out on the hypocrisy, CEO Larry Fink doubled down. The result: treasurers in West Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Missouri, Florida, Arkansas, Utah, and Arizona pulled state investments from BlackRock totaling $4.28 billion. Award Winner: Twitter* Reason: After years of subjective censorship, account suspensions, and partisan activism, Twitter was at a breaking point by October of this year when Elon Musk stepped in and took over the tech giant, ushering in a new era of free speech and open debate. He also pulled back the curtain on Twitter’s previous policy revealing the platform’s critics’ worst fears: Twitter’s staff censored accounts at the bidding of political elites. Award Winner: Apple Reason: Apple touts a commitment to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” in the United States, while contracting with suppliers in China using forced labor that has propelled the company to record profits. In 2022, Apple took the hypocrisy to a dangerous new level: blocking iPhone communication features in China at the behest of the Chinese Communist Party to help crush domestic protests. Award Winner: American Express Reason: At American Express, prejudice and hypocrisy are everywhere you want to be. In 2022, journalist Christopher Rufo exposed AmEx rules that incentivized hiring and promotion based on race and sex. Not only are such policies illegal and in violation of the company’s fiduciary duties — they’re also un-American. In 2022, NTC unveiled the “UnAmerican Express” campaign in partnership with Color Us United and Consumers’ Research, rallying grassroots action that to date has generated more than 46,000 messages to state pension trustees alerting them to the concerning personnel standards at AmEx. Award Winner: Georgetown University Reason: The woke mob roared into action in January following a tweet by constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro declaring SCOTUS nominees should be selected based on accomplishment rather than race. Georgetown Law responded by suspending Shapiro as the school’s Executive Director. The university exerted no such discipline in 2018 when Professor Christine Fair wished “miserable deaths” on supporters of Justice Kavanaugh. During a months-long Georgetown “investigation” into Shapiro’s tweet, students demanded that Georgetown use the moment to develop a “reparations” package that included free food and a designated place on campus for students to cry. The fiasco prompted Shapiro to walk away from Georgetown — and its cancel-culture mob — entirely. Award Winner: ACLU* Reason: The Amber Heard-Johnny Depp defamation trial made news for weeks. At the heart of the case: the ACLU and a 2018 op-ed bylined by Heard that implied abuse at Depp’s hands. Courtroom testimony from ACLU Chief Operating Officer Terrence Dougherty revealed the organization was “involved in conceiving, drafting and placing” the piece. By the time all was said and done, Heard was found guilty of defaming Depp, the #MeToo movement was effectively dead, and, in the words of Richard Klein, the once-respected ACLU had become little more than “a disgraced group of attorneys.” Award Winner: The Olympics Reason: The International Olympic Committee bent over backwards to accommodate China’s authoritarian government during the Winter Olympics in Beijing: gaslighting about the wellbeing of tennis star Peng Shuai and refusing to condemn CCP human rights abuses (in direct contravention of the Olympic Charter and Code of Ethics). Fox News host Laura Ingraham stepped up and rallied concerned Americans to tell NBC #NotOneMinute of their time would be spent watching Olympics television coverage. With Ingraham’s amplification, NTC supporters sent more than 26,000 messages to NBC executives. The United States staged a diplomatic boycott of the Games, and ratings reached record lows for NBC. Award Winner: School Boards Reason: “Nonpartisan” school boards pushing far-left agendas got a wake-up call this year, as parents asserted their right to know what their children are being taught in the classroom. In-home instruction via Zoom during the COVID pandemic alerted parents to the radical gender ideology and critical race theory being taught in grade schools. This year, alarm turned into action as grassroots campaigns driven by concerned parents replaced school board members pushing cultural agendas. Award Winner: The NBA Reason: The world of pro sports continued its wokeward drift in 2022, but none more so than the National Basketball Association (NBA). This year, for the first time in its history,

Past Campaigns

Emerson College Must Appoint a President Who Supports ‘Diverse Ideas’ and ‘Free Expression’

/

University presidents wield substantial power to promote — or limit — free expression on American college campuses. The future president of Emerson College in Boston, MA, is no exception: Whoever assumes this role will inherit the challenge of protecting student free speech on a campus with an unfortunate track record of limiting it. Over the past year and a half, Emerson has been embroiled in substantial controversy for suppressing student expression. Despite receiving multiple letters from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) listing concerns about its actions, Emerson has doubled and tripled down on campus censorship. Emerson’s own Community Standards affirm that “[a]s an institution dedicated to Communication and the Arts, the First Amendment of the US Constitution is of high importance.” The college’s actions over the past 18 months, however, call that commitment into question, even earning Emerson a place on FIRE’s 2022 list of the “10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech.” Now, as Emerson searches for a new university president, its Presidential Search Prospectus describes “[a]ppreciation for diverse ideas and the free expression of them” as a “non-negotiable value” underpinning the college’s search. To ensure that Emerson holds fast to this commitment, the New Tolerance Campaign is partnering with FIRE to empower students, alumni, and concerned citizens to voice their support for a pro-free speech president at Emerson. Tell Emerson’s Presidential Search Committee to fulfill its duty and appoint a president who supports free expression! UPDATE (01/12/23): Emerson College announced the appointment of Dr. Jay M. Bernhardt as the school’s next president. Our allies at FIRE are vetting Dr. Bernhardt for his record on support for different views and free speech on campus. Check back for updates!

Scroll to Top