Lisel Petis’ Post

Workplace harassment in the legal profession is a reality. I have experienced it too in the past, as have so many others I know. The power balances and importance of reputation in our profession mean that it often goes on with impunity, especially if the harassor is a boss or a law firm partner who can impact your career. There’s no point in us talking performatively about mental health in the profession without owning up to, and fixing, this.

Trudeau was lying when he said C-63 was “very, very specifically focused on correcting kids.” The purview of the Online Harms Act extends far beyond speech, reimagining society as a mandated social engineering project, creating transformational new procedures that would: enlist Canada’s citizens in an ambitious social monitoring system, with rewards of up to $20,000 for anonymous “informants” of hateful behavior, with the guilty paying penalties up to $50,000, creating a self-funded national spying system; introduce extraordinary criminal penalties, including life in prison not just for existing crimes like “advocating genocide,” but for any “offence motivated by hatred,” in theory any non-criminal offense, as tiny as littering, committed with hateful intent; punish Minority Report pre-crime, where if an informant convinces a judge you “ ” a hate offense, you can be jailed up to a year, put under house arrest, have firearms seized, or be forced into drug/alcohol testing, all for things you haven’t done; penalize past statements. The law gets around prohibitions against “retroactive” punishment by calling the offense “continuous communication” of hate, i.e. the crime is your failure to take down bad speech; force corporate Internet platforms to remove “harmful content” virtually on demand (within 24 hours in some cases), the hammer being fines of “up to 6% of… gross global revenue.” Things you’re saying, things you’ve already said, things an administrative judge thinks you might say, all barred, with neighbors deputized as enforcers? Good times. Leave it to Trudeau, a frequent trailblazer in new forms of illiberalism in the digital age, to come up with this quantum leap downward on the rights front. C-63 is a Frankenstein’s Monster combining the worst censorship ideas already deployed by supposed ally government-in-laws like Europe’s Digital Services Act, Australia’s updated Australian Communications and Media Authority Act (ACMA), and Scotland’s Hate Crime and Public Order Act, which saw 7,152 complaints in its first week when the law took effect last month.

Criminal justice, education and climate change – these are the topics our next class of O’Brien Fellows will be tackling. Read more on our next class.

Four reporters from Mississippi Today and The New York Times — finalists for the 2024 Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting — share how they investigated extreme abuses of power at Mississippi sheriff’s offices. They also offers tips for other journalists: #GoldsmithPrize #InvestigativeJournalism #JournalismAwards #JournalismTips

This is a fantastic proactive step to encourage inclusive reporting on issues facing system-impacted individuals. Language matters, especially as LLMs are being trained on public sources to inform a population increasingly using generative AI to synthesize information and educate themselves on new topics. If those systems are reproducing the same harmful language that’s been used in the past, it will impede our progress towards a more inclusive future. This is a moment for all of us to reflect on how we talk about system-impacted people and how we can each lower the barrier that prevents them from achieving their dreams.

Arguably the most affected, gushing, kid-trying-out-for-high-school-drama selfie, worst state of the union rebuttal in US history. Saturday Night Live's opening skit should simply be a replay of this godawful rebuttal. Is this woman really a member of Congress? Did American voters really pick her to represent them in Washington? Show the video to your kids--it proves ANYBODY can serve in Congress! And for all I coach as professional speakers: use the video of this rebuttal to learn how NOT to speak in public. Hoping this speaker gets speech coaching--and counseling--ASAP. https://lnkd.in/eFsGcSUj

AP just absolutely changed the game for crime reporting in America.. Sensational reporting leads to fear leads to bad, reactive policy. AP is raising the bar. The 57th edition of the AP Stylebook just announced that it will include guidance on criminal justice and public safety issues for the first time. This addition is a significant step forward, signaling to the media that crime and justice reporting must evolve to better serve communities. By focusing on solutions rather than just sensationalism, and by rethinking language and sourcing that lead to stigma, we can build a new foundation for community engagement on issues of crime and justice. A huge shoutout to our partners at Poynter and The Marshall Project for guidance on this and of course, to the Associated Press for once again leading the way. https://loom.ly/ba38acA

Inclusion Resources Groups (IRGs) connect team members by bringing them together with shared(and different) experiences and perspectives. However, it's crucial that leadership takes on the responsibility to create, maintain, and expand these spaces to ensure inclusivity for all. This means actively fostering an environment where every voice is heard and valued, promoting diverse representation, and continuously working to bridge gaps between groups. By doing so, we can build a stronger, more cohesive workplaces where everyone is empowered and included.

https://lnkd.in/g6UVfN4K It is time for us to unite and reclaim our Constitutional duty of self-governance. Learn how Article V gives We the People the power: https://bit.ly/COSOregon

We are so excited to see that the 57th edition of the AP Style Guide will contain guidance of criminal justice and public safety issues for the first time! This is a powerful signal to the media community that crime/justice reporting need to evolve to better serve communities, focus on solutions vs. just sensationalism, and rethink language and sourcing that lead to stigma and — not indirectly — bad reactive policy. Thank you to our partners Poynter Institute and The Marshall Project for advising this new chapter, and to the AP for once again leading the way. https://loom.ly/RrNt9mg