Teaching on Keren Wang

"What Is AI?" Part 1: A Survey of Imaginaries, Mythologies, and Rhetorical Structures of Thinking Machines

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 14:18:43 +0000

*Online lesson module and WIP chapter draft.

When our own era proclaims artificial intelligence (AI) as the centerpiece of contemporary technological fetishism, it often points to its sweeping impact on medicine, autonomous mobility, creative production, and the evolving rituals of law and civic life. Yet even amid these transformations, we should resist the impulse to treat AI as a clean break with the past, for the imaginaries that animate it are far older than the machines themselves.¹

Long before the first integrated circuit pulsed with electricity, societies from the past contemplated thinking machines in forms that now read like allegories of our contemporary anxieties.

Free Speech and Communication Rights

Mon, 03 Nov 2025 04:41:42 +0000

Online lesson module - A practical walk through First Amendment foundations, controversial but protected expressions, categories of unprotected speech, and contemporary questions of platform power, VPNs, and the Tor network. This lesson follows our in‑class slide deck and uses the same conceptual scaffolding for continuity.

1) Free Expression: Constitutional and Global Frames

The framers of the US Constitution felt a strong need to safeguard the freedom of speech and the press (as well as religion and the right to assemble).

The First Amendment of the Constitution articulates a bright‑line commitment: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” [1]

Interpretive anchor: Political and religious speech receive the highest protection under the US constitutional framework. Restrictions must satisfy content‑neutral “time, place, and manner” standards and leave open alternative channels of communication. [2]

The term “press” in the First Amendment is NOT meant to be narrowly understood as newspapers or printed matter. The Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) has consistency interpreted the "press" as an umbrella encompassing any medium used to disseminate information and opinions to the public. The "press" includes, but not limited to: print publications, broadcast media, digital platforms, blogs, podcasts, streaming contents, social media, and software source codes. [3]

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 19

Everyone has the right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. This is the global lingua franca of communication rights.[4]

While the U.S. Constitution enshrines free expression through the First Amendment, its spirit resonates in international human rights law. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) extends the same principle beyond national boundaries, affirming that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” [5]

In this sense, the American jurisprudence on press freedom contributes to a broader global discourse on communication rights—the notion that access to information and the ability to share ideas are not privileges granted by the state, but intrinsic conditions of human dignity and democratic participation. [6]

2) Free Expression in American History

The First Amendment’s promise of free expression has never fully insulated the United States from attempts to silence dissenting voices or control the press. A vivid early example came in 1798, when the Federalist-controlled Congress enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts, a series of laws designed to suppress opposition during a time of political and international tension. The Sedition Act, in particular, made it a crime to “write, publish, or print any false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the president, Congress, or the federal government.[7]

In practice, these laws targeted journalists, editors, and immigrant supporters of the Democratic-Republican Party, whose criticism of Federalist policies was reframed as a threat to national security. The Acts proved deeply unpopular, provoking a national backlash over what many viewed as an assault on constitutional liberties. When the Federalists were voted out of power in 1800, the new administration swiftly allowed the legislation to expire, marking an early and decisive reaffirmation that political dissent and criticism of public officials lie at the core of the American free speech tradition. [8]

2.1 Prior Restraint and its Discontents

Prior restraint refers to government actions that prevent speech or publication before it occurs, typically through injunctions, licensing, or other forms of preemptive censorship. Prior restraint has deep roots in English common law, where monarchs required the press to obtain royal licenses, in effect silencing political or religious dissent. [9]

The struggle over prior restraint became especially visible in twentieth-century American jurisprudence, as courts were forced to define the limits of government control over publication. In 1931, the Supreme Court’s decision in Near v. Minnesota marked the first major ruling to strike down a state’s attempt to suppress a newspaper before distribution. The case arose when Minnesota officials tried to shut down The Saturday Press for accusing local politicians of corruption. The Court ruled that such pre-publication censorship violated the First Amendment, establishing that punishment for libel or incitement must come after publication through due process, not before. [10]

A declassified Central Intelligence Agency map from November 1950 depicting dissident activity in Indochina, later published by The New York Times as part of the Pentagon Papers series. Source: Central Intelligence Agency, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dissident_Activities_in_Indochina.svg>

Four decades later, in 1971, New York Times Co. v. United States—the “Pentagon Papers” case—reaffirmed that even claims of national security rarely justify silencing the press in advance. The Nixon administration’s effort to block the Times and Washington Post from publishing leaked documents on the Vietnam War was rejected, with Justice Black famously writing that “the press was to serve the governed, not the governors.” [11]

The issue of prior restraint resurfaced in 1979 with United States v. The Progressive, when the Department of Energy (DOE) sought to prevent The Progressive magazine from publishing an article titled “The H-Bomb Secret: How We Got It, Why We’re Telling It.” Written by freelance journalist Howard Morland, the piece compiled publicly available scientific information to explain the general principles of hydrogen bomb design.

The US government argued that even though the H-bomb data was unclassified, the article could help hostile nations develop nuclear weapons and therefore threatened US national security. A federal judge initially granted an injunction, marking one of the rare instances in U.S. history where prior restraint was temporarily upheld. However, the case was dropped before reaching the Supreme Court after similar information appeared in other publications, rendering the injunction moot. [12]

3) One Man’s Vulgarity is Another’s Lyric

The First Amendment protects not only agreeable or accurate speech but also expression that is false, unsettling, or offensive, so long as it does not cross into one of the legally defined unprotected categories.

For instance, most false statements (or the “right to lie”) are protected as long as they do not amount to defamation, perjury, or professional malpractice. The Supreme Court made this point explicit in United States v. Alvarez (2012), when it struck down the Stolen Valor Act, which had criminalized falsely claiming military honors. The Court reasoned that the government cannot impose blanket bans on lies without threatening the broader freedom to engage in activities intrinsic to public discourse and self-expression. [13]

Cover of the November 1979 issue of The Progressive, displaying a simplified diagram of the Teller–Ulam hydrogen bomb design— an issue the U.S. Department of Energy sought to censor on national security grounds.
Source: By The Progressive magazine, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20156806

Another recurring controversy involves the publication of classified or sensitive government information by journalists or private citizens. In most circumstances, the First Amendment prohibits the government from punishing the press for publishing lawfully obtained materials, even if those materials expose state secrets or political wrongdoing.

The Pentagon Papers case (1971) and the United States v. Progressive “H-bomb” case (1979) we’ve discussed earlier reaffirmed this principle, holding that the risk of embarrassment or diplomatic tension generally does not outweigh the public’s right to know.

Finally, unpopular or offensive expressions, for the most part, remains constitutionally protected unless it directly incites violence or falls within another unprotected category such as fighting words (more on this later). This includes speech that most find morally objectionable or politically extreme. The protection of offensive speech ensures that public authorities cannot easily redefine the boundaries of "acceptable opinion." As Justice Harlan observed in Cohen v. California (1971), when a man wore a jacket emblazoned with “F*** the Draft” in a courthouse:

“One man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.” [14]

4) Unprotected Speech

While the First Amendment offers broad protection for expression, it is not absolute. Over time, the US Supreme Court has defined a narrow set of unprotected categories of speech—forms of expression that are considered so harmful, fraudulent, or devoid of public value that they do not merit constitutional protection. Each category has been shaped by specific historical cases, reflecting the tension between liberty and harm prevention in a democratic society.

4.1 Defamation (libel & slander)

Defamation refers to false statements of fact that unjustly harm another person’s reputation. For speech to qualify as defamation, it must meet ALL four criteria: it must be:

(1) Untrue - verified to be factually false or misleading.

(2) Public - cannot be an one-on-one private conversation, must be at minimum communicated to a third party individual.

(3). Actual Malice - made with reckless disregard for truth AND the intent to cause harm.

(4)Actual Injury - must result in verifiable monetary or reputational damages [15]

The Onion. “IRS Allows Taxpayers to Deposit Payments Directly into Elon Musk’s Bank Account.” The Onion, June 6, 2025. https://www.theonion.com/irs-allows-taxpayers-to-deposit-payments-directly-into-elon-musks-bank-account

Although The Onion’s June 6, 2025 article, “IRS Allows Taxpayers To Deposit Payments Directly Into Elon Musk’s Bank Account,” makes numerous false claims about the U.S. government and Elon Musk, it is a work of satire and does not meet the legal criteria for defamation. Satirical and parodic works like The Onion’s are protected precisely because they cannot reasonably be understood as stating actual facts. The publication made clear signals to its readers that the piece is humorous commentary on systemic wealth inequality, not actual news report. [16]

1. Untrue: The claim is factually false.
2. Communicated to at least one third party: It was shared to a large online audience.
3. Actual malice: The celebrity chef acted with reckless disregard for the truth by publishing without verification.
4. Actual injury: The restaurant suffered measurable financial and reputational harm.

4.2 Fighting Words (rarely applicable today)

The category of fighting words refers to a very narrow class of speech acts so personally abusive and confrontational that they are likely to provoke an immediate violent response from the person addressed. The doctrine was first articulated in the controversial case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942). Since then, courts have dramatically narrowed the fighting words doctrine, and it is almost never applied today—surviving more as a historical artifact. [17]

To qualify as fighting words, speech must satisfy ALL of the following elements:

(1) Personally Abusive — must be directed at a specific individual in a way that is extremely insulting or demeaning;

(2) Face-to-Face — must occur in a close, personal encounter where physical confrontation between involved parties is possible;

(3) Incite Immediate Physical Violence — the speech must be so severe where an reasonable be provoked into immediate physical retaliation (not merely offend, disturb, or anger).

(4) Lack of Broader Value — must exist purely as a personal insult and cannot be reasonably interpreted as having serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (“SLAPS” value)

Once again, fighting words are an exceedingly narrow exception to free expression, representing the constitutional system’s effort to balance the right to speak with the need to prevent immediate, face-to-face violence. Because these conditions are so strict, very few cases meet all four elements—even when the speech in question is highly offensive or hateful.

4.3 Obscenity (Miller's test)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Miller v. California(1973) established the three-part test for determining obscenity. [18]

A work is considered obscene only if it satisfies ALL of the following elements (also known as the Miller’s test):

(1) Appeals to the Prurient Interest - That “the average person, applying contemporary community standards,” would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to an excessive or unhealthy interest in sexual matters. [19]

(2) Patently Offensive - Whether the work depicts or describes patently offensive "'hard core' sexual conduct specifically defined by the regulating state law, as written or construed." [20]

(3) No "SLAPS" Value - the work, taken as a whole, does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (“SLAPS” value). [21]

Screenshot of adult video-sharing website Pornhub’s “Notice to User” page, captured on November 1, 2025. The page automatically appears when users attempt to access the site from regions subject to state-level age-verification laws. At the top of the notice, a video message features Dr. Cherie DeVille, an American licensed physician, adult film performer, and free speech advocate. In the clip, Dr. DeVille explains that recently enacted state statutes require age and identity verification before granting access to adult content. Her statement frames the measure as both a legal compliance notice and a policy commentary on the right to free expression in digital environments.

Age Verification Laws and Digital Rights

Under the Miller's test, most mainstream online pornography platforms are not likely to meet the legal definition of obscenity. The Miller framework narrowly defines obscenity as expression that appeals to prurient interests, depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. By contrast, U.S. courts have repeatedly held that consensual adult pornography constitutes protected speech (so long as it does not involve minors or non-consensual acts), as they may reasonably be understood as having some expressive or artistic value. [22]

However, beginning around 2021, a global wave of adult-content removals and site-access restrictions emerged—not through direct governmental censorship, but via indirect enforcement mechanisms.

Rather than invoking obscenity law, public authorities and private intermediaries have increasingly relied on trafficking and age-verification statutes to limit access to online adult material. These include 18 U.S.C. §§ 2257 and 2257A, which mandate age and identity verification for all performers in sexually explicit content, and the FOSTA–SESTA package (2018), which expanded platform liability for facilitating sex trafficking or prostitution. [23]

Under the threat of severe financial and legal penalties, credit card companies and payment processors suspended services to adult-content platforms such as Pornhub until they implemented stricter user identity and age verification systems that satisfied government and corporate compliance standards. This strategy effectively bypasses traditional obscenity law, achieving de facto regulation through economic pressure and private enforcement rather than court rulings.

Many digital rights and free expression advocates have voiced concern that such measures, while intended to prevent exploitation, expand the infrastructure for online censorship and erode user privacy. Mandatory age-verification systems require users to upload sensitive identification documents, increasing the risk of data breaches, identity theft, and potential state surveillance. In this way, the contemporary regulation of adult content reflects a shift from moral censorship under obscenity doctrine to a new regime of bureaucratic and corporate gatekeeping, where privacy and free expression are increasingly contingent on compliance with opaque verification systems. [24]

4.4 Intellectual Property Violations

While the First Amendment protects expression, it does not protect the unauthorized use of another person’s creative work. Copyright infringement is one of the most common forms of restricted speech in the digital age. In fact, the vast majority of online takedown and censorship cases involve intellectual property violations, not hate speech or political dissent.

Under U.S. law, copyright protection extends for the lifetime of the author plus 70 years after their death, a duration considerably longer than in most other countries. Once that period expires, the work enters the public domain, where it may be freely used, adapted, or redistributed.

However, a significant loophole allows corporations to preserve their intellectual monopolies: by continually producing “new” versions or derivative works based on existing characters and franchises. Each new iteration—whether a sequel, prequel, or cinematic remake—resets the clock on copyright protection for that specific creative expression. This system contributes to the recent wave of live-action remakes, reboots, and remasters of older works in film and television. [25]

4.5 Speech Integral to Criminal Conduct

The final major category of unprotected speech encompasses expressions that are themselves integral to criminal activity. Unlike controversial or offensive ideas—which remain protected under the First Amendment—these forms of communication are inseparable from the commission of a crime. The law draws a firm line between speech that expresses an idea and speech that acts as a mechanism of harm.

Examples include fraud and scams, where deceptive speech is used to obtain money or property through misrepresentation; the possession and distribution of child abuse material, which is categorically excluded from protection because it involves the documentation of real criminal abuse; criminal solicitation or conspiracy, in which language functions as the coordination or encouragement of illegal acts; and targeted harassment or threats of specific, imminent harm, where speech directly endangers the safety of an identifiable person.

In the digital age, many of these offenses increasingly manifest as forms of cybercrime—where speech itself becomes both the medium and mechanism of violence. [26]

Screenshot of the splash screen of the payload of the original version of Petya – a family of ransomware that encrypts its victims' hard drive and prevents their PC computers from booting. It subsequently demands that its victims to make a payment in cryptocurrency (typically Bitcoin) in order to regain access to their PCs.

An example illustrating this boundary is the case of Petya, a family of ransomware first identified in 2016. Petya malware encrypts the victim’s hard drive and prevents their computer from booting, displaying a ransom note demanding payment in cryptocurrency (such as Bitcoin) to restore access. [27]

5) Internet Censorship & Communication Rights

As discussed in our previous lesson, the internet remains an enduring paradox: it is both an infrastructure of free expression and a technology of control. On one level, it has democratized access to speech and empowered individuals to publish, organize, and collaborate across geographic and political boundaries. Yet the same architecture that enables open exchange also provides governments and corporations with unparalleled capacities for surveillance, behavioral manipulation, and information restriction. In this way, the internet operates simultaneously as a public sphere and a system of governance—a space where freedom and regulation constantly collide.

Forms of Internet Censorship:

Content Blocking: when Internet Service Providers (ISPs) or regulatory agencies restrict access to certain websites, social media platforms, or news outlets—often justified in the name of national security or “public morality.” [28]

Surveillance & Data Harvesting: allow both states and private firms to monitor user activity, constructing detailed behavioral profiles that can be used to shape, predict, remove, or "shadow ban" speech.[29]

Algorithmic Filtering: Platforms algorithmically curate or suppress visibility of particular content, can be driven by the economic logic of engagement or government pressure.[30]

Legal/Administrative Pressure: Arrests, fines, or online takedown orders targeting journalists, activists, users, ISPs, sites and payment processors.

5.1 Communication Rights

In response to these pressures, scholars and civil society groups have advanced the framework of communication rights, extending the logic of free speech into the digital age. These rights include:

The right to information - freedom to seek, receive, and impart information through any media (UN Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 19). The right to equitable digital access - free from discriminatory throttling or commercial gatekeeping.

Freedom from surveillance - protection from arbitrary surveillance and content restriction.

Data privacy - protection of personal data from being collected and used without user’s authorization.

Together, these principles reflect the spirit of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), which recognizes that the ability to communicate “through any media and regardless of frontiers” is essential to both human dignity and democratic governance.

The persistent balancing problem for communication rights lies in reconciling legitimate security concerns with the preservation of user rights protections. Measures enacted under the guise of protecting citizens (e.g. to combat terrorism, misinformation, or cybercrime) can easily evolve into permanent instruments of control. Once extraordinary powers are normalized, they seldom retreat. Thus, maintaining an open and pluralistic internet requires institutional transparency, public oversight, and digital literacy to ensure that digital protections do not quietly become digital censorship. [32]

5.1 VPNs: Benefits and Constraints

A Virtual Private Network (VPN) is a tool that encrypts a user’s internet traffic and routes it through a remote server, effectively masking the user’s IP address and geographic location. In doing so, VPNs provide a degree of privacy and autonomy in digital communication, which can be vital for journalists, activists, or citizens in countries with heavy online surveillance.

From a free speech perspective, VPNs extend the practical reach of expression by allowing individuals to bypass censorship, access restricted information, and protect their anonymity while engaging in political or social discourse. However, while VPNs are often marketed as instruments of digital freedom, they also introduce new ethical, legal, and trust-based dilemmas.

Why users adopt VPNs

Mask IP location to reduce tracking and profiling by advertisers, governments, or hostile actors.

Limit ISP and search engine data collection, preventing providers from logging browsing histories.

Bypass censorship and geo-restricted content, such as blocked news sites or streaming services.

Mitigate dynamic pricing based on a user’s location, device, or browsing history.

Secure, nonprofit options

Most commercial VPNs operate under opaque ownership structures, and many “free” VPNs monetize user data through surveillance advertising or analytics resale. By contrast, a small number of nonprofit projects are designed explicitly to serve privacy and anti-censorship goals:

- - Riseup VPN — One of the few legitimate free and open VPN services, supported entirely by charitable donations from privacy and anti-censorship advocates. https://riseup.net/en/vpn
  - ProtonVPN — Founded by scientists at CERN and initially financed through a community crowdfunding campaign; now operated by the Swiss-based nonprofit Proton Foundation. https://github.com/ProtonVPN

Constraints and Ethical Implications

- - A VPN doesn’t make you completely immune to all tracking: Websites can still identify users via cookies, browser fingerprinting, or account logins.
  - A VPN hides user data from the ISP, but the VPN provider can see user traffic.
  - Cybercriminals, (e.g., ransomware authors) also use VPNs to conceal their identities
  - In some countries (e.g., Belarus, Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, PRC, Russia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, UAE), using a VPN is restricted or banned.

5.2 The Tor Network and the “Dark Web”

Tor Browser is available in two versions for Android—standard and alpha. Non-technical users are advised to install the standard release, which is more stable and less prone to errors. The official Tor Browser for Android can be safely downloaded from the Google Play Store, F-Droid, or the Tor Project’s official website; obtaining it from any other source poses significant security risks.
Source: Tor Project. Mobile Tor Manual. Last modified 2024. https://iacobus.pages.torproject.net/manual/ca/mobile-tor/

Whereas a VPN relies on a single provider to encrypt and reroute traffic, Tor (also known as the Onion Router) -- an open source, open access project -- distributes this process across a decentralized network of volunteer-run servers, or “relays.”

As data travels through multiple nodes, each layer of encryption is peeled away like an onion, ensuring that no single relay knows both who the user is and what content they are accessing.

This structure minimizes centralized control and makes it exceptionally difficult for surveillance systems to trace communication back to its origin. [33]

Tor serves as both a technical safeguard for privacy and a philosophical statement about informational freedom. For users in heavily censored environments, Tor can mean the difference between silence and participation.

Yet Tor’s very strength—its multilayered anonymity—also fuels public suspicion. The same system that protects dissidents and reporters can be used by criminals to conduct illicit trade, distribute malware, or traffic in stolen data.

Advantages of using Tor

Circumvent Censorship: Enables users in restrictive regimes to access blocked sites and communication tools.

Protect Privacy: conceals both user identity & browsing activity from ISPs, governments, and advertisers.

Digital Democracy: Tor Project is open-source and community-run. Journalists, activists, and whistleblowers use it to safely share information without fear of retaliation.

Constraints & Ethical Concerns

Tor can be slow due to multiple encryption layers and limited volunteer bandwidth.

While Tor safeguards legitimate users, it is also exploited for cybercrimes such as illegal marketplaces

Just like the VPNs, access to Tor is also heavily restricted in many countries.

References

Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. The scope of tolerance: Studies on the costs of free expression and freedom of the press. Routledge, 2005.
Brownstein, Alan E. "Harmonizing the Heavenly and Earthly Spheres: The Fragmentation and Synthesis of Religion, Equality, and Speech in the Constitution." Ohio St. LJ 51 (1990): 89.
Balkin, Jack M. "Digital speech and democratic culture: A theory of freedom of expression for the information society." In Law and Society approaches to cyberspace, pp. 325-382. Routledge, 2017.
United Nations. General Assembly. Universal declaration of human rights. Vol. 3381. Department of State, United States of America, 1949.
McLeod, Sharynne. "Communication rights: Fundamental human rights for all." International journal of speech-language pathology 20, no. 1 (2018): 3-11.
Mallén, Ignacio Bel. "Freedom as the Essential Basis for Communication Rights." The Handbook of Communication Rights, Law, and Ethics: Seeking Universality, Equality, Freedom and Dignity (2021): 7-19.
Bradburn, Douglas. "A clamor in the public mind: Opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts." The William and Mary Quarterly 65, no. 3 (2008): 565-600.
Levy, Leonard W. "Liberty and the First Amendment: 1790-1800." The American Historical Review 68, no. 1 (1962): 22-37.
Jeffries Jr, John Calvin. "Rethinking Prior Restraint." Yale LJ 92 (1982): 409.
Meyerson, Michael I. "Rewriting Near v. Minnesota: Creating a Complete Definition of Prior Restraint." Mercer L. Rev. 52 (2000): 1087.
Godofsky, Stanley, and Howard M. Rogatnick. "Prior Restraints: The Pentagon Papers Case Revisited." Cumb. L. Rev. 18 (1987): 527.
Dumain, Ian M. "No secret, no defense: United States v. progressive." Cardozo L. Rev. 26 (2004): 1323.
Lieffring, Staci. "First Amendment and the right to lie: Regulating knowingly false campaign speech after United States v. Alvarez." Minn. L. Rev. 97 (2012): 1047.
Farber, Daniel A. "Civilizing public discourse: An essay on Professor Bickel, Justice Harlan, and the enduring significance of Cohen v. California." Duke LJ (1980): 283.
Dienes, C. Thomas, and Lee Levine. "Implied Libel, Defamatory Meaning, and State of Mind: The Promise of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan." Iowa L. Rev. 78 (1992): 237.
This protection was firmly established in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988), where the Supreme Court held that even offensive parodies of public figures are constitutionally protected so long as they cannot reasonably be interpreted as factual claims.
Wright, R. George. "Fighting Words Today." Pepp. L. Rev. 49 (2022): 805.
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 15 (1973).
Ibid., at 27.
Ibid., at 15, 23.
Karniel, Yuval, and Haim Wismonsky. "Pornography, Community and the Internet-Freedom of Speech and Obscenity on the Internet." Rutgers Computer & Tech. LJ 30 (2004): 105.
Marsden, Christine. "Age-verification laws in the era of digital privacy." Nat'l Sec. LJ 10 (2023): 210.
Murray, Alana, Huma Chhipa, and Johnathan Yerby. "Cyber risk, privacy, and the legal complexities of age verification for adult content platforms." Issues in Information Systems 26, no. 4 (2025): 332-347.
Bowrey, Kathy, and Michael Handler, eds. Law and Creativity in the Age of the Entertainment Franchise. No. 27. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Holt, Thomas, and Adam Bossler. Cybercrime in progress: Theory and prevention of technology-enabled offenses. Routledge, 2015.
Fayi, Sharifah Yaqoub A. "What Petya/NotPetya ransomware is and what its remidiations are." In Information technology-new generations: 15th international conference on information technology, pp. 93-100. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018.
Ververis, Vasilis, Sophia Marguel, and Benjamin Fabian. "Cross‐Country comparison of Internet censorship: A literature review." Policy & Internet 12, no. 4 (2020): 450-473.
Wang, Keren. "Legal and Ritological Dynamics of Personalized “Pillars of Shame” in Chinese Social Credit System Construction." China review 24, no. 3 (2024): 179-206. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48788933
Cobbe, Jennifer. "Algorithmic censorship by social platforms: Power and resistance." Philosophy & Technology 34, no. 4 (2021): 739-766.
McLeod, Sharynne. "Communication rights: Fundamental human rights for all." International journal of speech-language pathology 20, no. 1 (2018): 3-11.
Bennett, W. Lance, and Barbara Pfetsch. "Rethinking political communication in a time of disrupted public spheres." Journal of communication 68, no. 2 (2018): 243-253.
AlSabah, Mashael, and Ian Goldberg. "Performance and security improvements for tor: A survey." ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 49, no. 2 (2016): 1-36.

Fake News: Concepts, Rhetorical Disruptions, and Policy Implications

Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:26:53 +0000

Media, Society, and Culture Lesson Module

Seeing Isn’t Believing

 RepresentUs, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons: A synthetic Kim Jong Un warns Americans—evidence that our eyes/ears are no longer reliable gatekeepers.

This video clip is a "deepfake" of Kim Jong Un created in 2020 by RepresentUs, a non-partisan non-profit organization that produced it to raise public awareness about fake news in the emerging age of generative AI. The footage itself is fully synthetic, yet it’s an amalgamation from genuine video footage and voice samples of the North Korean leader drawn from publicly available news archives. It was intentionally designed to look real enough to unsettle us, but still recognizable as “fake” for educational purposes. Since 2020, of course, deepfake technology has advanced by orders of magnitude, in terms of realism, accessibility, and speed of production.

Public Relations: Industry, Practices, and Democratic Implications

Mon, 20 Oct 2025 16:35:06 +0000

Posted by Keren Wang, FA 2025

1) Public Relations and Propaganda

Let’s start today’s discussion with one of the most famous political ads in American history: Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1964 “Daisy” ad. It’s only about a minute long, but it changed the entire landscape of political persuasion. Go ahead and give it a watch: LBJ campaign’s “Daisy” ad (1964).

The Internet - from "Nuclear Hardened" Networks to Algorithmic Governmentality

Sun, 12 Oct 2025 17:15:36 +0000

References

Beck, Estee. "Who Is Tracking You?: A Rhetorical Framework for Evaluating Surveillance and Privacy Practices." In Cyber Law, Privacy, and Security: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, pp. 121-138. IGI Global, 2019.

Belk, Russell. “Extended self and the digital world.” Current Opinion in Psychology 10 (2016): 50-54.

Chen, Ning, and Yu Chen. “Smart city surveillance at the network edge in the era of iot: opportunities and challenges.” Smart cities: development and governance frameworks (2018): 153-176.

Understanding Advertising through Consumer Psychology and Computational Rhetoric

Mon, 29 Sep 2025 03:44:29 +0000

What Do You See?

Historical "Thickness" of Advertising

Demonstrative and Associative Ads

Advertising & Consumer Psychology

Bandwagon & Anti-Bandwagon Effects

Social Marketing & Exploitation

Computational Rhetoric of Hyper-Personalization

What Do You See?

Let’s begin today’s lesson with a quick glance at these sets of images. What do they remind you of?

Lesson 7: Rhetorical Artifacts

Sun, 14 Sep 2025 21:00:04 +0000

Posted by: Keren Wang

Before you start this lesson, please READ: Berger, Arthur Asa. 2024. Media and Communication Research Methods: An Introduction to Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 3rd ed. Chapter 4, “Rhetorical Analysis.” Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071939017.

1. Overview

What do you think of when you hear the word “artifact”? In rhetorical scholarship, the term “artifact” is not limited to historical objects or museum pieces. Instead, it encompasses various texts, speeches, symbolic objects, and events produced by humans.

In communication research, one key difference between rhetorical and critical methods and other qualitative research methods is that, while qualitative methods such as interviews, observations, and focus group studies revolve around studying human subjects, rhetorical scholars analyze rhetorical artifacts, or “texts” that have already been produced.

Introduction to a Brief History of Media

Mon, 25 Aug 2025 02:34:28 +0000

We begin by asking a deceptively simple question: What is media?

At its core, media is any technology that enables the storage, organization, transmission, and dissemination of information.

When we hear the word today, we tend to think of “mass media” — newspapers, television, the internet — technologies that spread information rapidly across wide distances. Commonly, people imagine the story of media beginning with the invention of the electric telegraph in the early 19th century. But is that really where media begins?

MEDIA & VIOLENCE - A Transnational Perspective

Mon, 14 Apr 2025 18:23:19 +0000

Lesson Module by Keren Wang, updated 4 Nov 2025.

This lesson module examines the contested and ambivalent relationship between media and violence from historical and transnational perspectives.

1. Violence as Ritual & Power: Historical and Global Perspectives

Let's open this session with a reference from Greek mythology: consider the telltale of Prometheus, whose theft of fire from the Olympian gods for humanity’s benefit inadvertently brought both civilization and destruction. Like Prometheus’s fire, the development of media technology simultaneously brings enlightenment and cataclysm.

1.1 Rhetorical Artifacts and Human Sacrifice

The history of the development of writing technology overlaps with the history of war propaganda and human sacrifice.^[1] As early as the Narmer Palette, one of the earliest hieroglyphic artifacts ever found from circa 3200 BCE depicting scenes of conquest and violence:

Similarly, during the height of the Chinese Bronze Age, also known as the Shang dynasty (c. 1250–1046 BC) produced ritual bronze artifacts at monumental proportions -- such as the 833 kg (1,836 lbs) Houmuwu Ding -- one of the heaviest bronze vessel from the ancient world -- and the 13-foot (3.96 m) tall Sanxingdui bronze tree (c. 1200 BC):

Rhetorical Methods - Ideological and Psychoanalytic Criticism

Wed, 02 Apr 2025 12:40:01 +0000

Originally posted by: Keren Wang, Fall 2024

Ideological Criticism - Overview

Ideological criticism is a method of analyzing texts and other rhetorical artifacts to uncover the underlying ideologies that shape and are reflected in them. This type of criticism is often used to explore how media, literature, and other forms of communication reinforce or challenge dominant social, political, and economic power structures.

Evaluating Online Sources

Wed, 26 Mar 2025 20:28:08 +0000

1. OVERVIEW

This lesson will be focusing on understanding and evaluating evidence and information sources, a crucial aspect of constructing persuasive arguments. It explains how evidence interacts with values, and presents general tests for assessing the quality of evidence. We will also be learning how to locate and evaluate various sources of evidence, guiding you on choosing reliable information from books, periodicals, websites, and more. The chapter emphasizes the importance of digital literacy and critical evaluation of different types of sources.

Media Bias Chart published by Ad Fontes Media, 2020. Fact-checking always lags behind the emergence of new biased sources of information.

2. UNDERSTANDING EVIDENCE

Evidence and Values

In public discourse, evidence is invariably filtered through the "terminal screens" of societal norms and cultural values, leading to divergent interpretations even when presented with the same set of facts. Consider, for instance, debates surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) and employment. For techno-optimists, as represented by some Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, rapid technological advancements are seen as essential for societal evolution. They may interpret the emergence of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) labor as an auspice for accelerated economic growth, productivity, and innovation, contending that AI liberates human workers from repetitive labor and allows greater engagement in creative, strategic, or emotionally rewarding tasks. Conversely, many labor advocates and trade unionists may interpret the prospect of an AGI workforce less positively. As critics of unchecked technological disruption, they might perceive this development as a harbinger of livelihood displacement, expressing concerns that automation could trigger widespread unemployment, diminish workers' bargaining power, and deepen existing economic inequalities. Such rhetorical divergence highlights how interpretations of evidence surrounding AI's impact are strategically framed to reinforce broader narratives of either progress or caution.

This example illustrates that the interpretation of evidence is not merely a neutral or objective process but is deeply intertwined with rhetorical constructions that reflect and reinforce specific value systems. Recognizing this interplay is crucial for understanding the dynamics of public debates and the ways in which information is presented and perceived.

Lesson on Data Visualization and its Misuses

Tue, 12 Nov 2024 01:05:28 +0000

Posted by Keren Wang, FA 2024

In this session, we aim to achieve several key learning objectives:

Understand the fundamental principles of framing and visual rhetoric, exploring how they shape the design and interpretation of data visualizations.
Examine the art of designing and manipulating graphic systems of signs that disclose or conceal specific quantitative or qualitative information.
Identify common types of data visualizations, such as bar charts, pie charts, line graphs, and network graphs, along with their appropriate applications.
Recognize the advantages and potential misuses of data visualizations, including manipulative techniques like framing and scaling distortions.
Critically analyze real and hypothetical examples to detect misleading or biased visual representations.
Develop best practices for creating clear, honest, and effective data visualizations, ensuring accuracy and ethical integrity.

Photography and Visual Rhetoric

To truly grasp the fundamental principles and perils of data visualization, we must journey back to the birth of photography and photojournalism. When photography was first employed in news reporting, it carried an inherent demand for credibility. Unlike paintings or sketches, photographs were perceived as unfiltered, unmediated representations of reality. Ironically, as our discussion will reveal, even from its inception, photojournalism was subject to rhetorical manipulation.

Argumentation - Language in Argument

Sun, 27 Oct 2024 21:16:47 +0000

Lesson on Statistical Evidence

Sun, 27 Oct 2024 18:04:48 +0000

Lesson on Statistical Evidence - Survey and Opinion Polling

Sun, 27 Oct 2024 18:01:49 +0000

Argumentation - Digital Literacy in Argumentation

Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:59:23 +0000

Digital Literacy in Argumentation

SCOM 2710 Argumentation Lesson, Posted by Keren Wang, updated 2024

Overview

This week we will be focusing on understanding and evaluating evidence, a crucial aspect of constructing persuasive arguments. It explains how evidence interacts with values, and presents general tests for assessing the quality of evidence. We will also be learning how to locate and evaluate various sources of evidence, guiding you on choosing reliable information from books, periodicals, websites, and more. The chapter emphasizes the importance of digital literacy and critical evaluation of different types of sources.

Media Bias Chart published by Ad Fontes Media, 2020. Fact-checking always lags behind the emergence of new biased sources of information.

Understanding Evidence

Evidence and Values

Evidence is always interpreted through personal and cultural values. Here are some examples of how values shape our interpretation of evidence:

Artificial Intelligence in Employment: Evidence showing that AI can improve productivity and efficiency is interpreted by some as a positive development for economic growth, whereas others see it as a threat to jobs, fearing mass unemployment and widening economic inequality.
Genetic Editing (CRISPR): Evidence about the successful application of CRISPR to edit genes in humans can be seen as a revolutionary medical advancement that will eliminate hereditary diseases, or as a dangerous intervention with unknown ethical and social consequences.
Universal Basic Income (UBI): Evidence from trials of Universal Basic Income might show improvements in mental health and poverty reduction, which is interpreted positively by proponents as proof of the policy’s benefits. However, others might see it as fostering a culture of dependency or as economically unviable, depending on their economic values.
Police Surveillance Technology: Evidence supporting the use of facial recognition and other surveillance technology to improve public safety can be seen as a way to effectively reduce crime. On the other hand, it is interpreted by others as a serious threat to privacy and civil liberties, especially in communities that may be disproportionately targeted.
Vaccination and Public Health: Evidence showing the efficacy of mandatory vaccination for school children may be interpreted as essential for public safety by some individuals, while others may view it as intrusive government overreach or distrust the pharmaceutical industry.

Evidence that suggests a major breakthrough in general artificial intelligence may be seen either as a major technological advancement or as ethically problematic depending on the individual's values.

General Tests of Evidence

Herrick introduces seven general tests of evidence that can help evaluate whether evidence used in an argument is reliable, credible, and sufficient to support a conclusion. These tests provide a comprehensive approach to assessing the quality of evidence. Here’s a detailed breakdown:

Accessibility: Is the Evidence Available?Evidence that is accessible and open to scrutiny is generally considered more reliable.Example: A public health official cites the number of COVID-19 cases reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This evidence is accessible because the CDC publishes its data on a website that anyone can visit and verify.Counterexample: Someone claims that the government has "secret documents" showing proof of extraterrestrial contact. Since these alleged documents are not accessible for review, the claim fails the test of accessibility.
Credibility: Is the Source of the Evidence Reliable?This can depend on the reputation of the author or organization providing the evidence, as well as whether the source has the appropriate credentials or expertise.Example: A research paper on the safety of vaccines authored by a team of immunologists and published in The New England Journal of Medicine is credible due to the expertise of the authors and the reputation of the journal.Counterexample: A claim about vaccine dangers coming from an anonymous social media post lacks credibility because the author’s qualifications are unknown, and the post does not have any verifiable authority.
Internal Consistency: Does the Evidence Contradict Itself?Evidence should not contradict itself. If evidence is self-contradictory, it weakens the argument and creates doubt regarding its reliability.Example: A government report on unemployment must consistently present the same statistics throughout the report. If one section states an unemployment rate of 6% and another section states 8% without clarification, the evidence lacks internal consistency.
External Consistency: Does the Evidence Contradict Other Evidence?Evidence that sharply contradicts most other reputable evidence is often seen as unreliable.Example: A study on climate change that finds rising global temperatures should align with the majority of climate research from other scientific bodies such as NASA, the IPCC, and NOAA.
Recency: Is the Evidence Up to Date?Evidence that has been superseded by more recent findings may no longer be applicable.Example: Citing a 2023 meta-analysis on the effectiveness of renewable energy technologies is preferable to citing a study from 2001, as the newer study will have taken into account technological advancements.
Relevance: Does the Evidence Bear on the Conclusion?Evidence that does not directly relate to the argument is not helpful.Example: If a speaker argues for increasing the minimum wage, citing research that shows increased minimum wages boost consumer spending is relevant because it directly supports the argument.
Adequacy: Is the Evidence Sufficient to Support Its Claim?Adequate evidence means having enough quality evidence to convincingly support the claim being made.Example: If you are trying to prove that sugary drinks contribute to obesity, providing multiple studies from different credible sources, statistics on consumption rates, and expert testimony would collectively provide adequate evidence to support your claim.

Sources of Evidence

Herrick, Chapter 7 outlines different types of sources for evidence and their respective strengths and limitations:

Periodicals: These include scholarly journals, special-interest magazines, and news/commentary publications. Scholarly journals are considered the most reliable due to their rigorous editorial and peer-review process.
- Scholarly journals are considered the gold standard due to their peer-review process, while special-interest publications and news magazines can offer accessible information but with less depth and more bias. They can be easily accessed via university libraries.
Books: Books can be useful sources of in-depth information, but it is important to consider the author's credentials, publication date, and the type of publisher.
Documentaries: These can offer reliable insights but may be influenced by commercial interests or biases.
The Internet: Offers vast information, but requires critical assessment for credibility. Websites with recognizable authors and credible organizations are generally more reliable. Digital literacy has become an essential skill for identifying and evaluating online sources.

Digital Literacy

Digital Literacy refers to the ability to effectively navigate, evaluate, and utilize online information. Digital literacy is more than simply being able to use technology; it is about understanding how to critically evaluate the veracity and quality of digital content and its sources. Key aspects of digital literacy include:

Critical Evaluation of Sources: Not all websites are created equal, and digital literacy involves determining whether an online source is credible, up-to-date, and relevant. It also requires recognizing the purpose of the content—whether it aims to inform, persuade, entertain, or mislead.
Understanding Bias and Intent: It is important to understand the motives behind the creation of digital content. Websites often have particular political, social, or commercial agendas, and digital literacy involves identifying these biases. For example, a blog promoting dietary supplements might not be objective if it’s sponsored by a company that sells such products.
Verification of Facts: Digital literacy requires cross-referencing information found online with multiple reliable sources. This helps verify facts and avoid falling for misinformation or “fake news.” For instance, a claim about a health benefit found on social media should be verified through medical publications or government health websites.
Awareness of Digital Manipulation: The internet includes not only text but also images, videos, and audio clips, many of which may be digitally altered. Digital literacy involves assessing whether visual or multimedia evidence has been manipulated to present a biased narrative.
Navigating Information Overload: The sheer volume of information available online can be overwhelming. Being digitally literate means knowing how to sift through large amounts of data to find high-quality, relevant information. This involves using effective search terms, recognizing authoritative domains (e.g., “.gov” or “.edu”), and understanding how search engine algorithms may prioritize certain content.
Digital Security and Privacy: Digital literacy also includes understanding how to protect one's privacy online and recognizing secure websites. For example, a digitally literate individual would know to look for “https://” at the beginning of a URL as an indicator of a secure website.

Example of Digital Literacy in Practice: Suppose you are researching the benefits of electric vehicles (EVs). A digitally literate approach would involve consulting a mix of sources, including reputable news organizations (e.g., Associated Press, Reuters), trusted independent technical professional organizations or public agencies (e.g., IEEE, European Alternative Fuels Observatory), and peer-reviewed journals (Energies, Transport Reviews, Journal of Power Sources). It would also involve recognizing potential biases—such as an oil company-funded blog questioning the sustainability of EVs.

Evaluating Websites

Evaluating the credibility of websites is a critical component of digital literacy. The internet contains valuable information but also a lot of misleading or false content. Here are key considerations for evaluating websites:

Key Considerations for Evaluating Websites

Language and Content Quality:
- Credible websites typically use a moderate and professional tone. They avoid extreme or sensational language that appeals to emotions rather than presenting facts.
- Grammatical accuracy and proper punctuation are often indicators of a professional and reliable website. Sites riddled with typos or casual language may lack reliability.
- Fact-based Content: Reliable websites provide references, links to original studies, or citations to support their claims.
- Example: A health website like Mayo Clinic (www.mayoclinic.org) provides detailed health information, cites medical sources, and avoids sensational claims about treatments.
Authority of the Site Creator:
- Consider who created the website. Recognized authorities (e.g., universities, government institutions, established news organizations) provide credible content.
- Look for the author’s credentials. An article on medical treatments should ideally be authored by a healthcare professional or medical researcher, with appropriate qualifications listed.
- Example: The American Medical Association’s website (www.ama-assn.org) is a trustworthy source for medical information because it is maintained by a reputable professional organization.
External Consistency:
- External consistency is about comparing the information on the site with other reliable sources. A credible website should not present claims that contradict established knowledge.
- Cross-referencing helps determine if the information presented aligns with mainstream consensus or is a fringe theory.
- Example: If a website claims that climate change is not occurring, a comparison with multiple authoritative scientific sources (e.g., NASA, NOAA, IPCC) may reveal that the claim lacks external consistency and therefore credibility.
Objectivity and Bias:
- Recognize the potential bias or purpose of a website. Websites created to sell a product, promote a political agenda, or advocate for a specific cause may present information in a skewed manner.
- Lobbying organizations, for example, may present one-sided information to persuade rather than to inform.
- Example: Greenpeace’s website (www.greenpeace.org) provides valuable information on environmental issues but is also advocating for specific policy changes. It is important to note that the content is aimed at activism and may include a biased perspective.
Currency of Information:
- Up-to-date content is crucial, especially for topics like technology, health, or science. Websites should indicate the date the content was published or last updated.
- Outdated information can mislead or provide inaccurate conclusions if more recent research contradicts earlier findings.
- Example: A website discussing COVID-19 treatments that has not been updated since 2020 may not reflect recent advancements, making it less reliable for current information.
Security of the Website:
- Secure websites often indicate greater credibility. Look for “https://” in the URL as a sign of secure data handling.
- Trustworthy websites also typically have an “About Us” page that details their mission, authors, and organization’s background.
Cross-Referencing Sources:
- A good practice in evaluating websites is to cross-check information with other reputable sources. If multiple authoritative sites support the same conclusion, the information is more likely to be accurate.
- Use fact-checking websites such as Snopes (www.snopes.com) or Media Bias / Fact Check (mediabiasfactcheck.com) to verify claims and their sources that seem suspicious.
Avoiding Clickbait and Sensationalism:
- Clickbait headlines are designed to attract attention but often lack substance or reliable evidence. Reliable websites present headlines that are informative and factual rather than exaggerated or misleading.
- Example: Compare a “clickbait” headline like "5 Ways Coffee Will Instantly Cure All Health Problems!" with a more measured one such as "Research Shows Potential Health Benefits of Moderate Coffee Consumption." The latter is more likely to come from a reputable source.

Persuasion and Propaganda - Supplementary Reading on Visualizing Propaganda (Emory, FA23)

Thu, 16 Nov 2023 11:36:19 +0000

Key Concepts: Visualizing Propaganda

Jenne, Erin K. “Varieties of Nationalism in the Age of Covid-19.” Nationalities Papers 50, no. 1 (2022)

Antagonistic sovereignty: Antagonistic sovereignty refers to two types of divisive portrayals. The first is an in-out depiction, which alienates and demonizes individuals who are not citizens of the nation (“non-nationals”). The second is an ‘up-down’ depiction, targeting and vilifying the upper echelons of society, including the ’elites’ and the ’establishment’. [1]

Class slides for Social Movements and Social Change (Emory, FA23)

Tue, 31 Oct 2023 11:20:56 +0000

Class teaching slides for CHN 375W Chinese Political Thought at Emory University, fall 2023

Section on social movements and social change in modern China:

[gallery ids=“689,690,691,692,693,694,695,696,697,698,699,700,701,702”]

Class slides - The Hundred Schools of Thought (Chinese Political Thought)

Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:08:46 +0000

Class PowerPoint slides for CHN375W: Chinese Political Thought/Propaganda (Emory University, Fall 2023): covering the historical evolution and contemporary implications of “The Hundred Schools of Thought” in Chinese governance and political practices.

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China (chapter draft), part 2: the Hundred Schools of Thought

Fri, 03 Dec 2021 14:30:03 +0000

The Warring States and the Hundred Schools of Thought

The core of classical Chinese philosophical tradition emerged during a tumultuous period of ancient Chinese history, during which the civilization transitioned from a decentralized feudal system into a unified empire. We begin this section with a brief and high-altitude overview of the historical background for those who are not familiar with ancient Chinese history. The time frame would be the Chunqiu-Zhanguo era (lit., “Periods of Spring and Autumn and the Warring States”) which lasted from c.770 to 221 BCE The Spring and Autumn period of Classical Chinese history, from approximately 771 to 476 BCE. The nominal seat of dynastic power, Zhou Tianzi (lit “Son of Heaven”) had rapidly declined, and in Confucious’ own words, that the “ancient feudal rite and hymns have crumbled （禮樂崩壞）.” It was a time when former Zhou feudal domains became de-facto independent sovereign states. Larger states swallow smaller ones. Rapid land reforms and power restructurings took place across major Chinese states in order to claim economic and military supremacy over their peers. Various great powers rose and fell throughout this period, constantly at war against one other for achieving hegemony over Tianxia. The Warring States period is also when the coin-based cash economy rapidly took off throughout China-proper. Of course this did not happen overnight, but based on ample material evidence, the cash economy did intensify within a relatively short period, as major states began to implement similar types of sweeping bureaucratic governance reforms and centrally managed crop buy-out policies to remain competitive. By the time of the late Warring States era, your “average” peasant say in the state of Wei or Zhao or any major power, not only was paid by the central government, in cash, to purchase his grains for strategic reserve, he is also likely to be drafted every so often, for a fixed term, to perform infrastructure labor or serve in the military, and paid a stipend at least in part in the form of cash coins. Consequently, old feudal aristocratic powers were displaced by an emerging class of scholar-officials, many of whom came from humble, non-noble backgrounds including Confucious and his disciples. Members of this new literati class often traveled throughout China and offered their knowledge and service to the most promising state sponsor. Because of the intense interstate competition and the increasing demand for scholar-officials, philosophies flourished throughout the Chunqiu-Zhanguo era. Early Han historian Sima Qian used the term zhūzǐ bǎijiā (諸子百家), or “Hundred Schools of Thought” to describe this unprecedented expansion and diversification of Chinese intellectual outputs. Many philosophical texts from this historical moment – such as the Analects, Tao Te Ching, and Sun Tzu’s Art of War have become widely known outside of China. See the timeline in figure 2 below for a partial list of key figures from the Hundred Schools of Thought (top row). The timeline also includes contemporaneous Indo-European thinkers at the bottom row for clearer time reference:

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China (chapter draft), part 1: Pyromancy and the Invention of the Chinese Writing System

Fri, 01 Oct 2021 17:14:32 +0000

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China

（chapter draft, part 1）

by Keren Wang, kwang35@gsu.edu

There are increasing calls to give rhetorics that are historically overlooked within Western academia their overdue consideration.[1] Despite growing interest in comparative and alternative rhetorics, insufficient attention has been paid to one category of crucial contribution to the intellectual history of persuasion and propaganda: the study of nonwestern ancient rhetorical traditions.[2] This chapter provides a sneak preview of the intellectual history of persuasion and propaganda in Ancient China, where a rich and distinct rhetorical tradition flourished for more than three millennia. We begin this chapter by addressing the question of why it is necessary to examine comparative perspectives, followed by looking briefly into the historical origin of Chinese characters – the oldest writing system still in use. Our discussion then proceeds to a high-altitude overview of the hundred schools of thought that emerged during a pivotal moment of Chinese intellectual history and profoundly shaped the arc of Sinic civilizational development.

Teaching on Keren Wang

"What Is AI?" Part 1: A Survey of Imaginaries, Mythologies, and Rhetorical Structures of Thinking Machines

Table of Contents

Free Speech and Communication Rights

1) Free Expression: Constitutional and Global Frames

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 19

2) Free Expression in American History

2.1 Prior Restraint and its Discontents

3) One Man’s Vulgarity is Another’s Lyric

4) Unprotected Speech

4.1 Defamation (libel & slander)

4.2 Fighting Words (rarely applicable today)

4.4 Intellectual Property Violations

4.5 Speech Integral to Criminal Conduct

5) Internet Censorship & Communication Rights

Forms of Internet Censorship:

5.1 VPNs: Benefits and Constraints

Why users adopt VPNs

Secure, nonprofit options

Constraints and Ethical Implications

5.2 The Tor Network and the “Dark Web”

Advantages of using Tor

Constraints & Ethical Concerns

References

Fake News: Concepts, Rhetorical Disruptions, and Policy Implications

Seeing Isn’t Believing

Public Relations: Industry, Practices, and Democratic Implications

1) Public Relations and Propaganda

The Internet - from "Nuclear Hardened" Networks to Algorithmic Governmentality

References

Understanding Advertising through Consumer Psychology and Computational Rhetoric

Table of Contents

What Do You See?

Lesson 7: Rhetorical Artifacts

1. Overview

Introduction to a Brief History of Media

MEDIA & VIOLENCE - A Transnational Perspective

1. Violence as Ritual & Power: Historical and Global Perspectives

1.1 Rhetorical Artifacts and Human Sacrifice

Rhetorical Methods - Ideological and Psychoanalytic Criticism

Table of Contents

Ideological Criticism - Overview

Evaluating Online Sources

1. OVERVIEW

2. UNDERSTANDING EVIDENCE

Evidence and Values

Lesson on Data Visualization and its Misuses

Posted by Keren Wang, FA 2024

In this session, we aim to achieve several key learning objectives:

Photography and Visual Rhetoric

Argumentation - Language in Argument

Lesson on Statistical Evidence

Lesson on Statistical Evidence - Survey and Opinion Polling

Argumentation - Digital Literacy in Argumentation

Overview

Understanding Evidence

Evidence and Values

General Tests of Evidence

Sources of Evidence

Digital Literacy

Evaluating Websites

Key Considerations for Evaluating Websites

Persuasion and Propaganda - Supplementary Reading on Visualizing Propaganda (Emory, FA23)

Key Concepts: Visualizing Propaganda

Class slides for Social Movements and Social Change (Emory, FA23)

Class slides - The Hundred Schools of Thought (Chinese Political Thought)

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China (chapter draft), part 2: the Hundred Schools of Thought

The Warring States and the Hundred Schools of Thought

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China (chapter draft), part 1: Pyromancy and the Invention of the Chinese Writing System

Persuasion and Propaganda Ancient China

（chapter draft, part 1）