[NIFL-ESL:8988] FW: [AAACE-NLA]NIFL listservs , free expression, and nonprofit organizations

From: Lynda Terrill (lterrill@cal.org)
Date: Fri May 16 2003 - 16:45:30 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h4GKjUC21447; Fri, 16 May 2003 16:45:30 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:45:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <B24038C0D3E160419E320030D92C22DED66A23@hobbes.cal.org>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Lynda Terrill" <lterrill@cal.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ESL:8988] FW: [AAACE-NLA]NIFL listservs , free expression, and nonprofit organizations
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 4507
Lines: 99

Dear NIFL-ESL,
 In response to Andre's note, here is a cross-posting from some of the other lists.

Lynda Terrill
NIFL-ESL moderator
National Center for ESL Literacy Education
4646 40th Street NW
Washington DC 20016-1859
tel (202) 362-0700 ext. 243
fax(202) 363-7204
LTerrill@cal.org
http://www.cal.org/ncle



-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Spangenberg [mailto:gspangenberg@caalusa.org]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 3:35 PM
To: nifl-povracelit@nifl.gov; aaace-nla@lists.literacytent.org;
nifl-womenlit@nifl.gov
Subject: [AAACE-NLA]NIFL listservs , free expression, and nonprofit
organizations


Janet, Hal, and other Colleagues --

I have done a fair amount of investigating on the matter of listserv 
"purging," notably the government-sponsored NIFL listservs.  I hope 
that this posting will contribute to a better understanding.

By now, we all know that messages deemed to contain political 
advocacy have been removed from archives of the NIFL listservs, and 
that messages containing certain words and phrases are being 
automatically blocked.  I do not want to cause problems for people 
who have been working hard behind the scenes to try and solve this 
problem but I think I can share enough information without betraying 
confidences to shed some light on why this has happened and enable 
you to form your own judgments.

Apparently, according to what a number of people have told me, Robert 
Sweet, an influential  Hill staffer, has challenged both NIFL and the 
Department of Education on what he sees as excessive "political 
advocacy" on the NIFL listservs.  That challenge has been made with 
sufficient vigor that lawyers are presently attempting to sort out 
the issues.  (For those of you who don't know, Mr. Sweet  was a key 
person in the drafting of the No Child Left Behind legislation.  He 
was president and founder of the phonics/reading advocacy 
organization, The National Right to Read Foundation. He was, by many 
accounts, a principal force in the attempts to radically change the 
mission of NIFL from a focus on adult basic skills in the WIA 
reauthorization to a focus exclusively on reading, primarily aimed at 
children.  He is said to be an active aspirant to the permanent 
directorship of NIFL.)

Many of us would take issue with Mr. Sweet's philosophy, operating 
style, and his work in the House.  But there is a central point in 
all of this that we need to keep in mind. Government-sponsored 
programs are not permitted under the law to be used as communications 
devices for political advocacy.  It is unclear, even to many lawyers, 
exactly how this prohibition should be interpreted in particular 
cases. 

I don't think that the legal issues regarding what should be 
permitted on NIFL listservs will be resolved very soon.  But here are 
a few practical thoughts about the current situation.  Perhaps NIFL 
listserv moderators can ask for very clear guidelines on what is 
presently permissible on the government listservs and what isn't. 
These guidelines might be made openly available to the field and to 
listserv subscribers, and the moderators themselves might take 
responsibility for applying the rules that everyone will hold in 
common.  That way, we would at least know who is doing what and why, 
and we would all be playing by the same set of rules (or choosing not 
to play) on the basis of clear and open communications.

Another thought:  The NLA listserv has protected its archives and 
open posting by shifting over to AAACE, and the Coalition for 
Literacy listserv did this by being taken in temporarily by 
ProLiteracy, both achieved with the cooperation and active help of 
NIFL. I think that the operation of listservs is an important 
NIFLservice, and ought to be retained as such, but it occurs to me 
there may be forms and homes for a different listserv that can be set 
up elsewhere and operate with complete independence from government. 

In the meantime, let's hope that the legal issues raised by Mr. Sweet 
regarding the NIFL listservs will be resolved by competent 
authorities as soon as possible.

-- 
Gail Spangenberg
President
Council for Advancement of Adult Literacy
1221 Avenue of the Americas - 50th Floor
New York, NY 10020
212-512-2362, fax 212-512-2610
_______________________________________________
AAACE-NLA mailing list: AAACE-NLA@lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/aaace-nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:15:57 EST