Fair For All

FAIR in Medicine Charts a New Direction with Dr. Doug Novotny

Fair For All — Fri, 31 Jul 2026 11:30:28 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

I’m thrilled to announce Dr. Doug Novotny as Interim Director of FAIR in Medicine, stepping into the role following Nikki Johnson’s departure. We are grateful for the foundation Nikki built and energized by Doug’s vision for FAIR in Medicine’s next chapter.

Doug is a licensed clinical psychologist with a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago and more than 25 years of experience in clinical practice. He currently serves as Senior Advisor at Open Therapy Institute, where he leads a peer group helping clinicians restore client-centered, evidence-based practice against politicized pressure in the field. Doug brings a rare combination of clinical expertise and moral clarity to this role, skills that are desperately needed as identity politics continues to reshape the teaching and practice of psychotherapy.

Doug comes with a clear diagnosis of the problem in the medical and mental health professions and a track record of doing something about it. For years, licensed practitioners have been subjected to ideologically charged training that sorts patients by identity rather than treating each one as an individual. Indoctrination begins in medical school and extends well into their careers through the Continuing Education (CE) they’re required to complete to keep their licenses. This unwarranted activism insults the intelligence of professionals who are perfectly capable of thinking through, on their own, the best ways to treat their patients.

Doug was inspired to create an alternative: informed consent that’s actually informed, a commitment to first do no harm, and a model for practice that sees the whole patient, not a label. That’s the direction he’s taking FAIR in Medicine, and we’re excited to have him lead it.

Doug’s leadership builds directly on work already underway at FAIR. Since February, FAIR has offered “Culture in Psychotherapy, Without the Corrosion of Identity Politics,” a CE course Doug developed that draws on FAIR Advisor Jonathan Haidt’s Moral Foundations Theory, giving clinicians a structural model for their work and restoring moral depth without moralism. The course was offered live in February, March, and April and is still available for those who couldn’t participate. Whether you’re a clinician navigating these pressures or simply someone who cares about keeping psychotherapy grounded in evidence rather than ideology, you’ll benefit from this course.

With Doug helming FAIR in Medicine, we will develop additional CE offerings that reach more clinicians, educators, and others looking for a pro-human alternative to the identity-politics frameworks reshaping their fields. More details on upcoming CE courses and how to get involved are coming soon.

Doug will also continue the work of expanding FAIR’s network of professionals and thought leaders willing to apply pressure to institutions that violate their duties and subject practitioners to cancellation for refusing to submit to groupthink. Under his leadership, FAIR in Medicine will also expand support for Suzannah Alexander’s research into accrediting agencies that pressure educational institutions to indoctrinate students rather than educate them. This is critical work aimed at reforming the incentives at the root of the problem, since accreditation is where much of this damage originates, yet is difficult to see from the outside. Lastly, FAIR in Medicine will endeavor to reach medical students entering the field who lack an understanding of the fundamental principles and ethics of medicine and are best positioned to help us recover them.

FAIR in Medicine isn’t only for physicians and clinicians. It’s for everyone — because sooner or later, all of us are patients. Confidence in the medical field has plummeted over the past several years, and rebuilding it means giving people tools they can actually use. To that end, Doug will lead the development of toolkits to help patients identify practitioners they can trust.

Plenty of people criticize a broken system. For the past several years, I’ve watched Doug create the infrastructure to offer something better. That’s the spirit I want FAIR in Medicine to carry forward, and it’s why I’m confident in handing him the reins.

But this isn’t work we can do alone. It only happens because people like you make it possible.

Your gift today helps us do all of this: grow FAIR in Medicine’s CE series under Doug’s leadership, deepen our support for Suzannah Alexander’s accreditation reform work, build the network of professionals standing up for their colleagues, and put trustworthy-practitioner tools directly into patients’ hands.

No matter the size, your donation will help FAIR restore confidence in medicine.

Thank you for standing behind this work, and please join me in welcoming Doug!

With gratitude,

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

Subscribe now to receive FAIR News weekly in your Inbox

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 15 Days — August 12 — 69 minute run time then 1 hour discussion

Directed by Natalya Murakhver, a New York City mother who sued to reopen schools during the COVID pandemic. The film investigates why America’s closures lasted longer than nearly every other nation and examines the science, policy decisions, and human costs ignored along the way.

Date: Wednesday, August 12th

Time: 7pm EST/4pm PST (until about 9:30pm EST)

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Defining & Understanding the “Isms”
What do we actually mean when we say capitalism, fascism, socialism/democratic socialism, communism or any of the other “isms”? In a culture where these words are used constantly and often imprecisely, clarity matters.

Join us for an open, rigorous conversation as we examine the definitions, histories, and real-world applications of some of the major “isms.”

Sessions will be virtual, open to all FAIR members, and designed to be as accessible as they are substantive. You don’t need to have read anything in advance. Just bring your curiosity, your willingness to listen, and your commitment to engage in good faith.

. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

Note to readers: We have paused the FAIR News podcast. If you prefer listening, rather than reading these newsletters, an audio version is available directly on the Substack app. Thank you for tuning in!

Join the FAIR Community

Where Are You From?

Vic Levitin — Thu, 30 Jul 2026 11:31:22 GMT

For most people, “where are you from?” takes three seconds to answer, but I need a moment.

As a kid, I never really knew what my mother tongue was. The first language I spoke was Russian. But we moved to Israel when I was six, and ever since, I think and dream in Hebrew. So which culture is the more accurate answer?

At 42, the question only got harder. I was born in Ukraine. I grew up in Israel. Now my wife Lital and I are raising our kids on an island in Thailand. If there’s a single clear answer, I still haven’t found it.

My parents left Ukraine for Israel with a box of vodka bottles, which they traded for bananas somewhere in Hungary along the way. They were running from a hard life toward a country that promised them safety and belonging–a tribe.

Thirty years later, their kid walked away from the stability they’d worked so hard to build.

I built my life on the foundations they provided, and I don’t blame them for the stability they worked so hard to create. But eventually, that stability started to feel less like a foundation and more like a ceiling. Everything was predictable, safe, and finished–and honestly, I was suffocating under all that certainty. I realized I needed a little friction just to feel alive. As it turns out, I’m not an outlier. I keep meeting other children of immigrants who are doing the exact same thing: walking away from the safety our parents fought for, not because we reject their struggle, but because it’s not the life we want to live.

For years in Israel, I could predict almost exactly what my life would look like ten years out. Not a bad life, just a predictable one. Same morning traffic, same supermarket, same news, same playgrounds, and the clarity, strangely, started to suffocate me. Apparently, I need some uncertainty to feel alive.

My wife Lital didn’t. She loved what we had. I understood that dragging her and the kids into an adventure she didn’t want wouldn’t end well, so I let the dream go.

And then a war started in our home, Israel. We flew to Thailand for two weeks, to spare the kids the worst of it.

The ability to simply leave, to seek refuge in a tropical paradise while the world we knew was consumed by conflict, is a privilege I know most don’t have. While others were huddled in shelters or facing the front lines, we were able to trade the sound of sirens for the sound of the ocean; a reality that carries a weight of its own.

Two weeks became two months. Two months became almost three years. Without ever intending to, we’d left our whole life behind.

A few months in, we had to fly to Cambodia for a visa run. I thought I was starting to understand Asia. Cambodia didn’t fit any pattern I had previously encountered.

Cambodia didn’t feel like another country, it felt like another planet. Even the airport was a ceremony: lines, entry fees, a police officer offering to move us up the queue with the kids for a little extra. I still don’t know if that was a bribe or an express lane. Even the money felt made up. Tens of thousands of the local currency for a coffee.

That sense of total disorientation–feeling like I’d landed on an alien world– forced me to see how much of my “clarity” was really just lazy pattern recognition. When everything from the money to the social codes becomes unreadable, your brain starts desperately scanning for any familiar anchor just to simplify things again. This is not to suggest one culture is superior to the other. As a multilingual, multicultural traveler, I have experienced the best and worst of many nations. Rather, in a world that often sends us out from our homes, away from our tribes and into places we can’t speak our mother language, familiarity becomes the ultimate comfort.

That was the hard part, actually: I couldn’t read the people around me. I came from a place where people mostly say what they think. Here, “yes” didn’t always mean yes, and a smile didn’t always mean agreement–sometimes it was just a way to keep the peace. Once I pressed my palms together and bowed to thank a taxi driver, the way I do in Thailand. He smiled, then shook my hand. I hadn’t broken a rule, I had just used the wrong cultural gesture. Living between so many shifting worlds meant I was constantly recalibrating, forever switching gears just to avoid stumbling over a cultural line I couldn’t quite see.

One night we had a Friday dinner with a group of Israeli travelers, and everything clicked at once. My people. Same humor, same codes, the same inside language you can’t fake. I felt safe before anyone had said a single real thing.

We all do this. We land somewhere strange and scan the room for someone who looks like us. Drop me into a world of aliens, and suddenly every human feels like family.

But the identity boxes aren’t fixed. That’s the part I didn’t expect.

Lital was sure no place but Israel could ever feel like home. Today she sings in Thai in the island bars, goes out dancing with Thai friends, trains Muay Thai, and has a Thai flag tattooed on her arm. She’s smashed every box that used to define her and built a life she couldn’t have imagined.
What does “where are you from” tell you about her?

It tells you perhaps where she was born or what her passport says, but it tells you nothing about her, who she is, or what cultures she truly belongs to.

And then there are the kids.

We recently got stuck in Vietnam for three weeks–another visa run. Almost every day we’d take the boys somewhere to burn off energy: a play zone, a roller rink, a park.

It never stopped amazing me. Every time I came to collect them, they were in the middle of a pack of Vietnamese kids, proudly introducing them to me: “Dad, I made two new friends.”

No shared language. No shared country. No passports checked. Just two new friends, in a city we were only passing through.

I went to Cambodia looking for my own tribe, just to feel safe. Lital learned you can belong to more than one. The kids don’t look for tribes at all, they just look for someone to play with.

Maybe that’s the real difference. Some of us have to understand a person before we’ll connect. Others connect first, and understand later.

When was the last time you met someone before it mattered where they were from?

Vic Levitin built four startups, then stepped off the default path to rebuild life from the ground up on a Thai island with his family. Writing about the experiment at viclevitin.com

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

In keeping with our mission to promote a common culture of fairness, understanding, and humanity, we are committed to including a diverse range of voices and to encouraging compassionate, good-faith discourse.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:16:11 GMT

Oh, Great Nation

This week, we featured an essay by Anisa Fox reflecting on America’s 250th anniversary through the perspective of a Bahamian-American immigrant. Drawing on her experiences growing up in the Bahamas and later moving to the United States, Fox argues that patriotism and honest criticism are not mutually exclusive. While acknowledging America’s flaws, she contends that they should not overshadow the freedoms, opportunities, and stability that continue to make the nation worth celebrating.

Fox’s appreciation for the everyday aspects of American life that are often taken for granted—from reliable infrastructure and educational opportunities to civic freedoms and public institutions informs her sense of gratitude and national self-reflection. She recognizes that America’s imperfections need not diminish its enduring greatness.

“I will never forget the first time a package arrived at my door after I moved to the United States. It felt like magic. I will never forget my first time in a Super Walmart. I thought it was a mall—I couldn’t imagine such abundance. I will never forget my first time riding a train or visiting a library or museum, many of which are free in America. Having police that respond in minutes, a court system that takes its cases seriously, and being able to vote in ways that bring about impact are all things that as an American I am thankful for and as a Bahamian am amazed by.”

Read the Full Article

How to Raise a Grateful American

This week, we also recommend an essay by Robert Pondiscio examining the role parents can play in cultivating gratitude and civic responsibility as America marks its 250th anniversary. Arguing that schools alone cannot instill a love of country, Pondiscio encourages families to teach children not only about America’s failures, but also about the freedoms, institutions, and opportunities that generations have worked to build and preserve.

Rather than advocating for blind patriotism, the essay argues that gratitude and honest criticism are complementary civic virtues.

“For all our political divisions, cultural anxieties, and a litany of daily complaints, I suspect most of us would choose America. Not because America is perfect. Not because it is free from injustice, conflict, or disappointment. Simply because if you had to place a bet on which nation offered you the greatest likelihood of living your life in safety, prosperity, dignity, and freedom, you would be hard-pressed to make a better wager. Needless to say, this is not how many Americans think about their country. Nor, alas, is it the way many children learn about it.”

Read the Full Article

Devon Akmon explores the unique role museums can play in rebuilding trust at a time of growing social division. Drawing on research showing that museums remain among America’s most trusted public institutions, Akmon argues that they are uniquely positioned to foster curiosity, dialogue, and meaningful engagement across political and cultural differences.

Akmon suggests that by encouraging thoughtful conversation instead of ideological certainty, museums can help strengthen the habits of empathy, curiosity, and civic trust that underpin a healthy democracy.

“At a moment when trust in public institutions is fragile, museums hold a rare and valuable position. They are places where people still expect to learn something new and to encounter ideas different from their own. When museums invite visitors to think together about complex issues, whether through exhibitions, conversations or community partnerships, they help nurture the habits of curiosity and empathy that democracy depend on.”

Read the Full Article

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR Builds Curriculum Momentum at SBAE and URSA Conferences

Fair For All — Fri, 24 Jul 2026 11:30:14 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

This summer, FAIR attended two important education conferences: the School Boards for Academic Excellence (SBAE) Summer Conference in Charleston and the Utah Rural Schools Association (URSA) Summer Conference in Cedar City. The feedback we received from educators and administrators has been incredibly energizing and provides valuable guidance for our work going forward.

In June, FAIR Executive Director Monica Harris attended the SBAE Summer Conference in Charleston, South Carolina, an event bringing together school board members and education leaders who are navigating complex curriculum adoption decisions. What emerged was both clarifying and inspiring.

Too often, the narrative around school boards centers on disengagement or powerlessness, but SBAE painted a different picture. The board members Monica met were deeply invested in their communities, genuinely committed to finding non-polarizing alternatives to liberated Ethnic Studies, and motivated to make meaningful curriculum decisions. Many were eager to continue the conversation post-conference and discuss adoption possibilities immediately. One attendee from Georgia, whose district has struggled with polarizing curricula, became emotional describing the relief she felt upon learning about Many Stories, One Nation. It was truly a moment that captures why FAIR’s work matters and can make a difference in so many communities.

These conversations confirmed what we at FAIR have long suspected: education leaders want a curriculum that won’t create controversy and won’t sanitize history. They want assurance that their investment in rigorous instruction won’t invite backlash. Many Stories, One Nation answers those questions by teaching difficult history through civil discourse methodology while maintaining academic rigor without ideological polarization.

This month, Jefferson Shupe, Aly Shupe, and Gabe Brown represented FAIR at the URSA Summer Conference in Cedar City. The conversations there revealed another critical insight: adoption pathways are multiple and creative.

Chuck Woodhouse, who teaches on an Indian reservation, asked how Many Stories, One Nation treats Native American history. When Jefferson handed him Chief John Ross’s letter and showed how it connects to the Declaration of Independence, Woodhouse’s immediate response reflected what educators across the country are discovering: this curriculum is exactly what they need. Three high school history teachers realized they could integrate Many Stories, One Nation into existing courses rather than adopting an entirely new curriculum. For rural districts with limited resources, this adaptation model may prove just as powerful as standalone adoption.

What both conferences revealed is how adoption happens in practice: through relationships with decision-makers, through educator-to-educator conversations about real constraints and creative solutions, and through board members like those in Charleston who are ready to lead their communities toward more complete American history.

We’re so grateful for everyone who represented FAIR this summer, and so energized by the momentum we’re building across the country!

With gratitude,

The FAIR Team

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

Subscribe now to receive FAIR News weekly in your Inbox

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the nation is still wrestling with some of its oldest questions: Who belongs? What does equality require? How should we understand our differences?

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 Killing America — July 29 — 38 min run time + discussion featuring Dr. Diana Blum and Eli Steele

🎬 15 Days — August 12

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

What does it mean to have “rights”?

The foundational claim upon which our Declaration of Independence and thus our Constitution and The Bill of Rights are based is the radical belief that individuals possess rights that are inalienable and independent of government.

Our goal is to have an intellectually rigorous and inspirational conversation that aligns with FAIR’s emphasis on open inquiry and civil discourse.

FAIR in Conversation has relaunched with a new monthly format built for this moment.

. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

Join the FAIR Community

Oh, Great Nation

Anisa F. — Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:30:29 GMT

With America’s 250th anniversary having just passed, many conflicting opinions on the nation have risen to the surface. There are those who are enamored with our great nation and whose faith in the American dream is unshakable. On the opposite end of the conversation are those who see endless issues with the USA and can’t wait to emigrate elsewhere. While both stances are valid in their own rights, I feel the truth is somewhere more in between.

As a Bahamian-American raised primarily outside of the US, I feel uniquely able to bridge this gap. I have experienced life in a developing nation, and the hustle of modern American life.

Growing up on the tiny island of Nassau–147 square miles and less than the length of the average marathon–I was fortunate to have a two-parent household, a private education and enjoyed a middle-class lifestyle. Despite these privileges I was only partially shielded from the reality at hand. Many Bahamians can’t swim–which is dangerous when you live in a country surrounded by water, many don’t pass grade school, and have no post-secondary education options unless they leave the country. While Nassau has two hospitals—one private and one public, both lacking in many ways–other islands–such as Grand Bahama where I lived for three years–have no real medical facilities.

Food and water are also a national concern. The majority of food in the Bahamas is imported, as a result supply chain issues, governmental corruption and resource scarcity have increasingly devastating effects on the population. Water that isn’t bottled is unsanitary for drinking and alternatives, such as rainwater collection, are costly and hard to maintain.

Additionally , the nation operates on an insufficient power grid as a result of the government catering to the power needs of ever-expanding hotels. These touristic hubs take precedence over residential neighborhoods and the daily power needs of locals because tourism is the nation’s sole industry–there is an economic reliance on foreign comfort. Most homes, excepting those who can afford a generator of which my family was not one, are without power daily for substantial lengths of time. The frequent on/off of the power damages appliances, and interrupts business. It also makes it impossible to cool homes–the ones that have air conditioning–which is hazardous in a hot humid nation.

The geographical location of The Bahamas also makes it a prime target of severe yearly hurricanes. Candle light baths with salvaged water and cold rationed dinners were not uncommon during hurricane season. Coupled with high rates of violence, an astronomical cost of living, an internationally valueless dollar, a corrupt government and storms that can leave locals without adequate food and water for weeks to months, the Bahamas is a travel beauty but a living disaster.

Hurricane Dorian, for example, was a category five storm that decimated the nation after stalling over islands like Grand Bahama for three days (storms usually blow through in a matter of hours). Dorian flooded 80% of the island, left the island’s only airport out of commission and forced locals to rely on foreign aid. It also led to an unreported death toll in the dozens without any concrete plans to rescue people or rebuild infrastructure.

Despite the hardship of life in the Bahamas, I love the country of my childhood and celebrate its joys just as I love my present American home.

I moved to America after losing a lot: My parents gave up their dream of owning a house in their home nation in favor of moving to a nation of greater stability. I had to, in the middle of high school and in the months precursing covid, change schools which brought a total cultural whiplash. Travel is expensive and time consuming, as is filing mountains of paperwork to demonstrate that your family are decent law-abiding people. Paper work that often makes no sense without legal guidance becomes an all day task. Packing is busy and even busier when you realize you will have to sell or leave behind boxes of belongings that meant so much to you. Learning that the humane society you had spent years volunteering at had become a watery death trap for pets and the brave workers who stayed with them during the storm reminds you that you have lost a lot and yet still less than others.

Walking away with my life, family, pets and most important belongings was a sobering experience and has given me a deep appreciation of our American nation. While we can argue about the government, bicker about history, acknowledge that the American dream is fleeting or take issue with any number of things across the country, one thing remains true: This is a great nation. That doesn’t mean perfect or always unified, but it does mean great. We live in a nation where we can freely voice opinions, contact our leaders, demand representation, access any part of the country reliably through public transport, and receive medical care from a licensed doctor who is up to date on modern medicine (however expensive it might be). We can select our educational paths, shop online and in-person, and reliably expect both the availability of products and the consistency of pricing.

I will never forget the first time a package arrived at my door after I moved to the United States. It felt like magic. I will never forget my first time in a Super Walmart. I thought it was a mall—I couldn’t imagine such abundance. I will never forget my first time riding a train or visiting a library or museum, many of which are free in America. Having police that respond in minutes, a court system that takes its cases seriously, and being able to vote in ways that bring about impact are all things that as an American I am thankful for and as a Bahamian am amazed by.

So, as we move beyond July 4th and continue our celebration of the 250th year of this great nation, I hope that we can all remember that it is ok—and even good —to love your home nation, to love your American nation and to simultaneously recognize its faults. Our areas for growth should not detract from our greatness and do not detract from the value of celebrating 250 years of that American greatness.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Sun, 19 Jul 2026 11:30:27 GMT

The Publishing Industry Stopped Believing in Its Readers

This week, we featured an essay by exploring what the extraordinary success of Theo of Golden reveals about the modern publishing industry. Using Allen Levi’s bestselling novel as a case study, Libes argues that publishers have spent decades favoring minimalist, fast-paced fiction while increasingly assuming that readers lack the appetite for slower, more intellectually demanding literature. She suggests that Theo of Golden challenges those assumptions, demonstrating that ambitious literary fiction still has a broad audience when given the chance to reach one.

Looking beyond a single bestselling novel, the essay examines how editorial preferences, BookTok culture, and an industry-wide emphasis on accessibility may be reshaping not only what gets published, but also how readers engage with literature itself. Libes contends that publishing plays a powerful role in shaping culture and argues that if publishers once again champion complex, reflective fiction, readers may prove far more willing to embrace it than the industry has long assumed.

“Publishing shapes our culture more than we like to admit. The very books championed by our publishing professionals become the books that we not only read and discuss but also aspire to write ourselves. If year after year the publishing industry rewards simpler, faster, and more disposable fiction, then readers inevitably become accustomed to “fast-paced” books that require no afterthought.
If, on the other hand, publishers start championing ambitious, intellectually rich novels again, then there is every reason to believe readers would rise to meet them.”

Read the Full Article

This week, we shared a tribute by Natasha Willowdale remembering educator and FAIR chapter leader Richard Bilkszto on the third anniversary of his passing. Reflecting on their friendship, Richard's unwavering commitment to fairness in education, and the profound impact he had on colleagues and students alike, Willowdale offers a deeply personal remembrance of a man who continued advocating for the principles he believed in long after his retirement.

The essay also reflects on the importance of preserving Richard's legacy by continuing the work he dedicated himself to throughout his career.

Learn More Here

Friends of Richard Bilkszto

What Killed Michael Brown?

This week, FAIR hosted a screening of What Killed Michael Brown?, the award-winning documentary by filmmaker Eli Steele and his father, Shelby Steele. Revisiting the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown and the national conversation that followed, the film examines how one of the defining events of the last decade shaped public discourse on race, policing, and systemic racism.

Ahead of the screening, Eli reflected on the making of the documentary, the climate in which it was released, and why he believes revisiting Ferguson remains important today. Missed the screening? You can still read Eli’s reflections on the film and explore additional resources using the links below.

“What makes us most proud is the impact the film had on so many Americans. It gave them the voice and the ability to push back against the narrative. We have many letters from people calling it “freeing” and “liberating.”

Read the Full Article

Watch the Full Film

Learn More

Why Did We Let Big Tech Take Over Education?

Jonathan Haidt features a discussion by Sophie Winkleman on his After Babel Substack exploring the growing role of screens, educational technology, and AI in the classroom. Drawing on research from educators, neuroscientists, and learning scientists, Winkleman argues that the rapid shift toward device-based learning has come at the expense of children’s attention, imagination, handwriting, and critical thinking while weakening the essential relationship between teachers and students.

Rather than rejecting technology outright, Winkleman makes the case for a “paper-first” approach to education—one that reserves technology for situations where it genuinely enhances learning rather than replacing it.

“When we talk about children, social media, smartphones, iPads, we tend to frame the discussion around the issue of harmful material. But Justine’s pupils weren’t traumatized by harmful material, they were just dazed, glazed, and passive, their young minds deactivated by constant, low-level stimulation.”

Read the Full Article

A cross-party UK parliamentary inquiry has called for the UK National Year of Reading to become a National Decade of Reading, arguing that reversing the decline in reading for pleasure will require sustained cultural change rather than short-term initiatives. The report recommends expanding access to school and public libraries, ensuring every child has regular opportunities to read for enjoyment, and addressing barriers ranging from increased screen use to unequal access to books.

“The rise of screen use is a “major factor” reducing the time children spend reading for pleasure, according to the report. Author, illustrator and teacher Onyinye Iwu told the inquiry that when she asked students why they don’t read, “a lot of them were like: ‘Miss, but we have TikTok. What is the point?’ That is it. You have TikTok, you have Netflix, you have the film coming out; why would you read the book?”

Read the Full Article

Join the FAIR Community

Remembering Richard Bilkszto

Fair For All — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 11:30:16 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

Three years ago this week, on July 13, 2023, FAIR Chapter leader Richard Bilkszto took his own life.

A retired Toronto principal, Richard spent his career championing the students who needed the most support: the ones who were bullied and overlooked, the kids who didn’t fit the mold. He could have spent his retirement on the beaches he loved. Instead, he kept showing up for the causes he believed in. Richard was a public servant who believed fairness and academic merit weren’t in conflict with one another — and he paid an enormous price for saying so out loud.

Richard’s death followed a diversity training session in which he was publicly accused of racism for voicing a disagreement while the administrators around him stayed silent. The story became international news, cited widely in debates over how DEI programs are run and who they’re allowed to hold accountable. But before he was a headline, Richard was a colleague, a friend, and to many of us at FAIR he was proof that one person’s willingness to speak plainly could move an entire conversation forward.

This week, our Substack published a tribute to Richard by Natasha Willowdale, a friend and fellow educator who worked alongside him on the issues he cared about most. It’s a personal, unflinching piece about grief, about regret, and about the fight over merit-based admissions to specialized school programs that Richard was in the middle of when he died.

Natasha’s tribute also carries a piece of good news that Richard unfortunately didn’t live to see: after three years of advocacy from groups like Friends of Richard Bilkszto and Save Our Schools Ontario, the lottery-based admissions policy that replaced merit-based entry has been revoked. Starting this school year, students will be admitted through a centralized evaluation. It’s not a perfect system, as Natasha acknowledges, but it’s a meaningful step toward the standards Richard fought for.

And that’s the part of this story that belongs to all of us now: not just mourning what happened to Richard, but continuing the work he started. FAIR exists because people like him were willing to speak plainly when too many people around them weren’t. Honoring him means refusing to look away from that discomfort when it’s our turn to speak up.

One reader’s poignant comment on Natasha’s tribute resonated with us. Tom Dearie, who knew Richard only briefly, observed that news of his death was “framed into a cynical narrative that overlooked the human side of his story.” That’s the risk when any tragedy becomes a symbol: the individual gets lost inside it. We don’t want to make the same mistake.

Richard was not a talking point. He was a principal who stayed late to help the kids other adults had given up on, and a man whose family and community are still living with the aftermath of his tragic death three years later.

We’ll leave you with the sentiment that Natasha’s piece closes on: Richard would be glad to know that his work wasn’t in vain, and that the work he was committed to doing is now bearing fruit.

Rest in peace, Richard. You are missed.

If you’d like to support the organizations carrying this work forward, visit Friends of Richard Bilkszto or Save Our Schools Ontario.

If you or someone you know is struggling, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline (call or text 988 in the US) and Talk Suicide Canada (1-833-456-4566) are available 24/7.

With gratitude,

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

Subscribe now to receive FAIR News weekly in your Inbox

This July, FAIR will join educators from across Utah at the Utah Rural Schools Association Conference to explore how Many Stories, One Nation can support rural classrooms and strengthen civic education.

Conference Link

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the nation is still wrestling with some of its oldest questions: Who belongs? What does equality require? How should we understand our differences?

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 Killing America — July 29 — 38 min run time + discussion featuring Dr. Diana Blum and Eli Steele

🎬 15 Days — August 12

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

What does it mean to have “rights”?

Our goal is to have an intellectually rigorous and inspirational conversation that aligns with FAIR’s emphasis on open inquiry and civil discourse.

FAIR in Conversation has relaunched with a new monthly format built for this moment.

. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

Join the FAIR Community

The Publishing Industry Stopped Believing in Its Readers

Liza Libes — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 11:30:20 GMT

Allen Levi’s Theo of Golden is this summer’s go-to read for BookTokers and academics alike—and it broke every rule in contemporary publishing.

This past week, The Wall Street Journal ran a feature on Levi’s unconventional journey to literary fame following the publication of his bestselling novel Theo of Golden. While I tend to gloss over most contemporary fiction news (which often pertains, as The Wall Street Journal admits, to BDSM or vampires), this particular story immediately captured my attention: Since its publication, three years ago, Theo of Golden has sold 2.5 million copies—amazing for an originally self-published work.

That fact alone should give every editor in New York City pause: If a novel capable of reaching millions of readers could not initially find a home in the traditional publishing industry, then literary professionals have erroneous assumptions about what readers desperately crave today.

Upon its initial release, Theo of Golden sold three thousand copies—a more than respectable number for a self-published title. It continued to reach indie fiction lovers across the country until Simon & Schuster finally recognized what readers knew long ago: Our culture is in desperate need of serious literary fiction.

As someone who has spent the past few years analyzing trends in the publishing industry, I can only chuckle at the reaction of Levi’s literary agent, who felt like she was “walking into the woods and discovering a unicorn.”

No hate for Theo of Golden, which abounds with beautiful sentences and complex ideas, but the irony is, of course, that the book only appears to be a unicorn because the publishing industry has spent decades engineering a literary landscape in which slow, introspective, and profound books have become exceedingly difficult to find.

The rise of BookTok culture—a TikTok book community characterized by algorithm-driven content and bite-size recommendations—has increasingly conditioned readers to expect stories that deliver immediate gratification rather than those that require sustained intellectual engagement. Several “BookTokers,” in fact, admit to reading only dialogue in novels while skipping over “slower” scenes, creating a reading culture where books are almost literally reduced to screenplays. Publishers, in turn, cater to the BookTok community, and the cycle continues.

In other words, Theo of Golden has only earned its claim to uniqueness precisely because the publishing industry systematically turns away all other books like it.

Every year, the publishing industry churns out hundreds of new fiction titles that all sound the same. Teeming with short sentences and declarative phrases, these books no longer require readers to consider what a work of fiction means. The value of a book has been reduced to its ability to provide quick, digestible entertainment rather than to challenge its reader.

The result is an entire literary ecosystem that has surrendered its capacity for reflection—and a broader culture that has lost its ability to think critically about our world.

Let’s look at some examples from recent literary fiction bestsellers, starting with Sally Rooney’s Normal People.

Marianne answers the door when Connell rings the bell.
She’s still wearing her school uniform, but she’s taken off the sweater, so it’s just the blouse and skirt, and she has no shoes on, only tights.
Oh, hey, he says.
Come on in.
She turns and walks down the hall. He follows her, closing the door behind him.

Rooney’s sentences are simple to a fault. Her prose contains overly simplistic words and ideas, communicating only the bare minimum information required to advance the plot.

One could excuse the publishing industry if it were just Rooney writing in this infantile style, but such literary minimalism has infested nearly every single literary fiction title that lines our shelves today.

Let’s take a look at another bestselling example—Caro Claire Burke’s Yesteryear, the literary rave of the past few months.

THIS IS THE LAST DAY of the life I imagined for myself.
I woke up two minutes before my alarm went off, like usual.
Five fifty-eight and bing: eyes wide open, ready to greet the day. I’ve never had a hard time waking up in the morning. Never used the snooze button, either, not once in my life. Sobriety helps. I don’t drink. Discipline helps, too.

Burke’s prose follows much the same pattern as Rooney’s: short, declarative sentences move the reader rapidly from one assertion to the next. We can describe Burke’s prose as utilitarian, creating a novel that is easy to consume but difficult to contemplate.

Let’s contrast these examples with the opening of Levi’s Theo of Golden:

On his first full day in Golden, Theo woke early, pulled back the curtains of his hotel room, and looked out over the southern dawn. He had arrived the previous afternoon from his home in New York City, where winter, with a newsworthy late-season mixture of snow and ice, was in full fury. The flight to Atlanta (on a private jet) and the drive farther south to Golden (in a chauffeur-driven Lincoln Town Car) had transported him to a world of warmth, abloom in myriad shades of green, yellow, lavender, and pink.

The difference is almost immediately apparent. Where Rooney’s prose reports, Levi’s evokes; where Burke explains, Levi reveals. Theo of Golden demonstrates that language is not simply a vehicle for plot but an art form in its own right. Levi trusts his readers to slow down and savor the cadence of a well-crafted sentence—and the meaning of his ideas as a whole.

Theo of Golden therefore stands as a direct antithesis to the prevailing wisdom of the contemporary publishing industry. It challenges the broader orthodoxy that readers want fiction that reads like a movie script.

But if readers are clearly willing to embrace the thematic and stylistic complexity of Theo of Golden, why, then, does the publishing industry keep pushing out didactic and minimalist literature?

The fact is that the stylistic similarities among the novels we examined above are not accidental—they reflect an editorial philosophy that increasingly equates literary quality with accessibility.

In the contemporary publishing world, minimalism has become not only the norm but a hard requirement. Publishing professionals routinely claim that any sentence over fifteen words causes readers to “concentrate too hard.” Such language suggests that the publishing industry has not only become convinced that readers of contemporary fiction do not have the attention spans to digest long, flowery sentences but also that the industry itself has shaped the tastes of its own readers.

Operating in this paradigm, writers are frequently told to avoid “poetic prose and metaphors,” with one agent offering the following advice on her blog:

Often times the writers will focus on sounding “literary” and write meandering, prosy or metaphor laden sentences. While it is a style choice, it’s not usually a successful one… Flowery prose and metaphor often detract from your writing.

Thus, this type of “literary” voice becomes not only the less desirable writing style but an active faux pas. Writers who take after Fitzgerald or Nabokov face rejection, while writers who produce “legible” writing see their books line our shelves. Over time, these editorial preferences have created the very reading habits they claim merely to reflect: Readers are told they no longer have the patience for long, intellectually demanding books but are rarely given the opportunity to encounter them in the first place.

Despite this, the success of Theo of Golden offers hope for a civilization that has increasingly abandoned its capacity for reflection.

Publishing shapes our culture more than we like to admit. The very books championed by our publishing professionals become the books that we not only read and discuss but also aspire to write ourselves. If year after year the publishing industry rewards simpler, faster, and more disposable fiction, then readers inevitably become accustomed to “fast-paced” books that require no afterthought.

If, on the other hand, publishers start championing ambitious, intellectually rich novels again, then there is every reason to believe readers would rise to meet them.

As our literature loses its capacity to challenge readers, an entire generation of thinkers becomes less comfortable with complexity—but we can restore the critical thinking brought by complex stories by daring to publish difficult books again.

Perhaps, then, the real lesson of Theo of Golden is not that readers suddenly rediscovered serious literary fiction but that they never stopped wanting it.

So maybe it’s time for the publishing industry to take notes from Theo—and to believe in its readers again.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Don't Break Faith with Those Who Die

Natasha Willowdale — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 11:30:36 GMT

Three years ago, July 13, 2023, I received the dreadful news that our friend, Richard Bilkszto, had taken his own life. Nothing prepares you for news like that.

Our friendship started through a FAIR meeting for Ontario educators and carried its course through our mutual concerns, commitments, and convictions. Those who knew Richard remember his belief in supporting the most vulnerable students, his efforts to stop the bullies, and his understanding of the needs of students who did not fit in some way or another.

The last time I was in touch with Richard was a week before this tragic event when I had messaged him. His response was brief: two-words, “thank you”. I assumed he was simply busy. I should have called. I should have asked. The “what ifs” and the regrets will not undo this tragedy. They will not bring him back to his family, to us, to the many people he was so passionate about helping or to those whose lives he touched when he didn’t have to. As a retired principal, he could have easily chosen to sit back on a beach, relax, and enjoy the well-deserved, hard-earned freedom of retirement.

But that was not who Richard was.

Even though we will never know exactly what or who pushed Richard to the edge, the fact remains that something did. Someone did. Society did. The system did. A system that claims to value diversity, equity, and inclusion — words I now loathe. A system that constantly beats the drum about the importance of mental health, yet has no qualms about blaming everything on the white man. Yes, that is what he was accused of being by a paid presenter, for expressing his opinions while numerous other administrators – principals and vice principals who attended that session – remained silent and went on with the flow. Appalling! They should have objected, stood up, walked out, denounced. Nope! They did no such thing. They approved the blatant racism by remaining a bystander. Ironically they are the ones running our schools. Go figure!

Openly blaming people simply for being white, specifically men at that time, was the prevailing trend. Now, the attitude seems more subtle, implied in job and admissions applications like an underlying disease that, instead of being treated, has simply been managed.

Richard’s tragic passing in July 2023 stirred an uproar not only in Canada and the United States but also globally, with coverage appearing across different media outlets and in multiple languages. The DEI mandates came under scrutiny and continue to be scrutinized, not only by some institutions and organizations, but most importantly by members of the general public, some of whom are gradually, but finally, beginning to question them.

Yet like any other news story, it is only “breaking” until something else breaks — and as we all know, things keep breaking all around the world. So, to not let Richard’s legacy be forgotten, a group of his friends who shared his values on education, merit, fairness, and equality of opportunity decided to recognize, encourage, and honour exceptional teachers, and future teachers in his honor. Friends of Richard Bilkszto was born. The group continues their advocacy for preserving and improving the education system including but not limited to policies regarding specialized programs.

Why things have to get really bad before they start getting better beats me—it is such an uncommon sense.

Three years ago, under the umbrella of DEI, the merit- and qualification-based admission process for specialized programs was revoked and replaced with a lottery system that considered historical backgrounds and, bluntly put, perceived victimhood as eligible criteria for admission. The community consultation meetings in which many of us — parents and teachers alike — participated and voiced our opposition to the idea, were simply a checkbox exercise; the decision had clearly already been made. A decision that was influenced, in no small part, by the loud voices of those who had the time and energy to accuse the system of racism and, quite literally, disrupt a system that was working and had proven successful. At the very least, it was not failing.

Like many of us, Richard was also opposed to this change. He recognized the social injustices that students in less fortunate families face, he was familiar with the barriers in their way, however, like me, he did not believe the new lottery-based admission policy is the solution. We both had ideas that would address the issue in the long term. He was vocal about his concerns and my proposed solutions received a written rejection and a verbal warning by the people above. Nevertheless, we worked together to try to prevent the change from happening or, at the very least, to educate the public and parents about the inevitable negative consequences of implementing such policies on a large scale without addressing the underlying causes of adversity. At a minimum, conducting small-scale pilot projects, or simply listening to us — the teachers who work with students day in and day out, those who know the lay of the land should have been better explored

That would have made sense.

There is a possibility that the entire process was a way to eliminate specialized school programs that required significant investment and funding by making them appear ineffective. The best way to justify getting rid of them would be to demonstrate that they were no longer successful. That is exactly what happened after the top-down implementation of the lottery system. Many of the students admitted through this process struggled to manage the workload, academic level, and intensity required to complete such programs. As a result, some schools adjusted their programs to better match students’ level. This effectively diluted and lowered the standards of programs initially designed to educate students at a much higher level. Once again, professionals who knew better went along with the flow.

There is something sinister about this approach.

Family and education are the foundations of a society. One would expect these two pillars to be treated as sacred and protected, especially by those entrusted with serving the public. Yet, instead of strengthening and preserving these pillars, there appears to be an insistence on making them irrelevant, fragile, or reduced to something resembling casual entertainment. Whether this is done intentionally or out of ignorance is ultimately irrelevant. The leadership responsible for this flagrancy must be held accountable. After all, we are the ones paying their salaries.

Three years have passed, and the lottery admission policy has now been revoked.

The students entering the specialized programs in the 2026–2027 school year have been admitted based on a centralized evaluation test. It is the closest one can get to merit-based admissions; however, it is still not the ideal approach. Different specialized schools offer different programs, each with its own requirements and standards for admission, which were designed based on the specific nature and demands of those programs. Those who deliver these programs are best positioned to establish the appropriate entrance criteria, and that is something a centralized test cannot fully accomplish. Nevertheless, it is a significant improvement over a lottery system and the consideration of victimhood as a determining factor in admission to specialized programs that require a strong foundation as a prerequisite.

During the past three years, instead of selecting the best of the crop and educating them according to their abilities so they could become the best contributors to their society, as one would expect to be the purpose of our schools, our education system ignored the professional judgment of its own teachers, wasted three years of students’ time, and misused publicly funded programs. The last cohort of students admitted to merit-based specialized programs graduated in June 2026. The next cohort of students admitted through a semi-merit-based process will begin these programs in September 2026. Over the past three years, the larger number of students admitted to these programs, in between these two groups, were placed in a difficult and unfair situation, while many others were denied the opportunity to gain admission. The result speaks for itself.

An inevitable and preventable failure. What a shame.

It has taken three years and an insane amount of work for an army of teachers, parents, individuals, and organizations such as Friends of Richard Bilkszto and Save our Schools Ontario to pressure the Ministry of Education to reverse this decision. Going backwards and returning to where we were in 2023 is not an improvement; that said, it could be considered one if it marks the point at which we stop the downward spiral of destructive policies.

Richard would be happy to know that we are closer to restoring what we had, and therefore the prospect of improvement could now be on the horizon. Rest in peace, Richard. You are in our thoughts and prayers.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Sun, 12 Jul 2026 11:30:34 GMT

How Librarians’ New Social Justice Mission Goes After the Privacy of Library Workers

This week, we featured an essay by Kristin Antelman examining how the library profession’s growing emphasis on social justice advocacy may be reshaping its longstanding commitments to institutional neutrality and intellectual freedom. Focusing on DEI training, employee privacy, and workplace culture, Antelman argues that ideological conformity within libraries can erode the trust these institutions have historically earned from the public.

Rather than dismissing libraries’ important role in advancing access to knowledge, the essay contends that their greatest strength lies in serving as neutral spaces where diverse viewpoints can coexist. Antelman suggests that preserving privacy, encouraging viewpoint diversity, and recommitting to the profession’s foundational values are essential if libraries are to remain trusted institutions for future generations.

“When a privacy-defending public service entity such as a library fails to protect the diversity of thought and privacy of its own employees, it has shown itself to have profoundly lost its way.”

Read the Full Article

Report Finds Books Aren’t Vanishing From Schools. But That’s Not the Whole Story

FAIR Board of Advisors member Robert Pondiscio examined new research on the role of whole books in today's classrooms. While recent data suggests that novels have not disappeared from schools, Pondiscio argues that too many students—particularly those in underserved communities—are reading too few complete works and missing the unique cognitive and educational benefits that sustained reading provides. His essay highlights why cultivating deep reading habits remains essential for literacy, critical thinking, and meaningful engagement with literature in an increasingly fragmented digital age.

“The researchers’ most troubling finding is that teachers serving disadvantaged students consistently assign fewer books. Students in high-poverty schools or majority nonwhite schools, multilingual learners and students with disabilities all appear less likely to experience sustained encounters with complete works of literature.
That matters, because reading a book is not just an extended version of reading a passage. It requires different cognitive habits…”

Read the Full Article

The Science of Reading Has Won the Argument. Has It Won the Classroom?

FAIR Board of Advisors member Robert Pondiscio explored the progress—and remaining challenges—of the science of reading movement. While evidence-based literacy instruction has gained widespread support in state policy and school districts, Pondiscio argues that meaningful reform depends on what happens in classrooms. He examines why teacher preparation, curriculum, and sustained implementation remain critical to ensuring all students receive effective reading instruction grounded in the best available evidence.

“The first phase of reading reform was winning the argument against bad ideas. Mission (mostly) accomplished. The next phase is harder: building systems where good ideas can survive contact with reality and resistance. That means better teacher preparation, curriculum selection, and coaching. It means less initiative churn and more consistency, follow-through and patience.”

Read the Full Article

Public libraries have long served as trusted centers for learning, and today that mission extends beyond books. A new report from the Public Library Association examines how libraries are helping communities develop media literacy, strengthen digital skills, and navigate an increasingly complex information landscape while continuing to provide equitable access to reliable information. As misinformation becomes easier to spread and technology continues to evolve, these skills are increasingly important for helping people think critically, evaluate sources, and engage confidently in civic life.

“Among the report’s key findings:
Public libraries are on the front lines of media literacy, helping patrons evaluate sources, navigate digital content, and access trustworthy information every day.
More than 65% of respondents said patrons struggle to use digital resources, while staff training emerged as the top investment needed to help libraries meet growing demand for digital literacy support.”

Learn More Here

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR in Cedar City: Introducing Many Stories, One Nation to Utah Educators

Fair For All — Fri, 10 Jul 2026 11:30:55 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

We’re excited to announce that FAIR will attend the Utah Rural Schools Association (URSA) Summer Conference in Cedar City, Utah on July 15-17. This conference brings together educators and administrators from rural districts across Utah, serving every grade level, who are dedicated to improving student outcomes and strengthening their curricula. URSA provides hands-on and break-out sessions focused on mental and behavioral health supports, literacy best practices, grading practices, and building a culture of investment. For FAIR, the event will be an important opportunity to introduce Many Stories, One Nation to educators and administrators who understand the unique challenges and strengths of rural schools.

FAIR is bringing a dynamic team to Cedar City: Jefferson Shupe, a veteran FAIR Utah Chapter Leader; Aly Shupe, FAIR’s Social Media Coordinator; and Gabe Brown, creator of FAIR’s educational reels and shorts.

Utah holds particular significance as FAIR expands its work in the West. Rural communities have their own complex narratives — stories of settlement, immigration, indigenous presence, and agricultural heritage — that deserve thorough, multi-perspective exploration in classrooms. Yet the needs of rural schools are often overlooked in curriculum development conversations. Many districts lack access to rigorous, comprehensive resources that reflect their history and distinct experiences. That’s where Many Stories, One Nation comes in.

The URSA conference theme, “Teaching and Reaching Every Student,” aligns perfectly with FAIR’s work. Rural educators are deeply committed to understanding their students’ needs and building curricula that serve them well — and Many Stories, One Nation embodies that commitment: it equips students to think critically about competing perspectives and engage with an increasingly complex society.

What makes FAIR’s curriculum ideal for rural districts is a framework that gives students a better understanding of America’s broader story. Students learn how and why different groups experienced the same historical moments in fundamentally different ways, while grounding that understanding in the values and heritage of their own communities. FAIR’s curriculum is academically robust without being ideologically polarizing, meeting students where they are and equipping educators with material that honors both national complexity and local identity.

FAIR’s team will share lesson materials and demonstrate to education leaders what Many Stories, One Nation looks like in action and how it can serve students, teachers, and rural communities navigating Ethnic Studies adoption. We’ll also document the conference on social media to share insights with FAIR’s community.

The conversations we have in Cedar City next week will help us understand how to better support these districts in bringing a fuller American story to their classrooms. We look forward to connecting with Utah educators and administrators and showing them what’s possible when a curriculum grounded in academic integrity meets communities that are committed to every student’s success. Stay tuned–we’ll share what we learn from these conversations in our next update!

Join us.

With gratitude,

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

Subscribe now to receive FAIR News weekly in your Inbox

Conference Link

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the nation is still wrestling with some of its oldest questions: Who belongs? What does equality require? How should we understand our differences?

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 What Killed Michael Brown? — July 15 — 110 min run time + 30 min discussion

🎬 Killing America — July 29 — 38 min run time + discussion featuring Dr. Diana Blum and Eli Steele

🎬 15 Days — August 12

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

What does it mean to have “rights”?

Our goal is to have an intellectually rigorous and inspirational conversation that aligns with FAIR’s emphasis on open inquiry and civil discourse.

FAIR in Conversation has relaunched with a new monthly format built for this moment.

. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

Join the FAIR Community

How Librarians' New Social Justice Mission Goes After the Privacy of Library Workers

Kristin Antelman — Thu, 09 Jul 2026 11:30:39 GMT

Libraries have been advancing democracy and social justice long before they became consumed by critical social justice ideology a decade ago. They served that mission by providing free access to books and inculcating a love of learning in children, teens and adults of all socioeconomic backgrounds. University libraries supported the mission of their parent institutions, which was to build and transmit knowledge across generations. These goals have always been integral to advancing society by creating community spaces, more equitable access to education, and an informed population.

Unfortunately, many of today’s libraries reject the library profession’s foundational value of institutional neutrality: that is, the development of balanced collections, services and programming. The value that has displaced institutional neutrality is “social justice,” meaning that many librarians see it as the library’s job to educate people about what they see as the right way to think about contested social and political issues.

Tailoring library collections and programming to reflect their worldview, or not allowing certain groups to meet in the library, are the main tools librarians use to advance a “social justice” mission. But just as important for these librarians is to work with people who agree with them, and enthusiastically.

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) staff trainings are one vehicle for communicating the social justice worldview—while at the same time encouraging staff to defer to the activists by raising the cost of disagreement. These trainings tend to be mandatory (whether explicitly or effectively). New training guidelines were developed in 2022 by the American Library Association’s College & Research Libraries division, replacing just ten-year old cultural competency guidelines that were based on longstanding library best practices. Instead of learning practical steps to serve populations who speak languages other than English, for example, the new Cultural Proficiencies for Racial Equity guideines encourage libraries to implement a staff training program that aims to develop only four competencies: awareness of racial identity, manifestations of racism, commitment to countering racism, and analysis of racialized outcomes.

“As LIS workers, our foundational growth is strengthened by an ability to identify and acknowledge ways in which whiteness and white supremacy have impacted the field of librarianship. Beyond this, Libraries and LIS workers must actively engage in practices that address and redress these inequities.” (Cultural Proficiencies for Racial Equity, ALA, 2022)

It is typical in these DEI trainings to elicit, and then to probe and challenge, the personal beliefs of individual library workers. You can see this proselytizing mission clearly by dipping into the content of any of these trainings (a good example is this account of a former longtime University of Virginia Library employee’s DEI training program). If a library worker challenges anything in one of these trainings it will be made clear to them that failure to embrace this content is unwelcome or even taken as a personal insult (e.g., “denying the existence” of the trainer’s identity); it may also result in a complaint to human resources or the library’s governing board, leading to an investigation or worse.

One staff training program in a university library asked workers “What are the last five books you read? What is the racial mix of the authors?” Those are questions that explicitly violate librarianship’s respect for privacy as articulated in the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights: “All people, regardless of origin, age, background, or views, possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use.” Do library workers not also have privacy rights? Is not one’s personal reading a private matter? Is it not an individual worker’s right to share—or not—their own beliefs without their employer trying to change those beliefs, or to cast judgment on them? Trainings such as these amount to forcing employer-endorsed political views on staff. They violate both library professional ethics and library workers’ personal privacy.

Just as how an organization treats its workers reflects the values of that organization, so does DEI staff training provide a window for outsiders to see into what a library culture is like. When a privacy-defending public service entity such as a library fails to protect the diversity of thought and privacy of its own employees it has shown itself to have profoundly lost its way.

Those librarians who build collections and workforces that conform to their own politics, and who subject their staff to a politicized workplace, jeopardize the position of trust their library has earned with its community. Trust in a library is built on its being useful and responsive to all segments of its community. Libraries are trusted because they help people think for themselves, without violating personal privacy and without opprobrium. They are big-tent institutions intentionally distanced from the tribal passions of the day. When librarians explicitly disavow institutional neutrality and privacy of thought in favor of becoming partisan institutions, the trust they have earned can be quickly eroded—as we are seeing now. Where we stand today, libraries are at risk of becoming simply another political pugilist in society instead of the glue that binds people together across our differences and between one generation and the next.

If the profession is able to reinvest in its core values, it may be strong enough to weather the damage. As in the broader society, there’s both a hunger and an opening for change right now in the library profession. This change is being pursued through an alternative professional association (the Association of Library Professionals), as well as FAIR for Libraries’ development of resources to support library board members and members of the general public who care about their libraries.

While undeniably weakened by politicization right now, libraries ranging from public libraries of all sizes and in nearly every community to multi-million-volume research libraries, still in meaningful ways embody the twin values of privacy and neutrality. Those values hold within them a profound democratic truth. And in that truth lies resilience.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 11:30:15 GMT

On this 250th Anniversary of American Independence, Try Gratitude Instead of Grievance.

This week, we reflected on America’s 250th anniversary with an essay by David King that argues for gratitude over grievance. Drawing on his experiences living abroad, the author suggests that a global perspective can help place America’s challenges in context while highlighting the freedoms, stability, and opportunities that are often taken for granted.

Rather than ignoring the nation’s shortcomings, the essay contends that acknowledging them should not come at the expense of appreciating what America has accomplished. King notes that we should all cultivate gratitude as a foundation for constructive civic engagement, arguing that a healthier national conversation begins with recognizing what parts of our nation are still works in progress alongside our many national successes.

“So on this anniversary of independence, if you feel compelled to say that we are inappropriately celebrating 250 years of oppression, imperialism, exploitation, racism, slavery, brutality, and warmongering, spare us the complaints. Take that energy and go make something better instead.
We here in the USA are so damn lucky. Yes, even you. And while things may feel dystopian at this particular juncture in our history, only by choosing to be grateful for what we have can we stave off those threatening to take it away from us.”

Read the Full Article

How do public libraries select the wrong books for kids?

This week, we explored how children’s books make their way onto public library shelves and the often-overlooked process behind library collection development. Rather than focusing solely on individual librarians, the essay examines the broader publishing ecosystem—including publishers, reviewers, wholesalers, and acquisition practices—and argues that these institutions collectively influence the range of viewpoints available to young readers.

The author contends that ideological incentives throughout this pipeline can shape children’s collections in ways that narrow viewpoint diversity, particularly on topics such as gender and sexuality. The essay explores how libraries can better uphold intellectual freedom through more independent collection development, broader representation of perspectives, and greater community engagement in the selection process.

“Even if these elements are not always aligned, the process still results in library collections being stacked with books for kids on gender and sexuality that skew heavily toward a one-sided viewpoint. These views [are], presented as fact to an audience not yet capable of critical analysis…”

Read the Full Article

Commencement 2026: Jonathan Haidt Address

Cradle Americans

Eli Steele’s essay reflects on America’s 250th anniversary by exploring what it means to inherit freedom rather than fight for it. Drawing on his family’s history—from segregation and the Civil Rights Movement to the Holocaust—Steele argues that many Americans have become “cradle Americans,” born into freedoms they have never had to defend and, as a result, may not fully appreciate.

Using personal history alongside philosophical reflection, Steele contends that freedom is not merely a legal or political condition but an individual responsibility that must be actively exercised. Rather than dwelling on America’s failures or idealizing its past, he encourages readers to honor the sacrifices of previous generations by embracing personal courage, accountability, and the freedoms they have inherited.

“I am the first male on my father’s side to be born free of any government-sanctioned racial oppression, and who knows how far back the line of unfree men runs behind me in America. That is the inheritance my converts left me. I did not earn it. I was the cradle American they made possible. I grew up in freedom but do I and the millions of others like me know what I was given? Or do I only practice it out of habit? What is the value of a freedom that has not been suffered for?”

Read the Full Article

How Jack Became Black

This week, we announced the opening of FAIR's Summer Film Series with a screening of Eli Steele's documentary How Jack Became Black. Inspired by his experience enrolling his multiracial son in public school, Steele examines the role racial classification continues to play in American institutions and asks what it means to see people as individuals rather than members of racial groups.

Blending personal experience with broader cultural reflection, Steele questions the purpose and consequences of race-based categorization in education and public life. The film invites viewers to consider how concepts of identity, equality, and individual dignity shape the way we think about race today, followed by a live discussion exploring these questions in greater depth.

“This film is the record of one father trying to keep one boy out of a category, and finding a whole country built on the practice. FAIR has framed the night around the right questions. Will we ever see people as individuals rather than members of groups? Who belongs? How should we think about race?”

Read the Full Article

Watch Trailer Here

Watch the Full Film

Why Democracy Requires Renewal

Michael Dimock, Ph.D., “president of Pew Research Center, a leading source of nonpartisan, non-advocacy data”, reflects on America’s 250th anniversary and the future of the nation’s democratic experience. Drawing on public opinion research, he explores the growing challenges of political polarization, civic disengagement, and declining trust in institutions while arguing that these trends need not define America’s future.

Rather than dwelling solely on the nation’s divisions, the address calls on Americans to reclaim a sense of civic responsibility by engaging with one another, embracing democratic participation, and remaining open to institutional reform. It ultimately argues that the founders left behind not a finished system, but an ongoing project—one that each generation has both the opportunity and the responsibility to strengthen.

“In a way, what binds us is this very idea that this nation can be, hopes to be an inspiration to future generations and a beacon to the world. What we sometimes forget though is that this system was never meant to be static. The founders didn’t hand us a finished product. They handed us an ongoing project that requires engagement and creativity from one generation to the next. Right? So our responsibility is to carry that democratic imagination forward to make sure that this democratic republic doesn’t become static, right, or stuck or rigid or even cynical.”

Watch the Full Talk

The American College of Surgeons Remains Committed to Ideology

Dr. Richard T. Bosshardt examines what he sees as the American College of Surgeons’ continued commitment to DEI initiatives, arguing that recent leadership decisions reflect an ongoing preference for ideological priorities over viewpoint diversity and merit-based principles.

Focusing on the organization’s decision to invite Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to deliver a keynote lecture at its 2026 Clinical Congress, Bosshardt contends that the invitation signals an enduring institutional alignment with DEI despite growing legal, scientific, and public debate surrounding these issues. His essay raises broader questions about ideological conformity within professional medical organizations, the role of open debate in scientific institutions, and how organizations can foster excellence while remaining open to differing perspectives.

“My suggestion to my fellow surgeons: boycott the Clinical Congress in September and make it the least attended in ACS history. Perhaps then, the leadership will get the message that we are not racists, that surgery is not racist, and that surgeons treat patients with the same care and competence, regardless of race or other immutable characteristics.”

Read the Full Article

Join the FAIR Community

On this 250th Anniversary of American Independence, Try Gratitude Instead of Grievance.

DK — Sat, 04 Jul 2026 11:30:52 GMT

This morning, I did not need to boil my water to drink it. My power has been on uninterrupted for many months. When I go out later, the vast majority of other drivers will be predictable and follow traffic laws. I will inevitably, at some point, criticize people in power in a very direct and public way, and I will not fear retribution from the government or other powerful people for doing so. When I go to the store, prices will be higher than I like, but they will probably be exactly what’s listed on the shelf, and the products I buy I can almost certainly expect to work properly. If I go for a walk in the park, strangers will greet me with a smile and a “hello.” I will drive past a farmstand that consists only of a shelter, products, and a box to put money in, unmonitored, and there will be both cash and products there. I recognize this isn’t universally true. Prices are unaffordable for some families and a walk in some neighborhoods carries real risk. These are real exceptions, and they matter. But my point is that these are exceptions, not the rule.

I type this from a nation about to turn 250 years old, having spent a great deal of my life in places where all of the above have not been true.

No, I have not described a utopia, but I have described a place we have all taken for granted — or even worse, needlessly denigrated, at one point or another.

Although I do not use social media, I know well that if I took a look at any social media platform I would be bombarded by nonstop cynical rhetoric about how America is a great evil in the world, a failed state, a terrible place to live, a place some long to escape from — a pox on the earth that would be best undone and abandoned.

I think we can reasonably expect that rhetoric to escalate quite a bit at the least appropriate time, as we celebrate 250 years of independence. But I believe a bit of thanks for that independence feels more in order.

Gratitude work has become widely regarded as a huge boost to mental health. The concept is simple: spending time intentionally focusing on what we are happy about in our lives can give us (according to an article from Harvard Women’s Health Watch) “… greater emotional and social well-being, better sleep quality, lower depression risks, and favorable markers of cardiovascular health.”

So, gratitude is good for us. Knowing this makes many anti-America remarks and the deep and unrelenting cynicism on social media look as bad as a pack-a-day cigarette habit.

Some will criticize the US as being “no better than a third-world country”, losing sight of the incredible comfort that we (yes, even many poor people) experience here compared to the vast majority of other countries. Others will talk about how the founders guaranteed only the rights of “rich white men”, willfully disregarding the slow but undeniable progression to guaranteeing those rights for everyone and how absolutely novel that is in history. Others will claim that America “has no culture,” an odd statement to make about the greatest cultural exporter in modern history — a culture that would not be nearly as rich without the contributions of those people they see as “systemically oppressed”.

They’ll make these criticisms from their safe, comfortable, air-conditioned homes. They’ll make them with zero fear of retribution or consequence. They’ll make these criticisms to an audience of similarly cynical, resentful, and ungrateful people who will reinforce their vitriol.

To me, this is like the teenager in the McMansion who screams at his parents, storms out, and speeds off in the BMW they bought him. Where are you going, kid? You’ll be back in your nice bedroom with your childhood toys tonight, and your parents probably won’t even ask you to apologize for your behavior.

That said, there is absolutely plenty to be unhappy about. I believe that on almost all fronts, American society is declining and losing much of what makes us special. I fear that my ability to live on my own terms here is under threat more and more as time progresses. But I also believe that a big part of the reason these problems exist is because so many in our “intellectual” classes are demoralized by this relentless strain of perspective-free self-hate.

A part of how we got here is social media: cynicism, self-righteousness, and snarky jabs at those who are perceived as “powerful.” Hot takes generally play better there, as they drive engagement. That seems to reinforce the shibboleth-like nature of American self-hate as a means of accessing the purported “intelligentsia”. As Benedict Beckeld, author of Oikophobia: Why Successful Societies Turn Against Themselves, says:

“Like Diogenes’ sneers and sarcasms about his fellow Greeks, or Voltaire’s snarkiness about French tradition and religion, little virtue-signaling asides about American faults are de rigeur for those Americans wishing to communicate how cosmopolitan and superior they are.”

It should not be news to anyone that spending all of one’s time incessantly criticizing others is not a strong indicator of moral superiority, but rather a substitute for it. Confidence and competence are quiet because security does not require belittlement.

Having spent half my adult life living in the People’s Republic of China and a great deal of time traveling the rest of the world, I can tell you this: having a global perspective puts the contrast between American society and most others in the world in stark light.

My anecdotal experience aside, simply looking at net migration numbers tells you an undeniable story: In 2025, enough people chose the United States over their home country that, standing in a line holding hands, they would stretch from New York City to Miami.

Being grateful does not mean willfully ignoring real problems or being revisionist about history. But willful ignorance and revisionism cut both ways: as much as they can be used to “whitewash” true evils, they can also be used to reinforce needless negativity. You know what’s wrong with America today. You’re probably bombarded with these problems in your social media feeds, so I’m not going to spend time discussing them here. I, too, am feeling the embarrassment of our broken political system and the existential dread brought about by the state of our economy.

Yet despite the challenges we face today and the many ghastly moments of our history, what we choose to focus on is key to the solution. Allow me to anthropomorphize our nation for a moment. Have you ever loved someone whose bad choices brought them to a bad place? If you truly wanted them to get better, would you spend your time constantly berating them for their flaws and proclaiming how bad they are to everyone you both know? Once you’ve acknowledged their reality, what is the purpose of staying critical? To feel better about yourself? Because some part of you fears you’re just like them? Be honest.

So on this anniversary of independence, if you feel compelled to say that we are inappropriately celebrating 250 years of oppression, imperialism, exploitation, racism, slavery, brutality, and warmongering, spare us the complaints. Take that energy and go make something better instead.

We here in the USA are so damn lucky. Yes, even you. And while things may feel dystopian at this particular juncture in our history, only by choosing to be grateful for what we have can we stave off those threatening to take it away from us.

As we celebrate America’s 250th birthday, join FAIR in cultivating a common culture of gratitude. The more of us who do, the less we’ll have to criticize.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

What America’s 250th Actually Asks of Us

Fair For All — Fri, 03 Jul 2026 11:31:04 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

I was a kid when America celebrated its bicentennial anniversary. I don’t remember much about what was happening in the country at the time, but I remember the feeling: parades, red-white-and-blue everything, collector’s items everywhere, and a sense that the whole country had agreed on what we were celebrating. It was simple. We had made it 200 years, America was doing well, and that seemed worth being proud of. Nobody felt compelled to qualify their pride or patriotism with an asterisk or explanation.

This year feels different, and I don’t think I’m the only one who feels it. We’re marking 250 years as a country still fighting a war, still sorting out how much division we can absorb before it becomes something worse, still trying to figure out what AI, social media, and a fast-changing economy are going to do to the way we live and work. A lot of people who love this country, who have given real parts of their lives to it, are feeling something more complicated than pride this year. Conflicted might be the better word. Even people deeply invested in America’s future are struggling to say, in one clean sentence, what this milestone means to them.

Our constitutional inheritance was never a finished project handed to us so we could admire it from a distance. It was built by people who often disagreed with each other, sometimes bitterly, and kept working anyway. They understood that America would only survive if each generation was willing to look honestly at where we stood and recommit to the work. Our country wasn’t built on consensus, but by people who realized the value of holding genuine disagreements and committed to staying at the table regardless. That’s the part of the founding story that tends to get lost or smoothed over during celebrations.

Our country is fifty years older than it was the last time we celebrated. If America were a person, it would be more experienced, but not always wiser for it. Being part of this moment requires us to step up and examine our history honestly — the parts we’re proud of and the parts we’re still wrestling with — without collapsing into either uncritical celebration or blanket cynicism. To honor America’s 250th anniversary, we need to do the hard work of showing up for the arguments like our Founders did instead of walking away from them. It means extending patience to neighbors who see the country differently than we do. That’s a lot harder than showing up for a parade or watching fireworks explode in the sky, but it’s a more fitting tribute to the grand experiment our founders built.

So what does this look like in practice? Here’s one small, concrete place to start: go back to the sources. Not a summary of America’s history, but the actual record of how our country has evolved and understood itself over time. Because history examined through primary resources is often more complicated and more interesting than the version we read secondhand through the lenses of other people.

Our own Many Stories, One Nation curriculum was built on a similar premise: that understanding this country and what it represents means being able to hold multiple, sometimes competing, true stories about it at the same time, rather than flattening our history into a single narrative in either direction.

Our friends at FAIR in Libraries and the Association of Library Professionals just released three reading lists (elementary, middle & high school, and adult) for America’s 250th, built by librarians who care about the same free and open discourse our founders cherished. These lists are a good way to spend part of your holiday weekend, and worth passing along to a librarian in your life who isn’t yet an ALP member.

If you’re not already a member of these communities, this is a good week to change that: join FAIR in Libraries or ALP. Their membership drive closes July 11th, and it’s a small, direct way to support the people doing the quiet work of keeping libraries places for open inquiry rather than ideological battlegrounds.

None of this resolves the tensions our nation is grappling with, and it’s not supposed to. But learning our own history honestly and supporting the people and institutions that help others do the same feels like a fitting way to meet a complicated anniversary. This year, honor America with more than a parade. Honor the actual work this anniversary celebrates.

We don’t get another 250th. Let’s do this one right.

Join us.

With gratitude,

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

Subscribe now to receive FAIR News weekly in your Inbox

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the nation is still wrestling with some of its oldest questions: Who belongs? What does equality require? How should we understand our differences?

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 How Jack Became Black — July 1

🎬 What Killed Michael Brown? — July 15

🎬 Killing America — July 29

🎬 15 Days — August 12

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

FAIR in Conversation has relaunched with a new monthly format built for this moment. We’re leaning away from books and into the issues themselves: the debates, decisions, and developments that are defining what fairness, free speech, and equal dignity mean in America, and beyond, right now.

Each session will center on a pressing topic of the day, drawing on a curated mix of articles, book summaries, short essays, podcasts, films, and other multimedia resources to ground the conversation before opening the floor for discussion.

These are exactly the conversations America needs now, and we are committed to modeling them. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

Join the FAIR Community

How do public libraries select the wrong books for kids?

Fair For All — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 11:30:26 GMT

Libraries across North America have recently been under fire from parents and authorities concerned that their collections of children’s and young adult books contain material that is sexually graphic. In many cases, the books in question are perceived as part of a progressive agenda that pushes the young to question their sexuality and gender identity. Books introducing gender and sexuality viewpoints to very young audiences have become alarmingly common in libraries. While only a minority veer into graphic sexual territory, together they raise community concern about age-appropriateness.

For the libraries in question, the defensive position is one that invokes intellectual freedom. Outside forces should not limit or direct the content of library collections—that is the purview of professional librarians, who choose material in accordance with carefully considered criteria with the goal of serving the needs of their users and communities. This argument is invoked with particular fervor when it comes to books that express the viewpoint of “marginalized” groups, because these are the groups deemed most vulnerable to censorship. The stated goal is a wide variety of viewpoints, including viewpoints that are potentially not aligned with majority opinion. But how did we get to the point where the professional selection process, seeking to include a wide variety of (often unpopular) opinions, actively collects books that promote a progressive ideology to such an extreme that graphically sexual material is allowed for young people. Has indoctrination of the vulnerable become the norm?

First, let me make clear that in many, if not most public libraries, the actual selection of books by staff librarians is limited. In the past, librarians may have spent hours perusing catalogues and review journals, and in some cases attending publishers’ showcases. Today, public libraries often do not have the resources for that level of labor-intensive work. The number of books published in a given year, thanks to electronic and self-publishing, has grown too large, and library budgets are increasingly stretched.

Instead, many public libraries rely on their suppliers to do part or all of the work. A small number of library wholesalers are in the business of supplying libraries with pre-selected books and providing them shelf-ready, with catalogue records, spine labels, and security tags included. These wholesalers select materials based on profiles that the library supplies, which detail community demographics, interests, genres, copies-to-waitlist ratios, and other criteria. Typically, a local librarian will examine the shipments before acceptance, modify the profile as needed, and supplement these “automatic release plans” with backlist orders, customer request items, specialized books, local history, and anything else that the plan doesn’t cover. The profiles in question often contain a reference to “diversity” with specified targets of books written by or about particular minority groups. In practice, the books that meet these criteria are inevitably skewed toward the progressive viewpoint within these minorities.

But the libraries and wholesalers are only one part of the selection ecosystem. The other players are the publishers themselves, eager to satisfy their progressive impulses, who trip over themselves to sign “minority voices”; and the professional book reviewers and journals, who also are eager to support identity-based causes. This favoritism—born out of an effort to support unheard voices—creates a new silence for stories and others that fall outside of target groups. Wholesalers base their decisions on major publishers’ offerings and positive reviews in library and literature journals. The resulting pipeline leading to library acquisition is ideologically skewed, and deviating from it would take some effort, even if local libraries were not ideologically captured themselves.

Even if these elements are not always aligned, the process still results in library collections being stacked with books for kids on gender and sexuality that skew heavily toward a one-sided viewpoint. These views, presented as fact to an audience not yet capable of critical analysis, are in some cases accompanied by descriptions and illustrations of a sexually explicit nature, compounding the age-inappropriateness of the works. All the actors consider “queer inclusion” to be part of their mandate, not a political stance, and even where skepticism exists, it often succumbs to self-preservation.

Opponents of gender ideology in kids’ books will often call it “grooming.” This is hyperbole; it’s more akin to propaganda, the presentation of a contested ideology as fact in an environment that is intended to be neutral and non-political. Prospects for reform make for some difficult choices. Governmental oversight, community review, and parental permission regimes all present their own challenges to the independence and effectiveness of public libraries. Somehow, we have to find a way to take social-justice ideology out of the decisions at all levels.

To combat some of this skewing and keep libraries neutral and reading options open, readers should request books—most libraries have a purchase request option online. Librarians should try to operate with more autonomy and critically evaluate what publishers are putting out even when it sacrifices some efficiency. As individuals, we should prioritize the value of experiencing a range of literary topics and viewpoints, allowing us to expand our horizons and keep us open to a wide variety of experiences.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Sun, 28 Jun 2026 11:31:20 GMT

Running the DEI Gauntlet

This week, we featured Jim Condon’s firsthand account of his final years at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory and the legal battle that followed. After publicly opposing workplace DEI policies he believed conflicted with principles of merit, equal protection, and free expression, Condon says he was removed from the position he had held for decades.

Reflecting on that experience, Condon argues that institutional pressure to affirm particular viewpoints can have unintended consequences for employees who feel unable to support contradictory policies. His essay raises broader questions about compelled speech, workplace culture, and how organizations can pursue diversity while preserving viewpoint diversity, due process, and merit-based decision-making.

“The real issue throughout all of this ordeal was never about a truly diverse workplace where all are judged equally on their merits; it is about using diversity to justify compelled speech, bullying, discrimination, and retaliation by employers.”

Read the Full Article

Commencement 2026: Jonathan Haidt Address

Jonathan Haidt’s 2026 NYU commencement address, is a reflection on attention, resilience, and human connection in an age of constant digital distraction.

Drawing on decades of research, Haidt argues that our attention has become one of our most valuable resources—and one of the most contested. He encourages graduates to reclaim agency over their lives by resisting technologies designed to capture their focus, embracing difficult challenges, and investing in meaningful relationships.

Rather than offering career advice alone, Haidt presents a broader vision of human flourishing: one grounded in intentional living, real-world connection, and the courage to pursue what truly matters. His message serves as a timely reminder that how we choose to spend our attention ultimately shapes who we become.

“I ask them to delete social media apps from their phones just for one week…They get back precious hours each day and a feeling of agency over how to spend that time. So treasure your attention more than the people who want to take it from you. Never forget what it’s worth. For Meta, it’s more than a trillion dollars. For you and your life, it’s priceless.”

Watch Full Speech

‘Disagreement itself has become morally legible’: Glenn Loury critiques self-censorship

This week, Stanford welcomed economist and public intellectual Glenn Loury for a conversation on self-censorship and the state of public discourse. Drawing on themes from his recent book Self-Censorship, Loury argued that fear of reputational consequences can discourage open inquiry, leading individuals to remain silent even when disagreement could improve public understanding. His remarks explored the relationship between free expression, institutional incentives, and the importance of candid conversation in a healthy democracy.

“Loury described self-censorship as “the equilibrium outcome of rational behavior,” and emphasized its compounding nature stating “silence today produces greater silence tomorrow.”

Read the Full Article

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR’s Summer Film Series: Four Documentaries. One Summer. The Conversation We Need Now.

Fair For All — Fri, 26 Jun 2026 11:31:43 GMT

Dear Friends of FAIR,

This summer, FAIR is launching a four-film series exploring how Americans have debated and constructed racial identity, belonging, and the nation itself. These documentaries ask urgent questions about what we owe one another across differences and how we talk about it.

The series launches July 1st with How Jack Became Black, a documentary that traces the invention of Blackness as a racial category in America. The film examines the roots of colorblindness, the hope that we might one day see people as individuals rather than group members, and shows how that promise collides with lived experience. It’s a fitting opener for a series running alongside the nation’s 250th anniversary, a moment when we’re reckoning with what America is, who belongs to it, and what we’ve promised ourselves about equality and freedom. Monica Harris, FAIR’s Executive Director, will host the discussion with Eli Steele.

July 15th, we screen What Killed Michael Brown?, a sharp, unflinching look at the facts, rhetoric, and storytelling that followed the shooting in Ferguson. The film eschews easy narratives and instead asks viewers to sit with an uncomfortable complexity: the difference between what happened and how it was told.

July 29th, we move to Killing America, a documentary that wades into the historical and contemporary tensions between individual rights and group identity. The film traces how America has wrestled with inclusion, exclusion, and the meaning of membership.

We close our summer series on August 12th with 15 Days, directed by Natalya Murakhver, a New York City mother who sued to reopen schools during the COVID pandemic. The film investigates why America’s closures lasted longer than nearly every other nation and examines the science, policy decisions, and human costs ignored along the way.

Each screening will be followed by a discussion with subject matter experts and scholars who can help audiences think carefully about what these films reveal.

FAIR believes that civil discourse across genuine disagreement is foundational to a free and equal society. The COVID pandemic was one of the most traumatic moments in American history, and race and racial identity remain among the most contested topics in our society. We struggle to discuss these issues clearly. We retreat into defensive positions. We mistake agreement for understanding. We assume bad faith instead of engaging with hard questions.

FAIR believes these topics cannot be discussed and debated on the fringes. They shape education policy, civil rights enforcement, hiring practices, and how young people understand themselves and their country. These films don’t promote a single perspective or conclusion. They present evidence, arguments, and human stories that require viewers to think. They are an invitation to think carefully, together, across lines of difference.

These screenings are open to FAIR newsletter subscribers and community members. Whether you work in education, media, or civil rights advocacy, or simply want to engage with evidence-based analysis and diverse expert perspectives on some of the nation’s most contested questions, this series is for you. Stay tuned for details in our newsletter or follow us on social media for registration information and screening times.

This summer, as we celebrate America’s 250th anniversary, our country is reckoning with its founding promises of equal protection, free expression, and belonging. These four films tackle that question from different angles. They model what it looks like to engage seriously, to resist easy narratives, to think together across genuine disagreement. That’s the conversation America needs now.

Join us.

With gratitude,

Monica Harris
Executive Director, FAIR

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the nation is still wrestling with some of its oldest questions: Who belongs? What does equality require? How should we understand our differences?

This summer, FAIR’s Film Series will explore these questions through four compelling documentaries produced by Eli Steele and discussions with filmmakers, scholars, and thought leaders.

Join us for this can’t-miss lineup:

🎬 How Jack Became Black — July 1

🎬 What Killed Michael Brown? — July 15

🎬 Killing America — July 29

🎬 15 Days — August 12

The Canadian Free Speech Crisis with Lisa Bildy

Canada shares our values, our language, and our legal traditions — yet free speech there is under pressure in ways that would have been unimaginable a decade ago. FAIR Advisor Lisa Bildy of the Free Speech Union of Canada will walk us through the landscape: who’s being silenced, who’s pushing back, and the cultural pressures that are reshaping expression north of the border. Join us for a candid look at what’s happening in Canada and why it matters for all of us.

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

These are exactly the conversations America needs now, and we are committed to modeling them. Sessions will run monthly through September 23rd. We hope you’ll join us!

FAIR Educators Alliance 2025-2026

Join the FAIR Educators Alliance for the 2025–2026 school year to equip PK–12 educators with the knowledge, strategies, and community support they need to foster schools that are more enriching and free from bias for students and educators.

Each monthly gathering will open with updates and presentations from FAIR staff, fellows, Chapter Leaders, and occasional guest speakers. Together, we’ll explore strategies to support educators, communities, and local chapters—and to advance positive change at the local, regional, and national levels.

Following the presentations, participants will have space for open-forum discussions to connect, seek advice, and coordinate on pressing issues in their schools. Breakout rooms will be divided into PK-6 and 7-12 grade levels with experienced teachers facilitating those conversations.

Meetings: First Thursday of each month at 7 PM ET via Zoom Duration: 1 hour

Join Us!

Join the FAIR Community

Running the DEI Gauntlet

Jim Condon — Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:30:56 GMT

My lifelong career in radio astronomy began in 1972 when I joined the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) as a new postdoc in Charlottesville, VA. After four decades as a Tenured Astronomer, I became an Astronomer Emeritus. Working with its excellent astronomers, engineers, and computer scientists was extremely rewarding—until the NRAO betrayed its founding principles of non-discrimination and merit in favor of DEI discrimination. For example, its revised hiring policy, “If two candidates for the same position have equal qualifications within the uncertainties, the candidate from the under-represented group should be hired” mandated discrimination against majority candidates, violating both Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 14^th Amendment guarantees of equal protection. All scientists and managers were expected to “champion” NRAO’s version of “diversity,” which promoted performative inclusion. Most NRAO employees who oppose DEI discrimination have been silenced by fear of losing their jobs.

In 2017 the NRAO required its employees to complete online training on NRAO’s non-discrimination policies and certify that they understood them. I believed the policies were self-contradictory, and balked at this compelled speech. Consequently, in 2018 I was tasked by the NRAO Director, HR Head, and Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI) to write a confidential memo documenting institutional discrimination that I observed during my four decades at the NRAO.

I emailed my memo “Institutional Discrimination by Race and Sex at AUI/NRAO” to the Director. I hoped he would follow HR’s investigation policy and promptly address my claims. Instead, he tried to suppress them. Legal discovery later revealed his email to the heads of HR and ODI: “ugh. Despite how we may feel about the fight, we really need this to die down and go away.” That email showed that the NRAO would never oppose discrimination in the name of maintaining DEI standards. A month later, the HR Head emailed me to suggest I seek employment elsewhere and threatened to place a negative note in my HR file. Having tenure and nearing retirement, I was annoyed but not intimidated.

In August of 2020, the NRAO Director held my UVa PhD student hostage by threatening to remove me as her supervisor. Having nearly finished her thesis and applied for several postdocs, removing me would have set her research career back a year. I had to pay her ransom by falsely certifying that I understood NRAO’s DEI policies. Even though the NRAO Director could not punish me directly, he could exploit others to compel my speech.

On September 14, 2022 the NRAO announced that “Advance broader, equitable, inclusive participation in science and engineering” had been added to its original mission statement. The announcement also linked to NRAO’s web page advertising several prima facie discriminatory DEI programs. Who could speak up for those grad students, job applicants, and employees who would not be accepted, hired, or promoted because they were of the wrong race, sex, or sexual orientation, or because they simply wouldn’t “champion” DEI discrimination? As a 77-year-old unpaid Astronomer Emeritus, I could and so I had to. I reluctantly sent an email to the whole scientific staff publicly opposing NRAO’s discriminatory programs and policies.

The Director promptly halted the scientific staff emailer. Within an hour, he proposed to the AUI President the method of retaliation approved by the AUI Board of Trustees at its next meeting.

Less than four hours after my email, the Director emailed the Heads of HR and ODI:

“I am going to suggest to a carefully selected few members of scistaff that they create a petition (outside observatory resources) to state their support for D[E]I, then get every damn member of scistaff to sign it and present [it] to the observatory to show their support. Every. Damn. One.”

The next day he emailed the AUI President “I have seeded an effort in the scientific staff to provide a widespread condemnation of Condon’s actions/opinions, and demonstrate a firm D[E]I support.” The resulting condemnation was deceptively styled “grass-roots” but was astroturf seeded by the Director for his own benefit.

The NRAO Director also emailed the scientific staff, falsely describing my email as an “egregious abuse” of the Scistaff emailer. The Director also claimed my email disparaged other members of the staff, and AUI later claimed that I falsely alleged that NRAO engaged in career-ending retaliation. My email did neither; both claims were based on fabrications. This completed his “degradation ceremony” and led to my cancellation an hour later by the UVa Astronomy Department, where I had taught their radio astronomy course ten times.

On November 4, 2022 I was shocked to receive a letter from AUI President Cohen informing me that my Astronomer Emeritus status had been revoked, any access I had to NRAO resources would be discontinued, and I should remove my personal items from the NRAO Headquarters building under guard. The letter didn’t say why, but it was in retaliation for my public opposition to DEI discrimination by race and sex at the NRAO. I hadn’t expected the AUI Board would retaliate because the previous AUI President had explicitly promised all NRAO employees “that you will never be subject to retaliation for reporting any concern that has the objective of helping this organization and its people.” Nor had I imagined the Board would act behind my back, denying basic due-process rights.

I was dismayed that my research career would be truncated by losing access to NRAO’s physical and digital libraries, critical computer support, and being made too “radioactive” for my colleagues to work with me. A week later, I removed my personal items from my office, saving what would fit into my small car and losing the rest. I will never forget looking back on the building where I arrived as a postdoc 50 years ago and was now leaving in disgrace, never to return.

I was unfairly dismissed from my lifetime career. Forcing employees to affirm contradictory policies is unjust compelled speech. I worried for the future of qualified scientists like myself who would be excluded due to their race or sex—which is ironic for DEI. Consequently, I sued AUI in federal court for retaliation made illegal by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This can cost about $100,000 out-of-pocket for legal expenses, several hundred hours of work helping your legal team prepare your case, and a three-year wait for results. The expensive and time-consuming process makes lawsuits like this impossible for most employees to resist injustice.

Soon after the judge ruled “AUI’s reason for terminating him [Condon] was pretext,” my case concluded in March 2026 with a clear legal victory—a judgment in my favor ordering AUI to pay $130,000 damages plus $79,171.52 to reimburse legal expenses.

Was my legal victory worth the ordeal? I was terminated, but the NRAO director was not. Because I was silenced, most NRAO employees are still afraid to oppose DEI discrimination. Even so, I don’t regret having opposed DEI discrimination, and now I can no longer be silenced. I believe that widely exposing NRAO’s actions is the best way to discourage any future attempts at discrimination or retaliation. The real issue throughout all of this ordeal was never about a truly diverse workplace where all are judged equally on their merits; it is about using diversity to justify compelled speech, bullying, discrimination, and retaliation by employers.

We welcome you to share your thoughts on this piece in the comments below. Click here to view our comment section moderation policy.

The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Fair For All or its employees.

We are actively seeking perspectives on this topic and others. If you’d like to join the conversation, please send completed drafts to submissions@fairforall.org.

Weekly Roundup

Fair For All — Sun, 21 Jun 2026 11:31:01 GMT

“You Can’t Say That!”: How Speaking About My Experiences as a Woman Researcher Ended My Academic Career

This week, we highlighted a personal essay by postdoctoral researcher Sylvia B.

In the piece, Sylvia reflects on the professional fallout that followed her attempts to discuss the challenges women in academia face. What began as a conversation about career mobility and sex-based differences evolved into accusations, formal complaints, and ultimately her decision to leave academia altogether. Through her experience, she asks whether institutions that encourage employees to “bring their whole selves to work” truly make room for diverse perspectives and imperfect conversations—or only some of them.

“A healthy intellectual community should be able to tolerate imperfect conversations and different viewpoints. I am not rejecting inclusivity or efforts to make all people feel welcome in science. I am asking whether the exhortation to “bring your whole self to work” actually includes everyone. Instead of empowering the performatively self-righteous to demand ideological obedience, we should promote open communication and professional tolerance of different lived experiences—for all people, not just select groups.”

Read the Full Article

Breaking the Spell: White Guilt from Belfast to Britain — with Jenny Holland

In a recent episode of Man of Steele, filmmaker and writer Eli Steele speaks with Belfast-based commentator Jenny Holland about the social and political tensions unfolding in the UK. Drawing on her proximity to recent unrest in Belfast, Holland discusses immigration, policing, identity politics, and the influence of what she and Steele describe as a culture of “white guilt.” Their conversation explores concerns about institutional ideology, the changing character of Irish republicanism, and growing frustrations among segments of the British public. Together, the pair argue that many of these issues are being overlooked or misunderstood by political and cultural elites.

“The younger generation aren’t seeing the benefit of the anti-colonial resistance narrative. In fact, they’re really getting it in the rear, to be crude about it. And they know they are. They know that they’re getting fucked, basically. And they’re like: no, we’re not going to endure this — so that you can pontificate in front of a microphone about how great and good you are, and how migrants are welcome. You’re not doing that off our backs. I think there’s more of that sentiment on the ground than has been reported.”

Read the Full Article

Why We Should Listen to Robert Coles — and to Each Other

Shared by FAIR board advisor Nadine Strossen, this reflection by historian Jonathan Zimmerman revisits the life and legacy of psychiatrist Robert Coles, who died on June 4. Coles spent decades listening to Americans from across racial, social, and political divides. He resisted reducing people to stereotypes, insisting that understanding begins with curiosity and conversation. He was best known for his conversations with children, especially those who had faced racial violence. Through more than 50 books and hundreds of articles, Coles championed the idea that every person—and especially every child—has something important to say. His work offers a timely reminder that listening to one another as individuals, rather than caricatures, is essential to a more humane and less polarized society.

“…every individual you meet becomes exactly that: an individual. They’re no longer a category or a caricature. They’re a human being, trying to make sense of the world. Just like you, and like me.”
“I don’t look upon them as good or bad,” Coles explained. “I look upon them as human beings, strong and sensible, weak and full of faults.” He readily acknowledged “the blindness, the distortions, the racism, the meanness” among them. But he refused to reduce them to that.”

Read the Full Article

Engaged citizens built America. Today, civics education is coming back.

Can a divided nation rediscover the habits of self-government? As America nears its 250th anniversary, a growing movement to strengthen civics education aims to do just that. Across the country, students are learning not only how government works, but how to wrestle with competing interpretations of history, engage opposing viewpoints, and participate responsibly in civic life. In an era of deep polarization, many see these efforts as essential to preserving a culture of pluralism and constructive disagreement.

“Nicholas Longo, director of the Rutgers Democracy Lab at Rutgers University, says young people want to be engaged, and when they have opportunities, they do great things. In these tumultuous and highly polarized times, teaching young people civics skills can have a profound impact on society, he says.”

Read the Full Article

Fair For All

FAIR in Medicine Charts a New Direction with Dr. Doug Novotny

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Join the FAIR Community

Where Are You From?

About the Author:

Vic Levitin built four startups, then stepped off the default path to rebuild life from the ground up on a Thai island with his family. Writing about the experiment at viclevitin.com

Weekly Roundup

Oh, Great Nation

How to Raise a Grateful American

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR Builds Curriculum Momentum at SBAE and URSA Conferences

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Join the FAIR Community

Oh, Great Nation

Weekly Roundup

The Publishing Industry Stopped Believing in Its Readers

What Killed Michael Brown?

Why Did We Let Big Tech Take Over Education?

Join the FAIR Community

Remembering Richard Bilkszto

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Join the FAIR Community

The Publishing Industry Stopped Believing in Its Readers

Don't Break Faith with Those Who Die

Weekly Roundup

How Librarians’ New Social Justice Mission Goes After the Privacy of Library Workers

Report Finds Books Aren’t Vanishing From Schools. But That’s Not the Whole Story

The Science of Reading Has Won the Argument. Has It Won the Classroom?

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR in Cedar City: Introducing Many Stories, One Nation to Utah Educators

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Join the FAIR Community

How Librarians' New Social Justice Mission Goes After the Privacy of Library Workers

Weekly Roundup

On this 250th Anniversary of American Independence, Try Gratitude Instead of Grievance.

How do public libraries select the wrong books for kids?

Commencement 2026: Jonathan Haidt Address

Cradle Americans

How Jack Became Black

Why Democracy Requires Renewal

The American College of Surgeons Remains Committed to Ideology

Join the FAIR Community

On this 250th Anniversary of American Independence, Try Gratitude Instead of Grievance.

What America’s 250th Actually Asks of Us

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

Join the FAIR Community

How do public libraries select the wrong books for kids?

Weekly Roundup

Running the DEI Gauntlet

Commencement 2026: Jonathan Haidt Address

‘Disagreement itself has become morally legible’: Glenn Loury critiques self-censorship

Join the FAIR Community

FAIR’s Summer Film Series: Four Documentaries. One Summer. The Conversation We Need Now.

The Canadian Free Speech Crisis with Lisa Bildy

FAIR in Conversation is Back!

FAIR Educators Alliance 2025-2026

Join the FAIR Community

Running the DEI Gauntlet

Weekly Roundup

“You Can’t Say That!”: How Speaking About My Experiences as a Woman Researcher Ended My Academic Career

Breaking the Spell: White Guilt from Belfast to Britain — with Jenny Holland

Why We Should Listen to Robert Coles — and to Each Other

Engaged citizens built America. Today, civics education is coming back.

Join the FAIR Community