Timeline
of Events
Getting Censored When Your Voice Does Not Echo "Their"
Own
Preface to My Digital Exhibition:
Prior
to the creation of my digital exhibition, Prof. Nkiru Nzegwu started an
email discussion highlighting the major issues with the exhibit, as well
as Lynn Gamwell’s (director of the museum) decision to bring such
an exhibit to a research institution like Binghamton University. The email
included professors, students, director of the museum, graduate
student organization, and high-level university officials such as the
president and the provost. Eventually, the email grew with many
critical responses to the exhibition. Please, see the commentaries
from the Acebes exhibition.
October 19,
Thursday
Since
there was NO RESPONSE from Dr. Gamwell as well
as from ANY university officials
addressing the issues and concerns raised in the emails, I decided to
create a digital exhibition. Since Gamwell said she won’t censor
Acebes exhibition, I wanted to test the extent to which free speech
is allowed on campus, and more so, I wanted to see who has the right
or the privilege to represent. More importantly,
I wanted to know if all naked bodies are the same especially when it is
being represented by the “other”?
The
theory is: what would happen if nude bodies of
white women were represented?
Would Dr. Gamwell still be against censorship
as she was for the Acebes exhibition? Would the university
have a problem if nude photographs
of white women were represented? Is nudity the same or
will certain representations of certain type
of people be censored? Essentially, would Dr. Gamwell or Binghamton university
object to an art exhibition that show white
women as the subject of the gaze?
With all these questions, I set out to create a digital exhibition that
addressed those concerns. To accomplish this, I modeled the same techniques
dominant in Acebes's representation of
African women in my exhibition.
October 20,
Friday: 8AM
My
exhibition goes online.
I
put up the digital exhibition, “Engaging the Camera: Portraits of
White Women -- Acebes Other Show” on my university personal web
account.
Address:
http://bingweb.binghamton.edu/~anzegwu1/
I
sent an email back to all the recipients of the original email started
by Dr. Nzegwu about the Acebes exhibition. The email was directed to Dr.
Lynn Gamwell.
* A web account performs two functions for storage: network space (h-drive
is network drive for storing academic documents) and webpages. In my case,
I used my space on the university web account, also known as Bingsuns,
to store academic documents, class readings, and host my exhibition.
October 20, Friday: Between 12 - 1 PM
The
website was shut down within
a few hours online.
I
was not informed prior to the
shut down.
It
was only after inquiring that I got some type
of explanation.
How I found out about my website was shut down:
After attending a forum on the exhibition, I noticed that my website was
down after a colleague had requested to view it. I logged in my Bingsuns
account through FTP (File Transfer Protocol) but I was unable to click
the “public_html” folder, where the exhibition was stored
for public access. Every time I clicked the “public_html”
folder, it kept saying, “Permission denied.” All the other
folders such as “bin” were accessible. In order words, my
website was still on the server but it is not accessible to me or to anyone
else who visit this link, http://bingweb.binghamton.edu/~anzegwu1/.
The
university never contacted me or my department before shutting down my
email AND web
account. They did NOT provide any reasons prior
to suspending my accounts.
I called the computing services to speak with a representative but was
told the person was at lunch. I was provided with the name of the contact.
October 20, Friday: Between 2:30 – 3:00PM
I
contacted Cindy Kester, the Assistant Director of Academic Computing at
computing services regarding the shutdown of my website. At that time,
I was only aware that my web account was shut down. Coincidentally,
when I got Ms. Kester on the telephone, she told me that she was composing
the letter at the very moment of my call. I have no idea if this was true
or not.
Ms.
Kester informed me that I broke copyright law
by using the logos of the university and the art museum.
She also communicated to me that there was a great urgency
to bring down my website. I assume that whoever gave the order did not
want my exhibition to be SEEN at all.
In
any case, I asked her to still send me the email she was composing so
that I would have it in writing. I should remind the readers that during
our phone conversation, Ms. Kester NEVER informed
me that my email account was suspended. Ironically, I will not have received
her letter of explanation until Monday, October 23, 2006.
October 20, Friday 6PM
I
checked my email at home only to discover that my email account
was disabled. I should mention that Ms. Kester never mentioned
it to me during our conversation, although she would have been aware
which of my university accounts were cancelled.
By
Friday at 6 PM, both my accounts were disabled. I was
functioning with limited computing access, which I had paid for at the
beginninging of the semester. Of course, all this made it hard to do my academic
work and communicate with my professors.
October 22,
2006
I
wrote a letter explaining that my web and email account were shut down.
I sent this letter back to the original email list that was circulating
about the exhibition. The president and provost were part of this email.
Both of them never responded. (commentaries)
October 23, 2006
This
is the email Ms. Kester sent to me on Friday after our phone conversation.
Most of the things she mentioned on the telephone
were not part of the email. (commentaries)
October 24, 2006
I
sent the same letter to the president of the university. I never
received a response. (commentaries)
November 2, 2006
I
emailed Mr. Reed, vice-president of computing services, to find out the
circumstance regarding the suspension of my email and
web accounts. This email was also addressed to Ms. Kester. (commentaries)
November 5, 2006
This
is Mr. Reed's response to my email on Nov 2, 2006. He did not address
most of my concerns. He concluded by telling me to come in and
sign the documents. (commentaries)
November 6, 2006
I
emailed Mr. Reed again because of his suggestion about other copyright
violation, and his lack of response to my questions and concerns. He never
responded. (commentaries)
November 6, 2006
This
is Ms. Kester's response to an email I addressed to Mr. Reed. She want
me to come to her office. (commentaries)
November 6, 2006
I
responded to Ms. Kester's allegations that I never came to her office,
as well as her inconsistent stories, or lies. I also informed her that
I will not sign any legal documents until all the questions
in my email were addressed AND the circumstance
surrounding the suspension of my accounts were disclosed.
(commentaries)
November 6, 2006
This
is Ms. Kester's response to my previous email. In her email, she says
that she cannot reveal the name of the person
who made the charge about copyright because it is not part of their practice.
This is not what she told me earlier. And yet,
she does not cite any policy which indicates that this is not their practice.
(commentaries)
November 6-7, 2006
Somewhere
around this time, Ms. Kester filed a report to Mr. Paul Stroud, the Associate
Director of Judicial Affairs, about my refusal to sign the legal documents.
She never mentioned to me that she will be filing
a formal report against me. (commentaries)
November 15
I
get a confidential "come see me" letter from Mr. Stroud in the
Judicial Affairs demanding that I meet him on Friday or face an official
charge from the university if I fail to show. The letter was written on
November 8, 2006, just two days
after I told Ms. Kester and Mr. Reed that I will NOT
sign ANY LEGAL documents.
The
purpose of the meeting is to determine if the university will file a formal
charge against me for the copyright violations (university and art museum
logos) for my digital exhibition. (commentaries)
November 17
I
met Mr. Stroud in his office in the Judicial Affairs office today. It
was clear that Mr. Stroud will be filling an official charge
against me for copyright violation. Mr. Stroud told me that the judicial
hearing might resolve with the "usual" sentence.
The "usual" sentence is a loss of computer access for
a semester AND a disciplinary
probation for a year. That is assuming if I get the "usual"
punishment, otherwise, the sanctions will be worse. In
short, I might loose my university funding.
Summary
All
in all, the pending official charge by the university is their way of
punishing me for creating such
an exhibition.
Copyright
is just a MASK for the real reasons the university
have taken to shut down my website, disable my
email account which had nothing to do
with copyright (the university still have not
provided any reasons for their actions), and finally, charge me for copyright
violation.
|