Letters: Voters must turn back GOP tide of censorship

Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Voters must turn back
GOP tide of censorship

Re: “ABC suspends Kimmel over his Kirk comments” (Page A3, Sept. 18).

Donald Trump and his “Make America Great Again” team want to seek out and punish anyone who speaks out against Charlie Kirk.

Kirk, a self-described campus rabble rouser, constantly shielded his divisive, incendiary, reckless vitriol beneath the mantle of “free speech.” But free, irresponsible hate speech has its consequences. While I don’t advocate for assassination or the murdering of those with whom we disagree, I understand its genesis. Had Trump, J.D. Vance or any of the other “cowardly liars” expressed outrage over the assassination of Minnesota Rep. Melissa Hartman and her husband by a right-winger, I might have had a different reaction.

We must turn the red tide in 2026.

Jon James
Pleasanton

Cancel Hulu, Disney
to defend free speech

Re: “ABC suspends Kimmel over his Kirk comments” (Page A3, Sept. 18).

I know how much we love our content on Disney and Hulu. However, allowing Donald Trump to dictate our right to free speech while he continues his hateful and divisive rants on Fox is intolerable.

Send a message. Cancel your subscriptions until corporate America can grow a backbone to stand up and fight for our constitutional rights. We are America. Defend your Constitution.

Jay Owen
Castro Valley

‘We’ aren’t to blame
for high tech’s abuses

Re: “Silicon Valley needs to address its role in Charlie Kirk’s killing” (Page A6, Sept. 18).

Tyler Johnson should have used the word “them” instead of “we” in his article, in my opinion.

They or them, the “digital titans,” invented the devices that “we,” the rest of us, use willingly or unwillingly. They are the ones who are constantly, it seems, wanting “we” to upgrade our applications or “apps”. It is them who are reluctant to monitor content.

Gerald Veiluva
Oakland

Newsom should reject
overreaching bill

Re: “California must make schools safer for Jews” (Page A8, Sept. 7).

Daniel Klein’s article sounds reasonable: Stop antisemitic materials from being presented in schools. The problem is that the legislation in question, Assembly Bill 715, does not specify what constitutes antisemitism. The original bill established the Office of the Antisemitism Prevention Coordinator, under the administration of the State Board of Education. The coordinator would have the power to decide what cannot be presented in a school setting, and, with little oversight, specify the remedies.

The California Teachers Association opposed the bill due to its overreach.

At a minimum, the bill should have been amended to clarify what would constitute antisemitic content. Is expressing outrage at the Israeli government’s program of death in Gaza antisemitic? How about opposing the U.S. government supplying lethal bombs that are being used on innocent Palestinians? How about questioning the establishment of a Jewish state that expelled non-Jewish residents?

Complicated, isn’t it? Gavin Newsom should not sign AB 715.

Jim Boots
Danville