Petition to Society of Authors re their chair

[beastlyslumber]

The chair of SoA is Joanne Harris, a TRA. Over the years she has tweeted some nasty things to and about other authors. After the attack on Salman Rushdie, JKR tweeted and received death threats. JH's response was a sarcastic tweet.

There's now been a petition organised to ask the SoA to consider whether their chair can be considered to be defending authors' rights in the light of her activism.

I'm an author, and as much as I find JH's activism unpleasant, I'm not convinced that a petition isn't just more cancel culture. I want to see evidence that what she's doing on twitter is affecting the work of the SoA - I think she is damaging the perception of the organisation, for sure. But she is an unlikeable person and it's hard for me to separate these things out. I don't want to sign the petition just because I dislike her. Any other authors who've signed it or are considering doing so?

I’m so pleased to read this

I’m not an author, but delighted you’re taking such a balanced view. No one should lose their job because of their opinions

No,they shouldn't: but what do we do when people in positions of support and advocacy DON'T share that classical liberal view? It does create a bit of a pickle.

Not an author either so I've only followed from a distance.
It sounds to me as if the issue isn't JH's personal opinions or her likeability (and nor should it be). It's whether or not JH is letting her personal opinions get in the way of doing her job, which I understand is to support all authors, regardless of their opinions / beliefs.

I've confused myself now 😀

First open letter:

juliebindel.substack.com/p/an-open-letter-to-the-society-of

Response to open letter:

melindasalisbury.wordpress.com/2022/08/16/an-open-letter-to-the-society-of-authors-regardining-joanne-harris/

Response to open letter response:

juliebindel.substack.com/p/to-those-defending-joanne-harris

Nobody has said JH should lose her position ‘for her opinions’. That’s inaccurate. They have said the way in which she treats other people because of their opinions makes her unsuitable for her post. Is that true? That’s up to authors in the SoA. But people should try to understand the issues properly.

I think Harris should be fired because she’s only representing and advocating for authors she agrees with. She isn’t doing her job, instead she’s encouraging hate campaigns against authors and silencing freedom of speech.

She is welcome to hold her opinions, but if loidly advocating those opinions makes it impossible for her to do her job, she should find a different job. Same as BBC staff and civil servants don’t go shouting their political opinions all over twitter.

Generally I would agree (and at first I did) but Harris isn’t doing her job. She is clearly not suited to this position.

It’s tricky isn’t it, because when you feel very strongly about something you must feel you should be able to engage politically. She probably can, but she’s going about it all wrong. The glibness, the half-truths about who did what, the sense that she’s prepared to say she’ll offer support that she won’t actually offer. She should just put out a statement saying she is able to differentiate between her own strong feelings about trans rights and writers’ free speech rights, and she won’t allow it to stand in the way of her role as Chair. Then she should stop liking posts about people being stabbed and saying it’s ‘humour’.

I’m surprised Harris is allowed to reveal that JKR is in the Society of Authors. Surely that’s a data breach?

I think that's it's totally fair enough for other members of the SoA to call for her resignation, but I think that's it's not really the place of non-members to sign the letter. I agree with you that it looks like another example of cancel culture.

This twisting of facts makes me angry. JH can only cling to her role if she actively practises unbiased support for freedom of speech. She is showing that she is incapable of doing this, in fact she shows no understanding of what the actual principle is and what it requires of the Chair of the SOA. She is quite clearly treating her post as a way of exercising personal power rather than serving the organisation as a whole.

Exactly @Bluebells12 i work in the voluntary sector and if any chair of an organisation I worked with used their position the way she has I’d be horrified

the role of the SoA is ti defend all authors not just the ones JH personally agrees with. Furthermore her unprofessional and frankly infantile snarking on twitter brings the organisation into disrepute

She should lose her job becuse she didn't stand up for JK Rowling who has done so much for women and girls.

If she can't do this particular job properly, she ought to be sacked. I don't think that's the same as wanting her cancelled. I still want her to be able to write novels etc. I'd never try and discourage people from buying her books. I'd never object to her being given a platform to speak.

If the society exists to protect or support members and the chair mocks one member by tweeting hilarious polls about 'death threats', one does have to ask, what is the point of the society in the first place.

Should all members only be supported if they agree 100% with the Chair's views, and if the Chair allows the society to support them?

Is that specified when they take the subscription?

No. It's info already in the public domain (she has a page on their site).

Author. I'm not signing - I don't want to target a person for their views. Even if I find them abhorrent. I've not joined the SoA, mostly because it's really expensive and I don't really see the point. I agree that members asking for a new chair is a different matter than non-members saying she should go.

FWIW, I signed the letter in support of JKR, under my real name, and was proud to do so. This is a different matter entirely.

@JustSpeculation

Got it, that’s fair enough.

to clarify - people should lose their jobs if they perform them poorly.

I suspect Harris has performed her job poorly, although I don't understand enough about her role to be sure.

but performance is quite a different thing to opinions

only if that was part of her role, surely?

Member here. I don't think I want to sign anything, but that's mainly because the whole gender ideology scenario is so twisted, that I think JH will just use any such letter as "evidence" of her being persecuted for her views, and her (she's a she/they) and her newly trans child (not revealing anything she hasn't said herself) being victims of transphobia. If the SOA as an organisation can't see that there's a problem with her and her antipathy to JKR (who has done nothing wrong and would not be found to be"anti-trans" in any court), I'd rather just leave the SOA. JH can believe what she likes but her behaviour is the equivalent of being a Muslim and siding against Rushdie because of it. If that's her approach. she can't defend authors properly.

@BlossomsOnATree

But if you put that comparator to her, she would completely fail to get it. She would regard it as fine to tell devout Muslims that Rushdie doesn’t share their beliefs and can say what he likes. But suggest that I don’t share her beliefs, and she comes up with the bizarre conclusion that I must hate millions of people worldwide.

performance is quite a different thing to opinions

Exactly.
Being a Muslim would be fine, being a Muslim and privately disapproving of Rushdie would be fine, but attacking him from the position of chair of SOA would not be.

Likewise she's free to have gender ideology beliefs, but they shouldn't affect her treatment of JKR as an author being persecuted for her opinions.

The chair of a quasi union is a leading member of a campaign to 'cancel' at least one other member of the union. That seems to be to be a clear conflict of interest.