NABJ condemns President Donald Trump’s decision to deny access to MS NOW journalists and his threat to exclude CNN and Politico because of coverage he dislikes. The role of journalists is to hold power accountable on behalf of the American people. Government officials cannot reward reporting they find favorable with access, or withhold access as punishment for journalists who have scrutinized or criticized them. This retaliation is a threat not only to the news organizations being targeted, but to every journalist working to report independently and without fear of government reprisal. The White House belongs to the American people, and they have a right to know what their government is doing. Journalists must be free to ask difficult questions and report the answers. A free and independent press is not a privilege granted at the discretion of any president. It is a cornerstone to a healthy and functioning democracy. The First Amendment can never be optional.

Based on reporting by Texas Metro News.

By Marc H. Morial

National Urban League President & CEO

New York City’s troubling decline in reading scores, despite one of the most ambitious literacy reform efforts in the nation, is a wakeup call for the entire nation.

Across the country, reading achievement continues to decline. Nearly 40 percent of fourth graders read below the basic level and roughly a third of eighth graders are reading below basic, the highest share ever recorded.

Taken together, these numbers reveal a national literacy crisis that threatens economic opportunity, educational equity, and our nation’s future competitiveness.

Reading is not merely another subject in school. Reading is the foundation upon which all learning rests. A child who struggles to read struggles to learn history, science, mathematics, and civics. A young person who cannot effectively read and analyze complex information faces barriers to college completion, workforce success, and informed participation in our democracy.

That is why the growing literacy crisis is fundamentally an opportunity crisis. Behind every percentage point is a child whose future opportunities hang in the balance. Persistent achievement gaps mean that Black and Latino students continue to bear a disproportionate share of the consequences when reading instruction falls short. If we are serious about economic mobility and educational justice, literacy must be at the center of the conversation.

For more than two decades, many schools embraced Balanced Literacy approaches that sought to cultivate a love of reading by putting books in students’ hands and encouraging independent reading. The approach was well-intentioned, but too often foundational skills instruction, particularly phonics and decoding, suffered.

The evidence is increasingly clear that explicit, systematic instruction helps more children become successful readers. States and school districts that are embracing these principles deserve credit for moving in the right direction. But millions of students are already in middle school, high school, and even college struggling to read complicated texts, analyze difficult arguments, and complete entire books.

What is our plan for them?

Too many students arrive in high school lacking the reading stamina necessary to engage deeply with literature, history, or complex informational texts. College professors increasingly describe students who struggle with lengthy assignments that previous generations navigated more comfortably.

To be clear, Balanced Literacy alone cannot explain these trends. Increased screen time, constant digital distractions, shortened attention spans, and the dominance of algorithm-driven content all influence students’ reading habits and learning experiences.

Yet recognizing these factors cannot become an excuse for inaction.

Instead, it should compel us to think more broadly about literacy.

The challenge before us is not simply helping children sound out words. It is helping them develop the capacity to wrestle with complex ideas, sustain attention, evaluate evidence, and build knowledge through reading. It is helping them become informed citizens and lifelong learners.

And that requires a comprehensive, systemic strategy.

We need high-quality literacy instruction beginning in early childhood settings and extending throughout elementary school. We need to strengthen early intervention so that struggling readers receive support before learning gaps become entrenched. We must carefully examine the quality and effectiveness of programs serving our youngest learners, including Head Start and other early childhood initiatives.

At the same time, we need a national commitment to literacy recovery for older students. Districts and states should be developing evidence-based strategies that help adolescents strengthen comprehension, vocabulary, knowledge-building, and engagement with complex texts. Students who fell behind during the pandemic and those who continue to struggle deserve intensive support, not lowered expectations.

We should also have serious conversations about the role of technology in children’s lives. Restricting unnecessary screen exposure, particularly in the early grades, should be part of a broader effort to rebuild reading habits and attention spans that support learning.

More concerning than the decline in reading scores is the absence of a clear, large-scale strategy to address the growing crisis. Every year that a struggling reader falls further behind increases the likelihood that they will face lifelong educational and economic disadvantages.

The recent reading results from New York City are a warning. The national NAEP results are an even louder one. Together, they tell us that incremental change is not enough.

We know more about how children learn to read than ever before. We know that literacy is the gateway to opportunity. What remains to be seen is whether we have the collective will to act with the urgency this moment demands.

Our children cannot afford for us to wait.

Based on reporting by Jackson Advocate.

Peter Magubane was more than a photographer. He was a witness, storyteller, historian and courageous chronicler of one of the most turbulent periods in South African history. Born on January 18, 1932, in Vrededorp, Johannesburg, and raised in Sophiatown, Magubane discovered photography as a young boy after receiving a Kodak Brownie camera. That simple camera would eventually become his instrument for documenting the lives, struggles and determination of Black South Africans. He died on January 1, 2024, at the age of 91, leaving behind one of the most important photographic archives of South Africa’s apartheid era.

Magubane’s professional journey began at Drum magazine in 1954. He initially worked as a driver and messenger, but his ambition was to become a photographer. Under the mentorship of Drum’s legendary chief photographer Jürgen Schadeberg, Magubane developed his skills and began photographing major political and social events. His first significant assignment involved covering the 1955 African National Congress convention. From that point forward, photography became his way of documenting a country undergoing enormous change.

The South Africa that Magubane photographed was governed by apartheid, a system that legally enforced racial segregation and discrimination. For Black South Africans, everyday life was shaped by restrictions on where they could live, work and travel. Magubane did not limit himself to photographing politicians or famous leaders. He photographed ordinary people—children, workers, families and communities—giving the outside world a visual record of what apartheid meant in everyday life.

One of the defining moments of Magubane’s career came in 1960, when he photographed the aftermath of the Sharpeville Massacre. His photographs helped bring international attention to the violence surrounding resistance to apartheid. He also photographed the 1956 women’s anti-pass march, the Rivonia Trial involving Nelson Mandela and other activists, and numerous other events that became part of South Africa’s historical record.

Magubane paid an enormous personal price for his work. In 1969, he was arrested while photographing protesters outside Pretoria Central Prison. He was subsequently held in solitary confinement for 586 days. After his release, the apartheid government placed him under a banning order that severely restricted his ability to work and move freely. Yet the restrictions did not convince him to abandon photography. Instead, they demonstrated just how powerful the authorities believed his photographs could be.

In 1976, Magubane documented the Soweto Uprising, when thousands of Black students protested against the apartheid government’s education policies. His photographs captured young people confronting police violence and became some of the most internationally recognized images of the uprising. Despite the danger, Magubane continued photographing what was happening around him. His work transformed individual moments of protest into permanent historical evidence that could not easily be erased.

His creativity was matched by his determination to get the picture. Because authorities restricted photographers and attempted to prevent journalists from documenting certain events, Magubane sometimes concealed his camera in unusual places, including a hollowed-out Bible, bread and other objects. These methods allowed him to continue working when openly carrying a camera could attract police attention. His photographs demonstrated that documentary photography sometimes requires not only technical ability but extraordinary courage and resourcefulness.

After Nelson Mandela was released from prison in 1990, Magubane entered another important chapter of his career. He became Mandela’s official photographer and documented the transition toward democracy, including significant moments surrounding South Africa’s first democratic election and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The photographer who had spent decades documenting resistance now had the opportunity to photograph a country moving toward a new political era.

Magubane’s legacy extends far beyond the individual photographs he made. He published numerous books, exhibited internationally and received major honors, including an honorary Doctor of Literature from the University of Cape Town in 2010. His photographs remain part of the historical record because they show not only the brutality of apartheid but also the humanity, resilience and determination of the people who lived through it.

Peter Magubane ultimately demonstrated the extraordinary power of photography. He understood that a photograph can preserve a moment long after the people who witnessed it are gone. His camera recorded injustice, resistance, suffering, courage and eventually freedom. For photographers today, his life offers an enduring lesson: photography is not simply about making beautiful pictures—it can also be about seeing clearly, standing close to history and making sure that important stories are never forgotten. Magubane’s photographs gave South Africa a visual memory, and his life’s work reminds every photographer that sometimes the most important picture is the one that history needs someone brave enough to make.

Based on reporting by The Positive Community.

By Austin Gage, California Black Media

California voters will decide in November whether Proposition (Prop) 38 should authorize substantial state funding for immunology and immunotherapy research.

The initiative would fund immunology and immunotherapy research aimed at harnessing the body’s immune system to develop new treatments, medical procedures and potential cures for diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease.

More specifically, Prop 38, titled the Immunology and Immunotherapy Research Funding Initiative, is split into three main components that would go into effect if passed.

First, the initiative would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds to support immunology and immunotherapy research. At least half of the bond proceeds, or $4.2 billion, would be dedicated exclusively to research.

Additionally, Prop 38 would make it mandatory for the state to enter into an agreement with a qualified nonprofit institute focused and dedicated to researching immunology and immunotherapy within 90 days of the initiative’s effective date. The research institute must be affiliated with the University of California. 

The third component mandates that the remaining bond revenue must be directed to California-based public and nonprofit medical institutions through a peer-reviewed grant process.  

“Yes on 38”, with the tagline “Californians for Life-Saving Immunology Research and Cures,” is leading the campaign for the support side of the proposition. 

Along with the campaign, organizations that have publicly supported the ballot initiative include the California Democratic Party, The ALS Association, Alzheimer’s treatment and advocacy organizations, California Black Health Network, Parkinson Association of Northern California and Reform California among others.

“California has an opportunity to accelerate lifesaving medical breakthroughs. Immunotherapies work differently than traditional treatments. Instead of attacking cells directly, they empower the body’s own immune system to recognize and stop disease. Today, these therapies are already treating certain cancers and chronic conditions — and researchers continue to expand what’s possible. This initiative invests in proven science so cures can move from the lab to patients faster,” said the campaign.

No on Proposition 38 is leading the campaign against the measure, with support from the League of Women Voters of California. Opponents argue that California cannot afford to assume $8.4 billion in debt for medical research that may not produce definitive results. They also object to directing more than half of the bond proceeds — $4.2 billion — to a single qualifying nonprofit research institute, arguing that funding decisions of this magnitude should be made through the state’s regular budget process.

“Medical research can save lives, but Prop 38 is the wrong way to fund it. It would authorize $8.4 billion in borrowing for immunology and immunotherapy research and require the state to make $500 million to $600 million in annual debt payments for about 20 years. Those payments would come from the General Fund, which also pays for schools, health care, and other public services,” the League of Women Voters of California said.

A “yes” vote would authorize $8.4 billion in state bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy medical research.

A “no” vote would reject the proposed bond funding.

By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

A bill temporarily prohibiting law enforcement agencies from using electric shock gloves in California is awaiting action by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Assembly Bill (AB) 2760, authored by Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), passed the Senate 29-9 on Aug. 31. The Assembly concurred in Senate amendments the same day on a 55-16 vote.

The bill would prohibit state, local and federal law enforcement agencies from using wearable electroshock devices in California until Jan. 1, 2030. It would also bar agencies from using state funds to purchase the devices and require them to update their use-of-force policies accordingly.

Traditional handheld devices, including tasers and stun guns, are exempt.

Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

Sharp-Collins introduced the measure after reviewing information indicating that the devices could cause serious injury or death if used without adequate safeguards and training.

“AB 2760 draws a line that public safety technology must be proven safe and accountable before it is employed. Not after someone is killed or injured,” said Sharp-Collins, a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC).

“Our commitment is to protect our communities, especially the most vulnerable. That is what AB 2760 is about and that is what AB 2760 will do,” Sharp-Collins told her colleagues.

The device at the center of the debate is known as the G.L.O.V.E., an acronym for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a $16.7 million contract for 6,000 pairs of the gloves, which are designed to deliver an electric shock through an officer’s hand.

During the Assembly debate, Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton), also a CLBC member, thanked law enforcement representatives for helping negotiate amendments to the bill.

“This is something new to us (and) it’s something that absolutely should be studied,” Ransom said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature to figure out if this is an appropriate tool to be used.”

Neither the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department nor the Los Angeles Police Department has reported using electric shock gloves. However, the Santa Monica and El Monte police departments have obtained devices for testing.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office purchased 10 shock gloves as part of a $35,000 acquisition that also included 10 remotely activated shock bands. Sheriff’s officials had been developing training and policies for the devices before AB 2760 advanced.

State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) opposed the legislation, arguing that it would unnecessarily force agencies to change their use-of-force policies and could compromise public safety.

“I don’t disagree with the author that the electric shocks are not a great option, but at the end of the day, I think it’s important to understand that we need to give law enforcement the tools they need to keep themselves safe and the community safe,” Strickland said.

Supporters countered that wearable electroshock devices have not been sufficiently studied and could pose particular risks to immigrants, children, older adults and other vulnerable groups.

“People who are Black or Brown could be test subjects for these gloves of torment,” Mark González (D-Los Angeles) said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the legislature.”

By Ken Epstein

A growing coalition, the Oakland People’s Arms Embargo, has gained broad support in the Bay Area as it organizes to demand to end FedEx shipments of military equipment to Israel through the Oakland International Airport (OAK).

Especially significant, according to the coalition, is the delivery of military hardware to Israel for the U.S. F-35 fighter jet, which has been used to drop 2,000-pound bombs on civilians in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

In an interview with the Oakland Post, Rami Abdelkarim, a spokesperson for the Oakland People’s Arms Embargo and a member of the Bay Area chapter of the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), discussed the goals and the organizing work of the coalition, which has expanded rapidly since it began in August 2025.

Besides, PYM, other groups involved in organizing the coalition are the Arab Resource and Organizing Center (AROC), and the U.S. Palestinian Community Network.

Backing the demand for an arms embargo are 150 local businesses and over 300 local organizations, including the faith community as well as more than 20 labor unions and the Alameda Labor Council, which unanimously endorsed the campaign.

Support for the demand has also come from Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee and U.S. Rep. Lateefah Simon, and Alameda County Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bas.

Abdelkarim said the coalition has been tracking “how our roads, our airports, and our infrastructure are being used to facilitate the Israeli military’s genocidal campaign against the Palestinian people, and not just the Palestinian people, but also in Lebanon and Iran.”

“We were able to uncover what is Oakland’s complicity in this genocide, and what it looks like for our tax dollars to serve the Israeli military,” he said.

The coalition’s findings were published in a 15-page report on the website of the Oakland People’s Arms Embargo (armsembargonow.com), titled “Exposing Oakland Airport’s Military Cargo Shipments to Israel.”

“Since January 2025, at least 280 military cargo shipments to Israel have been identified departing from OAK, with Nevatim Airbase being the primary final destination,” the report said.

The shipments have occurred multiple times per week for nearly the whole year, “including F-35 fighter jet components used to carry and release munitions, guide weapons, power surveillance and targeting systems, and support critical flight operations—all essential to sustaining the combat readiness of Israel’s Air Force,” according to the report.

“The frequency of these shipments, particularly when compared to other U.S. airports, positions OAK as one of the few consistently active logistical nodes in the U.S. military supply chain to Nevatim Airbase (in Israel),” the report said.

According to the report, a sample of 500 shipments to Israel transported through FedEx’s Global Superhub in Memphis, Tennessee, between April and June 2025, OAK was the second-most frequent transit point nationwide, after Fort Worth, Texas.

Among the items that were shipped were “bomb release units, weapons bay adapters, surveillance sensors, and flight-critical electronics … “the mechanisms that enable the F-35 to fly its bombing missions and to identify, target, and strike with lethal accuracy.”

These components were supplied or contracted through Lockheed Martin and “have been used extensively by the Israeli Air Force in bombing campaigns in Gaza, including the airstrike on Al-Mawasi in July 2024, during which Israel dropped three 2,000-pound bombs on a designated humanitarian safe zone—killing at least 90 people.”

In a section of the report on the F‑35 Lightning II fighter jet, the airplane is described as “a highly advanced combat aircraft utilized in Israel’s bombardment of Palestinians in Gaza.”

“The F‑35 can carry up to 18,000 pounds of munitions—including 2,000-pound ‘bunker buster’ bombs—and uses advanced sensor systems to identify targets, guide bombs, and conduct precision attacks,” the report said.

“These shipments typically arrive at OAK’s FedEx cargo facility between Monday and Friday and are consolidated into outbound freight flights routed through hubs in other states. The flights identified in the report “used for these transfers are civilian-operated cargo planes, not military aircraft. While they do not carry passengers, these FedEx Express flights operate out of a commercial airport shared with public air traffic, serving the broader Bay Area.”

“This means that military cargo destined for the Israeli Air Force is routinely shipped through infrastructure embedded in densely populated civilian areas,” with data showing that “shipments departed OAK on multiple days every week.”

FedEx has strongly denied allegations that it transports military supplies.

A FedEx spokesperson stated, “FedEx is committed to complying with applicable laws and regulations. We do not ship weapons or ammunition internationally and have put in place strict screening procedures to prevent such shipments.”

International Amnesty International and European civil society groups have filed a criminal complaint against FedEx Belgium, alleging the unauthorized transit of F-35 fight jet parts without required regional licenses. Further, the Jewish anti-Zionist group France Action has filed a genocide claim against FedEx in France over cargo transporting through Paris.

In a statement released in February, Mayor Lee said, “As you know, for decades, I have been opposed to the use of public property to militarize arms shipments, federal immigration enforcement, and public safety, whether it is in Oakland or anywhere else,” she said. “Thus, I share your concerns about weapons and military cargo being shipped through the Oakland International Airport.”

Congresswoman Simon in September 2025, announced she is supporting a federal bill, the “Block the Bombs Act,” to withhold the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel and demanding Israel’s compliance with U.S. and international law.

“I come to Congress from a lineage of folks who know that war does not make us stronger, from a lineage of Ron Dellums and Barbara Lee, who were very clear that we as a nation cannot kill and slaughter our way to peace, that we cannot fund the machinery of death, and that safety is found in care – and not conquest.”