Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

Trump FCC Using False Claims Of Immigrant Fraud To Drive Up Costs Of Broadband For Everyone

32 minutes ago

SCOTUS Term Limits May Be a Good Idea. But They Still Require a Constitutional Amendment.

33 minutes ago

Stablecoins still dominate despite yield advantage of tokenized funds: JPMorgan

51 minutes ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Thursday, May 21
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»News»Global Free Speech»An Ai Weiwei billboard in Manchester, January 2026. Photo: Andrii Shevchuk/Alamy This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026.  Ai Weiwei’s new book is, in a sense, anything but new. “Censorship, through intimidation and sanction is evident in the history of the Chinese Communist Party,” he writes in Ai Weiwei on Censorship, recently published in the United Kingdom by Thames and Hudson. This frame of reference does more than anthologise, however. History puts the present in context. “For over 70 years, censorship policies have been a core function of the regime and a widely accepted aspect of society. The first to be sanctioned were always those with independent thought or differing political ideologies.” Index spoke with Ai via email. He was in a Cambridge cafe during his UK book tour in February 2026. The university town is not unfamiliar for Ai; his teenage son goes to school in the city. But over the last decade, Ai has lived a peripatetic existence. He keeps a studio in Berlin but no longer lives there. Cambridge was home for a while. In 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic, Ai moved to Portugal. But he does not call that country, or any other, home. “I do not have a country, nor a homeland, but I don’t need one,” Ai told Index. “I just need to wake up every day and recognise that I am still alive.” Last August, Ai briefly travelled to Kharkiv, a frontline of the four-year war started by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. “It was a surreal experience to witness Ukrainians defending their own territory and their national dignity,” he said. “Their commitment is immense.” In mid-December, Ai visited China for the first time since leaving in 2015. “Meeting up with my ninety-three-year-old mother was a special experience,” he said. “I feel [that] in certain respects China has not changed at all. But it also felt unfamiliar – a sensation I had never experienced before.” Ai posted a limited number of pictures and videos of the trip – without commentary – on Instagram in real time, though they could not be viewed in China itself. Ai is critical of social media platforms in general. They “engage in active and passive censorship under governmental influence,” he said. Nevertheless, he does use Instagram, “as a diary, to deposit traces of my everyday life,” he explains. All that said, Ai is concerned about the ubiquitous presence of social media in everyday life. It is gradually turning us passive and docile, he thinks. “Today, trying to maintain independent thought is far more difficult than it was in the past,” he told Index. “Controlled by major powers, large capital, huge corporations, and dominant technology, the internet is serving to extract even greater resources, exploit humanity’s information, guide consumption, and even mislead public opinion to manipulate the populace.” Artificial intelligence has, over the last few years, become the dominant presence in the global conversation about the reach – and overreach – of technology and commerce into the private lives of citizens. Ai equally distrusts AI. In his opinion, it is already boxing us into a more homogenised global society. He referenced an incident (without specifying the precise details) where someone testing China’s Deepseek AI platform asked it to talk about Ai Weiwei. Deepseek’s response? “Let’s talk about something else.” “[AI] is commonly described as a liberating productive force, but … systems impose new constraints on traditional ways of human existence, producing a reality that is more unpredictable, chaotic, and disruptive,” Ai said. “Eventually, we are going to lose the poetic aspect of human nature, which includes each individual’s possibility [sic] of making mistakes according to their own habits.” The symbiotic relationship between big data and censorship is a key theme in Ai’s book. In the country where he grew up, he notes, this relationship has created an inescapable panopticon. “[In] China, censorship operates around the clock, infiltrating every channel of communication. It impacts all forms of personal expression related to the public, whether communicated through publications, art exhibitions or social networks.” Ai Weiwei’s Study of Perspective is a universal gesture of defiance to the world. Photo: Ercilla/Alam Running in the family Ai Weiwei comes from a family of dissenters. His father, Ai Qing, was one of modern China’s most influential poets. A key text of his is Understanding Writers and Respecting Writers, published in 1942. “Writers ask for no privileges other than the freedom to write,” Ai Qing wrote in the essay. “Only when artistic creation is granted … can art play a role in advancing social reform.” In the early days of the communist revolution, Mao Zedong sought Ai Qing’s advice about the potential role that culture could play in a communist society. But their views were not compatible. Despite being a voracious reader and lover of poetry, Mao did not believe that writers should be treated with respect or understanding. Ai Weiwei was born in Beijing in 1957 – the same year that Mao launched the so-called Anti-Rightist Campaign. 300,000 individuals, including many artists and intellectuals, were exiled to China’s remote border regions, to undergo reform and political education. Ai Qing was banished to Heilongjiang Province, in the far northeast. A decade later, at the onset of the Cultural Revolution, Ai Qing was moved to the desert region of Little Siberia. Daily duties included cleaning toilets. Ai joined his father in political exile. “That experience with my father helped me recognise the worst aspect of human nature: blindness and ignorance,” Ai told Index. From his father, Ai learned that the artist’s life – despite the difficulties that this would, of necessity, entail – could help in forging a path towards political resistance. In 1981, Ai left China to study in the USA, at the Parsons School of Design in New York. His artistic mentors from that period included the Irish-American artist Sean Scully and Allen Ginsberg, the acclaimed poet. In 1988, Ai put on his first solo art show, Old Shoes, Safe Sex, at New York’s Ethan Cohen Gallery. Five years later, Ai returned to China to be with his father, who had fallen ill. Ai Qing died in 1996, aged 86. The biographies of father and son have many commonalities. Both received their artistic education in the West (Ai Qing, between 1929 and 1932, in Paris); both were publicly persecuted and silenced for refusing to conform with the China Communist Party’s codes of political censorship. Ai’s difficult relationship with the Chinese authorities began in 2005 when he started a blog in China. “To express yourself needs a reason, but expressing yourself is the reason,” his first post read. “This is my question: where are those lives?” another blog post, from the summer of 2008, asked. Ai was referring to the estimated 80,000 individuals killed in an earthquake in the southwestern Chinese province of Sichuan. In the wake of the natural disaster, the Chinese government censored and controlled information, so Ai decided to undertake a “citizens’ investigation”. Accompanied by followers from his blog, he travelled to the ruins of the earthquake and began to document the names of those who perished. “I met many families who lost their children,” said Ai. “I was trying to raise a collective voice in pursuit of fairness and justice, but it felt almost impossible.” The following summer, as the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen protests approached, Sina – China’s biggest news portal – shut down Ai’s blog because he refused to self-censor his posts. Ai, remarkably, seems almost blasé when recalling this period of censorship: “In one moment we believe that a certain space for freedom exists, but in another moment that space disappears. This is part of the normal order.” Under surveillance In early April 2011, the Chinese authorities detained Ai at Beijing International Airport, as he was about to board a flight for Hong Kong. His interrogators put absurd allegations to him about his conduct, claiming that he was engaged in “economic crimes”, but keeping the details vague. The politically motivated accusations, Ai told Index, were meant to break my “commitment to truth justice” and “to tarnish my reputation”. He said: “I was secretly detained for 81 days, but I was not subjected to verbal, physical harm or humiliation. The harm I endured was more of a psychological nature.” The episode gave Ai a valuable insight into how power works within a complex state bureaucracy. “It was not about right or wrong; but [about] the singularity and certainty of power’s inviolability”, he said. “Which makes all the efforts you have made appear pale and powerless in its presence.” Despite his release without charge, Ai’s passport was confiscated by the state. Then in the autumn of 2015, he discovered a hidden listening device inside his Beijing art studio. The authorities had “assumed I was engaged in secret and disreputable activities,” he said. “I believed they would come to recognise their misjudgement since my actions were entirely open and public.” Farcically, the authorities asked Ai to return the surveillance device – which he described as resembling an outdated relic “from the Cold War era”. By then, his passport had been returned. He was free to travel. Ai left Beijing for Berlin. The following February, as the refugee crisis sparked by unrest in the Middle East gripped Europe, Ai and a team of artists created a public art installation in Berlin, placing 14,000 unused life vests around the pillars of the Konzerthaus, a landmark concert hall in the German capital. Not just China But censorship exists in the West too. In 2023, Ai’s exhibition at London’s Lisson Gallery was cancelled after Ai posted and then deleted social media posts about the Hamas Israel conflict. Ai was keen to point out that recently, he was asked by Britain’s Royal Academy Magazine to write an opinion piece about artists’ ability (or lack thereof) to speak truth to power. “I submitted the article, and then I was informed that due to a reduction in the magazine’s pages, they could not publish my piece,” Ai explained. “Similar things have happened many times in the UK, where they use gentlemanly British politeness to make the most ruthless decisions.” [see box below]. The Royal Academy Magazine was asked for comment, Ai mentioned other examples of western censorship. “The global film market is now dominated by China,” he said. “There is a desire not to offend major financial backers, so most of my films are rejected by many major international film festivals.” Ai’s documentary films include Coronation (2020), which secretly filmed hospitals, homes, and quarantine sites in Wuhan, China – the first city to be hit by the global COVID-19 pandemic – and Human Flow (2017), which provided a detailed and emotional exploration of the global refugee crisis. “Everything is Art. Everything is Politics,” reads a caption in the latter film’s opening sequence. Thirty minutes later, another caption appears on the screen. “When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 11 countries around the world with border fences and walls,” it reads. “By 2016, 70 countries had built border fences and walls.” But can artists transcend borders and governments? Ai believes yes. Presently, his art is being showcased in exhibitions in New Delhi, Cambridge and Cologne. Later in the year, Ai will be staging exhibitions in Seattle, Guimarães in Portugal, and Gyeongju in South Korea, aside from a Manchester show in July 2026 called Button up! which reflects on two centuries of Chinese British relations, globalisation and interconnected power structures which cause wars and global crises. At 68, the outspoken and resilient Chinese artist shows no signs of slowing down. Undoubtedly, being a man without a country must take its toll. But there are some advantages too. “I can imagine going anywhere,” Ai said. “The earth is round, and at any latitude or longitude there is the possibility of survival.” Is this the definition of true freedom, the freedom that Ai Qing wrote about back in the 1940s? Not exactly. “Humanity’s longing for freedom, and the price it pays in pursuit of freedom, is an enduring endeavour,” Ai concluded. “But freedom is an unattainable goal.” Ai Weiwei’s book On Censorship was published by Thames and Hudson in January 2026   Truth is at the heart of all art by Ai Weiwei For an artist, speaking the truth is not optional; it is the essential quality of art itself. The very existence of art arises from an individual’s particular experience, something that cannot be replaced. Using that experience to express oneself, whether through words or images, is one of the most fundamental ways in which art exists. It is a responsibility, and it is also an obligation. For if art loses its perseverance in truth, its effort to speak true words, then it becomes like a river without water, or a field or mountain without trees – art would lose its very possibility of existing in the world. Yet in most circumstances, this is not what we see. We encounter many kinds of expression, many forms and languages, but how distant are these forms and languages from art’s essential appeal? We can say that what we usually see is the reiteration of already accepted values, without any expression that offers new possibilities, new sensibilities, or wholly individual feelings. Every artist, like every individual, knows that speaking the truth and insisting on one’s own perspective is dangerous, and may exact a heavy price. Books may go unpublished, exhibitions may be closed, concerts cancelled. We see this every day. Those who refuse to betray their conscience and insist on telling the truth are always the first to be punished. My father, as a poet, endured such punishment throughout his life. He was not an activist nor someone engaged in politics, but rather a poet in the purest sense – someone who would not, in any circumstances, betray his conscience, a man who would speak his mind without calculating gain or loss. He paid dearly for this. He was exiled for 20 years. The year I was born was the year he was exiled. I, too, became collateral, enduring the catastrophic consequences of his truth-telling. When I was growing up, I did not feel the need to speak the truth because I did not yet know what truth was. But when I reached a certain age, I began to recognise what was false. I detest falsehood to the extreme, because it alters the quality of our lives. It makes us look at our surroundings without confidence. Meanwhile, once we recognise untruth, we no longer dare to look at ourselves. Even so, speaking the truth remains difficult. First of all, language as a form of expression – or art as a form of expression – requires being seen or heard, which is a difficult process in itself. My voice was not heard or seen until I was nearly 50 years old; only then did I find my language and my manner of expression. But this language and manner of expression are not permanent. They are like a plant, and do not have an eternal lifespan. Therefore, as artists, we must continuously challenge and doubt ourselves in our understanding of truth, seeking ways to break through censorship – including self-censorship. In this process of pursuing truth, the path is strewn with thorns and full of obstacles; there is a real risk of falling into the abyss at any moment. Even so, I have paid every price required, and I am proud of that, because I am not doing it for myself but for the world we see with our own eyes, so that it may become clearer, and so that we may express ourselves with greater accuracy. An artist’s being truly exists when there is both self-awareness of the real and self-expression of the real. This “self” does not inherently exist on its own; rather, it emerges when confronted with a certain reality. Ai Weiwei is a Chinese artist whose exhibitions are held all over the world. This article was originally written for the Royal Academy magazine, but did not appear READ MORE
Global Free Speech

An Ai Weiwei billboard in Manchester, January 2026. Photo: Andrii Shevchuk/Alamy This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026.  Ai Weiwei’s new book is, in a sense, anything but new. “Censorship, through intimidation and sanction is evident in the history of the Chinese Communist Party,” he writes in Ai Weiwei on Censorship, recently published in the United Kingdom by Thames and Hudson. This frame of reference does more than anthologise, however. History puts the present in context. “For over 70 years, censorship policies have been a core function of the regime and a widely accepted aspect of society. The first to be sanctioned were always those with independent thought or differing political ideologies.” Index spoke with Ai via email. He was in a Cambridge cafe during his UK book tour in February 2026. The university town is not unfamiliar for Ai; his teenage son goes to school in the city. But over the last decade, Ai has lived a peripatetic existence. He keeps a studio in Berlin but no longer lives there. Cambridge was home for a while. In 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic, Ai moved to Portugal. But he does not call that country, or any other, home. “I do not have a country, nor a homeland, but I don’t need one,” Ai told Index. “I just need to wake up every day and recognise that I am still alive.” Last August, Ai briefly travelled to Kharkiv, a frontline of the four-year war started by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. “It was a surreal experience to witness Ukrainians defending their own territory and their national dignity,” he said. “Their commitment is immense.” In mid-December, Ai visited China for the first time since leaving in 2015. “Meeting up with my ninety-three-year-old mother was a special experience,” he said. “I feel [that] in certain respects China has not changed at all. But it also felt unfamiliar – a sensation I had never experienced before.” Ai posted a limited number of pictures and videos of the trip – without commentary – on Instagram in real time, though they could not be viewed in China itself. Ai is critical of social media platforms in general. They “engage in active and passive censorship under governmental influence,” he said. Nevertheless, he does use Instagram, “as a diary, to deposit traces of my everyday life,” he explains. All that said, Ai is concerned about the ubiquitous presence of social media in everyday life. It is gradually turning us passive and docile, he thinks. “Today, trying to maintain independent thought is far more difficult than it was in the past,” he told Index. “Controlled by major powers, large capital, huge corporations, and dominant technology, the internet is serving to extract even greater resources, exploit humanity’s information, guide consumption, and even mislead public opinion to manipulate the populace.” Artificial intelligence has, over the last few years, become the dominant presence in the global conversation about the reach – and overreach – of technology and commerce into the private lives of citizens. Ai equally distrusts AI. In his opinion, it is already boxing us into a more homogenised global society. He referenced an incident (without specifying the precise details) where someone testing China’s Deepseek AI platform asked it to talk about Ai Weiwei. Deepseek’s response? “Let’s talk about something else.” “[AI] is commonly described as a liberating productive force, but … systems impose new constraints on traditional ways of human existence, producing a reality that is more unpredictable, chaotic, and disruptive,” Ai said. “Eventually, we are going to lose the poetic aspect of human nature, which includes each individual’s possibility [sic] of making mistakes according to their own habits.” The symbiotic relationship between big data and censorship is a key theme in Ai’s book. In the country where he grew up, he notes, this relationship has created an inescapable panopticon. “[In] China, censorship operates around the clock, infiltrating every channel of communication. It impacts all forms of personal expression related to the public, whether communicated through publications, art exhibitions or social networks.” Ai Weiwei’s Study of Perspective is a universal gesture of defiance to the world. Photo: Ercilla/Alam Running in the family Ai Weiwei comes from a family of dissenters. His father, Ai Qing, was one of modern China’s most influential poets. A key text of his is Understanding Writers and Respecting Writers, published in 1942. “Writers ask for no privileges other than the freedom to write,” Ai Qing wrote in the essay. “Only when artistic creation is granted … can art play a role in advancing social reform.” In the early days of the communist revolution, Mao Zedong sought Ai Qing’s advice about the potential role that culture could play in a communist society. But their views were not compatible. Despite being a voracious reader and lover of poetry, Mao did not believe that writers should be treated with respect or understanding. Ai Weiwei was born in Beijing in 1957 – the same year that Mao launched the so-called Anti-Rightist Campaign. 300,000 individuals, including many artists and intellectuals, were exiled to China’s remote border regions, to undergo reform and political education. Ai Qing was banished to Heilongjiang Province, in the far northeast. A decade later, at the onset of the Cultural Revolution, Ai Qing was moved to the desert region of Little Siberia. Daily duties included cleaning toilets. Ai joined his father in political exile. “That experience with my father helped me recognise the worst aspect of human nature: blindness and ignorance,” Ai told Index. From his father, Ai learned that the artist’s life – despite the difficulties that this would, of necessity, entail – could help in forging a path towards political resistance. In 1981, Ai left China to study in the USA, at the Parsons School of Design in New York. His artistic mentors from that period included the Irish-American artist Sean Scully and Allen Ginsberg, the acclaimed poet. In 1988, Ai put on his first solo art show, Old Shoes, Safe Sex, at New York’s Ethan Cohen Gallery. Five years later, Ai returned to China to be with his father, who had fallen ill. Ai Qing died in 1996, aged 86. The biographies of father and son have many commonalities. Both received their artistic education in the West (Ai Qing, between 1929 and 1932, in Paris); both were publicly persecuted and silenced for refusing to conform with the China Communist Party’s codes of political censorship. Ai’s difficult relationship with the Chinese authorities began in 2005 when he started a blog in China. “To express yourself needs a reason, but expressing yourself is the reason,” his first post read. “This is my question: where are those lives?” another blog post, from the summer of 2008, asked. Ai was referring to the estimated 80,000 individuals killed in an earthquake in the southwestern Chinese province of Sichuan. In the wake of the natural disaster, the Chinese government censored and controlled information, so Ai decided to undertake a “citizens’ investigation”. Accompanied by followers from his blog, he travelled to the ruins of the earthquake and began to document the names of those who perished. “I met many families who lost their children,” said Ai. “I was trying to raise a collective voice in pursuit of fairness and justice, but it felt almost impossible.” The following summer, as the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen protests approached, Sina – China’s biggest news portal – shut down Ai’s blog because he refused to self-censor his posts. Ai, remarkably, seems almost blasé when recalling this period of censorship: “In one moment we believe that a certain space for freedom exists, but in another moment that space disappears. This is part of the normal order.” Under surveillance In early April 2011, the Chinese authorities detained Ai at Beijing International Airport, as he was about to board a flight for Hong Kong. His interrogators put absurd allegations to him about his conduct, claiming that he was engaged in “economic crimes”, but keeping the details vague. The politically motivated accusations, Ai told Index, were meant to break my “commitment to truth justice” and “to tarnish my reputation”. He said: “I was secretly detained for 81 days, but I was not subjected to verbal, physical harm or humiliation. The harm I endured was more of a psychological nature.” The episode gave Ai a valuable insight into how power works within a complex state bureaucracy. “It was not about right or wrong; but [about] the singularity and certainty of power’s inviolability”, he said. “Which makes all the efforts you have made appear pale and powerless in its presence.” Despite his release without charge, Ai’s passport was confiscated by the state. Then in the autumn of 2015, he discovered a hidden listening device inside his Beijing art studio. The authorities had “assumed I was engaged in secret and disreputable activities,” he said. “I believed they would come to recognise their misjudgement since my actions were entirely open and public.” Farcically, the authorities asked Ai to return the surveillance device – which he described as resembling an outdated relic “from the Cold War era”. By then, his passport had been returned. He was free to travel. Ai left Beijing for Berlin. The following February, as the refugee crisis sparked by unrest in the Middle East gripped Europe, Ai and a team of artists created a public art installation in Berlin, placing 14,000 unused life vests around the pillars of the Konzerthaus, a landmark concert hall in the German capital. Not just China But censorship exists in the West too. In 2023, Ai’s exhibition at London’s Lisson Gallery was cancelled after Ai posted and then deleted social media posts about the Hamas Israel conflict. Ai was keen to point out that recently, he was asked by Britain’s Royal Academy Magazine to write an opinion piece about artists’ ability (or lack thereof) to speak truth to power. “I submitted the article, and then I was informed that due to a reduction in the magazine’s pages, they could not publish my piece,” Ai explained. “Similar things have happened many times in the UK, where they use gentlemanly British politeness to make the most ruthless decisions.” [see box below]. The Royal Academy Magazine was asked for comment, Ai mentioned other examples of western censorship. “The global film market is now dominated by China,” he said. “There is a desire not to offend major financial backers, so most of my films are rejected by many major international film festivals.” Ai’s documentary films include Coronation (2020), which secretly filmed hospitals, homes, and quarantine sites in Wuhan, China – the first city to be hit by the global COVID-19 pandemic – and Human Flow (2017), which provided a detailed and emotional exploration of the global refugee crisis. “Everything is Art. Everything is Politics,” reads a caption in the latter film’s opening sequence. Thirty minutes later, another caption appears on the screen. “When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 11 countries around the world with border fences and walls,” it reads. “By 2016, 70 countries had built border fences and walls.” But can artists transcend borders and governments? Ai believes yes. Presently, his art is being showcased in exhibitions in New Delhi, Cambridge and Cologne. Later in the year, Ai will be staging exhibitions in Seattle, Guimarães in Portugal, and Gyeongju in South Korea, aside from a Manchester show in July 2026 called Button up! which reflects on two centuries of Chinese British relations, globalisation and interconnected power structures which cause wars and global crises. At 68, the outspoken and resilient Chinese artist shows no signs of slowing down. Undoubtedly, being a man without a country must take its toll. But there are some advantages too. “I can imagine going anywhere,” Ai said. “The earth is round, and at any latitude or longitude there is the possibility of survival.” Is this the definition of true freedom, the freedom that Ai Qing wrote about back in the 1940s? Not exactly. “Humanity’s longing for freedom, and the price it pays in pursuit of freedom, is an enduring endeavour,” Ai concluded. “But freedom is an unattainable goal.” Ai Weiwei’s book On Censorship was published by Thames and Hudson in January 2026   Truth is at the heart of all art by Ai Weiwei For an artist, speaking the truth is not optional; it is the essential quality of art itself. The very existence of art arises from an individual’s particular experience, something that cannot be replaced. Using that experience to express oneself, whether through words or images, is one of the most fundamental ways in which art exists. It is a responsibility, and it is also an obligation. For if art loses its perseverance in truth, its effort to speak true words, then it becomes like a river without water, or a field or mountain without trees – art would lose its very possibility of existing in the world. Yet in most circumstances, this is not what we see. We encounter many kinds of expression, many forms and languages, but how distant are these forms and languages from art’s essential appeal? We can say that what we usually see is the reiteration of already accepted values, without any expression that offers new possibilities, new sensibilities, or wholly individual feelings. Every artist, like every individual, knows that speaking the truth and insisting on one’s own perspective is dangerous, and may exact a heavy price. Books may go unpublished, exhibitions may be closed, concerts cancelled. We see this every day. Those who refuse to betray their conscience and insist on telling the truth are always the first to be punished. My father, as a poet, endured such punishment throughout his life. He was not an activist nor someone engaged in politics, but rather a poet in the purest sense – someone who would not, in any circumstances, betray his conscience, a man who would speak his mind without calculating gain or loss. He paid dearly for this. He was exiled for 20 years. The year I was born was the year he was exiled. I, too, became collateral, enduring the catastrophic consequences of his truth-telling. When I was growing up, I did not feel the need to speak the truth because I did not yet know what truth was. But when I reached a certain age, I began to recognise what was false. I detest falsehood to the extreme, because it alters the quality of our lives. It makes us look at our surroundings without confidence. Meanwhile, once we recognise untruth, we no longer dare to look at ourselves. Even so, speaking the truth remains difficult. First of all, language as a form of expression – or art as a form of expression – requires being seen or heard, which is a difficult process in itself. My voice was not heard or seen until I was nearly 50 years old; only then did I find my language and my manner of expression. But this language and manner of expression are not permanent. They are like a plant, and do not have an eternal lifespan. Therefore, as artists, we must continuously challenge and doubt ourselves in our understanding of truth, seeking ways to break through censorship – including self-censorship. In this process of pursuing truth, the path is strewn with thorns and full of obstacles; there is a real risk of falling into the abyss at any moment. Even so, I have paid every price required, and I am proud of that, because I am not doing it for myself but for the world we see with our own eyes, so that it may become clearer, and so that we may express ourselves with greater accuracy. An artist’s being truly exists when there is both self-awareness of the real and self-expression of the real. This “self” does not inherently exist on its own; rather, it emerges when confronted with a certain reality. Ai Weiwei is a Chinese artist whose exhibitions are held all over the world. This article was originally written for the Royal Academy magazine, but did not appear READ MORE

News RoomBy News Room2 weeks agoNo Comments11 Mins Read1,231 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
An Ai Weiwei billboard in Manchester, January 2026. Photo: Andrii Shevchuk/Alamy

				
				
				
				
				
			
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026. 
Ai Weiwei’s new book is, in a sense, anything but new. “Censorship, through intimidation and sanction is evident in the history of the Chinese Communist Party,” he writes in Ai Weiwei on Censorship, recently published in the United Kingdom by Thames and Hudson. This frame of reference does more than anthologise, however. History puts the present in context. “For over 70 years, censorship policies have been a core function of the regime and a widely accepted aspect of society. The first to be sanctioned were always those with independent thought or differing political ideologies.”
Index spoke with Ai via email. He was in a Cambridge cafe during his UK book tour in February 2026. The university town is not unfamiliar for Ai; his teenage son goes to school in the city. But over the last decade, Ai has lived a peripatetic existence. He keeps a studio in Berlin but no longer lives there. Cambridge was home for a while. In 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic, Ai moved to Portugal. But he does not call that country, or any other, home. “I do not have a country, nor a homeland, but I don’t need one,” Ai told Index. “I just need to wake up every day and recognise that I am still alive.”
Last August, Ai briefly travelled to Kharkiv, a frontline of the four-year war started by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. “It was a surreal experience to witness Ukrainians defending their own territory and their national dignity,” he said. “Their commitment is immense.”
In mid-December, Ai visited China for the first time since leaving in 2015. “Meeting up with my ninety-three-year-old mother was a special experience,” he said. “I feel [that] in certain respects China has not changed at all. But it also felt unfamiliar – a sensation I had never experienced before.”
Ai posted a limited number of pictures and videos of the trip – without commentary – on Instagram in real time, though they could not be viewed in China itself. Ai is critical of social media platforms in general. They “engage in active and passive censorship under governmental influence,” he said. Nevertheless, he does use Instagram, “as a diary, to deposit traces of my everyday life,” he explains.
All that said, Ai is concerned about the ubiquitous presence of social media in everyday life. It is gradually turning us passive and docile, he thinks. “Today, trying to maintain independent thought is far more difficult than it was in the past,” he told Index. “Controlled by major powers, large capital, huge corporations, and dominant technology, the internet is serving to extract even greater resources, exploit humanity’s information, guide consumption, and even mislead public opinion to manipulate the populace.”
Artificial intelligence has, over the last few years, become the dominant presence in the global conversation about the reach – and overreach – of technology and commerce into the private lives of citizens. Ai equally distrusts AI. In his opinion, it is already boxing us into a more homogenised global society. He referenced an incident (without specifying the precise details) where someone testing China’s Deepseek AI platform asked it to talk about Ai Weiwei. Deepseek’s response? “Let’s talk about something else.”
“[AI] is commonly described as a liberating productive force, but … systems impose new constraints on traditional ways of human existence, producing a reality that is more unpredictable, chaotic, and disruptive,” Ai said. “Eventually, we are going to lose the poetic aspect of human nature, which includes each individual’s possibility [sic] of making mistakes according to their own habits.”
The symbiotic relationship between big data and censorship is a key theme in Ai’s book. In the country where he grew up, he notes, this relationship has created an inescapable panopticon. “[In] China, censorship operates around the clock, infiltrating every channel of communication. It impacts all forms of personal expression related to the public, whether communicated through publications, art exhibitions or social networks.”
Ai Weiwei’s Study of Perspective is a universal gesture of defiance to the world. Photo: Ercilla/Alam
Running in the family
Ai Weiwei comes from a family of dissenters. His father, Ai Qing, was one of modern China’s most influential poets. A key text of his is Understanding Writers and Respecting Writers, published in 1942.
“Writers ask for no privileges other than the freedom to write,” Ai Qing wrote in the essay. “Only when artistic creation is granted … can art play a role in advancing social reform.”
In the early days of the communist revolution, Mao Zedong sought Ai Qing’s advice about the potential role that culture could play in a communist society. But their views were not compatible. Despite being a voracious reader and lover of poetry, Mao did not believe that writers should be treated with respect or understanding.
Ai Weiwei was born in Beijing in 1957 – the same year that Mao launched the so-called Anti-Rightist Campaign. 300,000 individuals, including many artists and intellectuals, were exiled to China’s remote border regions, to undergo reform and political education. Ai Qing was banished to Heilongjiang Province, in the far northeast.
A decade later, at the onset of the Cultural Revolution, Ai Qing was moved to the desert region of Little Siberia. Daily duties included cleaning toilets. Ai joined his father in political exile. “That experience with my father helped me recognise the worst aspect of human nature: blindness and ignorance,” Ai told Index.
From his father, Ai learned that the artist’s life – despite the difficulties that this would, of necessity, entail – could help in forging a path towards political resistance. In 1981, Ai left China to study in the USA, at the Parsons School of Design in New York. His artistic mentors from that period included the Irish-American artist Sean Scully and Allen Ginsberg, the acclaimed poet. In 1988, Ai put on his first solo art show, Old Shoes, Safe Sex, at New York’s Ethan Cohen Gallery. Five years later, Ai returned to China to be with his father, who had fallen ill. Ai Qing died in 1996, aged 86.
The biographies of father and son have many commonalities. Both received their artistic education in the West (Ai Qing, between 1929 and 1932, in Paris); both were publicly persecuted and silenced for refusing to conform with the China Communist Party’s codes of political censorship. Ai’s difficult relationship with the Chinese authorities began in 2005 when he started a blog in China. “To express yourself needs a reason, but expressing yourself is the reason,” his first post read.
“This is my question: where are those lives?” another blog post, from the summer of 2008, asked. Ai was referring to the estimated 80,000 individuals killed in an earthquake in the southwestern Chinese province of Sichuan. In the wake of the natural disaster, the Chinese government censored and controlled information, so Ai decided to undertake a “citizens’ investigation”. Accompanied by followers from his blog, he travelled to the ruins of the earthquake and began to document the names of those who perished.
“I met many families who lost their children,” said Ai. “I was trying to raise a collective voice in pursuit of fairness and justice, but it felt almost impossible.”
The following summer, as the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen protests approached, Sina – China’s biggest news portal – shut down Ai’s blog because he refused to self-censor his posts. Ai, remarkably, seems almost blasé when recalling this period of censorship: “In one moment we believe that a certain space for freedom exists, but in another moment that space disappears. This is part of the normal order.”
Under surveillance
In early April 2011, the Chinese authorities detained Ai at Beijing International Airport, as he was about to board a flight for Hong Kong. His interrogators put absurd allegations to him about his conduct, claiming that he was engaged in “economic crimes”, but keeping the details vague.
The politically motivated accusations, Ai told Index, were meant to break my “commitment to truth justice” and “to tarnish my reputation”. He said: “I was secretly detained for 81 days, but I was not subjected to verbal, physical harm or humiliation. The harm I endured was more of a psychological nature.”
The episode gave Ai a valuable insight into how power works within a complex state bureaucracy. “It was not about right or wrong; but [about] the singularity and certainty of power’s inviolability”, he said. “Which makes all the efforts you have made appear pale and powerless in its presence.”
Despite his release without charge, Ai’s passport was confiscated by the state. Then in the autumn of 2015, he discovered a hidden listening device inside his Beijing art studio. The authorities had “assumed I was engaged in secret and disreputable activities,” he said. “I believed they would come to recognise their misjudgement since my actions were entirely open and public.”
Farcically, the authorities asked Ai to return the surveillance device – which he described as resembling an outdated relic “from the Cold War era”. By then, his passport had been returned. He was free to travel. Ai left Beijing for Berlin. The following February, as the refugee crisis sparked by unrest in the Middle East gripped Europe, Ai and a team of artists created a public art installation in Berlin, placing 14,000 unused life vests around the pillars of the Konzerthaus, a landmark concert hall in the German capital.
Not just China
But censorship exists in the West too. In 2023, Ai’s exhibition at London’s Lisson Gallery was cancelled after Ai posted and then deleted social media posts about the Hamas Israel conflict. Ai was keen to point out that recently, he was asked by Britain’s Royal Academy Magazine to write an opinion piece about artists’ ability (or lack thereof) to speak truth to power. “I submitted the article, and then I was informed that due to a reduction in the magazine’s pages, they could not publish my piece,” Ai explained. “Similar things have happened many times in the UK, where they use gentlemanly British politeness to make the most ruthless decisions.” [see box below]. The Royal Academy Magazine was asked for comment,
Ai mentioned other examples of western censorship. “The global film market is now dominated by China,” he said. “There is a desire not to offend major financial backers, so most of my films are rejected by many major international film festivals.”
Ai’s documentary films include Coronation (2020), which secretly filmed hospitals, homes, and quarantine sites in Wuhan, China – the first city to be hit by the global COVID-19 pandemic – and Human Flow (2017), which provided a detailed and emotional exploration of the global refugee crisis. “Everything is Art. Everything is Politics,” reads a caption in the latter film’s opening sequence. Thirty minutes later, another caption appears on the screen. “When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 11 countries around the world with border fences and walls,” it reads. “By 2016, 70 countries had built border fences and walls.”
But can artists transcend borders and governments? Ai believes yes. Presently, his art is being showcased in exhibitions in New Delhi, Cambridge and Cologne. Later in the year, Ai will be staging exhibitions in Seattle, Guimarães in Portugal, and Gyeongju in South Korea, aside from a Manchester show in July 2026 called Button up! which reflects on two centuries of Chinese British relations, globalisation and interconnected power structures which cause wars and global crises. At 68, the outspoken and resilient Chinese artist shows no signs of slowing down.
Undoubtedly, being a man without a country must take its toll. But there are some advantages too. “I can imagine going anywhere,” Ai said. “The earth is round, and at any latitude or longitude there is the possibility of survival.” Is this the definition of true freedom, the freedom that Ai Qing wrote about back in the 1940s? Not exactly.
“Humanity’s longing for freedom, and the price it pays in pursuit of freedom, is an enduring endeavour,” Ai concluded. “But freedom is an unattainable goal.”
Ai Weiwei’s book On Censorship was published by Thames and Hudson in January 2026
 
			
				
				
				
				
				Truth is at the heart of all art
by Ai Weiwei
For an artist, speaking the truth is not optional; it is the essential quality of art itself. The very existence of art arises from an individual’s particular experience, something that cannot be replaced. Using that experience to express oneself, whether through words or images, is one of the most fundamental ways in which art exists. It is a responsibility, and it is also an obligation. For if art loses its perseverance in truth, its effort to speak true words, then it becomes like a river without water, or a field or mountain without trees – art would lose its very possibility of existing in the world.
Yet in most circumstances, this is not what we see. We encounter many kinds of expression, many forms and languages, but how distant are these forms and languages from art’s essential appeal? We can say that what we usually see is the reiteration of already accepted values, without any expression that offers new possibilities, new sensibilities, or wholly individual feelings. Every artist, like every individual, knows that speaking the truth and insisting on one’s own perspective is dangerous, and may exact a heavy price. Books may go unpublished, exhibitions may be closed, concerts cancelled. We see this every day. Those who refuse to betray their conscience and insist on telling the truth are always the first to be punished. My father, as a poet, endured such punishment throughout his life. He was not an activist nor someone engaged in politics, but rather a poet in the purest sense – someone who would not, in any circumstances, betray his conscience, a man who would speak his mind without calculating gain or loss. He paid dearly for this. He was exiled for 20 years. The year I was born was the year he was exiled. I, too, became collateral, enduring the catastrophic consequences of his truth-telling.
When I was growing up, I did not feel the need to speak the truth because I did not yet know what truth was. But when I reached a certain age, I began to recognise what was false. I detest falsehood to the extreme, because it alters the quality of our lives. It makes us look at our surroundings without confidence. Meanwhile, once we recognise untruth, we no longer dare to look at ourselves. Even so, speaking the truth remains difficult. First of all, language as a form of expression – or art as a form of expression – requires being seen or heard, which is a difficult process in itself. My voice was not heard or seen until I was nearly 50 years old; only then did I find my language and my manner of expression. But this language and manner of expression are not permanent. They are like a plant, and do not have an eternal lifespan. Therefore, as artists, we must continuously challenge and doubt ourselves in our understanding of truth, seeking ways to break through censorship – including self-censorship. In this process of pursuing truth, the path is strewn with thorns and full of obstacles; there is a real risk of falling into the abyss at any moment. Even so, I have paid every price required, and I am proud of that, because I am not doing it for myself but for the world we see with our own eyes, so that it may become clearer, and so that we may express ourselves with greater accuracy. An artist’s being truly exists when there is both self-awareness of the real and self-expression of the real. This “self” does not inherently exist on its own; rather, it emerges when confronted with a certain reality.
Ai Weiwei is a Chinese artist whose exhibitions are held all over the world. This article was originally written for the Royal Academy magazine, but did not appear
			
			
				
				
				
				
			
				
				
					
	
	
			
			
					
				
				
				
				READ MORE
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026. 

Ai Weiwei’s new book is, in a sense, anything but new. “Censorship, through intimidation and sanction is evident in the history of the Chinese Communist Party,” he writes in Ai Weiwei on Censorship, recently published in the United Kingdom by Thames and Hudson. This frame of reference does more than anthologise, however. History puts the present in context. “For over 70 years, censorship policies have been a core function of the regime and a widely accepted aspect of society. The first to be sanctioned were always those with independent thought or differing political ideologies.”

Index spoke with Ai via email. He was in a Cambridge cafe during his UK book tour in February 2026. The university town is not unfamiliar for Ai; his teenage son goes to school in the city. But over the last decade, Ai has lived a peripatetic existence. He keeps a studio in Berlin but no longer lives there. Cambridge was home for a while. In 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic, Ai moved to Portugal. But he does not call that country, or any other, home. “I do not have a country, nor a homeland, but I don’t need one,” Ai told Index. “I just need to wake up every day and recognise that I am still alive.”

Last August, Ai briefly travelled to Kharkiv, a frontline of the four-year war started by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. “It was a surreal experience to witness Ukrainians defending their own territory and their national dignity,” he said. “Their commitment is immense.”

In mid-December, Ai visited China for the first time since leaving in 2015. “Meeting up with my ninety-three-year-old mother was a special experience,” he said. “I feel [that] in certain respects China has not changed at all. But it also felt unfamiliar – a sensation I had never experienced before.”

Ai posted a limited number of pictures and videos of the trip – without commentary – on Instagram in real time, though they could not be viewed in China itself. Ai is critical of social media platforms in general. They “engage in active and passive censorship under governmental influence,” he said. Nevertheless, he does use Instagram, “as a diary, to deposit traces of my everyday life,” he explains.

All that said, Ai is concerned about the ubiquitous presence of social media in everyday life. It is gradually turning us passive and docile, he thinks. “Today, trying to maintain independent thought is far more difficult than it was in the past,” he told Index. “Controlled by major powers, large capital, huge corporations, and dominant technology, the internet is serving to extract even greater resources, exploit humanity’s information, guide consumption, and even mislead public opinion to manipulate the populace.”

Artificial intelligence has, over the last few years, become the dominant presence in the global conversation about the reach – and overreach – of technology and commerce into the private lives of citizens. Ai equally distrusts AI. In his opinion, it is already boxing us into a more homogenised global society. He referenced an incident (without specifying the precise details) where someone testing China’s Deepseek AI platform asked it to talk about Ai Weiwei. Deepseek’s response? “Let’s talk about something else.”

“[AI] is commonly described as a liberating productive force, but … systems impose new constraints on traditional ways of human existence, producing a reality that is more unpredictable, chaotic, and disruptive,” Ai said. “Eventually, we are going to lose the poetic aspect of human nature, which includes each individual’s possibility [sic] of making mistakes according to their own habits.”

The symbiotic relationship between big data and censorship is a key theme in Ai’s book. In the country where he grew up, he notes, this relationship has created an inescapable panopticon. “[In] China, censorship operates around the clock, infiltrating every channel of communication. It impacts all forms of personal expression related to the public, whether communicated through publications, art exhibitions or social networks.”

Ai Weiwei’s Study of Perspective is a universal gesture of defiance to the world. Photo: Ercilla/Alam

Running in the family

Ai Weiwei comes from a family of dissenters. His father, Ai Qing, was one of modern China’s most influential poets. A key text of his is Understanding Writers and Respecting Writers, published in 1942.

“Writers ask for no privileges other than the freedom to write,” Ai Qing wrote in the essay. “Only when artistic creation is granted … can art play a role in advancing social reform.”

In the early days of the communist revolution, Mao Zedong sought Ai Qing’s advice about the potential role that culture could play in a communist society. But their views were not compatible. Despite being a voracious reader and lover of poetry, Mao did not believe that writers should be treated with respect or understanding.

Ai Weiwei was born in Beijing in 1957 – the same year that Mao launched the so-called Anti-Rightist Campaign. 300,000 individuals, including many artists and intellectuals, were exiled to China’s remote border regions, to undergo reform and political education. Ai Qing was banished to Heilongjiang Province, in the far northeast.

A decade later, at the onset of the Cultural Revolution, Ai Qing was moved to the desert region of Little Siberia. Daily duties included cleaning toilets. Ai joined his father in political exile. “That experience with my father helped me recognise the worst aspect of human nature: blindness and ignorance,” Ai told Index.

From his father, Ai learned that the artist’s life – despite the difficulties that this would, of necessity, entail – could help in forging a path towards political resistance. In 1981, Ai left China to study in the USA, at the Parsons School of Design in New York. His artistic mentors from that period included the Irish-American artist Sean Scully and Allen Ginsberg, the acclaimed poet. In 1988, Ai put on his first solo art show, Old Shoes, Safe Sex, at New York’s Ethan Cohen Gallery. Five years later, Ai returned to China to be with his father, who had fallen ill. Ai Qing died in 1996, aged 86.

The biographies of father and son have many commonalities. Both received their artistic education in the West (Ai Qing, between 1929 and 1932, in Paris); both were publicly persecuted and silenced for refusing to conform with the China Communist Party’s codes of political censorship. Ai’s difficult relationship with the Chinese authorities began in 2005 when he started a blog in China. “To express yourself needs a reason, but expressing yourself is the reason,” his first post read.

“This is my question: where are those lives?” another blog post, from the summer of 2008, asked. Ai was referring to the estimated 80,000 individuals killed in an earthquake in the southwestern Chinese province of Sichuan. In the wake of the natural disaster, the Chinese government censored and controlled information, so Ai decided to undertake a “citizens’ investigation”. Accompanied by followers from his blog, he travelled to the ruins of the earthquake and began to document the names of those who perished.

“I met many families who lost their children,” said Ai. “I was trying to raise a collective voice in pursuit of fairness and justice, but it felt almost impossible.”

The following summer, as the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen protests approached, Sina – China’s biggest news portal – shut down Ai’s blog because he refused to self-censor his posts. Ai, remarkably, seems almost blasé when recalling this period of censorship: “In one moment we believe that a certain space for freedom exists, but in another moment that space disappears. This is part of the normal order.”

Under surveillance

In early April 2011, the Chinese authorities detained Ai at Beijing International Airport, as he was about to board a flight for Hong Kong. His interrogators put absurd allegations to him about his conduct, claiming that he was engaged in “economic crimes”, but keeping the details vague.

The politically motivated accusations, Ai told Index, were meant to break my “commitment to truth justice” and “to tarnish my reputation”. He said: “I was secretly detained for 81 days, but I was not subjected to verbal, physical harm or humiliation. The harm I endured was more of a psychological nature.”

The episode gave Ai a valuable insight into how power works within a complex state bureaucracy. “It was not about right or wrong; but [about] the singularity and certainty of power’s inviolability”, he said. “Which makes all the efforts you have made appear pale and powerless in its presence.”

Despite his release without charge, Ai’s passport was confiscated by the state. Then in the autumn of 2015, he discovered a hidden listening device inside his Beijing art studio. The authorities had “assumed I was engaged in secret and disreputable activities,” he said. “I believed they would come to recognise their misjudgement since my actions were entirely open and public.”

Farcically, the authorities asked Ai to return the surveillance device – which he described as resembling an outdated relic “from the Cold War era”. By then, his passport had been returned. He was free to travel. Ai left Beijing for Berlin. The following February, as the refugee crisis sparked by unrest in the Middle East gripped Europe, Ai and a team of artists created a public art installation in Berlin, placing 14,000 unused life vests around the pillars of the Konzerthaus, a landmark concert hall in the German capital.

Not just China

But censorship exists in the West too. In 2023, Ai’s exhibition at London’s Lisson Gallery was cancelled after Ai posted and then deleted social media posts about the Hamas Israel conflict. Ai was keen to point out that recently, he was asked by Britain’s Royal Academy Magazine to write an opinion piece about artists’ ability (or lack thereof) to speak truth to power. “I submitted the article, and then I was informed that due to a reduction in the magazine’s pages, they could not publish my piece,” Ai explained. “Similar things have happened many times in the UK, where they use gentlemanly British politeness to make the most ruthless decisions.” [see box below]. The Royal Academy Magazine was asked for comment,

Ai mentioned other examples of western censorship. “The global film market is now dominated by China,” he said. “There is a desire not to offend major financial backers, so most of my films are rejected by many major international film festivals.”

Ai’s documentary films include Coronation (2020), which secretly filmed hospitals, homes, and quarantine sites in Wuhan, China – the first city to be hit by the global COVID-19 pandemic – and Human Flow (2017), which provided a detailed and emotional exploration of the global refugee crisis. “Everything is Art. Everything is Politics,” reads a caption in the latter film’s opening sequence. Thirty minutes later, another caption appears on the screen. “When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 11 countries around the world with border fences and walls,” it reads. “By 2016, 70 countries had built border fences and walls.”

But can artists transcend borders and governments? Ai believes yes. Presently, his art is being showcased in exhibitions in New Delhi, Cambridge and Cologne. Later in the year, Ai will be staging exhibitions in Seattle, Guimarães in Portugal, and Gyeongju in South Korea, aside from a Manchester show in July 2026 called Button up! which reflects on two centuries of Chinese British relations, globalisation and interconnected power structures which cause wars and global crises. At 68, the outspoken and resilient Chinese artist shows no signs of slowing down.

Undoubtedly, being a man without a country must take its toll. But there are some advantages too. “I can imagine going anywhere,” Ai said. “The earth is round, and at any latitude or longitude there is the possibility of survival.” Is this the definition of true freedom, the freedom that Ai Qing wrote about back in the 1940s? Not exactly.

“Humanity’s longing for freedom, and the price it pays in pursuit of freedom, is an enduring endeavour,” Ai concluded. “But freedom is an unattainable goal.”

Ai Weiwei’s book On Censorship was published by Thames and Hudson in January 2026

 



Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Global Free Speech

Kurt Vonnegut and his daughter Nanette in 1997. Photo: Family handout This article first appeared in the Spring 2026 issue of Index on Censorship, The monster unleashed: How Hungary’s illliberal vision is seducing the Western world published on 2 April 2026. “My mother warned me early on that my father was going to get in trouble for writing dirty books.” Nanette Vonnegut, youngest daughter of the late American novelist Kurt Vonnegut, remembers these words vividly. Even though she was around eight years old at the time, she recognised the real fear in her mother’s voice. At the time, she didn’t quite know what to do with the warning. But through a serendipitous encounter, she now has a much better idea. When she was invited, along with her brother, to represent the Vonnegut Estate at a meeting about book censorship hosted by publisher Penguin Random House, she had what she describes as a conversion experience. Now, she is taking on the State of Utah alongside other plaintiffs, in a case defending the freedom to read, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Utah Foundation. “I was blown away by the urgency,” she told Index, recalling the passion and bravery of the librarians and lawyers who spoke at the meeting. Each person took their turn to make a speech, “like one sermon after another”. Vonnegut spoke about her own childhood memories, when she was afraid of what might happen to her father. One speaker in particular, she remembered, described how book bans in the USA are not about words or even sex, but about ideas. “Not until now, did I ever feel afraid for what’s going on. These books in Utah are being thrown away. They’re just pulled off the shelves,” Vonnegut said. But this, she added, has always been a lurking threat. No sex please, we’re prudish At the meeting, she discovered that in Utah, any mention of sex in a book was sufficient reason for it to be pulled from any school library in the state. Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, an anti-war novel first published in 1969, remains hugely controversial; it has already been banned in two school districts in Utah, labelled as pornographic. If the book is successfully challenged in a third district, the ban automatically becomes state-wide, as has already happened with 28 other books. Nanette Vonnegut can’t recall the book being particularly pornographic in nature. Interviewed on National Public Radio, Terry Hutchinson, a former member of a Utah schoolboard, said: “I am not a big Kurt Vonnegut fan. Not really because of subject matter, but because of style.” He believed that Slaughterhouse-Five should be removed from school libraries. For him, the book crossed the line when a character gets an erection. When Vonnegut and her attorney Tom Ford were invited to discuss the lawsuit on WHMP Radio, Ford explained that Utah’s book removal law, HB29 (passed in 2022 and amended in 2024), prohibits public school libraries from carrying any book that contains a description of a sex act. In Vonnegut v. Utah, the plaintiffs will argue that sections of HB29 are overbroad and in violation of First Amendment rights. “It prohibits a remarkably sweeping range of literature from every school library in the state,” Ford told the radio station. Appropriate age categories are irrelevant where this law is concerned – all sex is bad sex. The law itself, Ford said, springs from the false narrative created by conservative lawmakers in Utah that the state’s school libraries were full of pornographic books. In fact, Ford continued, the real targets of this censorship were ideas, messages and lived experiences. The earliest memory Vonnegut has of her father being a target of literary censorship is not one of quiet removal from a library shelf, but rather something more dramatic. In 1973, a school in Drake, North Dakota threw copies of Slaughterhouse-Five into its furnace. The books were burnt on the orders of the local school board, which had deemed the novel “profane”. Ironically, Vonnegut’s novel was inspired by his experiences as a prisoner of war in Germany during the Second World War. Before the war the Nazis had organised public burnings of books that they deemed “un-German”. Kurt Vonnegut wrote a letter to the school in response. “You can feel his rage and his hurt,” his daughter told Index, recalling the letter. Putting the Vonnegut name to good use Now, she said, she can’t believe that book banning is back in the USA, and “worse than ever”. She fears for the teenagers who don’t have access to the right resources and how much trouble it’s going to leave them in. For the first time, she feels she can really put her Vonnegut name to good use. Nanette Vonnegut grew up in a creative household, with her mother guarding the door to protect her father’s writing space. “You were scared of that door, because you knew that he was he was trying to write.” He worked hard, she remembered, all the time, and there was a sense that it was serious work. She described to Index how her father would come out from his writing for a snack (usually pumpernickel loaded with butter). The kitchen would be full of the kids and their friends, but he’d barely register them. Often, he would be muttering to himself; sometimes, he’d stop and talk to his youngest daughter, verbally working through an idea. Once, on his way back to his study, he paused and said to her: “You know, the unstructured life is not worth living.” Kurt rarely left the house. His wife, Jane Marie Cox, maintained the family’s social front by doing all the expected things like going to cocktail parties and playing tennis. She was his biggest supporter. Cox was passionate about reading too, and the Vonnegut house was always full of books. At the end of each day, the couple would discuss Vonnegut’s day of writing. “She was like his editor,” Nanette said, describing how when it came to stories, “she was the midwife.” A Vonnegut family trip Niagara Falls circa 1964. Photo: Family handout Memories of Slaughterhouse-Five Her father, she explained, was always writing to tell the truth. Slaughterhouse-Five was a particular challenge, because he struggled to get the information he needed about the fire-bombing of Dresden, which he had experienced. When he did finally finish the book, he left the galleys out for the children to read. When it was published, he became an overnight sensation. It was a writer’s house, and as the children got older, it became a party house too. According to Nanette Vonnegut, “It was a very heady, exciting time.” Her parents often had other creatives over at the Vonnegut home. Once, it was actor and director Peter Fonda, to talk about film rights for Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle. Jack Kerouac, author of On The Road, visited before he was famous. After having a little too much to drink, his bad language ramped up. Nanette and a friend, aged around nine, were told to leave the room and go upstairs. “But we did not go upstairs,” she recalled. “We stayed behind the door. It was sort of thrilling and exciting. He was like a wild man, and he seemed to be a lot of fun. We didn’t want to miss any of it.” Growing up in this household, she internalised a strong faith in the creative process. She has inherited this “creative groove” as an artist. Take, for example, the day she snapped, for no particular reason, a photo of the Senate floor being shown on a television screen. A few days later, on 6 January 2021, came the US Capitol riot. Following her creativity, Vonnegut created a huge six-foot painting (opposite) from the photograph. Although mostly found in her art studio, Vonnegut feels a strong sense of the power of words, and is a writer too. “Words are the most sacred things that we have, and that’s something I grew up with,” she told Index. And above all, evident in her fight against Utah, she has always taken for granted the belief that there are no “dirty words”. READ MORE

3 hours ago
Global Free Speech

CPJ, RSF warn Iran using 83-day blackout to hide press crackdown

4 hours ago
Global Free Speech

Are you our new senior editor? Index is on the hunt for a new senior editor to work at the heart of our editorial team across our magazine and website. This is an exciting opportunity at a time when Index is launching a membership scheme and redesigning its magazine and website. Reporting to the editor, you will be expected to edit agenda-setting essays, columns, features and investigations. The right candidate will have excellent judgement and editing skills and be a deep thinker. You will be confident working with some of the biggest names in journalism and the arts, as well as committed to finding and commissioning underrepresented voices and stories.  A non-tribal outlook is essential: Index is non-partisan and its only “cause” is that of promoting free expression and examining censorship. The right candidate will combine curiosity with excellent attention to detail. You will support the editor with the production and editing side of the magazine and website as well as commissioning a larger network of freelance contributors around the world, alongside sub-editors, illustrators and designers. The new senior editor must be equally at home working on print and digital-only journalism and analysis. The role demands someone who is just as comfortable writing a grabbing web headline as they are editing a 2,000-word essay. Regular writing opportunities are also available. About Index Index on Censorship is Britain’s leading organisation that campaigns for, reports on and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate and monitor threats to free speech. Our work is varied and always rewarding. On any given day, we could be publishing letters written by Belarusian political prisoners and defending a cartoonist who might have caused offence – all to make the case that freedom of expression is vital for liberal democracy and for a vibrant and creative society. At the organisation’s heart and in circulation since 1972 is an award-winning quarterly magazine that has featured some of the world’s best-known writers. In addition to the magazine is a website, a weekly newsletter, a policy arm and an events programme. Together they make Index what it is today – the go-to for information on the global free speech landscape. Specific responsibilities Edit articles and analysis for the magazine and upload copy for the website and other digital platforms Coordinate with contributors from around the world to ensure news articles, analysis and essays are of high quality and on time Manage the weekly newsletter to Index subscribers Commission content for the magazine and web stories including photographs, cartoons and the cover illustration Write articles and analysis for the magazine and website Operate the content management system for publication of written stories Lead on a website refresh and support the redesign of the magazine so they have an overall look and brand that work together Monitor analytics across written content (web and magazine), adjusting strategy to optimise KPIs, membership and grow our audience Work with the communications manager on developing new formats including more use of video and audio to tell stories, through experimentation and data-driven decision-making Forge partnerships with creators globally and digital platforms to expand Index’s reach and engagement Represent Index at events, panels or media appearances where appropriate Support the editor with general commissioning, editing and proof-reading  for the magazine and when needed Knowledge Excellent editing and commissioning abilities, with attention to style, accuracy and tone Deep knowledge of the principles of digital and magazine journalism Strong digital acumen, including familiarity with SEO, analytics tools and CMS platforms Understanding of website design and how to improve it Knowledge of other digital platforms Proven ability to write authoritative magazine and online articles and analysis Knowledge of UK and global affairs and the principles of censorship and free speech issues in the UK and globally Skills (essential) Experience working for a magazine and/or online digital platform The ability to work under deadline pressure Excellent written and verbal communication skills Strong communication skills to work collaboratively with contributors in a small team Prior experience managing contributors Experience of identifying content that will grow a digital audience while driving membership of the organisation The ability to recognise sensitive or potentially libellous issues and raise them for discussion Experience in web publishing, including using content management systems such as WordPress Strong organisational skills and the ability to thrive in a small team The initiative to identify tasks and to work independently Ability to commission articles by and defend the right to free speech for people with whom you personally fundamentally disagree or believe are wrong Preferred Understanding of international affairs Experience working with writers whose first language is not English Familiarity with the Economist style book Experience managing newsletters Proficiency in at least one major language other than English Hours: Full-time, contract Salary: £35,000 – £42,000 dependent on experience Location: Remote but with lots of travel to London Index is a small and ambitious organisation that values diversity. We are committed to equal opportunities and welcome all applicants regardless of ethnic origin, national origin, gender, gender identity, race, colour, religious beliefs, disability, sexual orientation, age or marital status To apply please send a cover letter with your CV by Friday 19 June 2026 to [email protected] If you want to find out more about the job please email the editor on [email protected] READ MORE

4 hours ago
Global Free Speech

Journalist Yelis Ayaz arrested in Turkey for ‘spreading disinformation’

20 hours ago
Global Free Speech

A social video about Reform’s policy on immigration centres. Image: www.instagram.com/zia.yusuf/ We did warn that the Online Safety Act would chill free speech and vehemently opposed the legislation for that reason. We said the remit of the act was too wide and that perfectly legitimate legal points of view would be shut down under its provisions. And we are beginning to see that happening and beginning to see also how it will be used politically, by all sides. GB News on the right and The Canary on the left have both blogged about the case of Zia Yusuf the Reform spokesman on home affairs who had two recent TikTok videos taken down from the platform. GB News in outrage, and The Canary saying the platform was quite right to do so because Reform policies amount to  “hateful behaviour”. It all started when Yusuf told his X followers that a video of him saying that Reform would put migration centres in Green-voting areas – and which Yusuf claims had millions of views on other social media channels – had been taken down by TikTok which cited the Online Safety Act for their decision. Then a second video was removed – also by TikTok a couple of days ago. Here Yusuf was saying some unpleasant, but not illegal things, about migration ie that Reform would deport everyone who is in the country illegally including foreign nationals committing crimes and those not paying their way. TikTok  said it had acted on a complaint by a user. In this case, the platform first cited the Online Safety Act and then said that the video contained “hate speech and hateful behaviour”. Yusuf was also furious that TikTok threatened to remove him from the platform altogether if he committed further “offences”, blasting the Conservatives for pretending to pass legislation to protect children, when in fact the law was “silencing voices the open-borders political establishment don’t like”. Enter Nadine Dorries, the erstwhile Conservative Culture minister, today a Reform champion and Daily Mail columnist who steered the legislation through parliament and now says it has to be consigned “to the dustbin where it now belongs” because it is silencing her colleagues. Yusuf’s video, by the way, has now been restored. None of this would have happened without the Online Safety Act – and this is exactly how we warned the legislation would be used – to shut down legitimate debate. Unless speech is aired in a public forum, it cannot be challenged. And the implications go wider. What about other types of speech in the future, on the left say? Will these videos too be challenged by the TikTok community for being “hateful” or “causing public disorder”? Will there by a tit-for-tat war now with political players on all sides trying to shut down the speech of their opponents, because that’s what the Online Safety legislation is enabling. Maybe that’s what the Chinese-owned company TikTok wants – believing as the Chinese Communist Party does that liberal democracies cause chaos –   but perhaps that’s a conspiracy theory too far. The spat has certainly fuelled the suspicions of many Reform voters that there is liberal establishment trying to shut down ideas they don’t like. And we agree, that’s exactly what it looks like. Free expression means nothing if it is not for all. READ MORE

21 hours ago
Global Free Speech

Mexican journalist, IPFA recipient Maria Teresa Montaño targeted in possible malware, surveillance attacks

2 days ago
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Editors Picks

SCOTUS Term Limits May Be a Good Idea. But They Still Require a Constitutional Amendment.

33 minutes ago

Stablecoins still dominate despite yield advantage of tokenized funds: JPMorgan

51 minutes ago

Fed Proposes ‘Skinny’ Accounts, Calls for Tier 3 Pause

54 minutes ago

Terraform Accuses Jane Street of Leveraging Secret Telegram Group

57 minutes ago
Latest Posts

Racial Slurs as Actionable Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

2 hours ago

It’s not all HYPE: Privacy and quantum-resistant coins surge as bitcoin marks time: Crypto Daily

2 hours ago

OSL Strengthens Asia’s Digital Asset Ecosystem with Listing of State-Supervised Gold-Backed Stablecoin USDKG

2 hours ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

Trump FCC Using False Claims Of Immigrant Fraud To Drive Up Costs Of Broadband For Everyone

32 minutes ago

SCOTUS Term Limits May Be a Good Idea. But They Still Require a Constitutional Amendment.

33 minutes ago

Stablecoins still dominate despite yield advantage of tokenized funds: JPMorgan

51 minutes ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.