About the "Web" Highly Inappropriate Filtering of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Key Questions on Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 - # Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W Decision to Place an Embargo and a Restriction of His Zenodo Journal Article With the Digital Object Identifier (DOI).: 10.5281/zenodo.11416577

Even though Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has never sought nor ever solicited nor ever contacted anyone to have his written publications listed and featured prominently on the AOL, Bing/MSN and Yahoo Internet Search Engines (ISE); Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has uncovered many instances where his written content were filtered, distorted, misused and misattributed. Regrettably, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W journal articles about the circumstances that led up to the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act were obscured and obfuscated after they were published on the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) - Zenodo. As a direct consequence of this, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W has placed a restriction as well as an embargo for the foreseeable future on many of his journal articles published on the Zenodo. Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W would like to take this opportunity to clarify that no binding contractual agreements exist between him and ISE such as AOL, Bing/MSN and Yahoo, which enables them to make unsolicited comments upon the written publications of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W on Zenodo.  According to information posted on the website of DataCite Commons, journal articles published or added on Zenodo “maximize their usefulness for the entire research and scholarly communications community” when the data is not modified “so as to make it false, incomplete, defamatory, or misleading.”  Based on the statements made by DataCiteCommons, it has become obvious to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that many of his journal articles published on the Zenodo will not be maximizing their usefulness either in the short-term or in the long-term future. 

Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is a Bachelor of Arts Degree graduate of Westminster College (located in Fulton, Missouri) who was in January 2010 informed about the April 5^th 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” in healthy sexual relationships. Via email dated March 7^th 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have informed W that (his alma mater) Westminster College had extended an invitation to their then Director William Webster to “deliver the 1987 Commencement Address on Sunday, May 17^th 1987 at 2:30 P.M.” The invitation extended by Westminster College on August 29^th 1986 came approximately 5 months after the April 5^th 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery on the campus of Lehigh University (located in the State of Pennsylvania). In other emails beginning November 12^th 2020, the DOJ (FBI) had informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they had transferred the case of Jeanne Ann Clery rape and murder to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on (or around) June 11^th 1992. However, via postal mail correspondence that was addressed to Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W, the CIA have denied ever being “assigned” the case of Jeanne Ann Clery on (or around) June 11^th 1992. It is the opinion of Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that the letters sent to him by the DOJ (FBI) and the CIA were inconsistent with one another. For your information, William Webster was Director of the DOJ (FBI) from 1978 to 1987. He was also Director of the CIA from 1987 to 1991. His father Thomas Webster is an alumnus of Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri). According to the 2019 – 2020 Student Handbook published by Westminster College (Fulton, Missouri), “the college has comprehensive, intentional, and integrated programming, initiatives, strategies, and campaigns that are intended to end sexual misconduct, dating / domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Programs to prevent sexual misconduct, dating/domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking include both primary prevention and awareness programs directed at incoming students and new employees and ongoing prevention and awareness campaigns directed at students and employees. The ongoing educational programs are overseen by the Title IX Coordinator / Director of Human Resources and Vice-President / Dean of Student Life. All prevention programs are [1] culturally relevant, inclusive of diverse communities and identities, sustainable, responsive to community needs, and empirically based and assessed for value, effectiveness, or outcome; [2] in consideration of environmental risk and protective factors as they occur on the individual relationship, institutional community and societal levels; [3] accessible to students, faculty and staff and accommodated based upon one’s ability status, language, and/or learning style.”  

The key questions asked by Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery as well as Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 include but are not limited to the following. 1) What were American colleges and universities obligations pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? Were American colleges and universities required by law to condemn violence committed against women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their religious affiliations, their national origins and/or their disability status following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If yes, were American colleges and universities required to inform their students (beginning Calendar Year 1973) what constitutes appropriate sexual boundaries pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? 2) Did American colleges and universities begin informing their students what constitute “affirmative and effective consent” in the years following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972? If not, when did American colleges and universities begin to inform their incoming freshmen and transfer students about the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent?” Did American colleges and universities begin teaching the concepts of “affirmative and effective consent” to their students following the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery (on April 5^th 1986)? If yes, why have American colleges and universities waited so long following the enactment of Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 to inform their students what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent?” 3) Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? Are American colleges and universities discussions pertaining to what constitutes “affirmative and effective consent” consistent with their academic integrity policy if they are first informing their incoming new students about the rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery? 4) Were there forces out there in the 1970s and the 1980s looking for a case where a Black or an African American man rapes and murders a Caucasian woman for the purpose of enacting a law similar to the Jeanne Clery Act? Was the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act the result of racist and sexist individuals coming together for the purpose of [a] preventing racial minorities from climbing the social ladder through academic education; [b] cracking down on interracial relationships particularly between a Caucasian woman and a Black or African American man (in American colleges and universities); [c] not applying the same standards in circumstances where a Caucasian man sexually assaults a woman from a racial minority (as in the case of Brock Turner and Chanel Miller following her rape on January 18^th 2015 at the campus of Stanford University)?

As a matter of principle, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W unequivocally condemns violence committed against girls and women irrespective of their racial backgrounds, their sexual orientations, their national origins, their religious affiliations, their disability status or their age groups. Still, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W is vexed by the very bizarre and persistent frenzy that has targeted him on the internet ever since he made the decision to publish on digital platforms [1] some of his recollections on how he was in the month of January 2010 (as an undergraduate student of Westminster College) informed about the April 5^th 1986 rape and murder of Jeanne Ann Clery before being told what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships; [2] his questions about Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972; [3] his correspondence with agents of the United States government on the circumstances that led up to the enactment of the Jeanne Clery Act on (or around) November 8^th 1990; [4] his inquiry on the exact year American colleges and universities began teaching their undergraduate students what constitutes affirmative and effective consent in healthy sexual relationships… 

Via email dated February 9^th 2024, Zenodo has informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W that they are incapable of preventing the filtering and distortion of journal articles published on their platforms on ISEs such as AOL, Bing/MSN as well as Yahoo. Zenodo have also informed Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W on (or around) February 9^th 2024 that they would not delete any journal articles that are over one month old even in circumstances where they are presented with evidence that the journal article has gone on to be filtered and distorted on Internet Search Engines (such as AOL, Bing / MSN and Yahoo) to the displeasure of the author. As previously noted, Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W regrets that his Zenodo journal articles with the DOI.: 10.5281/zenodo.11416577  will not be maximizing its usefulness either in the short-term future or in the long-term future. 

According to a December 27^th 2023 complaint filed by the New York Times, Microsoft and OpenAI generative artificial intelligence tools rely on large-language models that were built “by copying and using millions of NYT copyrighted news articles, in-depth investigations, opinion pieces, reviews, how-to guides and more. (…) Through Microsoft’s Bing Chat (recently rebranded as ‘Copilot’) and OpenAI’s ChatGPT, both Microsoft and OpenAI seek to free-ride on the New York Times massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive product without permission or payment. (…) At the same time as Microsoft and OpenAI models are copying, reproducing, and paraphrasing New York Times content without consent or compensation, they are also causing the New York Times commercial and competitive injury by misattributing content to the New York Times that it did not, in fact, publish. In AI parlance, this is called a ‘hallucination.’ In plain English, it’s misinformation. ChatGPT defines a ’hallucination’ as the ‘phenomenon of a machine, such as a chatbot, generating seemingly realistic sensory experiences that do not correspond to any real-world input.’ Instead of saying, ‘I don’t know,’ Microsoft and OpenAI GPT models will confidently provide information that is, at best, not quite accurate, and, at worst, demonstrably (but not recognizably) false. And human reviewers find it very difficult to distinguish ‘hallucinations’ from truthful output. These ‘hallucinations’ mislead users as to the source of the information they are obtaining, leading them to incorrectly believe that the information provided has been vetted and published by the New York Times. Users who ask a search engine what the New York Times has written on a subject should be provided with neither an unauthorized copy nor an inaccurate forgery of a New York Times article, but a link to the article itself.” 

The New York Times have also noted in their December 27^th 2023 complaint that “it takes enormous resources to publish, on average, more than 250 original articles every day. Many of these articles take months – and sometimes longer – to report. That output is the work of approximately 5,800 full-time equivalent Times employees (as of December 31^st 2022), some 2,600 of whom are directly involved in the Time’s journalism operation. Quite often, the most vital news reporting for society is the most resource-intensive. Some of The Time’s most important journalism requires deploying teams of journalists at great cost to report on the ground around the world, providing best-in-class-security and support, filing lawsuits against government entities to bring information to light, and supporting journalists through investigations that can take months or years. (…) Making great journalism is harder than ever. Over the past two decades, the traditional business models that supported quality journalism have collapsed, forcing the shuttering of newspapers all over the country. It has become more difficult for the public to sort fact from fiction in today’s information ecosystem, as misinformation floods the internet, television, and other media. If The Times and other news organizations cannot produce and protect their independent journalism, there will be a vacuum that no computer or artificial intelligence can fill. The protection of the Time’s intellectual property is critical to its continued ability to fund world-class journalism in the public interest. If The Times and its peers cannot control the use of their content, their ability to monetize that content will be harmed. With less revenue, news organizations will have fewer journalists able to dedicate time and resources to important, in-depth stories, which creates a risk that those stories will go untold. Less journalism will be produced and the cost to society will be enormous. The Times depends on its exclusive rights of reproduction, adaptation, publication, performance, and display under copyright law to resist these forces. (…) The Times requires third parties to obtain permission before using Times content and trademarks for commercial purposes, and for decades The Times has licensed its content under negotiated licensing agreements. These agreements help ensure that The Times controls how, where, and for how long its content and brand appears and that it receives fair compensation for third-party use. Third-parties, including large tech platforms, pay The Times significant royalties under these agreements in exchange for the right to use Times content for narrowly defined purposes. The agreements prohibit uses beyond those authorized purposes. (…) In 2019, the Times published a Pulitzer-prize winning, five-part series on predatory lending in New York City’s taxi industry. The 18-month investigation included 600 interviews, with more than 100 records requests, large scale data analysis, and the review of thousands of pages of internal bank records and other documents, and ultimately led to criminal probes and the enactment of new laws to prevent future abuse. OpenAI had no role in the creation of this content, yet with minimal prompting, will recite large portions of it verbatim.”

Be well. Stay well. Take care. Keep yourselves at arms distance.  


Michael A. Ayele (a.k.a) W
Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist
Audio-Visual Media Analyst
Anti-Propaganda Journalist