Blog

Category: Freedom of Speech

FCC Case Against CBS Rejected

4 November 2011

In a victory this Wednesday for freedom of speech, an appeals court rejected the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) decision to punish CBS for airing an expressive portion of Janet Jackson’s broadcast performance during the 2004 Super Bowl. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled by 2-1 (CBS Corp et al v. FCC, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 06-3575) that, by imposing a penalty, the FCC “arbitrarily and capriciously” departed from prior policy that exempted “fleeting” indecency from sanctions and that the FCC “improperly imposed a penalty on CBS for violating a previously unannounced policy”.

The FCC released an antagonistic and harsh statement that says the federal agency is disappointed by the decision and intends to use “all the authority at its disposal” to force broadcasters to serve the public interest when they use the so-called public airwaves. A CBS spokeswoman said the network hopes the FCC will “return to the policy of restrained indecency enforcement it followed for decades.” The FCC fined CBS $27,500 for each of the 20 stations it owned when part of Janet Jackson’s anatomy was accidentally and briefly exposed during the halftime performance.

In 2008, the 3rd Circuit voided the fine, but that decision was vacated when the Supreme Court in 2009 upheld the FCC policy in a case brought by Fox News’ parent company, News Corporation, though that 5-4 ruling did not decide whether the policy was constitutional. In this week’s decision, Judge Marjorie Rendell said that the FCC had maintained a “consistent refusal” to treat fleeting nude images as indecent for 30 years, and that there is no justification for punishing CBS, according to Reuters. No word on whether the FCC will appeal the ruling. CBS and News Corporation are outstanding examples of businesses that refuse to sanction their own demise and both companies deserve credit for defending their free speech against the United States government’s censorship. The FCC should not exist because the agency is fundamentally inconsistent with freedom of speech in the first place. But this week’s Philadelphia court decision, which goes to show that fighting on principle is good, practical business, is better than the alternative.

Permalink  |  Posted in Freedom of Speech, Law, News, Television

(Un) American Crackdown

17 August 2011

Back in October of 2010, with Greek unrest and riots in France, I forecast that lawlessness was likely to get worse throughout the West’s welfare states and we’ve seen this summer’s anarchy in Great Britain with widespread looting and rioting. In London, and here in America, we have also seen criminal flash mobs organizing through social media, converging upon certain pre-designated locations to loot, rob and destroy private property, as police across the country are imposing new curfews and crackdowns. Several new government restrictions have been imposed by the cities of Philadelphia and Chicago and in Maryland. This week, a new curfew is being considered in Kansas City and, as roving mobs, gangs, and anarchists continue to strike using social media, the city of San Francisco declared a total shutdown of cellular service in certain parts of the city, which had been targeted by protestors against the city’s government-controlled transportation system, during rush hour.

With reports of new outbursts of coordinated criminal activity popping up all over the country—from attacks on an Apple store in Connecticut and a Walgreens in Chicago to a 7-Eleven in Maryland and a local sheriff’s emergency communications system in Los Angeles County besieged by a rapper’s coordinated telephone attack—we can expect harsher measures from local, state, and federal government. This is the implosion of the welfare state; as government improperly expands its role into our lives, regulating light bulbs, plastic bags and every aspect of existence, government fails to perform its proper function, such as defense of the nation and private property through the courts, police, and military. Law and order breaks down while individual rights are wiped out. It’s not enough that the nation’s travel infrastructure has been turned into a government-controlled maze of dictates under a Department of Homeland Security bureaucracy known as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA); the entire country is heading toward some form of lockdown. The welfare state becomes the police state.

Curfews as a temporary measure while police investigate crimes are one thing and I don’t see why police shouldn’t monitor social media for evidence of criminal activity. Curfews as a permanent way of life are not consistent with a free society. Tyranny begins with restrictions on free travel and association and tyranny begins in earnest with censorship, including shutting down technology and cell phone service in certain places, at certain times, in certain contexts. From the President singling out a broadcaster for attack to dozens of examples of censorship in recent years, free speech, as with property rights, is under siege. Recently, a government school board banned a Sherlock Holmes book in Virginia on the grounds that author Arthur Conan Doyle offends religion. History shows that such violations of man’s rights end with people in chains—or worse.

Americans should not tolerate censorship, including shutdowns of cellular service. Americans should demand that police show zero tolerance for criminals who disrupt public safety and threaten lives and property. But by allowing government to control every aspect of their lives, Americans have put government in a position to shut down free speech, which is why we must demand that government end its monopolies on roads and transportation, education and the economy and let people make choices in a free market. We should not tolerate permanent curfews in our cities, towns and counties. But we should not have tolerated dictates from the Department of Homeland Security, with its obscene TSA, (or the Department of Education, et al) in the first place.

Crackdown by crackdown, while government types blame criminals for damaging their race when they should arrest them for damaging lives and property, freedom in America is coming to an end. With every crime wave and act of war, the government increases its controls and shuts down man’s rights. So, Americans must stop passively standing in line at the airport, Department of Motor Vehicles, and everywhere else that government does not belong and speak out against this incremental, permanent paralysis. We must speak out and insist upon a secular, capitalist republic based on individual rights. While we can.

Permalink  |  Posted in Culture, Freedom of Speech, News

21st Century Media

7 June 2011

The DailyWith exciting developments in technology and new media, such as Apple‘s announcement about iCloud, the possibilities are truly dazzling for creating content across multiple platforms. I’ve been writing for print, broadcast, and online (and currently creating for page and screen) since the 1980s and I have never been more optimistic about the future of the arts, including journalism.

As I’ve previously observed here, there is the ominous threat of government control of the press. Whether a newspaper already heavily influenced by powerful Mormons hires a top government official to write a regular column, as recently happened in Utah, or top reporters flee journalism to work for government, as recently happened in Oregon, separation of government and the press (like separation of government and religion or government and business) is rapidly eroding. Today’s media is plastered with government bureaucrats or former politicians: shrill Chris Matthews and smarmy Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC, CNN’s sleazy Eliot Spitzer, and the parade of clowns on FoxNews that’s like a festival of 20th century fools, from Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich to Karl Rove and Sarah Palin. None honored the United States of America while in government and none have anything new and original, much less rational, to say. They represent the failed past and suggest a dark future of government-controlled media and a state of de facto censorship, whether from the left or from the right.

Companies such as Apple are changing how we produce and consume news and information in ways which may make it harder to establish a centralized press and easier to escape government controls. Apple’s new operating system for the iPhone and iPad, iOS 5, will make creating a digital newsstand more desirable, according to this media post. This Mashable piece observes that Apple’s new favorite social media, Twitter, counters Microsoft’s relationship with Facebook, and offers real market competition, which makes it harder for the state to insidiously control or seize the media. Google is reportedly now supporting certain tags which may encourage people to read work by individual writers and discourage stealing writers’ content. The New York Observer is remaking its print and online editions to feature longer articles, unveiling its new Web site tomorrow. Of course, the Observer is liberal, and some changes may also make it easier to disrupt and censor the press in certain cases, a legitimate concern given the nation’s trend toward total government control.

But opportunities exist for those willing to discover, explore, and create challenging new voices for reason and means of distribution, though Rupert Murdoch’s heavily hyped The Daily, dubbed the first magazine application for the iPad and apparently managed mostly by former New York Times staffers, which may explain why no one wants to read, let alone pay for, its content, is not likely to be one of them (incidentally, I have ideas for creating an organ of objective journalism if anyone serious is interested). To preserve a free press and the freedom of speech, we need the innovations of visionary businessmen such as Steve Jobs, who was greeted by an ovation for being a man of ability during his speech yesterday. People must be free to nurture the spirit of enterprise that is integral to restoring the lost art of objective communication.

News Corporation’s The Daily may fail, or it may not, but at least Rupert Murdoch, like former Atari video game creator Steve Jobs and Polaroid’s Edwin Land, are using what freedom we have left to manufacture technology so we can choose what to produce and consume to improve our lives. In this sense, media entrepreneurs deserve our admiration and support.

Permalink  |  Posted in Business, Freedom of Speech, Journalism

Juan Williams, NPR, and Islam in America

21 October 2010

First, the President hosted an Islamic event in the White House and practically endorsed the Ground Zero mosque. Then, the government demanded that an American citizen cease and desist plans to burn an Islamic book, the Koran. Today, the government’s domestic radio network, state-sponsored National Public Radio, which is financed by the taxpayer-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting, fired one of its senior journalists, Juan Williams, for speaking his mind about Moslems. Nine years after the worst attack in American history by jihadist Moslems, with the nation still, in fact, at war with jihadists and the states that sponsor them (whether we acknowledge it or not), the insidious rise of the Islamic religion in America and the demand by our government that the American people submit to acceptance of Islamic faith is unmistakable.

As Juan Williams’ comments about Moslems suggest, to pretend that no correlation exists between Moslems and jihadist Moslems, who are widely known to attack based on a political-religious concept known as jihad, which means holy war, is to drop the context that we are at war. We need look no further than the pre-war actions and maneuvers of those Islamic soldiers who attacked us on 9/11; they sought to assimilate as Americans, appearing to innocently practice Islam and attend prayers at mosques while plotting their diabolical act of war.

That an intellectual has been ousted by a federally-funded organ of the press for expressing his thoughts about Moslems ought to concern every American. There are numerous examples of the government either turning the other cheek to jihadist Moslem activities and/or attacks in America or sanctioning and spreading this particular religion, among others. The undeniable advancement of Islam in our government, our nation and our culture since we were attacked by those who seek our destruction in the name of Islam is ominous.

Permalink  |  Posted in Culture, Freedom of Speech, News, War

Supreme Court Rules Against Freedom of Speech

28 April 2009

The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision against Fox in the television network’s case versus the fascist Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Fox rightly asserted that the FCC’s “fleeting expletive” rule is arbitrary. But Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, stated that he did not find the rule arbitrary and capricious, as Fox claims. So, this decision is extremely harmful to freedom of speech because broadcasters will continue to be censored and live in fear of government penalties. However, the Supreme Court dodged the issue of whether the FCC rule is Constitutional (censorship is certainly not Constitutional) giving a lower court a crack at addressing that fundamental issue. Look for more on this highly important case, which may determine how quickly we advance toward dictatorship.

Permalink  |  Posted in Freedom of Speech, News, Television