Free Speech and Freedom
I'm really enjoying being on the campaign trail with my opponent. As I mentioned previously, I believe we're giving people some strong differences of opinion on several important issues, while respecting the other's willingness to participate in the process. That approach invites voters to look more closely at a race, rather than send them running away screaming and holding their ears like many of the federal races seem to do.
In any event, I'm really struck right now by the greatness of our system that allows us to actively contest our differences and determine whose opinion will carry the day. On that note, though, I can't help but laugh that Sen. McCain's campaign is arguing that federal encroachments on free speech rights are interfering with dissemination of ideas. Ya. That's what tends to happen when government abandons first amendment agnosticism in order to pick winners and losers in public discourse.
Of course there are complexities to the McCain-YouTube DMCA story. YouTube and Google are free to decide how to respond to the takedown notices -- and are mighty enough to fully defend any principled choices they choose to make. But, even though I want McCain to win and I believe that YouTube/Google might be a bit more hasty to take down his stuff, it is nice to see that one of the senators who unanimously voted for this speech-regulating bill notices that it has some bad effects on legitimate speech.
In any event, I'm really struck right now by the greatness of our system that allows us to actively contest our differences and determine whose opinion will carry the day. On that note, though, I can't help but laugh that Sen. McCain's campaign is arguing that federal encroachments on free speech rights are interfering with dissemination of ideas. Ya. That's what tends to happen when government abandons first amendment agnosticism in order to pick winners and losers in public discourse.
Of course there are complexities to the McCain-YouTube DMCA story. YouTube and Google are free to decide how to respond to the takedown notices -- and are mighty enough to fully defend any principled choices they choose to make. But, even though I want McCain to win and I believe that YouTube/Google might be a bit more hasty to take down his stuff, it is nice to see that one of the senators who unanimously voted for this speech-regulating bill notices that it has some bad effects on legitimate speech.
posted by steve u. at 10/15/2008
Subscribe
12 Comments:
It would be nice to subject more federal legislators to the consequences of their poor technology decisions. Let's hope that the recently passed PRO-MAFIAA, er, PRO-IP Act bites them on the bottom as well.
Hi Steve,
Please tell me how Rep. Reisen free speech to the press is a violation of ethics in Utah.
Being an attorney as you are, will you find me some documentation as to why your party filed this breech of ethics.
Can you also explain how the "InsideUtahPolitics" blog for your radio show has turned off commenting altogether, making the exchange of ideas impossible, and how that promotes a healthy discourse of validates what you've written above about the importance of discussing alternative viewpoints?
There's a significant difference between protected free speech and defamatory speech. While people are free to defame, society has determined that it is done at a cost.
Internal investigations -- which an ethics committee hearing is -- have protocols for the bringing of charges, so that reputations aren't destroyed willy nilly. If the committee determines grounds exist for more thorough investigation, then matters are laid before the public. If Phil had brought the allegations to the proper body, that would have been fine and appropriate. But if he got his nose bent out of shape because he was tossed from a meeting and immediately published false accusations in retaliation, that is a much different matter.
If the accusations he published are false and if he acted with actual malice in publishing the accusations, he and his fellow actors have crossed a line that society has determined should have consequences.
We'll have to see how the accusations stand up to testimony and scrutiny.
Jasonthe,
I don't do anything with the show other than submit my hilarious Ask a Republican segments. I don't think I've ever been on the blog, but I agree that blogs work best when they allow uncensored commentary.
And if you guys really are trying to say that I'm a pro-censorship guy, do a little research.
See the back room deals,
Seriously? A public officials "free speech to the press".
I'm all for open government and sure think the secrecy of the whitehouse is evil, but I also think government officials have an obligation to not misuse information to their own advantage.
I don't know enough about the investigation to be an expert, and my guess is you don't either.
If you really cared about free speech you wouldn't post anonymously. With free speech also comes accountability, for everyone.
Steve,
I appreciate that you have always allowed comments on your blog, even when the heat is on.
Rob Miller
Thanks, Rob. Same back at you. As I'm sure you agree, give the people enough information, and we'll all be conservatives. Actually, wait. After watching the bailout stuff, I might be the last conservative in America. Omega Conservative.
Blogger steve u. said...
Jasonthe,
I don't do anything with the show other than submit my hilarious Ask a Republican segments. I don't think I've ever been on the blog, but I agree that blogs "and government" work best when they allow uncensored commentary.
10:02 AM
With rep Reisen account I think that government works best when people speak out. I believe that Phil was in the course and scope of his legislative duties.
Don't you? After all, should we not all know what is happening in the capitol that we the people own?
Salem, If I were to post under my real name, I would be punished like the other republicans in this state
"Should we not all know what is happening in the capitol that we the people own?"
Yes.
If Rep. Reisen and his colleagues were telling the truth, then they were just sharing what is happening in the capitol, and they have nothing to worry about.
If they made up accusations that aren't true, though, they would not be sharing what is happening in the capitol. Rather, they would be defaming someone's character.
We'll have to see how the accusations stand up to testimony and scrutiny.
Er, actually, your phrasing might be tossing me.
"Should we not all know . . .?"
No. You should NOT not all know, because all of you SHOULD know . . ..
<< Home