Freedom of speech is a right guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
What it isn't is a trump card to say whatever you want whenever and wherever you want. For example, if Facebook takes exception to something I've written there and removes it and punishes me by putting me in Facebook "jail" this is not a violation of my constitutional right to freedom of speech but an enforcement of the terms of service I agreed to when I signed up. If Blogger objects to something I've written here and takes action against me because of it they have not violated my free speech rights but have enforced the terms of service they set out as a condition of using their platform. If I come to your house and offend you with what I say and you've had enough and kick me out you have not violated my freedom of speech rights but instead have acted to defend your space against speech you find objectionable. If I use my account to repeatedly spread COVID-19 misinformation in violation of Twitter's terms of service and they permanently suspend my account it is not a free speach violation but an enforcement of their rules for engagement on their platform.
This ain't rocket science, people.
I've seen more cries of "but ma freedom!" in the past few years than I ever did before, and it's always by people trying to assert rights that they do not understand. There are no limitless rights to say anything you want whenever and wherever you want to, and actions have consequences.
*******
Please note: I've seen a recent post mentioning free speech on a blog I follow. My own post has been scheduled well in advance and is not a response to hers or related to her post in any way.
Posts
You can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. With free speech comes responsibility. Read the fine print. If you don't want to play by their rules, don't sign up.
ReplyDeleteYep. I don't have the wherewithal to start my own social media campaign, and even if I did most that get started fail -I'm lookin' at you Google+ :( I try to strictly abide by the rules of those I want access to.
Delete...AMEN!
ReplyDelete:)
DeleteSuper post
ReplyDeleteI like this post. And it is so true. Your comparison to coming to your house and saying things you don't like and being asked to leave is great. It was like at school. Although I could say what I wanted, I would have had consequences if I decided to say things that were not considered appropriate. Like if I swore and called the kids horrible names. Would you want that teacher to stay at school and do that to your kid? Not at all. I've used this example, but certain people somehow feel that the "rules" never apply to Trump. That's because he says that is true. Thankfully Biden called him out in his speech on the 6th, even if he didn't use his name directly. Thanks for this Nita.
ReplyDeleteI was pleased with Biden's speech, though the response from the right has been predictably sour. The response to MTG's Twitter ban has been amusing,
DeleteI've heard the term "free-dumb" and every day I think it's more and more the case. I agree completely. From the time we are in school and get sent to the principal's office or get expelled for doing something wrong or against the rules, we learn that basic premise. How quickly we forget. Spot on.
ReplyDeleteIt hurts to see otherwise intelligent people miss the point of an amendment guaranteeing free speech so completely :(
DeleteYou are so right. Freedom of speech is not a free pass to con others. Valerie
ReplyDeleteYes! We also have laws against slander and libel.
DeleteWell written my friend.
ReplyDeleteThank you :)
DeletePeoples understanding of the constitution or how the internet functions is imperfect at best and misused at it's worst. Neither side having the upper hand both using the constitution and the internet to try to win their point. I think people claim lack of free speech when they see an unfair availability of the forums where ideas are shared. Having Facebook and Twitter and the like decide what information is being shared is a dangerous game and puts an awful amount of control into big tech's management. I'm not sure what the answer is but banning people from the media platforms doesn't seem to be a step in the right direction. How soon until social media is broken up into right and left and no one hears anyone else.
ReplyDeleteTwitter and FB enforcing their own terms of service doesn't provide an unfair advantage to either "side".
DeleteAnd those issues are beside the point of the free speech amendment, which does not require private businesses to accept anything you want to say. There is no such thing as a limitless right; and I can be punished for libel, slander, inciting a riot, creating a clear and present danger, screaming profanities in the local diner... Private businesses can refuse their services to people who violate their rules.
I understand being angry at getting kicked off a major social media platform. Really, I do. I might even disagree with their terms of service. It's _not_ a constitutional free speech issue, though, any more than someone being kicked out of a restaurant for being loud and disruptive is -even if it's the only restaurant in town.
The problem is social media deciding out what is true or false and the arbitrary nature of it. Many times what the media giants find offensive or false is more nuanced than they would like people to believe. That is the essence of free speech if you just call someone a liar or a bigot and gag them there is no longer free speech.
ReplyDeleteSocial media doesn't _decide_ what is true or false; they _recognize_ it. "False" and "offensive" are not synonyms. And if you call me a liar and gag me on your blog I still have free speech.
DeleteIf you haven't seen examples of the media calling something false which was obviously true or claiming something was bigoted or offensive and than kicking someone off facebook or twitter you haven't been paying attention. This is not breaking terms of service this is big tech caving to political pressures to regulate speech.
DeletePerhaps you could cite some examples, because, no I haven't seen "the media calling something false which was obviously true" (well, wait, there was that press spokesperson who declared the existence of "alternative facts" and the radio hosts I hear who declare the election was stolen and trump somehow really won and those who claim drinking urine kills COVID, but I don't think that's what you mean...). What _are_ you referring to?
DeleteBigotry is against most TOS and can get you kicked off for multiple offenses. I pay attention -a lot of attention. To enforce the TOS is a standard business practice; it is not caving to political pressure.
I will have to look for a list of things that have gotten people kicked off social media. It happens so often that I think really! they are tossing someone for that, afraid to offend,afraid of the truth.
DeleteI look forward to your list of "the media calling something false which was obviously true".
DeleteI am sometimes surprised at what gets folks kicked off, but I'm unaware of it happening often or of it happening because people state facts.
I thought a lengthy list would be easier to research,maybe they are covering their tracks,LOL. However i did find three.
Delete1. Twitter blocked all retweets of a NY Post article detailing Hunter Biden and potential security problems With Joe Biden weeks before the election.
2.Trump was blocked for saying the covid may have started in Wuhan research facility.
3.Many people were blocked for touting the benefits of Hydroxychloriquine.
With your permission I will keep looking and add additional ones as I find them.
Thanks. Yes, please. I enjoy the discussion :)
Delete1: It caused quite the kerfuffle, didn't it! They didn't "call something false which was obviously true". They blocked that one article because of a policy against leaked/hacked material and questions about its veracity, then reversed their decision and changed their policy. The CEO issued a statement calling “our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great. And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable.” I'll give anybody a chance to make a mistake as long as they correct it in public fashion in decent time.
2: Trump didn't say "covid may have started in Wuhan research facility". He said he'd seen evidence it had. I'm not seeing anything about Trump being blocked on Twitter for saying it...
3: Well, yeah. Promoting hydroxychloroquine (or injecting bleach or disinfectant, or drinking urine, etc.) during a pandemic is irresponsible and violates Twitter's tos. That's not "calling something false which was obviously true" but removing tweets that contain false medical advice from their platform. Was anybody permanently blocked from Twitter for a hydroxychloroquine tweet? I can't find a case of that, but I do see where individual tweets were removed.
If your point is that sometimes reporters or Twitter administrators make mistakes about matters of fact that they then correct when called out on it, I'll agree with you.
The first one with Hunter Biden was only a mistake if you believe they weren't all in for Biden and trying to influence the election.
DeletePromoting hydroxychloriquine is in no way the same thing as bleach or urine. There are many medical professionals that found it helped ease symptoms in people who caught covid.
The bleach statement got plenty of air time because they could attack Trump with it manipulating someone's words and taking them out of context is what the media passes for journalism these days.
Twitter's mistake was in their handling of it, and no I certainly don't think Twitter was "all in for Biden and trying to influence the election". But that's a different subject than your original claim about "the media calling something false which was obviously true".
DeleteA doctor prescribing an anti-malaria drug as a last resort in treating symptoms is not the same as claiming that hydroxychloroquine cures covid. What we need is some nuance here and less of politicians recommending medications and quack treatments, which is what there was so much of. I was watching when Trump made his bleach/disinfectant/uv light comments at that press conference. And remember the ivermectin claims? Irresponsible. And, as I said, I can't find any cases of people being kicked off of Twitter for recommending hydroxychloroquine. My opinion of its irresponsibility is irrelevant to your claim about "the media calling something false which was obviously true".
His exact words were these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zicGxU5MfwE
Yes, injecting disinfectant lol I was watching. I say politicians should leave medicine and medical research to the doctors and scientists lol And again, nobody kicked him off any media platform for saying this or called it false when it was obviously true. People made fun of it, yes, and I'm good with that.
I look forward to what other instances you find.
We got an entire inch of snow here. A winter wonderland! Or as much of one as we usually get. Pretty!
We got 12 inches at my house, some of the cities just east of us got 25 inches. Our road crews decided because it was mlk day they would wait till after lunch to bother plowing.
DeleteWow! I can't remember the last time we got a foot of snow, and I don't imagine our road crews would have the equipment to handle 25 inches. Ours was gone the next day. There's no more snow in our forecast, but Thursday -a day I have to take someone to the doctor for a 7:00 AM appointment and have to stay to wait for them but can't wait inside the building- our high is predicted to be 31. Ouch!
DeleteIt makes it tough when you can't go in with the patient. Some patients need a second pair of ears to help them understand the doctor's orders. Good luck and dress warm.
DeleteThis is (or should I say _was_) a dental appointment. Some major work, but I'm just transportation. I don't relish waiting outside in 22 degree weather starting before sunrise with a wind chill of 8 and possibility of glaze/ice on some roads from tonight's rain. I rescheduled it for next week. Better safe than sorry, that's my motto.
DeleteI'll stay in lol
You have summarized the case really clearly and concisely. Unfortunately, the evil in our society is beyond any reasoning or explaining laws or the constitution. I fear what is coming.
ReplyDeletebest... mae at maefood.blogspot.com
Yep. "I wanna" has become the whine of those who want rights without responsibilities.
DeleteI guess for some people it is rocket science. It absolutely goes way over their heads.
ReplyDeleteROFLOL! I love this!
DeleteI loved what Rita said. This is one reason why I have never joined FB or Twitter. I find some of what is said offensive. However, because I can click away, I'm not giving them the satisfaction of a retort that will be equally offensive.
ReplyDeleteI joined FB for friend/family connection. Then I made new connections within my local community, and those are delightful, especially now that I can't/won't get out. And now I have a couple of blogging buddies who interact with me there. My friends circle is in my living room :)
DeleteTwitter is a different fish entirely. I joined it for breaking news. I tweet enough on-this-day tweets (you know the type: in memory of so-and-so, who died on this date) to be seen as an active account to anybody who looks, but I don't interact there except to like other people's tweets. To be honest, the offensive stuff is extremely easy to avoid, and I don't see it until it reaches the point of being covered by major news services. Once I was on Twitter I discovered all the folks who tweet wildlife photos, and now I follow those. That's also where I find any new reports on urban design and pedestrian safety. The latest Star Trek news is there, too. I check Twitter every morning.