Is the American First Amendment the best way to protect free speech? For , I argue that the answer is ... maybe not. At least, we should consider how democracies in Europe & Canada etc do it, by balancing free speech w *other* pro-democratic values.
After warning for years that liberal democracy is under threat, the Times has begun to wonder whether illiberal democracy would be so bad.
The NYT runs 8,500-word authoritarian pieces arguing to abolish the First Amendment. How long do we have to pretend these people are liberals?
So some dunderhead NYT "legal scholar" argues that the first amendment must be altered in "age of disinformation" She mentions Color Revolution article from the President's favorite site as example of what must be censored.
To paraphrase Toni Morrison: the very serious function of disinformation is to distract you. To keep you from doing your work. Great piece by ⁦⁩.
As usual, determines one of the most burning questions of our time, and then tries to help us understand it. How do lovers of Democracy reconcile the right to free speech with the toxic spread of misinformation?
Conservatives, with their Weaponized First Amendment, are always Pouncing. If only we could balance free speech w *other* pro-democratic values, such as, say, the Democratic Party always wins.
New article about free speech by is excellent for a number of reasons, including a balanced and factually correct examination of Section 230 (rare these days!)
I really hope that , as the author of our generation's most persuasive treatise in favor of free speech (please read "Kindly Inquisitors" if you haven't yet), will share with us his thoughts on this repudiation of our First Amendment.
"Why is Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed beyond the pale but not an October Op-Ed by Regina Ip, a legislator in Hong Kong, who defended police officers’ filling the streets and arresting hundreds of pro-democracy demonstrators?" [email protected]
Finally read this. It sucked.
Like most attacks on free speech, this NYT essay focuses exclusively on the "marketplace of ideas" metaphor, with no consideration of how First Amendment law evolved in response to government repeatedly trying to imprison or punish its critics.
“A crude authoritarian censors free speech. A clever one invokes it to play a trick, twisting facts to turn a mob on a subordinated group and, in the end, silence as well as endanger its members.”
“'The 1st Am. value of individual autonomy means we should know who is speaking to us and why,' prof argues. But online, neither the Supreme Court nor Congress has stepped in to require disclosure."
It was useful. She's so sensible it belies her somewhat radical notion (in the law world).
Reading 's magnum opus now. Good to see so much stuff cited here, including essays from and new book edited by 's David Pozen.
Outstanding article by ⁦⁩ on free speech and democracy
The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation - Terrific piece ⁦
Very interesting and well written article. Please, I implore you to read past the headline. In fact, read to the end.
Tldr: This essay puts NYTimes staffers in danger.
'The US accounted for 89% of the comments, likes & shares of false & misleading health information. “A lot of US-based entities are actually targeting other countries with misinformation in Italian, Spanish, Portuguese...The US is by far the worst actor.”'
The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation via
... “The Perilous Public Square,” a book edited by David E. Pozen that was published this year. [by , thank you very much, ]
I don't castigate everything Bazelon writes; the piece is exhaustive (and a bit canted w/ the usual); there's food for thought. But hard to square w/ Dean Baquet saying, of 1619 Project, "The column fell fully within our standards as a news organization"
Despite the clickbait title, this article does a good job of providing background on misinformation and disinformation in American discourse, and the evolution of "free speech" from fighting antidemocratic policies to promoting them.
2/ barring ownership of more than 1 station in a local market. In Baltimore, Sinclair got around the same rule by creating another company, Glencairn, controlled by Smith’s mother & an employee....Sinclair is now the largest station owner in swing states."