Freedom of Speech
Posted by susan.brackett on Sep 19, 2007 · Member since Jun 2007 · 198 posts
This has been quite a week for questions about the limits or infringements on freedom of speech.
Where do you come down on this issue with the Emmys, the student tasered at the FL Kerry Q&A, and the Swedish cartoon of Mohammad in mind?
You can find the cartoon here http://www.vilks.net/ (scroll down to Del 388)
Please no death threats. :D
I did not watch the Emmys, what happened?
Hey- what do you expect from this president? "A government by Bush for everybody else."
I did not watch the Emmys, what happened?
Fox News cut Sally Field's microphone before she could finish her sentence "if mothers were in charge there wouldn't be any more goddamn wars."
Alot of people are saying that was a setup by him.
The police were after him asked him to step away i think and then
he was shown to be giving a camera to someone and he said take my picture and then he started screaming.
Yes, it has been quite a week! Well--FUX editing someone is probably more dependible then most clocks! I think are whole world is becoming more censored by the day, what can be done? Hopefully a new admisistration will help somewhat--but people really need to keep speaking up for themselves, some how we will get heard.
Did you guys know that Rupert Merdoch owns MySpace? I know this isn't exactly related to the free speech, but it is interesting that a FUX founder is running what most people would consider the pre-eminate "free speach" blog...just find it interesting!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/rupert_murdoch/index.html?adxnnl=1&inline=nyt-per&adxnnlx=1190258177-oE01dCz0P6d4SoFRmyz47g
Have you all seen this site?
Did you guys know that Rupert Merdoch owns MySpace? I know this isn't exactly related to the free speech, but it is interesting that a FUX founder is running what most people would consider the pre-eminate "free speach" blog...just find it interesting!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/rupert_murdoch/index.html?adxnnl=1&inline=nyt-per&adxnnlx=1190258177-oE01dCz0P6d4SoFRmyz47g
Ugh. Yes. Rupert Murdoch is such an a**hole (pardon me). Has anyone seen the documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism"?? It's very good. And very frustrating & disturbing. FOX "News" is a total joke. They're superfans for Bush, and that is it. >:( It's a shame people actually believe what they hear from that network... :'( (And sad that they shouldn't...)
http://www.outfoxed.org/OutfoxedSummary.php
and the Swedish cartoon of Mohammad in mind?
You can find the cartoon here http://www.vilks.net/ (scroll down to Del 388)
Please no death threats. :D
I realized you might be put off by a site in Swedish so......
The cartoon is of a dog with Mohammad for it's head. It was pub in a Swedish paper with an editorial about freedom of expression. The local Muslim community protested it as blasphemous. Then Iran , Pakistan, etc. condemned it and asked the Swedish gov to do so too. the gov said it was unfortunate, but no apologies. More gov and Muslim groups called for the artist and paper to be punished. Gov of Sweden said it was freedom of speech. On Sat. Al Queda in Iraq offered a reward for killing the artist and newspaper editor. The artist is in protective custody of the Swedish version of the FBI and can't return home.
Alot of people are saying that was a setup by him.
The police were after him asked him to step away i think and then
he was shown to be giving a camera to someone and he said take my picture and then he started screaming.
1-He gave the camera to a girl before he went to the mic to ask his question. He asked her to film him asking his question.
2-Asking questions, even as a prank, is not a crime.
3-The police response was an overreaction and excessive force. They were dead wrong.
I highly recommend the book he was holding (it sits on my shelf)
Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast
His questions were also ones I'd like Kerry to answer about the '04 election too.
Why didn't he contest the election?
the student tasered at the FL Kerry Q&A,
I feel...disturbed about that particular incident....I don't know, the video really just made me mad at first. Then I watched the video of the student being tasered last November in the library and I got even more upset. Why can't we live in a world where we don't have to be afraid to just live and speak as we want? I don't want to have it in for the "fuzz", but man....lighten up with tasers, guys
I'm pro freedom of speech, 100%. I don't think it should be regulated by the government. People are so "politically correct" nowadays. It seems like something will always offend someone. There's another message board I go to that is SO politically correct, you can't say anything! They had a thread asking people to stop using the term DH because it was offensive to those people who were same sex partners. Another thread on there was how the term "sperm donor" in describing missing dads was offensive to those who went to a sperm bank.
I mean, come on. If I spent my time being offended at the things people say, I would miss out on a lot of happiness.
Having said that, I think everyone has the right to make rules on their own private property. So, when someone comes into my home and starts telling me racial jokes, or starts slurring other races ... I ask them to either stop or leave. I don't tolerate that in my own home, on my own property.
The problem comes in with all this public property we have. Technically, it belongs to everyone, so you either have the problem of not being able to say anything because it will be offensive to someone. Or having everyone be given the right to say everything. I still vote for the latter.
Hey, thats a good site! A lot more of what I am looking for, although the perfect news source wouldn't be biased at all (ah, utopia....)
Although this site reports lies more than news, its a step in the right direction.
Thanks!
Did you guys know that Rupert Merdoch owns MySpace? I know this isn't exactly related to the free speech, but it is interesting that a FUX founder is running what most people would consider the pre-eminate "free speach" blog...just find it interesting!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/rupert_murdoch/index.html?adxnnl=1&inline=nyt-per&adxnnlx=1190258177-oE01dCz0P6d4SoFRmyz47g
Ugh. Yes. Rupert Murdoch is such an a**hole (pardon me). Has anyone seen the documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism"?? It's very good. And very frustrating & disturbing. FOX "News" is a total joke. They're superfans for Bush, and that is it. >:( It's a shame people actually believe what they hear from that network... :'( (And sad that they shouldn't...)
http://www.outfoxed.org/OutfoxedSummary.php
Robert Greenwald is the one who made "Outfoxed" and has a small film company called Brave New Films.
Here's a little piece he put together showing guests on Faux News using the words "god damn" that were never edited. Funny how they let conservative rightwing talibangelicals use the words, but chose to edit Sally Field and the Emmy's..... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCEOJZ7JaSo
Here's his Youtube page....lot's of nice Faux News clips on there.... :D
http://www.youtube.com/user/bravenewfilms
I'm pro freedom of speech, 100%. I don't think it should be regulated by the government.
In the US there have always been limits on freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has ruled many times over the years defining these limits. Some of them are very legitimate.
Libel and slander are prohibited forms of speech. So is incitement to riot or other illegal acts. Threatening. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.
The court has made some rulings that more or less say that "obscene" speech does not enjoy first amendment protection (Miller vs. California, 1973).
I think the main intention of the founders when they added the first amendment was to protect political and religious speech. They didn't want us to be unable to publicly criticize our own government.
If we were to have "100% freedom of speech" there would be nothing to stop people from defrauding one another by lying and misrepresenting in business dealings. There could be no prohibition of perjury, conspiracy or threatening. Certain limits to freedom are necessary. Laws. Those subtle restraints that set us free.
Did you guys know that Rupert Merdoch owns MySpace? I know this isn't exactly related to the free speech, but it is interesting that a FUX founder is running what most people would consider the pre-eminate "free speach" blog...just find it interesting!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/rupert_murdoch/index.html?adxnnl=1&inline=nyt-per&adxnnlx=1190258177-oE01dCz0P6d4SoFRmyz47g
Ugh. Yes. Rupert Murdoch is such an a**hole (pardon me). Has anyone seen the documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism"?? It's very good. And very frustrating & disturbing. FOX "News" is a total joke. They're superfans for Bush, and that is it. >:( It's a shame people actually believe what they hear from that network... :'( (And sad that they shouldn't...)
http://www.outfoxed.org/OutfoxedSummary.php
Ah yes! I really want to see ths documentary! thank you for reminding me about it, I'm going to pick it up soon!
FUX SUXS! *but I still like to watch the cartoons on Sunday* :P *ERG*
Did you guys know that Rupert Merdoch owns MySpace? I know this isn't exactly related to the free speech, but it is interesting that a FUX founder is running what most people would consider the pre-eminate "free speach" blog...just find it interesting!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/rupert_murdoch/index.html?adxnnl=1&inline=nyt-per&adxnnlx=1190258177-oE01dCz0P6d4SoFRmyz47g
Ugh. Yes. Rupert Murdoch is such an a**hole (pardon me). Has anyone seen the documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism"?? It's very good. And very frustrating & disturbing. FOX "News" is a total joke. They're superfans for Bush, and that is it. >:( It's a shame people actually believe what they hear from that network... :'( (And sad that they shouldn't...)
http://www.outfoxed.org/OutfoxedSummary.php
Ah yes! I really want to see ths documentary! thank you for reminding me about it, I'm going to pick it up soon!
FUX SUXS! *but I still like to watch the cartoons on Sunday* :P *ERG*
FUX. ;D ;D ;D I kept wondering if that was a typo. I realize now that it's not, but either way, I love it! "Outfoxed" is pretty widely available; my brother even rented it from Blockbuster one time! So hopefully it won't be hard to find!
If we were to have "100% freedom of speech" there would be nothing to stop people from defrauding one another by lying and misrepresenting in business dealings. There could be no prohibition of perjury, conspiracy or threatening. Certain limits to freedom are necessary. Laws. Those subtle restraints that set us free.
I think most people are honest, and most people are intelligent enough to know when they're being lied to. They don't need mommy and daddy to look after them for their whole lives. I'd hope that by the time people become adults, they can think for themselves. The small amount who would lie to people would, probably, cheat a few (as they do now, anyway) before people caught on and spread the word.
It's not laws that stop me from lying or cheating others - it's my own moral compass. This is true for every other person who does not lie and cheat. Those who DO lie and cheat others do so because of a lack of moral compass, therefore laws don't stop them (as evidenced by all the frauds in business out there).
So, I'm all for freedom of speech. Especially, when it comes to cases like the ones mentioned on this thread.
But, I can agree to disagree of course. :)
I'm pro freedom of speech, 100%. I don't think it should be regulated by the government.
In the US there have always been limits on freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has ruled many times over the years defining these limits. Some of them are very legitimate.
Libel and slander are prohibited forms of speech. So is incitement to riot or other illegal acts. Threatening. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.
The court has made some rulings that more or less say that "obscene" speech does not enjoy first amendment protection (Miller vs. California, 1973).
I think the main intention of the founders when they added the first amendment was to protect political and religious speech. They didn't want us to be unable to publicly criticize our own government.
If we were to have "100% freedom of speech" there would be nothing to stop people from defrauding one another by lying and misrepresenting in business dealings. There could be no prohibition of perjury, conspiracy or threatening. Certain limits to freedom are necessary. Laws. Those subtle restraints that set us free.
Doesn't your freedom end when it begins to harm another person? Isn't that what freedom is? The ability to express yourself as long as you don't infringe on the rights of someone else (therefor compromising their freedom).
Doesn't your freedom end when it begins to harm another person? Isn't that what freedom is? The ability to express yourself as long as you don't infringe on the rights of someone else (therefor compromising their freedom).
A good point I forgot to mention in my post, lol.
I'm always bothered by these type of events. Technically, we're supposed to have freedom of speech in this country ... but about the only place that can protest/make fun of the government is the comedy channel!
These are all along the same lines of protestors not being allowed near Bush when he's making speeches, or meeting with the press. How are people supposed to let the government know that they're not happy if peaceful protests and marching is moved 10 blocks away from where all the action is?
And, now, you're not even allowed to say a mild comment at the Emmy's or ask a question. It's crazy. It makes me wonder - who is the government really protecting? The citizens (while tasering them) ... or their own image? More and more, personally, I see the government protecting their own "we're for the people" image, rather than anything else.
Ecstatic, finally a topic we seem to basically agree on. ;)
I think it's interesting the differences between what is going on in the US versus the Swedish gov. In the case of the cartoon...
Do you think that any corp. paper in the US would write an editorial supporting freedom of expression and publish a cartoon with it they knew would be controversial?
Then would the US gov. completely stand by the people who did so?
I think these attacks in the US on freedom of speech are being done to terrorize the citizenry. We are being reminded what will happen to us, if we dare to step out of line by the Bush crime family, et al. The Bush family and all their cohorts were fans of Nazi Germany in the '30's and wanted to transform America then to a fascist society. They've been working on it again for the last 30+ years, since they put in place conditions to eliminate the middle class and to force feed us complacency.
Would we ever react the way citizens of Europe do?
Do you think TV is a tool to make us compliant?
Is there any hope for the US to shake fascism?
Oh, and aren't those protest areas they've developed since the criminal has been in office nothing more than jails?
Pages