Freedom Of Speech Is A Core Value ...
... and I am happy to see those in Congress taking a strong stand for it. Yesterday, I posted up a piece regarding HR 1606--the new legislation coming to the House floor, hopefully next week, that would place bloggers in the same category as the press when it comes to the campaign finance laws. Today, Glenn Reynolds, author of An Army Of Davids, and the man who runs Instapundit points to a speech given by Bill Frist regarding this issue. It is cited below in it's entirety.
Yesterday, I filed the Online Freedom of Speech Act as an amendment to the lobbying reform bill.
This morning, the House Administration Committee will mark up identical legislation. We expect the House to act as early as next week to pass this vital protection of free speech.
Thomas Jefferson once quipped that, “Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper.” But despite his low opinion of the press, he also observed that, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”
From the earliest days of our republic, freedom of speech and freedom of the press – be they anonymous pamphlets, celebrated essays, or local newspapers – were understood to be fundamental to the practice and defense of liberty.
Without the ability to convey ideas, debate, dispute, and persuade, we may never have fought for and achieved our independence.
Ordinary citizens – farmers, ministers, local shop owners – published and circulated their views, often anonymously, to challenge the conventional order, and call their fellow citizens to action.
Indeed, as Boston University journalism professor Chris Daly points out, “What we think of as reporting – the pursuit, on a full time basis of verifiable facts and verbatim quotations – was not a significant part of journalism in the time of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine… In historical terms, today’s bloggers are much closer in spirit to the Revolutionary-era pamphleteers.”
And, today, it’s bloggers whom we now have to protect.
There are some who, out of fear or shortsightedness, wish to restrict the ability of our modern day-Thomas Paines to express political views on the World Wide Web.
They seek to monitor and regulate political speech under the guise of “campaign finance reform.” They argue that unfettered political expression on the Internet is dangerous, especially during the highly charged, election season.
Needless to say, I stand firmly against these efforts to hamstring the Internet and squarely with the champions of free speech – whether that expression takes place in the actual, or virtual, town square.
Free speech is the core of our First Amendment. And the Internet represents the most participatory form of mass speech in human history.
It’s no accident that this technology was invented here in America. Freedom of speech is encoded in our DNA. It’s what allows us to be uniquely curious, daring and innovative. And it’s no coincidence that Americans, steeped in the tradition of inquiry and rebellion, would give flight to yet another revolution on behalf of the principle we value most.
In an era where technology has made instant, unfiltered communication possible, I believe that the Congress has a fundamental responsibility to allow this new medium to flourish.
As an amateur blogger myself, and soon-to-be private citizen, I’m committed to ensuring that the extraordinary explosion of political debate in the blogosphere is protected from meddling bureaucrats and regulators in Washington, D.C.
I commented on this very issue on my own blog last week. Free political expression is not a narrow privilege but a fundamental right.
Back in April of 1999, when observers and commentators were only beginning to glimpse the rich potential of the Internet, Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls and David Weinberger posted the “Cluetrain Manifesto.”
In it they said that, “A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed.”
Since then, the conversation has only grown.
While authoritarian regimes like Communist China struggle to control the information crossing their borders, millions of private citizens, typing away on their home computers, are engaged in millions of discreet and overlapping conversations, exchanging information, and circulating ideas.
As Americans, we should be on the side of this dazzling development. As citizens of the 21st century, we should recognize we have no power to stop it.
Brian Anderson of the Manhattan Institute points out that the Supreme Court has extended free speech to include nude dancing, online pornography, and cross burning.
It seems only reasonable that free speech should include the humble act of posting a blog.
Here, here. Like Glenn, I am happy to see that some in Congress recognize that blogging, as much as news reporting, is an inherent exercise in our freedom of speech. That freedom, however, does not come without a level of responsibility. For good bloggers, that responsibility lies in the ability to convey a message, a story, or sound commentary using the most up-to-date facts available, and to avoid the slander/libel problems the MSM chooses to sidestep more often than not.
Indeed, it is the blogger who has put the MSM in it's place more times than I can count. It is the blogger that helps drive the daily debate over a whole host of topics. Were it not for the blogger, the general public, while painfully aware of the MSM and it's inherent bias, would have had no recourse against them. Now, the public does.
And while others disdain the blogger, or attempt to spin how much influence blogging has ont he general public, they fail to acknowledge that bloggers have made an impact. The victims of scrutiny by the blogosphere know full well who brought them down, who took them to task, and who silenced their spin. Bloggers do this daily, and with little effort exerted. Indeed, if the MSM spent as much time researching stories--getting all sides of the story--there would be little for bloggers to comment on. But as long as the media continues it's faltering reign, bloggers will be right there, looking over their shoulder.
And as it pertains to election cycles, the bloggers put their mark on the map in 2004. It was a concerted effort by South Dakota bloggers to get John Thune to unseat Tom Daschle. When John Kerry floated (forgive the pun) his Christmas-Eve-In-Cambodia story, it was bloggers who blew him out of the water (again, forgive the pun). Bloggers did their best in the overall election cycle and got results whereas the MSM did their best, and failed miserably. And to think that they had so much help from MoveOn.org and Democratic Underground, yet they still could not get John Kerry into the Oval Office. And the fight still continues today on the Internet between center-right bloggers, and the moonbat fringe; a fringe that is slowly working its way into the mainstream of the Democrat Party. One only needs to look at their "celebrities" to see that. From Cindi Sheehan to Michael Moore, from Jimmy Carter to George Soros, the moonbats are literally on the march, and they will settle for nothing less than control of the party even if it means having to resort to scorched-earth tactics to achieve that end.
But regardless of where a blogger stands on the ideological spectrum, they are entitled to the same freedoms that the press enjoys. We have the freedom to speak and comment just as much as they do. And should it come down to a big story--a seriously big story--bloggers should be able to invoke the freedom of the press protections the media relishes. It is only fair. No, we do not have the name slats on our doors or desks. No, we do not work for the high-powered media outlets. We are precisely what Senator Frist described. We are the citizen journalists in the tradition of Jefferson, Paine, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. We are the scrutinous public that does not drink all which we are fed.
We are, above anything else, simply bloggers. We have a passion to write. We have a duty to inform. And we have the right to do that without interference from the government when doing so.
The Bunny ;)
... and I am happy to see those in Congress taking a strong stand for it. Yesterday, I posted up a piece regarding HR 1606--the new legislation coming to the House floor, hopefully next week, that would place bloggers in the same category as the press when it comes to the campaign finance laws. Today, Glenn Reynolds, author of An Army Of Davids, and the man who runs Instapundit points to a speech given by Bill Frist regarding this issue. It is cited below in it's entirety.
Yesterday, I filed the Online Freedom of Speech Act as an amendment to the lobbying reform bill.
This morning, the House Administration Committee will mark up identical legislation. We expect the House to act as early as next week to pass this vital protection of free speech.
Thomas Jefferson once quipped that, “Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper.” But despite his low opinion of the press, he also observed that, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.”
From the earliest days of our republic, freedom of speech and freedom of the press – be they anonymous pamphlets, celebrated essays, or local newspapers – were understood to be fundamental to the practice and defense of liberty.
Without the ability to convey ideas, debate, dispute, and persuade, we may never have fought for and achieved our independence.
Ordinary citizens – farmers, ministers, local shop owners – published and circulated their views, often anonymously, to challenge the conventional order, and call their fellow citizens to action.
Indeed, as Boston University journalism professor Chris Daly points out, “What we think of as reporting – the pursuit, on a full time basis of verifiable facts and verbatim quotations – was not a significant part of journalism in the time of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine… In historical terms, today’s bloggers are much closer in spirit to the Revolutionary-era pamphleteers.”
And, today, it’s bloggers whom we now have to protect.
There are some who, out of fear or shortsightedness, wish to restrict the ability of our modern day-Thomas Paines to express political views on the World Wide Web.
They seek to monitor and regulate political speech under the guise of “campaign finance reform.” They argue that unfettered political expression on the Internet is dangerous, especially during the highly charged, election season.
Needless to say, I stand firmly against these efforts to hamstring the Internet and squarely with the champions of free speech – whether that expression takes place in the actual, or virtual, town square.
Free speech is the core of our First Amendment. And the Internet represents the most participatory form of mass speech in human history.
It’s no accident that this technology was invented here in America. Freedom of speech is encoded in our DNA. It’s what allows us to be uniquely curious, daring and innovative. And it’s no coincidence that Americans, steeped in the tradition of inquiry and rebellion, would give flight to yet another revolution on behalf of the principle we value most.
In an era where technology has made instant, unfiltered communication possible, I believe that the Congress has a fundamental responsibility to allow this new medium to flourish.
As an amateur blogger myself, and soon-to-be private citizen, I’m committed to ensuring that the extraordinary explosion of political debate in the blogosphere is protected from meddling bureaucrats and regulators in Washington, D.C.
I commented on this very issue on my own blog last week. Free political expression is not a narrow privilege but a fundamental right.
Back in April of 1999, when observers and commentators were only beginning to glimpse the rich potential of the Internet, Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls and David Weinberger posted the “Cluetrain Manifesto.”
In it they said that, “A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed.”
Since then, the conversation has only grown.
While authoritarian regimes like Communist China struggle to control the information crossing their borders, millions of private citizens, typing away on their home computers, are engaged in millions of discreet and overlapping conversations, exchanging information, and circulating ideas.
As Americans, we should be on the side of this dazzling development. As citizens of the 21st century, we should recognize we have no power to stop it.
Brian Anderson of the Manhattan Institute points out that the Supreme Court has extended free speech to include nude dancing, online pornography, and cross burning.
It seems only reasonable that free speech should include the humble act of posting a blog.
Here, here. Like Glenn, I am happy to see that some in Congress recognize that blogging, as much as news reporting, is an inherent exercise in our freedom of speech. That freedom, however, does not come without a level of responsibility. For good bloggers, that responsibility lies in the ability to convey a message, a story, or sound commentary using the most up-to-date facts available, and to avoid the slander/libel problems the MSM chooses to sidestep more often than not.
Indeed, it is the blogger who has put the MSM in it's place more times than I can count. It is the blogger that helps drive the daily debate over a whole host of topics. Were it not for the blogger, the general public, while painfully aware of the MSM and it's inherent bias, would have had no recourse against them. Now, the public does.
And while others disdain the blogger, or attempt to spin how much influence blogging has ont he general public, they fail to acknowledge that bloggers have made an impact. The victims of scrutiny by the blogosphere know full well who brought them down, who took them to task, and who silenced their spin. Bloggers do this daily, and with little effort exerted. Indeed, if the MSM spent as much time researching stories--getting all sides of the story--there would be little for bloggers to comment on. But as long as the media continues it's faltering reign, bloggers will be right there, looking over their shoulder.
And as it pertains to election cycles, the bloggers put their mark on the map in 2004. It was a concerted effort by South Dakota bloggers to get John Thune to unseat Tom Daschle. When John Kerry floated (forgive the pun) his Christmas-Eve-In-Cambodia story, it was bloggers who blew him out of the water (again, forgive the pun). Bloggers did their best in the overall election cycle and got results whereas the MSM did their best, and failed miserably. And to think that they had so much help from MoveOn.org and Democratic Underground, yet they still could not get John Kerry into the Oval Office. And the fight still continues today on the Internet between center-right bloggers, and the moonbat fringe; a fringe that is slowly working its way into the mainstream of the Democrat Party. One only needs to look at their "celebrities" to see that. From Cindi Sheehan to Michael Moore, from Jimmy Carter to George Soros, the moonbats are literally on the march, and they will settle for nothing less than control of the party even if it means having to resort to scorched-earth tactics to achieve that end.
But regardless of where a blogger stands on the ideological spectrum, they are entitled to the same freedoms that the press enjoys. We have the freedom to speak and comment just as much as they do. And should it come down to a big story--a seriously big story--bloggers should be able to invoke the freedom of the press protections the media relishes. It is only fair. No, we do not have the name slats on our doors or desks. No, we do not work for the high-powered media outlets. We are precisely what Senator Frist described. We are the citizen journalists in the tradition of Jefferson, Paine, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. We are the scrutinous public that does not drink all which we are fed.
We are, above anything else, simply bloggers. We have a passion to write. We have a duty to inform. And we have the right to do that without interference from the government when doing so.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 2:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home