Tag Archives: First Amendment

#RogerEbert, #SocialMedia and the #FirstAmendment

I kinda figured Roger Ebert (@ebertchicago) wasn’t a fan of the “Jackass” television shows and movies (although I personally find them gut-bustingly hilarious despite my alleged high IQ and fancy college degree), but the famed film critic ruffled feathers when he posted the following tweet after “Jackass” player Ryan Dunn’s death in a car crash early Monday morning:

As one might imagine, response to Mr. Ebert’s missive elicited some angry responses, so much so that Facebook pulled his page from the site. Ebert fired back:

The thumbs and keyboards of Ebert defenders and defamers, as well as Ebert himself, have been working overtime ever since.

Facebook spokeman Andrew Noyes later was quoted as saying that Mr. Ebert’s page “was removed in error.”

Anyone who knows me knows that I’m a libertarian when it comes to the First Amendment, and I applaud anyone who chooses to exercise this right and out himself as a jerk or an idiot….it makes life easier for demographers to sort them into target audiences boxes.

But the larger issue here is the impact of social media on the laws of free speech.

For instance, let’s say the leadership at Facebook tomorrow decides they really want to see Barack Obama re-elected next year, and that they’re going to pull the pages of every other candidate. In theory, it’s their bat and ball, and they can make up the rules as they see fit.

Same thing with Twitter. I doubt that’s going to happen, but it could.

I may be wrong here, but unlike the “equal time” rules governing broadcast media (which use the public airwaves to deliver their messages), there are no laws governing what private businesses can and cannot do with their online media properties.

And that means that anything you’re posting to a social media site belongs to someone else, and that they have the power to remove, edit, block or delete your content depending on how they feel on any given morning.

Your freedom of speech is only as free as the owners of social media platforms want it to be.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Issues Management, Social Media

Who Makes the Rules When the Public Airwaves Are Used for Profit?

I heart FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who was quoted Wednesday in a Los Angeles Times blog post on the state of journalism in the USA. His take:

“American media is not ‘producing the body of news and information that democracy needs to conduct its civic dialogue,’ Copps said in an interview with the BBC’s Katty Kay. That trend, he added, has to be reversed or ‘we are going to be pretty close to denying our citizens the essential news and information that they need to have in order to make intelligent decisions about the future direction of their country’.”

Copps spoke Thursday at Columbia University in New York, delivering an address entitled, “Getting Media Right: A Call to Action.” You can click HERE to get links to a live broadcast of the address, along with a link to the Katty Kay BBC interview and a related panel discussion. You can also follow coverage using the #cjcopps hashtag.

Copps said that the FCC shares the blame, enabling media consolidation to reduce public access to a diversity of opinions and straight reporting of issues that affect everyday Americans. Additionally, he calls for a more stringent licensing renewal process for local television stations:

Copps wants stations to commit to covering more debates and issues-oriented programming during election years. He also wants stations to be more in touch with the communities they serve.

A position that elicited this response from one reader of the LA Times blog:

“Deregulation” is merely the battle cry of meddling bureaucrats like Mr. Copps. In this case, an FCC commissioner desires to anoint himself judge and jury on what is “proper television news.” Placing the government’s seal of approval on news programming as Mr. Copps suggests is a very slippery slope that leads in only one direction – propaganda a la George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth and the Two Minutes Hate.

Mr. Copps, how well broadcast journalists and their news organizations are doing their jobs is quite frankly none of your damned business. Have you ever heard of the First Amendment? It couldn’t be more clear on this subject. It says that if you’re a bureaucrat whose legal authority derives from Congressional action, as is the case with the FCC, then you are cordially invited to BUTT OUT.

Posted by: Sid Vicious | December 02, 2010 at 08:54 AM

Nice of Mr. Vicious to come back from the grave and offer his opinion, don’t you think?

But therein lies the rub. Whom should have the right to decide what’s in the public’s best interest? And how is it that the public’s airwaves are being used by for-profit enterprises to deliver those messages in the first place?

I understand that the media companies pay handsomely for the licenses that allow them to broadcast, but where does the proper balance between profit motive and public interest exist…and who decides?

Anyone?

Leave a Comment

Filed under Journalism