The written word is protected under First Amendment. However, methods of transmission and broadcast is not (see: the FCC).Winston wrote:Does anyone know of an instance where the US government closed down a forum? If so, under what pretense? If not, does that mean that we can say whatever we want without fear of government intervention?
Has the US government ever closed down a forum before?
-
- Elite Upper Class Poster
- Posts: 4898
- Joined: August 31st, 2007, 9:44 pm
- Location: Orange County, California
Re: Has the US government ever closed down a forum before?
Meet Loads of Foreign Women in Person! Join Our Happier Abroad ROMANCE TOURS to Many Overseas Countries!
Meet Foreign Women Now! Post your FREE profile on Happier Abroad Personals and start receiving messages from gorgeous Foreign Women today!
-
- Elite Upper Class Poster
- Posts: 3761
- Joined: June 12th, 2010, 7:08 am
- Location: New Orleans, LA USA
- Contact:
Re: Has the US government ever closed down a forum before?
Not entirely true. Broadcasting over the public airwaves is subject to regulation by the FCC because the airwaves are a publicly-owned resource and licensees that use it are required to serve the public interest (though they never do). The courts can overrule FCC decisions on First Amendment grounds, however.momopi wrote:The written word is protected under First Amendment. However, methods of transmission and broadcast is not (see: the FCC).Winston wrote:Does anyone know of an instance where the US government closed down a forum? If so, under what pretense? If not, does that mean that we can say whatever we want without fear of government intervention?
-
- Elite Upper Class Poster
- Posts: 4898
- Joined: August 31st, 2007, 9:44 pm
- Location: Orange County, California
The purpose of a free speech amendment is to protect your right to express your opinion against the majority voice ("community standard"). If your opinion is with the majority voice, then you wouldn't need protection in the first place.
The purpose of FCC is to enforce community standards against what is considered inappropriate by the majority voice.
Fundamentally, the two are diametrically opposed.
Just my $0.02.
The purpose of FCC is to enforce community standards against what is considered inappropriate by the majority voice.
Fundamentally, the two are diametrically opposed.
Just my $0.02.
-
- Elite Upper Class Poster
- Posts: 3761
- Joined: June 12th, 2010, 7:08 am
- Location: New Orleans, LA USA
- Contact:
Good point re how the FCC functions today. Back before this country went brain dead there was a debate about how the FCC might best discharge its statutory mandate of ensuring that licensees to use the public airwaves serve the "public interest convenience and necessity." Many felt that the airwaves had been taken over by a commercialism that vigorously kept any kind of dissenting voices out. A Supreme Court decision from 1969 held that the most important First Amendment consideration w/respect to the airwaves was the public's right to be broadly informed by a variety of viewpoints.momopi wrote:The purpose of a free speech amendment is to protect your right to express your opinion against the majority voice ("community standard"). If your opinion is with the majority voice, then you wouldn't need protection in the first place.
The purpose of FCC is to enforce community standards against what is considered inappropriate by the majority voice.
Fundamentally, the two are diametrically opposed.
Just my $0.02.
But good luck intersting the Roberts court in any First Amendment theory that doen't protect the rights of large broadcasting corporations to do whatever they want on the public airwaves. 1969 was, as I say, before the country went brain dead.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 18 Replies
- 3516 Views
-
Last post by xiongmao
-
- 10 Replies
- 2376 Views
-
Last post by ladislav
-
- 1 Replies
- 4210 Views
-
Last post by globetrotter
-
- 0 Replies
- 2452 Views
-
Last post by mattyman
-
- 42 Replies
- 8102 Views
-
Last post by Gali