I consider myself a free speech absolutist. Speech should be free up to the point where it isn't, as is now well defined by the Supreme Court in Brandenburg (1969), speech is no longer free when it poses a threat of Imminent Lawless Action.
Now one of my favored Jewish groups for peace and justice: Jewish Voice for Peace, is asking me to sign petition against some web service hosting Lists of Jews by anti-Semitic groups, apparently for harassment purposes. I call such lists "Target Lists."
Generally I believe the same standard that applies to "protected speech" under the First Ammendment, should also apply to websites and internet services. I am opposed to banning content because it is deemed to be "fake news." In order to find the truth, we must hear all sides, unfiltered, as much as possible. So, for example, I was opposed to Facebook banning Alex Jones, not because I like him. And, since then many anti-war and/or left voices have been banned as well, as I predicted.
But I will concede that in my mind Target Lists do in fact constitute a threat of Imminent Lawless Action. Therefore, I think they should be banned, but with one qualification.
"Target Lists" of public names, of all kinds, should not be banned. This includes public officials, corporate officials, attorneys, principals of privately held major employers, news editors, celebrities. When people take on public roles such as these, they assume the risk of being "listed." Generally such people are better prepared and protected from harassment also, nor do others as much dare harass them.
Banning lists of public names interferes with freedom in politics, government, commerce, and employment.
What needs be banned is unauthorized Target Lists of private persons, for any divisive category, including religious, ethnic and political.
Now one of my favored Jewish groups for peace and justice: Jewish Voice for Peace, is asking me to sign petition against some web service hosting Lists of Jews by anti-Semitic groups, apparently for harassment purposes. I call such lists "Target Lists."
Generally I believe the same standard that applies to "protected speech" under the First Ammendment, should also apply to websites and internet services. I am opposed to banning content because it is deemed to be "fake news." In order to find the truth, we must hear all sides, unfiltered, as much as possible. So, for example, I was opposed to Facebook banning Alex Jones, not because I like him. And, since then many anti-war and/or left voices have been banned as well, as I predicted.
But I will concede that in my mind Target Lists do in fact constitute a threat of Imminent Lawless Action. Therefore, I think they should be banned, but with one qualification.
"Target Lists" of public names, of all kinds, should not be banned. This includes public officials, corporate officials, attorneys, principals of privately held major employers, news editors, celebrities. When people take on public roles such as these, they assume the risk of being "listed." Generally such people are better prepared and protected from harassment also, nor do others as much dare harass them.
Banning lists of public names interferes with freedom in politics, government, commerce, and employment.
What needs be banned is unauthorized Target Lists of private persons, for any divisive category, including religious, ethnic and political.
No comments:
Post a Comment