4 ms·
It has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech though
by lm28469 3y ago
It has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech though
- ceejayoz 3y agoSure it does. Freedom of speech has the side effect of wealthy people and organizations being able to purchase louder speech, and often mask that process.
- TexanFeller 3y agoThis is the big problem with corporate personhood. If we ditch that concept, which seems nonsensical on its face to me, our individual free speech can remain better protected. Without corporate personhood those individual limits on campaign donations and lobbying might actually work.
- tiahura 3y agoSo freedom of the press doesn’t apply to the corporation New York Times, Inc.?
- TexanFeller 3y agoDedicated news organizations are protected separately by freedom of the press, no need to make Exxon and Apple "persons" with free speech rights to maintain freedom of the press. There probably need to be additional restrictions on what constitutes a news organization though otherwise Google might start calling itself "the press" and partisan organizations will own the press. Things like not engaging in other forms of business or taking money from lobbyists and political campaigns.
- ceejayoz 3y agoIt sounds nice, but "freedom of the press only for approved entities" tends not to work out that well.
- pastacacioepepe 3y agoIt's not hard, really. Are you a corporation? If no, it doesn't concern your freedom.
- JoshTko 3y agoThis. The wealthy will always have loudest voice in a zero regulation speech environment.
- marcosdumay 3y agoWell, if the part of masking the process is a problem, you can simply unmask it.
- lm28469 3y agoAnd not having freedom of speech would magically do the opposite ?
- ceejayoz 3y agoWho espoused that opinion?