4 ms·
You are defining freedom of the press to only apply to a narrow definition of press composed solely of professional agencies which certainly wasn't the case at
by michaelmrose 2y ago
You are defining freedom of the press to only apply to a narrow definition of press composed solely of professional agencies which certainly wasn't the case at inception of our country and is also misaligned with legal interpretation thereafter.
- lazide 2y ago[flagged]
- michaelmrose 2y agoThis dig is so off I honestly don't know what you are getting at. Freedom of the press can't be limited to government defined group without being abrogated entirely. It is rather the freedom of a citizen to inform their fellows. Likewise national security concerns isn't licence to impose commercial limits on such freedoms without an actual security concern. Once you allow photos to be shared there is no security interest in who gets paid. Failure to attend to the relevant and discard the irrelevant makes it hard to arrive at a reasonable argument.
- lazide 2y agoI’m noting that it’s been fashionable to go after people making these types of arguments for… a decade now? Or ‘protest zones’. Either way, I’m struggling to think of a time where the military was okay with folks being around they didn’t have control over.