5 ms·

I have not observed that opinion as of yet. Most would appreciate transparency on who funds "political movie" and like, which to my understanding we do not hav

• rayiner 14y ago
  The internet: where anonymous speech is an inextricable part of free speech when complaining about drug enforcement on reddit, but an unnecessary uncumberance on democracy when releasing a movie criticising a Presidential candidate.
  • davorak 14y ago
    They seem like two very separate cases to me. The opinion I have seen is that it is perfectly fine to release the movie anonymously on the internet. Buying prime time advertisement on TV or other impractical, in the sense it is impractical to expect the vast majority of people, to avoid formes of advertisement should not always be protected. Rule of thumb seems to be easy to opt out is protected and the hard to opt out it is the more it makes sense to make sure there is funding transparency. Free speech is limited, such as yelling fire in a crowded area(theater is the classic example I believe). Free speech is not guaranteed under all circumstance where the negative consequences are extreme.