Whatever happened to free speech? - Page 4

Ned · March 17, 2003, 16:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Flubber
Actually this is free speech in action. They said what they wanted to say and a whole bunch of other people are exercising their own freedoms as well.

People have every right to hold an unpopular opinion. And other people have every right to buy things or refuse to buy things from the person holding the unpopular opinion. Simple.

This is the essence of free speech. The government protects the right of everyone to speak. It does not, however, give them immunity from the consequences of what they say. For example, libel suits or boycotts.

Dis · March 17, 2003, 16:31

MTG if the listeners don't like it, they wont' listen. The ratings drop and the DJ gets fired.

The system is working just fine!

MichaeltheGreat · March 17, 2003, 16:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher

Why is that different?

I was referring to pulling the song. Since Dixie Chicks were played before the one shot off her mouth, presumably the audience of the radio station had no problem with the music.

If an individual song is unpopular, obviously it ain't gonna sell air time (just like any crap filler on a bad album), so not playing that song is not at all the same as sponsoring CD burning parties or a boycott of everything produced by that group.

MichaeltheGreat · March 17, 2003, 16:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
MTG if the listeners don't like it, they wont' listen. The ratings drop and the DJ gets fired.

The system is working just fine!

It worked just fine in the 50's, too!

Japher · March 17, 2003, 16:34

I want to reitterate that the country music industry is less tolerable of these kinds of things than other industries. Why? Because of their audiences. You can't swear, be a female singer and look ugly, openly defy America, blah, blah, blah. Until recently it was still "taboo" to play two songs by female artists in a row!

Ned · March 17, 2003, 16:35

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

A technical violation of First Amendment free speech rights only occurs in one of two types of situations: Active censorship by the government;

or direct government action or a refusal to act when government would otherwise ordinarily do so, (i.e. refusal to grant parade permits, provide customary security or inspection signoffs, etc.) that has the effect of blocking or intimidating the exercise of free speech.

This isn't the case.

This IS, however, more akin to the sort of blacklisting in the McCarthy era - people were "tainted" so nobody would hire them. What I have an issue with is not only the radio stations, but the general notion of acceptance that anyone who expresses an opinion that isn't subject to mob approval, will be subject to economic pressure or any other form of "influence" to keep their opinions "in line."

If I buy or don't buy the Dixie Chicks CD's, it's because I like or dislike their music, not because I give a **** about their politics, or because I want to support or limit any political opinion they might express.

Actually, the Congress was highly involved in blacklisting. This involvement so infected the blacklisting so as to make it unconstitutional. This is why Eisenhower did what he did to end it.

Dis · March 17, 2003, 16:35

you can swear

listen to David Allen Coe

Arrian · March 17, 2003, 16:59

Quote:

A technical violation of First Amendment free speech rights only occurs in one of two types of situations: Active censorship by the government;

or direct government action or a refusal to act when government would otherwise ordinarily do so, (i.e. refusal to grant parade permits, provide customary security or inspection signoffs, etc.) that has the effect of blocking or intimidating the exercise of free speech.

This isn't the case.

Agreed. That was all I was arguing, actually.

I think the radio stations are being silly, but I mean it's TEXAS.

-Arrian

Chemical Ollie · March 17, 2003, 17:02

This reminds me of the old Bruce Springsteen song "57 Channels and nothing on". That song was about TV, but you have about the same situation on radio.

With so many channels, you should expect them to have a multitude of angles on things, both in the news broadcasts and other programs. Surprisingly, they are all the same. Same news and same ideas in all channels within a country (but not necessarily between countries). That is a fact in Europe, but even more so in America.

Ramo · March 17, 2003, 17:03

There's more to freedom than freedom from the state.

Willem · March 17, 2003, 17:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
I want to reitterate that the country music industry is less tolerable of these kinds of things than other industries. Why? Because of their audiences. You can't swear, be a female singer and look ugly, openly defy America, blah, blah, blah. Until recently it was still "taboo" to play two songs by female artists in a row!

And how exactly does this make the current situation right? If these same people demanded a return to segregation, would that be right as well? Maybe if the industry as a whole showed some backbone and stood up for the principles that the US constitution is supposed to represent, then maybe their audiences might develop more tolerance towards differing views.

The US is trying to convince the world that they can be trusted in the role of global cop, but they can't even uphold the ideals of freedom in their own back yard. The minute it's no longer convenient to do so, they cave in to mob pressure. How on earth is some poorly informed schmuck in some impoverished country on the other side of the world supposed to have faith in that system after seeing this type of intolerance? How will their views be respected when the American public can't even tolerate differing views within their own population?

Dis · March 17, 2003, 17:04

That's because all radio stations are owned by like 3 companies. There is no diversity. No one takes any chances.

Flubber · March 17, 2003, 17:09

willem

who are the "they" that have given into mob rule?Here the only people acting are the "mob" itself as personified by some music consumers and DJs. As long as they do no violence and violate no one else's fundamental rights, I have no problem with what they are doing. Personally I think its silly but that the beauty of freedom . . . you don't necessarily have to do sensible things

Jac de Molay · March 17, 2003, 17:31

Quote:

That's because all radio stations are owned by like 3 companies. There is no diversity. No one takes any chances.

And because they're so averse to controversy, something like this can easily come back to bite em in the ass. Look what happened to clear channel post 9/11.

There's just as many people who can boycott a station if they don't like the "sound" of censorship.

Arrian · March 17, 2003, 17:31

Clearchannel sucks.

-Arrian

Willem · March 17, 2003, 17:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Flubber
willem

who are the "they" that have given into mob rule?Here the only people acting are the "mob" itself as personified by some music consumers and DJs. As long as they do no violence and violate no one else's fundamental rights, I have no problem with what they are doing. Personally I think its silly but that the beauty of freedom . . . you don't necessarily have to do sensible things

"They" are the DJ's, radio statio owners and music execs who are going along with all this, and jumping on the same narrowminded bandwagon as their audiences. They are public broadcasters, the ones spreading American culture and ideals thoughout the country, and the world. That puts them in a position of responsibility to uphold the concepts of free speech that the "American way" is supposed to represent. At a time when the rest of the world is judging the US and wondering whether they can be trusted, they should take every action they can to ensure that everyone sees clearly that the American people actually do practise what they preach.

orange · March 17, 2003, 17:32

My respect for the Dixie Chicks just skyrocketed

Japher · March 17, 2003, 17:36

Willem:

What is right about appealing to the masses? Oh, wait, that kind of makes it right... as far as a law is concerned.

Other places where free speech is denied:

NBA - Basketball players who merely utter the F-word while playing are automatically given a Technical foul.

NFL - Telling a Ref how you really feel will get you ejected, suspended, and fined.

Political Arenas - I don't think a Democrat for the war will get elected, kind of like that guy at the convention last weekend.

Work Place - Call anyone a Beatch, I dare you.

Go ahead, practice your freespeach all you want, and see where it gets you. Like someone else on this board said, you have the right to say whatever you want, you will just have to face the consequences for having done so.

Imran Siddiqui · March 17, 2003, 18:10

Quote:

I think the radio stations are being silly, but I mean it's TEXAS.

Not just in Texas. In Georgia the same thing is going on.

Quote:

Go ahead, practice your freespeach all you want, and see where it gets you. Like someone else on this board said, you have the right to say whatever you want, you will just have to face the consequences for having done so.

Very true.

DinoDoc · March 17, 2003, 18:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem
"They" are the DJ's, radio statio owners and music execs who are going along with all this, and jumping on the same narrowminded bandwagon as their audiences.

Damn them for trying to please the people on whom they base thier incomes!

Sinapus · March 17, 2003, 18:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

Do you have a problem with reading my views? How many times do I have to say it, my beef is with the radio stations.

My "beef" is your lack of comprehension on what is protected speech.

This Forum has restrictions on users based on behavior and it is possible to get banned or kicked off for posting something violating those restrictions. Is that banning free speech? Yes or no?

If the Dixie Chicks member had said she supported the war, many of their fans took umbrage with this and radio stations decided to stop playing their music would you have the same reaction?

Sinapus · March 17, 2003, 18:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

To stand up to the principles of your constitution? Isn't that what you guys are supposed to be going to war over, freedom and liberty and all that? Or does that only apply when it's convenient to do so?

So Congress is making a law banning speaking out against the war? Is a state legislature creating a similar law?

KrazyHorse · March 17, 2003, 18:38

I can bet you that your elected representatives would probably have had a similar reaction.

It's obviously not protected under the 1st amendment, which deals specifically with government intervention in speech. But just as obviously we're allowed to express annoyance at the thought that it's considered such a violation of public decency to criticise Dubya that stations will pull their songs for it.

DinoDoc · March 17, 2003, 18:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
But just as obviously we're allowed to express annoyance at the thought that it's considered such a violation of public decency to criticise Dubya that stations will pull their songs for it.

Of course. It's just annoying to see stupid people claim that actions such as this violate 1st amendment freedoms.

Ming · March 17, 2003, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by DetroitDave
There's just as many people who can boycott a station if they don't like the "sound" of censorship.

Then they should speak up and complain. If more of them complain about them NOT being played then people saying they don't want them to be played, THEY WILL BE BACK ON THE AIR, pure and simple. It's all about money, NOT CENSORSHIP or freedom of speech.

Zero · March 17, 2003, 18:44

Quote:

Originally posted by DaShi
I think it is more that many of the Dixie Chicks' fans are from the South and the right. They basically offended their target audience. Just bad marketing.

"Just so you know, we're ashamed the fans of Dixie Chicks are from Texas."

Hueij · March 17, 2003, 19:10

Quote:

A bit more display of prior fans expressing their right of free speech. Feel free to call these CD burners radical demonstrators, but this is a perfect example that free speech IS quite healthy.

Burning stuff now huh? How soon people forget...

Jac de Molay · March 17, 2003, 19:35

Quote:

Then they should speak up and complain. If more of them complain about them NOT being played then people saying they don't want them to be played, THEY WILL BE BACK ON THE AIR, pure and simple.

How is that supposed to happen when it's the DJs and media outlets themselves that are whipping people into a frenzy by saying how "unpatriotic" the women is over one stupid comment?

There hasn't been anything close to a balanced treatment of this on most talk radio shows. It's the same juvenile behaviour that makes freedom fries out of french frie, and all that other BS.

I don't disagree that its legal. But when so much of radio is consolidated nowadays, the role of the average listener is diminished considerably.

Willem · March 17, 2003, 19:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
NBA - Basketball players who merely utter the F-word while playing are automatically given a Technical foul.

Big deal, a slap on the wrist to remind them that there might be kids in the audience.

Quote:

NFL - Telling a Ref how you really feel will get you ejected, suspended, and fined.

Telling them, or screaming in their face with veins bulging from their forehead. There's a big difference!

Quote:

Political Arenas - I don't think a Democrat for the war will get elected, kind of like that guy at the convention last weekend.

That's the role of a politician, they make a stand either way and get elected according to their views. That's part of their job!

Quote:

Work Place - Call anyone a Beatch, I dare you.

I've heard that said a number of times in the workplace. Again a slap on the wrist.

Quote:

Go ahead, practice your freespeach all you want, and see where it gets you. Like someone else on this board said, you have the right to say whatever you want, you will just have to face the consequences for having done so.

I don't deny that it was a tactless thing to say, but it doesn't deserve this kind of over-reaction. What's next, being tarred and feathered in a public square? It was about as diplomatic as...as...well, something George Bush would say! They must have gone to school together!

Willem · March 17, 2003, 19:52

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Damn them for trying to please the people on whom they base thier incomes!

Damn them for accepting their responsibilties as public broadcasters so lightly in a country that keeps lecturing the rest of the world about freedom. Is there something wrong with practising what you preach?