Censorship, Freedom of Speech, and the Foundation of American Press Law

Media Consumption and Reflection

• Personal Media Log Example: The instructor uses a personal example of comparing their media consumption habits to those typically attributed to millennials.
  • Normal vs. Not Normal: A simple comparison of personal behavior against perceived generational norms.
  • Facebook and Instagram: Common platforms for both the instructor and millennials.
  • Time Spent: Millennials might spend $4-7$ hours daily on social media, while the instructor's normal usage is around $3$ hours.
  • Reflection Question: "What does this mean for me? What have I learned about this?"
  • Hypothetical Reflection: The instructor might reflect on protecting themselves by avoiding interpersonal phone use (not texting back, not taking calls), while still passively consuming entertainment. This leads to questions about whether this passive consumption is a 'good steward' of the device and whether it's truly better.
• Outcome of Reflection: One might be satisfied with their habits or identify areas for improvement.

Historical Context of Censorship and Early America

• Catholic Church's Influence in England: The Catholic Church was highly influential in the English government, with no clear separation of church and state.
• Censorship in Europe: During this period, the Church was primarily responsible for censoring ideas, beliefs, religions, and laws.
• America's Founding: Early American settlers left Europe due to opposition to this lack of separation, foreseeing dangers if power (like the Pope's) fell into the wrong hands.
• Authority Figures: For early Americans, authority figures meant the Pope of the Catholic Church and the King of England.
• Reasons for Settling in America:
  • Freedom of Religion: Many sought to practice Protestant faiths, free from the control and perceived problems of the Catholic Church.
  • Other Reasons: It's acknowledged that religious freedom was not the only reason for settlement, hinting at other motivations like land, economic opportunity, or political freedom.
• Humanity of Ancestors: When considering generational shifts or historical events, it's crucial to acknowledge the humanity and complexities of our ancestors.

Evolution of News and Information

• Assumption about News: There's a common misconception that newspapers have always been about factual news.
• Definition of News (Student Input): Political, sports, community, factual information.
• Early Newspapers: Contrary to current assumptions, early newspapers were primarily for sharing town gossip, not factual news. Sociologists like Jonathan Haidt suggest language evolved through gossip.
• Bias in News: The historical function of early news as gossip contributes to the ongoing friction and perception of bias. News has not always been intrinsically unbiased.
• Shift to Daily Updates: While early newspapers were more periodical (weekly or monthly, story-driven), the emergence of war necessitated daily, factual updates.

Propaganda and Edward Bernays

• Propaganda as Early Public Relations: The term 'propaganda' originated as an early public relations term.
• Edward Bernays: Coined the term 'propaganda.' He is often called the 'father of public relations.'
  • Relationship to Sigmund Freud: Bernays was Sigmund Freud's nephew and worked closely with him, leveraging psychological principles in his work.

Freedom of Speech and Chesterton's Fence

• Importance of Understanding Freedom of Speech: It is crucial to understand what freedom of speech truly means and why it's important before advocating for or against its protection.
• Chesterton's Fence Metaphor:
  • Analogy: Imagine early American settlers finding a fence running through their ideal market location. The immediate reaction might be to tear it down.
  • Chesterton's Point: Before removing a fence (or a law/regulation), one must first understand why it was put there and what purpose it serves (what it keeps out/in).
  • Application to Laws: This metaphor advises against hastily discarding laws, especially if their original purpose is not fully understood. It encourages understanding the function of existing rules before changing them, particularly in areas like censorship.

Early American Censorship Methods

• Four Basic Approaches (Still Visible Today):
  • Licensing for Printing Companies: Newspapers had to pay for licenses. This allowed the government to exert control, essentially saying, "You have freedom of speech, but you'll pay for it."
    • Economic Impact: Newspapers charged higher prices to cover costs, leading to a need for better content and stories to attract buyers.
  • Pre-Press Approval: Books and educational publications required approval before mass publication in early America (similar to modern campus rules requiring approval for flyers up to a university president).
    • Mechanism: This was possible because not everyone owned a printer; town printers were businesses that could be regulated.
  • Taxation on Stamps and Publications: To print and disseminate or mail information, individuals and organizations had to pay taxes, limiting who could afford to share their views.
  • Prosecution (Lawsuits): People could be sued for speech crimes like libel or sedition.
    • Modern Relevance: The current lawsuit by the President of France against an American journalist is cited as an unprecedented example of these precarious times, indicating a misunderstanding of what censorship and freedom of speech entail.

The Marketplace of Ideas and the Boomerang Effect

• Shift in Marketplace of Ideas: Communication technologies have moved the 'marketplace of ideas' from the physical realm (where people gathered to exchange ideas) to a digital one.
• Issue with Digital Discourse: Instead of asking questions, people often retweet with only their opinions, hindering genuine engagement.
• The Boomerang Effect (Persuasive Theory):
  • Mechanism: When a message or strong opinion drastically opposes a person's existing beliefs (falls outside their 'latitude of acceptance'), it's like throwing a boomerang that hits them in the face.
  • Consequence: The recipient doesn't engage with the message; they are merely alienated or angered. This is not an isolated incident and has lasting consequences, potentially reinforcing their original stance.
• Censorship vs. Stewardship of Language: The discussion raises the question of whether censorship is the solution or if a better understanding of how words create reality and a commitment to stewarding language well is more appropriate. For believers, this involves bringing "communicative life."
• Who Censors? The argument against censorship asks whether it should be personal (self-censorship) or governmental. If governmental, who decides what is censored and what is right/wrong?
• Quote on Freedom of Thought and Speech:
  • "Without freedom of thought, there could be no such thing as wisdom and no such thing as public liberty. Without freedom of speech, which is the right of every man as far as by he does not hurt and control the right of another, and this is the only check which ought to suffer to yes, to suffer. The only balance which to ought to know."
  • Meaning: This emphasizes internal reflection and self-regulation of one's words, ensuring they do not harm others.
• Limitations of Discussion: Acknowledgment that the topic of freedom of speech and censorship is vast and complex, only a small part ("one grain of sand") is being covered.

Sedition and Libel: Definitions and Differences

• Seditious Libel: An early term for "speech crimes."
  • Sedition: A crime of speech or action that encourages or organizes opposition to the government.
  • Libel: A type of defamation involving the publication of a false statement about a person in writing or other graphic form.
    • Purpose: The purpose of libel is defamation – to ruin someone's reputation.
    • Key Elements:
      • The statements must be false.
      • The individual making the statement must have known it was false.
• Distinguishing Sedition and Libel:
  • Sedition: Targets the government (e.g., journalist or public speaker against the government).
  • Libel: Targets an individual; defamation against a person.
• Candace Owens Lawsuit Example: A contemporary case is referenced to illustrate the difference between "libel" and "defamation." The current lawsuit against Candace Owens is for defamation, which implies ruining a reputation, but the distinction of whether the statements were false and knowingly false is critical in a libel claim.
• Macron Example: A journalist wrote a book alleging gender transitioning within the French government (regarding President Macron and his wife). The book was published in America because it couldn't be published in France. This highlights the legal complexities involving national governments and American journalists.
• Importance of Terminology: Understanding these legal terms is crucial to forming correct conclusions about censorship and freedom of speech, rather than relying on opinions or prayers.

The Zenger Trial: A Landmark Case

• John Peter Zenger: A journalist for the New York Weekly Journal, he was the first major American journalist to be sued for sedition.
• The Lawsuit: Zenger was sued by Governor William Cosby of New York.
  • Context: Cosby was engaging in corrupt activities.
  • Zenger's Actions: Zenger published a true and verifiable story exposing Cosby's corrupt actions, which made the governor look bad.
  • Cosby's Expectation: Cosby expected to apply English legal standards where the government could not be slandered, regardless of truth.
• Crossroads of American Journalism: This case was monumental, as a ruling in favor of Cosby would have severely hindered journalistic freedom of the press in America.
• Andrew Hamilton's Defense: Zenger's lawyer, Andrew Hamilton, delivered a powerful closing statement to the jury.
  • Argument: He argued that the jury's decision would impact the future of thought and truth, affecting "every free man that lives under a British government on the main of America." He presented it as a cause for "liberty."
  • Outcome: The jury sided with John Peter Zenger.
• Significance/Precedent Set:
  • Truth as a Defense: The Zenger trial established a crucial precedent: truth is a valid defense against libel.
  • Journalistic Intent: To sue for defamation (libel) in the future, one would need to prove not only that the statement was false, but also that the journalist knowingly lied (i.e., knew the truth but still wrote something different).

Conclusion

• Value of Knowledge: Emphasizes that knowing the precise definitions of terms like sedition and libel is essential for informed discussions about censorship and freedom of speech.
• "Grain of Sand" Metaphor: Reiteration that this discussion merely scratches the surface of a vast and complex topic. Ignoring this knowledge is akin to "tearing down a fence that doesn't even exist."