Freedom of the press

June 20, Jared Schroeder, associate professor of Journalism specializing in Free Press/Free Speech at SMU Dallas, for a piece analyzing the free press implications of the Pentagon Papers as we recall the 50^th Anniversary of the event. Published in History News Network with the headline “50 Years Later, the Pentagon Papers Remain an Historic Landmark for Freedom of the Press”: https://bit.ly/35J3j6W

Democracy has seemed paper thin lately.

Politicians and pundits increasingly forget, ignore and distort First Amendment principles in hopes of scoring points with constituents.

This week, we celebrate the 50^th anniversary of a key part of freedom of the press which, like our democratic principles, survives as a hardened protection for publishers and remains unmoved by the unrelenting attacks our First Amendment freedoms face.

On June 30, 1971, the Supreme Court announced its decision in New York Times v. United States, also called the Pentagon Papers case. In its terse, one-page opinion, the Court concluded the government cannot censor or restrain the press. The First Amendment does not allow it.

Continue reading “50 Years Later, the Pentagon Papers Remain an Historic Landmark for Freedom of the Press”

Aug. 13, Jared Schroeder, SMU journalism professor, on a piece critiquing the Trump Administration’s executive order that attempts to compel social media platforms to be less “biased” against conservatives in their moderation efforts. Published in The Hill: https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/457297-efforts-to-compel-social-media-fairness-go-afoul-on-freedom-of

The White House’s effort to draft an executive order to limit social media companies’ alleged biases against conservative voices gets everything wrong about freedom of expression.

News of the proposed order, which is titled “Protecting Americans from Online Censorship,” emerged late last week. The order appears to suffer from a case of First Amendment amnesia. Even the name of the order shows a misunderstanding of freedom of expression, since the First Amendment protects us from government, not corporate, censorship.

The notion that social media companies can be compelled by the White House to make their online forums fair requires that the government can force private corporations to communicate information. This would set a dangerous precedent when it comes to freedom of expression, particularly since the government would decide what “fair” means. . .

Continue reading “Efforts to compel social media ‘fairness’ go afoul on freedom of expression”