Comments on: Fighting for our f’ing First Amendment http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/ by Jeff Jarvis Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:10:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: EB http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245782 EB Fri, 22 Dec 2006 14:35:04 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245782 I watched it on C-Span, too! The FCC lawyer looked so young and scared that to compare him to a "deer in the headlights" would be unkind to deer. You really should watch it if you can, rather than listen to it. I loved how the first lawyer (for Fox) just started spouting expletives in his argument, and then later one of the Judges later asked a question saying: What if someone showed a clip of this court case on the news which contained the banned words, would that station get fined? (paraphrasing) ... I guess "news" is ok to have "fleeting expletives" in. I watched it on C-Span, too!
The FCC lawyer looked so young and scared that to compare him to a “deer in the headlights” would be unkind to deer.

You really should watch it if you can, rather than listen to it. I loved how the first lawyer (for Fox) just started spouting expletives in his argument, and then later one of the Judges later asked a question saying: What if someone showed a clip of this court case on the news which contained the banned words, would that station get fined? (paraphrasing) … I guess “news” is ok to have “fleeting expletives” in.

]]> By: Hasan Jafri http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245227 Hasan Jafri Fri, 22 Dec 2006 03:34:10 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245227 In Seattle issues like this are settled over a latte at Starbucks, so I don't know if this should go to the Supreme Court. That said, part of the problem stems clearly from different standards courts -- and governments-- apply to different media. Why do print newspapers get a relative free ride while film and television labor under medieval codes of decency and good behavior? And why is new media -- in the United States -- viewed still as the bottom feeder in the equation? It will be interesting to see where our courts -- and by corollary American society -- position themselves on these issues as time goes on. U.S. judges should be aware though that they are venturing into uncharted seas in more way than one. I am a Seattleite in Hong Kong, and from my vantage point I can safely say U.S. court proceedings and decisions in a globalized world are watched and studied by judges in Asia. This has implications beyond our orders, especially for new media. During the ITU conference here in Hong Kong earlier this month, the Chinese government made the unprecedented gesture of opening up the internet. As reported by IHT tech editor Victoria Shannon on her blog Digital Dialogue Wiki entries on China, which are routinely blocked, were available to everyone -- including people in the People's Republic. I believe this was a Chinese "yes" to the new media community's values. It was a stunning move, and in some ways grounbreaking. It was also evidence that new media, being by definition a community rather than an arbitrary corporation chopping wood, has the potential to earn the respect of foreign governments. How long will this trend last if our own judges take a contrarian view? Anyone -- including Jeff Jarvis -- care to enlighten us on where this is going, globally? Merry Xmas! In Seattle issues like this are settled over a latte at Starbucks, so I don’t know if this should go to the Supreme Court.

That said, part of the problem stems clearly from different standards courts — and governments– apply to different media. Why do print newspapers get a relative free ride while film and television labor under medieval codes of decency and good behavior? And why is new media — in the United States — viewed still as the bottom feeder in the equation? It will be interesting to see where our courts — and by corollary American society — position themselves on these issues as time goes on.

U.S. judges should be aware though that they are venturing into uncharted seas in more way than one. I am a Seattleite in Hong Kong, and from my vantage point I can safely say U.S. court proceedings and decisions in a globalized world are watched and studied by judges in Asia. This has implications beyond our orders, especially for new media.

During the ITU conference here in Hong Kong earlier this month, the Chinese government made the unprecedented gesture of opening up the internet. As reported by IHT tech editor Victoria Shannon on her blog Digital Dialogue Wiki entries on China, which are routinely blocked, were available to everyone — including people in the People’s Republic. I believe this was a Chinese “yes” to the new media community’s values. It was a stunning move, and in some ways grounbreaking. It was also evidence that new media, being by definition a community rather than an arbitrary corporation chopping wood, has the potential to earn the respect of foreign governments.

How long will this trend last if our own judges take a contrarian view? Anyone — including Jeff Jarvis — care to enlighten us on where this is going, globally?

Merry Xmas!

]]> By: CaptiousNut http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245175 CaptiousNut Fri, 22 Dec 2006 03:01:52 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-245175 Jeff, What about this more important <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/21/D8M5DKT80.html" rel="nofollow">free speech ruling</a>? I just don't see how you think obscenity is a more important First Amendment issue than freedom of political speech. Jeff,

What about this more important free speech ruling?

I just don’t see how you think obscenity is a more important First Amendment issue than freedom of political speech.

]]> By: Safran http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244940 Safran Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:53:22 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244940 I watched the arguments, nerdily fascinated by the process. The judges indeed seemed dubious of the FCC's arguments. I also thought the FCC's lawyer seemed a bit of a lightweight for the job. He stammered with every rhetorical blow the court dealt him. He argued his way into a circle. Without knowing a thing about the guy, I thought he was young and inexperienced. (He could be a constitutional law scholar for all I know - his performance was weak.) The Court asked all the questions I would have if I were going on the attack. The best part was when the FCC lawyer talked about how children now have TVs in their rooms. (That's why we need the government to protect them.) The judges, as you'd expect, clearly believed that was a parent's choice, not the government's. This is going all the way to the Supremes. I watched the arguments, nerdily fascinated by the process. The judges indeed seemed dubious of the FCC’s arguments. I also thought the FCC’s lawyer seemed a bit of a lightweight for the job. He stammered with every rhetorical blow the court dealt him. He argued his way into a circle. Without knowing a thing about the guy, I thought he was young and inexperienced. (He could be a constitutional law scholar for all I know - his performance was weak.)

The Court asked all the questions I would have if I were going on the attack. The best part was when the FCC lawyer talked about how children now have TVs in their rooms. (That’s why we need the government to protect them.) The judges, as you’d expect, clearly believed that was a parent’s choice, not the government’s.

This is going all the way to the Supremes.

]]> By: Richard Cook http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244748 Richard Cook Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:21:06 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244748 You gotta get back on your meds girl. You gotta get back on your meds girl.

]]> By: Duffer http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244655 Duffer Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:36:13 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244655 Tom, Bingo! http://fccfu.com/video/fccfu_lg.mov Tom,

Bingo!

http://fccfu.com/video/fccfu_lg.mov

]]> By: Tom http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244626 Tom Thu, 21 Dec 2006 19:20:59 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244626 We would be instantly outraged if the government tried to set up a commission to supervise newspapers, yet we allow the government to do that to TV and radio. The FCC may have been justified in the past due to the scarcity of airwave frequencies, but that justification has been wiped out by current technology and therefore the FCC should be totally abolished. It would be very convenient to do it by judicial fiat. We would be instantly outraged if the government tried to set up a commission to supervise newspapers, yet we allow the government to do that to TV and radio. The FCC may have been justified in the past due to the scarcity of airwave frequencies, but that justification has been wiped out by current technology and therefore the FCC should be totally abolished. It would be very convenient to do it by judicial fiat.

]]> By: Tony http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244287 Tony Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:19:51 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244287 I should add, C-SPAN is re-airing it on television on Saturday at 7pm, I think. I should add, C-SPAN is re-airing it on television on Saturday at 7pm, I think.

]]> By: Tony http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244281 Tony Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:17:11 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/12/21/fighting-for-our-fing-first-amendment/#comment-244281 I listened to it on Sirius, and the account is correct. At first I was worried because the judges grilled the Fox lawyer. But when the FCC lawyer stood in, they hammered him. They tangled him up in every argument he made, and he did an ugly job trying to dance out of his predicament. I'm optimistic that the court will rule in Fox's favor, but one of the judges repeated many times that the court is interested in ruling on the fewest questions necessary to resolve the case. If they don't have to address the Constitutional question, they won't. The Fox lawyer smelled blood for going after the Constitutional question, but I don't think the Court will go that far. But I'm just a layperson hoping for the Constitutional moment, like you. I listened to it on Sirius, and the account is correct. At first I was worried because the judges grilled the Fox lawyer. But when the FCC lawyer stood in, they hammered him. They tangled him up in every argument he made, and he did an ugly job trying to dance out of his predicament.

I’m optimistic that the court will rule in Fox’s favor, but one of the judges repeated many times that the court is interested in ruling on the fewest questions necessary to resolve the case. If they don’t have to address the Constitutional question, they won’t. The Fox lawyer smelled blood for going after the Constitutional question, but I don’t think the Court will go that far.

But I’m just a layperson hoping for the Constitutional moment, like you.

]]>