FREE
SPEECH, INDEPENDENT MEDIA UNDER ATTACK, Frank Vernuccio 12/15/16
The principles of
free speech and independent media are enduring substantial attacks both within
the United States and abroad.
Since President Obama,
without the consent of Congress, surrendered control of the internet to an
international body with a membership comprised of many nations that advocate
censorship, and with the growing willingness of American media sources to bend their
will to the needs of left wing candidates, the ability of the public to receive
unfettered news and information has been dwindling. Wikileaks’ (which has been
attacked by the Obama Administration) revelation that CNN colluded with the
Democrat Party on presidential debate questions illustrates one aspect of this
challenge, and China’s tightening controls on free speech, another.
The Daily Mail reports that Beijing has strengthened
its “Great Firewall” of restrictions on internet speech by tightening rules and
imposing further limits on online speech. Using vague concepts such as
“damaging national honor” and “disturbing economic or social order,” as well as
the blunter charge of seeking to overthrow the socialist system, China’s
powerful censors continue to expand their control of internet content. As a
further chill to candid online activities, Beijing prohibits anonymous posting.
The Daily Mail noted that
“Amnesty’s
Patrick Poon, China researcher at global rights group Amnesty International
said the law ‘goes further than ever before in codifying abusive practices,
with a near-total disregard for the rights to freedom of expression and
privacy.’ Chinese authorities have long reserved the right to control and
censor online content. The country stepped up controls in 2013, launching a
wide-ranging internet crackdown. Hundreds of Chinese bloggers and journalists
were detained as part of the campaign, which has seen influential critics of
Beijing paraded on state television. Under regulations announced at the time,
Chinese internet users face three years in prison for writing defamatory
messages that are re-posted 500 times or more. They can also be jailed if
offending posts are viewed more than 5,000 times. Comments posted on social
media have been used in the prosecution of various activists, such as human
rights lawyer Pu Zhiqiang.”
China’s official
internet controls are mirrored, to a limited extent, by actions by private
internet sources within the United States to restrict content. Project Veritas reports that its founder James
O’Keefe was temporarily blocked from his Twitter account after posting two
items. The first was a video showing that Manhattan Democratic Election
Commissioner Alan Schulkin admitted that voter fraud does indeed exist. The
second was a video revealing that a Clinton staffer claiming he could rip up
Republican voter registration forms and not be reprimanded.
What is done through
government action in China is accomplished through left-wing activism within
the United States.
The College Fix reports that Rutgers University student
Aviv Khavich was fired for a column in which he argued that being in favor of immigration
enforcement was not “anti-immigrant.” Apparently, the “trigger” for the
dismissal was Khavich’s use of the phrase “illegal aliens.” The move was
not unique to the University. There has been an attempt, spearheaded by
sources such the AP style manual, to control the dialogue by eliminating
certain terms that clearly describe issues, turning instead to language that
favors left wing positions.
Direct collusion between
media and political campaigns also hampers the public’s ability to receive
objective information. Polizette reports that further Wikileaks releases
reveal that “CNN commentator Donna Brazile alerted Hillary Clinton’s
campaign team about a possible audience question the candidates would
field at the Democratic primary debate in Flint, Michigan. Hillary Clinton
apparently did not just get to see forum questions from CNN in advance
thanks to Brazile — her campaign was also notified on questions to be
asked by regular citizens.” Wikileaks also disclosed that some reporters,
including a New York Times staffer, requested quote approval from the Clinton
campaign before submitting articles.
The collusion is further
evidenced by a Daily Caller report by Peter Hasson that revealed
that a Washington Post columnist “appears to have asked the Democratic National
Committee (DNC) to do the majority of the research for a negative column”
written about Donald Trump in April 2016.
Abuses, both within the
U.S. and abroad, are not new. But there is a clear paradigm shift in the
growing acceptance of acts against free speech and honest reporting by the
media, and acts by the White House that seek to get around First Amendment
protections by surrendering control of the vital internet sphere to
international bodies that have no commitment to the concept of an open press.
Originally published on New York Analysis of Policy and
Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment