General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Our Freedom of Expression Is Killing Us [View all]nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)if the riot was in oh Montana though, you could not use it... due to the fact that US laws lagg well behind social media.
But let's forget all the complications with international customary law and all that. Let's assume you had a riot, killing a group of people, after a person had an inflammatory film on social media in Billings Montana... sooner or later, a good aggressive DA, will have to go there, and settle this with PRECEDENT.
My preference is FEDERAL.
But, but, but... no buts, incitement to a riot is NOT protected speech.
And people who believe there are NO LIMITS whatsoever, go get a copy of the AP manual for journalists, a short read into the LAW that pertains to news gathering, and yes FREEDOM OF THE PRESS... will quickly disabuse you of that. No sorry, I am not free to libel or slander anybody in a paper.
As I have said it before, it is not absolute. But of course when people think that ASKING YOU TUBE to remove this, is a limit of speech, and that their BUSINESS DECISION NOT TO do it, well that is a problem.
Yup skinner can take away all my rights to post on this site and there is nothing LEGALLY I can do about it, nor is it a violation of my freedom of speech. Any court will laugh me out of there, since last time I checked this is a PRIVATE SITE. But we are to the point when people really do not know what freedom of speech is... they think they know, but from the evidence, not really.
Hey, at least only one person threw at me the very authoritative wikipedia, when presented with U.S Code, that was the point I went, I truly give up.
By the way these are real examples of suppression of speech.
When the U.S Postmaster General (A US AGENCY) refused to deliver an issue of the Woman Rebel in 1913, that is suppression of speech. You had a US GOVERNMENT agency refusing to carry speech they disagreed with
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5084/
The First and Second Red Scare could and were defended for violation of free speech. It was just... government agencies.
I do not expect people to know this any longer either.