Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Tell the Truth campaign logo
NewsBusters.org logo

February 12, 2012
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • RSS
Home » Blogs » Noel Sheppard's blog
  • Santorum Nomination ‘Completely Terrifies’ Economist Magazine’s Economics Editor
  • Evan Thomas and Chris Matthews: Jackie and Serial Adulterer JFK Had a 'Good' and 'Full' Marriage
  • Bozell Column: Another Fleeting Failure for NBC
  • Martin Bashir Implies GOP Too Racist to Have Marco Rubio as VP Candidate
  • Barbara Walters, Shameless Hypocrite: Hits Kennedy Mistress for Greed, Tells Her She Should Have Stayed Quiet
  • NY Times Writers Rush to Obama's Defense Like It's Their Job
  • Rachel Maddow Trumpets Inane 'Amish Bus Driver' Analogy for Obama Contraception Rule
  • MRC's Bozell Scolds Media's Reluctance to Cover HHS Birth Control Mandate

USA Today Accidentally Raises Hypocrisy of Liberal Free Speech Concepts

By Noel Sheppard | January 25, 2007 | 10:44

Change font size:  A |  A
Noel Sheppard's picture

As reported by NewsBusters here and here, there is a battle going on between liberal bloggers and a conservative radio station in San Francisco, California.

Though arriving at the party somewhat late, USA Today covered this story on Wednesday: “In a dispute between the ‘new media’ of the Internet and the ‘old media’ of broadcasting, liberal bloggers and conservative talk-radio hosts are accusing each other of trampling the First Amendment's guarantees of free speech.”

As this issue has surfaced coincident with liberal members of Congress proposing a media reform bill that would require, amongst other things, conservative talk radio stations to give equal time to opposing viewpoints during their broadcasts, doesn’t this raise quite a compelling hypocrisy inherent in what the left sees as free speech?

Put simply, how is limiting speech that you don’t agree with an exercise in expanding free speech? And, isn’t it most egregious for members of the new media – which clearly epitomizes the explosion of free speech around the world – to be using this fantastic invention to mute the voices of others?

Dan Riehl at his Riehl World View blog expounded on this concept:

This is a sad story for blogging as it runs contrary to a fundamental principle of blogging, that all individuals with incredibly different voices have a chance to be heard. To see such a truly democratic medium turned into a tool used in an attempt to shut down another voice, regardless of the medium, is an unfortunate thing for bloggers of every political stripe. Where does it end?

Possibly answering this question was an article from the liberal blog Raw Story published on Sunday:

Concerns about monopolies and fears of a possible "fascist" takeover of the US media have prompted a Democratic congressman to push to restore the Fairness Doctrine, RAW STORY has learned.

"Media reform is the most important issue confronting our democratic republic and the people of our country," Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) said at the Free Press National Media Reform Conference held in Memphis, Tennessee last weekend. "This is a critical moment in history that may determine the future of our country…maybe forever."

Hinchey told RAW STORY he plans to reintroduce the Media Ownership Reform Act (MORA) that would break up media monopolies and restore the Fairness Doctrine, which was eliminated by the Federal Communications Commission under the Reagan administration.

Who are the “fascists” that Hinchey et al are worried about? Take a guess:

“If Rush shoots his mouth off, he must give equal access to our side,” Hinchey said. “The American public will begin to get both sides or all sides of an issue. That is basic – fundamental to a democracy.”

Starting to get a clearer picture of what is really going on here?

This isn’t about free speech or the First Amendment. This is about silencing conservative voices to expand the amount of liberal opinions that are thrust upon the populace.

After all, one of the positions of the liberal bloggers concerning this Spocko issue was that ABC/Disney had no right to try and stop him from using audio clips from KSFO’s broadcasts, a position that I likely agree with. However, at the same time, these folks are trying to stop KSFO from making the statements present in those clips.

As such, these folks are fighting to allow bloggers to copy and air statements made by radio personalities that they themselves object so strongly to that they want said personalities to not be allowed to make. In effect, the bloggers are saying that they should be free to disseminate examples of what they feel is hate speech at the same time that they are trying to invoke a boycott of those committing the act.

Anybody see an extraordinary hypocrisy here?

In the end, folks that are using the ideals inherent in the First Amendment to curb or restrict speech really need to take a long look in the mirror, especially those in the new media who in the past decade have been given a tremendous gift that they currently don’t seem to appreciate.

As amazing as it might seem, our liberal brethren on the opposite side of the aisle don't understand that the more they look this horse in the mouth, the less freedom they might find they have in the future.

Share this

About the Author

Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Click here to follow Noel Sheppard on Twitter.
  • Media Business
  • USA Today
  • Noel Sheppard's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Donate to NewsBusters

Donate to NewsBusters Today!

This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead

User Shortcuts

Log in

  • My account
  • My buddylist
  • Log in to check messages
  • RSS feed
  • About NB
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Advertise on NB

 

 

 

  • Chuck Colson, cardinal, and rabbi oppose HHS mandate (WSJ)
  • Idea of the Democrats better than the reality (Wisc. State Journal)
  • The cynical and self-contradictory Gospel of Obama (Krauthammer)
  • Video: Protesters at CPAC admit they're being paid to protest (Daily Caller)
  • Does the drug 'ella' cause abortions? (Weekly Standard)
  • Does income inequality cause global warming? (Power Line)
  • Jay Carney gets snippy about Super PACs (Verum Serum)

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Try a Sweater Vest, Mitt
more cartoons
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Lachlan Markay
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Editorial Associate
Aubrey Vaughan

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2012 NewsBusters. Terms of Use.