In America, we have a specific clause in our Constitution that outlines the right for all Americans to have a freedom of speech. We've used this law in many ways, from allowing Neo-Nazis to have parades on small town streets, to giving us the right to criticize our government that be when we feel it is wrong.
This idea however, is not true for all countries. Canada for instance is facing its own landmark lawsuit right now concerning this very "freedom" (not outlined in their Constitution). In it, the BC Human Rights Commission is reporting a violation of rights on behalf of Muslims in Canada after a popular Canadian magazine published an article that these groups feel could possibly insight hatred toward them. I find this fascinating. Hate speech is a very serious issue in Canada and not to be taken lightly, but to many Americans, this whole debacle infringes on our right to free speech. To read a great article on this entire issue, I recommend the
NY Times piece which originally brought these differences to my attention.
However, what I find more interesting is the role that corporations are beginning to play in curbing free speech. If you've worked for an organization before, you've heard this, the prohibition of "external communication" besides from those in upper echelons. What does this mean? Essentially, legal action can be taken against you for discussing things that happen in your work day in a public setting. Translation: when your facebook status or blog cites an incident from work, you are violating the external communication stipulation.
I find this idea very dangerous. It's not that people should use blogs or the internet as a platform to merely rant about their work situations, but where is the line crossed when "external communication" becomes so that one is no longer able to discuss incidents in the workplace with anyone else besides those in the work place? Where is the freedom to discuss critically in the public sphere violations perceived or real within this setting? How long until the corporate world trumps the First Amendment and we're all left speechless?
Comments (5)
operation smile my ass - she is obnoxious and needs to go away immediately.
haha
you could always become a professional blogger...then it's your job to rant on your blog. we just have to outcontract the contracts
Well, Benjamin Franklin wrote (Check Liars for Jesuschapter 11 for reference) that we should have a law allowing battery when one is offended by free speech of newspapers. How about that for an American solution that solves nothing but at least makes for good entertainment.
Hey, I liked the article you forwarded to me on this. President Toope at UBC has been really outspoken recently about the value of having free speech and hot debate on Canadian campuses. Perhaps what is most significant about this is not that he holds it to be important, but that the news across the country picked up on his remarks as if this was a new idea.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080604.wtoope04/BNStory/specialComment/
you're right....
hopeThis
we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast...