What others say: Measures could crimp the free press

The voters of Haines recently amended that small Southeast Alaska town’s municipal charter to declare that the constitutional rights outlined in the document are guaranteed only to individual humans and not to artificial entities, such as corporations.

 

The idea is to express dissatisfaction with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in the Citizens United case, which allowed corporations, unions and other groups to spend money to elect specific candidates. That dissatisfaction is understandable, but critics need to think a little more deeply before pushing to nullify the free speech rights of all corporations.

That thinking, of course, focuses on the deep pockets of big corporations and their ability to influence elections after the court decision. The corporate spending is viewed as so foul and corrosive that it must be stopped. So, if our courts insist the Constitution protects this spending as a form of free speech, opponents assert, then the only solution is to void free speech guarantees for the corporations.

That logic forgets that there are many types of corporations. Voiding all their free speech rights would be far too drastic a step.

This strikes particularly close to home for media corporations. Should a newspaper’s right to comment on political matters, free of government oversight, be nullified simply because it is owned by a corporation? What about the rights of television networks, wire services, blogs, social network sites and other forms of media that often are owned by corporations? Should the government eliminate their fundamental right as well?

Justice John Roberts saw the problem with nullifying corporate speech rights when writing in the Citizens United decision: “(The) theory, if accepted, would empower the government to prohibit newspapers from running editorials or opinion pieces supporting or opposing candidates for office, so long as the newspapers were owned by corporations — as the major ones are,” he wrote.

Opponents of the Citizens United decision might not intend to take away the free speech rights of media corporations, but the nullification of those rights for all corporations would have that effect. It’s not clear to us what the solution is, but nullifying free speech rights is not it.

— Fairbanks Daily News-Miner,

Oct. 8

More

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 11:42

Voices of Alaska: A better future for the holidays

Alaskans are on the verge of seeing the oil-rich coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) opened to leasing for the first time... Read more

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 11:42

Editorial: Governor’s budget provides lots to chew on

Gov. Bill Walker released his administration’s budget proposal for the state’s fiscal year starting July 1, 2018, and there is certainly a lot for the... Read more

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 11:41

Op-ed: Trump’s accomplishments obscured by distractions

Side issues — some of them created by the president himself — have obscured the accomplishments of the Donald Trump administration during his first year... Read more

Sun, 12/17/2017 - 11:41

What others say: Murkowski, Young aiming to keep ANWR oil provisions

House and Senate Republican leaders are hoping Congress will vote on and approve a reconciled Senate tax bill before Dec. 22. In the meantime, the... Read more