The Ridgewood Blog Brings a Free Market Laissez-faire Point of View to Local, New Jersey State and National Issues.
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, Tim Wu, the former Biden White House “antitrust expert” known for coining the term “net neutrality,” has sparked a heated debate with his recent op-ed in the New York Times. The piece, headlined in a way that underscores the apprehensions of the progressive left, addresses what Wu sees as the judiciary’s mismanagement of the First Amendment.
A New Jersey judge has overturned an order preventing a newspaper from reporting on a child services complaint involving a kindergartener who brought drugs to school twice.
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — A judge has overturned an order preventing a newspaper from reporting on a child services complaint involving a kindergarten student who brought drugs to school twice.
Judge Lawrence De Bello ruled Monday that he found no evidence to support the state’s argument that a reporter for the Trentonian newspaper illegally obtained the complaint from the boy’s mother.
Government lawyers sought the injunction against the newspaper, saying child welfare complaints must be kept confidential under state law. The state had alleged that Trentonian reporter Isaac Avilucea stole the complaint from the mother, but he said she knew he was reporting on the story and gave it to him. She had met with him at his office earlier in the day.
The newspaper and open-government advocates argued that the previous order was a clear violation of the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the government cannot prevent the press from publishing information except in extreme circumstances involving a clear and present danger.
file photo by Boyd Loving
Just shut up and listen, argues newspaper’s data editor
Paul Joseph Watson – APRIL 21, 2016
The Guardian’s Mona Chalabi says that correcting bad grammar is offensive and racist because white people are more likely to be concerned about good grammar.
According to the newspaper’s data editor, grammar rules were invented by wealthy white people and therefore non-whites should be free to ignore them without being criticized.
“The people pointing out the mistakes are more likely to be older, wealthier, whiter, or just plain academic than the people they’re treating with condescension,” states Chalabi.
“All to often, it’s a way to silence people and that’s particularly offensive when it’s someone who might already be struggling to speak up,” she adds.
Chalabi argues that rather than correcting bad grammar, people should just shut up and listen.
“We should spend more time listening to what others have to say and less focusing on the grammar what they say it with,” she asserts.
https://www.infowars.com/the-guardian-correcting-peoples-bad-grammar-is-racist/
The outcome comes after two weeks of testimony in a first-of-its-kind case where discussions of newsworthiness and decency dominated.
Weighing free speech against privacy, a Florida jury has decided to uphold the sanctity of the latter by turning in a $115 million verdict against Gawker over its 2012 posting of a Hulk Hogan sex tape.
Hogan brought the case three years ago after Gawker, a 13-year-old digital news site founded by Nick Denton, an entrepreneur with an allergy to celebrity privacy, published a video the wrestler claimed was secretly recorded. The sex tape was sensational, showing Hogan — whose real name is Terry Bollea — engaged in sexual intercourse with Heather Cole, the then-wife of his best friend, Tampa-area radio shock jock Bubba the Love Sponge (real name: Todd Alan Clem). Gawker’s posting of the Hogan sex tape was accompanied by an essay from then–editor-in-chief A.J. Daulerio about celebrity sex and a vivid play-by-play of the encounter between Hogan and Cole.
In an era when digital networks have reshaped culture, raising tough questions about sharing and prying in society, the jury got to hear two weeks of testimony in a first-of-its-kind sex tape case where discussions of newsworthiness and decency dominated.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/hulk-hogan-gets-115m-verdict-876768
Posted by Jonathan Levin Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 11:05am
Twitter, an invaluable news aggregator when properly run and used, has seemingly taken aim at conservatives and those advocating conservative causes.
In early January, Twitter stripped Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos (@Nero on Twitter) of his “verification,” saying he violated the anti-harassment Terms of Service.
A verified account means the user has a little blue checkmark next to his or her user name. It is Twitter’s way of affirming to all other users that this is, in fact, the person he or she claims to be. It sounds like a small thing, but Twitter, like so much social media, is rife with accounts purporting to be or that just look like a real public figure.
That verification checkmark tells all the other users that a particular account is the real thing. Having a verified account can be a big draw and boost followers who are otherwise reluctant to be suckered or drawn in by fakes. Stripping verification takes that mark of legitimacy away. It is also a sort of peculiar way to punish violations of terms of service. Assuming @Nero actually violated the terms of service, is the account somehow no longer Yiannopoulos’s?
Of course not. More important, it is not at all obvious that @Nero violated the terms of service at all. Stipulate that he is a troll who relishes destroying the Left’s sacred cows and laughs at the resulting discomfiture. Stipulate even that it’s really not nice and consciously deprives people of their “safe spaces.” So what? Five minutes on twitter reveals death threats by and against every possible demographic. Terror accounts proliferate. Anti-Semitism is rampant.
Leaving these accounts untouched but de-verifying a public figure like @Nero for violating the Terms of Service in the course of his public persona is nonsensical. Other Twitter methods for stifling anti-PC thought have come to light.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2016/02/is-twitter-silencing-conservatives/
Twitter says it wants to strike a balance between free speech and harassment. It didn’t.
Robby Soave|Feb. 9, 2016 3:25 pm
In order for users to feel confident expressing themselves “freely and safely,” Twitter is debuting a new advisory group dubbed the “Trust & Safety Council.” But a quick glance at its membership roster suggests the council is almost as Orwellian as it sounds—and overwhelmingly biased in favor of speech suppression.
If you thought Milo Yiannopoulos losing his blue checkmark was the opening salvo in the next great culture war (I tended to agree with Popehat’s Ken Whitethat the controversy was overblown), then this might be your virtual invasion of Poland.
The council includes more than 40 organizations that will be tasked with helping Twitter, “strike the right balance between fighting abuse and speaking truth to power.” But if the goal was really to find some middle ground between total free speech and safeguards against harassment, one might have expect Twitter to solicit some diversity of opinion. In fact, despite the press release’s claim that the council includes a “diversity of voices,” virtually none of the council members are properly classified as free speech organizations. (Full list here https://blog.twitter.com/2016/announcing-the-twitter-trust-safety-council ).
Some of the groups—such as Hollaback! and the Dangerous Speech Project—don’t think harassment should be criminalized outright. But the vast majority are certainly more concerned about allowing too much speech rather than too little. Notable members include Feminist Frequency—the blog and Youtube channel of anti-Gamer Gate activist Anita Sarkeesian—the Anti-Defamation League, and a host of suicide-and-domestic-violence prevention groups.
https://reason.com/blog/2016/02/09/new-trust-and-safety-council-is-twitter
British universities have become too politically correct and are stifling free speech by banning anything that causes the least offence to anyone, academics argue
By Javier Espinoza, Education Editor; and Gordon Rayner
10:56PM GMT 18 Dec 2015
British universities have become too politically correct and are stifling free speech by banning anything that causes the least offence to anyone, a group of leading academics warns on Saturday.
A whole generation of students is being denied the “intellectual challenge of debating conflicting views” because self-censorship is turning campuses into over-sanitised “safe spaces”, they say.
Their intervention comes as an Oxford college considers removing a historic statue of Cecil Rhodes, one of its alumni and benefactors, because he is regarded as the founding father of apartheid in South Africa.
Jessica Remo | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
ELIZABETH — A recent Kean graduate has been charged with being responsible for a series of tweets threatening black students at the school two weeks ago, acting Union County Prosecutor Grace H. Park announced Tuesday.
Kayla-Simone McKelvey, 24, of Union – a black alum who graduated in May – was charged by summons with third-degree creating a false public alarm.
Students react after Kean Twitter threatKean students react and sound-off after an anonymous Twitter user sent messages threatening to shoot black students at the university. (Video by Adam Clark & Amanda Marzullo | NJ Advance Media for Nj.com)
Park said an investigation by the Union County Prosecutor’s Office’s Special Prosecutions Unit and Kean University police found that McKelvey, a self-proclaimed activist, participated in a student rally to raise awareness of racism on college campuses on Nov. 17, but left midway through and walked to a computer station in a university library.
Once there, McKelvey allegedly created an anonymous Twitter account – @keanuagainstblk – and began posting threats of violence against black Kean students.
https://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/2015/12/arrest_made_in_kean_twitter_threat.html
We couldn’t agree with this more!
A letter from our Wesleyan Church College President, in Bartlesville Oklahoma.
In the face of college students far and wide complaining about emotional “triggers” they see and hear, annexing “safe spaces” where opposing views can’t hurt their feelings and even threatening free speech, Everett Piper is seemingly fed up with it all.
Lisa Brownlee
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
TWEET THIS
the European Commission is preparing a frontal attack on the hyperlink
each web link would become a legal landmine
Another storm appears to be brewing in Europe that will impact the ability of many U.S. businesses to freely operate there. According to a leaked draft European Commission Communication, “the Commission will examine whether action is needed on the definition of the rights of ‘communication to the public’ and of ‘making available’,”–direct references to EU case law governing hyperlinks. According to European Parliament member Julia Reda, this means that “ the European Commission is preparing a frontal attack on the hyperlink , the basic building block of the Internet as we know it.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisabrownlee/2015/11/09/hyperlinks-may-be-under-attack-save-the-link/
An instructive example out of Kenya (and a few from our own backyard).
Elizabeth Nolan Brown|Oct. 20, 2015 8:00 am
One of the most baffling things about the newfangled “liberal” push for laws against so-called hate speech is their inability to imagine these bans backfiring. In their zeal to punish those who spread sexist, racist, transphobic, or otherwise out-of-fashion speech, they seem to forget that history has a bad track record of using censorship to suppress religious, social, sexual, and political minorities. And that’s exactly what’s been happening in Kenya, according to Nairobi-based newspaper The Star.
“There is growing evidence that the government is using prosecution for hate speech as a tool to silence its opposition critics,” writes John Onyando. “The norm is incendiary speech by pro-government politicians and online activists going unchecked while law enforcement agencies enthusiastically pounce on the mildest expressions by critics.”
The agency tasked with prosecuting hate speech in Kenya is called the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC); it was formed in 2008 to address ethnic conflicts in the nation. Onyando asserts that NCIC has ignored the bulk of complaints it has received and acts “more like an arm of the ruling coalition” than an independent agency, honing in only on those who speak out against the Jubilee Alliance, a coalition established in 2013 to support the candidacy of current President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto.
https://reason.com/blog/2015/10/20/how-hate-speech-laws-work-in-practice
file photo by Boyd Loving
Readers also Voice Concern on the Mayors Overly Cozy Relationship Stephen Borg, Publisher and President, North Jersey Media Group
Stephen Borg, Publisher and President, North Jersey Media Group. Chris Harris reporter for the Record De facto Press Secretary for our Mayor and of course our Mayor former Press Secretary to Gov. Mc Grievy. What do you think folks. Do you think your get the full story from North Jersey Media or is it slanted towards our Mayor and his deeds.
Is there a liberal slant to The Record’s news coverage? A number of readers who participated in recent telephone interviews with our market research team said they think there is.
The focus of interviews conducted over 10 days in March centered on what “jobs” readers want fulfilled by The Record. “Tell me the truth” stood out as a key job, but several readers added that they want the truth objectively – not from a reporter’s personal angle. That led to expanded conversations.
“A good portion of these people feel The Record is politically liberal,” said Joe Ferrara, market research manager. “Some of that may mirror a broader perception about media generally having a political agenda. But some people made the distinction between The Record’s editorial pages and news content, saying ‘Your opinion pages are sneaking over into your news articles’.”
Readers feel the Mission of the “Civility Forums” is nothing more than Censorship and Control political speech of Village residents.
I have not been able to attend the the so-called Civility Forums initiated by Paul Aronsohn of Ridgewood. I am sure that most of us would like to have the volume lowered in public discourse. The irony is that much of the high volume public discourse is perpetrated by politicians, pundits, and the print and electronic news media. I agree with the blogger that it is elitist that elected officials, a lobbyist, and a newspaper publisher would use their position and power to imply that anonymous bloggers are in someway destructive to the democratic process. I should not have to remind the participants that history is riddled with people in power who have sought to control and re-write the public narrative to their satisfaction. Mr. Tedesco and Paul Aronsohn should read Robert’s Rules of Order to maintain orderly public meetings. Public opinion, free speech, and dissent are the domaine of all the people including those who choose to remain anonymous.
“Ed Koch once said ,”If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist.”
But not according to Stephen Borg, Publisher and President, North Jersey Media Group, who insisted that the whole problem is that since people have found their voice through social media they have come to so many different opinions civil discourse has fallen .Things were so much better when North Jersey Media had a monopoly on public discussion and could always dictate terms . Borg implied that elites like himself we the only ones qualified to make those decisions. Borg pointed out how this blog and its anonymous posters are the greatest enemy to not only American Democracy but to the dominance of North Jersey Media Group. While I was rather flattered that the Publisher and President, North Jersey Media Group thought this blog shook the very foundations of civil discourse and was viewed as the barbarians at the gate , I would suggest the far larger problem might be the totally bias, and slip shot reporting of his Media Empire. Borg set the tone for the evening which came down silencing critics and reasserting the elitist “we know better than you ” , so time to be quite .https://theridgewoodblog.net/civility-forum-moves-forward-to-squelch-public-dissent/ “
Yes, it does sound as if some Gruber-like sentiments about the general public were expressed at the most recent event of Mr. Aronsohn’s series of discussions designed to lay the groundwork for the Obama administration’s plans for naked and direct government censorship of the political speech of individual citizens.
The general public, as a whole, has and regularly displays, far more integrity than do, as a whole, the self-appointed elites in this country. That’s why the following sentiment has always rung so true:
“I would sooner be governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than by the two thousand members of the faculty of Harvard.”― William F. Buckley Jr., Happy Days Were Here Again: Reflections of a Libertarian Journalist
Hillary Clinton, pining for Aronsohn-style “civil discourse”…as if! Sounds suspiciously like Borg with her complaint about non-standard media sources.
Hillary Clinton Blames ‘Different Media’ For Dividing Country by Charlie Spiering/Breitbart , the Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton complained that “different media” are dividing the country, making it impossible for people to even have a conversation with each other.”
The Government’s War on Freedom of the Press
Press freedom has declined in recent years.
Ken Silva | February 21, 2015
The U.S. plummeted to a dismal 49th place on the Reporters Without Borders annual Press Freedom Index, marking the country’s second lowest ranking since the list was created in 2002 and its lowest since 2006. Other countries ranked in the 40s and 50s include Haiti, Mongolia, and Chile .
The index cited “judicial harassment” of New York Times reporter James Risen, the arbitrary arrest of at least 15 journalists during the Ferguson, Missouri clashes, and the fact that U.S. journalists are still not legally entitled to protect sources who reveal confidential information about their work.
The U.S.’s slip in press freedom rankings mirrors its seven-place drop in Freedom House’s Global Press Freedom Index from 2013-2014, though the country still ranks among the 14 percent of countries whose press is classified as “free” in the latter scale.
Reality may be even worse than the rankings suggest. Legal protections for the press have only eroded since the 2006 trough year when the Bush Administration threatened to prosecute Risen for publishing stories chronicling warrantless wiretapping of citizens’ phone calls.
https://reason.com/archives/2015/02/21/the-governments-war-on-freedom-of-the-pr
Democrats on FEC open to new regulation on donors, Internet
BY PAUL BEDARD | FEBRUARY 11, 2015 | 12:01 PM
Claiming that thousands of public comments condemning “dark money” in politics can’t be ignored, the Democrat-chaired Federal Election Commission on Wednesday appeared ready to open the door to new regulations on donors, bloggers and others who use the Internet to influence policy and campaigns.
During a broad FEC hearing to discuss a recent Supreme Court decision that eliminated some donor limits, proponents encouraged the agency to draw up new funding disclosure rules and require even third-party internet-based groups to reveal donors, a move that would extinguish a 2006 decision to keep the agency’s hands off the Internet.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/dems-on-fec-open-to-new-regs-on-donors-internet/article/2560099
