As a moderate, I am delighted to report that the liberal Los Angeles Times (in a January 26, 2018, editorial with the heading that I have used in my thread title) has strongly come out in support of the First Amendment.
The newspaper says that we should continue to support the Supreme Court's current principle that offensive or distressing statements are protected if they also "comment on matters of public concern."
I will let you read the whole editorial yourself. When I first saw the heading, I said to myself: "I won't waste my time. Probably just another liberal newspaper calling for Internet censorship." Then a little voice told me to read it. Boy! Was I in for a pleasant surprise.
I will end by quoting the penultimate paragraph (the emphasis is mine):
People who want to restrict speech on the Internet "assume the internet poses a unique threat to privacy and personal dignity, one that justifies scaling back protections for free speech. It does not. The tests for speech should be the same regardless of where or how it's conveyed. Otherwise, each step forward in technology could ratchet back the freedom to speak in this country, chilling disruptive speakers and technological innovators alike."
*****
Just google these words (use the quotation marks): "Free speech and internet trolls" Press Reader
(I am unable to link. Sorry.)
The newspaper says that we should continue to support the Supreme Court's current principle that offensive or distressing statements are protected if they also "comment on matters of public concern."
I will let you read the whole editorial yourself. When I first saw the heading, I said to myself: "I won't waste my time. Probably just another liberal newspaper calling for Internet censorship." Then a little voice told me to read it. Boy! Was I in for a pleasant surprise.
I will end by quoting the penultimate paragraph (the emphasis is mine):
People who want to restrict speech on the Internet "assume the internet poses a unique threat to privacy and personal dignity, one that justifies scaling back protections for free speech. It does not. The tests for speech should be the same regardless of where or how it's conveyed. Otherwise, each step forward in technology could ratchet back the freedom to speak in this country, chilling disruptive speakers and technological innovators alike."
*****
Just google these words (use the quotation marks): "Free speech and internet trolls" Press Reader
(I am unable to link. Sorry.)