South Carolina Censors the Internet
The attorney general of South Carolina is attempting to censor the Internet by threatening to criminally prosecute Craigslist’s CEO unless he removes an entire section of the mostly free online classifieds site.
Although Craigslist can stand to make some changes regarding it’s policies, it is ridiculous to require them to remove all ads, both legitimate and illigitimate, or else be criminally prosecuted. This fits the definition of government censorship and is a classic case of politically motivated action from a conservative politician that threatens the basic freedoms many of us used to take for granted, prior to the reactionary politics of 9/11.
Do we believe in freedom or not?
Craigslist offers the ability to “flag” an ad based on site user complaints. The site is run by it’s users. If the attorney general objects to certain ads or thinks that some may be illegal he (or any other user of the site) is able to flag that specific ad.
Again, Craigslist has some changes to make in order to improve the site. However, would the AG be as quick to attack a traditional newspaper and request that the editorial section be removed? How about attempting to ban Playboy or Hustler from all state stores? These forms of content may contain content that some of us object to. But the United States Constitution and Supreme Court decisions associated with these specific mediums of speech have made it clear that free speech is here to stay.
Ironically, on the local South Carolina news station’s web site directly across from the AG’s press release is an erotic ad that would be censored in China and most of the Middle East.
I’m surprised that this news station website has so enthusiastically worded their title – going so far as to label this form of speech illegal based solely on the AG’s press release and not actual illegal actions by Craigslist. The freedoms of speech and press are closely intertwined and perhaps the station would be wise to remember that.
Let’s punish people who hurt other people. People who conspire to hurt others, even. But, let’s allow the citizens of this country, uniquely protected under the Bill of Rights, to continue to post legal, uncensored content. Yes, even offensive content.
Do we believe in freedom or not? Closing a website because a prostitute or other criminal used it – legally used it – and then committed an illegal act afterwards, is like closing a city because a crime was committed there. More ironically, it’s like firing an AG because he released a legal press release that includes offensive content attacking basic Constitutional rights.
