Censorship Idiocy Alert

The Left is up in arms as apparently ATT blocked a few lines from a Pearl Jam broadcast that were anti-Bush - not that I'm thrilled ATT apparently felt the need to do that:

A bit of heavy-handed censorship of a Pearl Jam concert by AT&T this weekend led the band to fire off an open letter to fans—a letter in which Pearl Jam railed against media and ISP consolidation and called for readers to support network neutrality.

Pearl Jam's performance of their big 90's hit "Daughter" morphed into the melody from Pink Floyd's "The Wall," and Eddie Vedder served up a pair of anti-Bush lyrics to the tune. "George Bush, leave this world alone," he sang. "George Bush, find yourself another home."

BUT: First, it isn't censorship, which is ultimately a term that should be confined to governmental interference into otherwise free speech. ATT is not so much a "controlling body" in this regard, it is a partner in delivering content. And it opted to not deliver that particular content. Well, why, one might ask? Were they signing on to a political event from the jump? I doubt it.

Isn't it at least in part because of groups like DailyKos, now embarked on a move to attack sponsors of Bill O'Reilly because that group doesn't like his speech? Such efforts certainly can't be helping as corporations look at potential backlashes from either side of any political debate.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. You either support the open exchange of ideas and stay away from boycotts and protests which fuel fear in a business America that often sponsors speech, directly or indirectly. Or you have to take your lumps when your side finds itself being limited by the very same types of fear you are instilling in sponsors and vendors aligned with events that might cross over someone's line as unacceptable.

Update: Of course, the above doesn't stop the idiots at Daily Kos from jumping right in. Dopes. You can find them via the Memeorandum link.

Comments

[Terry Gain]

Eddie Vedder is a moron. In fact he's no brighter than Boob In Stamford. Speaking of Boob, where is he now when even Democrats admit that the Surge is working.

From Powerline

When even as vocal a war critic as Sen. Durbin acknowledges that the U.S. military is “making real progress,” there can be little doubt that the surge is also producing progress here at home. Nonetheless, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid remain committed to seeking the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. The question, as the Examiner puts, becomes "Do they now really want to bring our boys home just when they are poised to win?"
----
Sorry Boob. You tried your best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. But you failed. Sorry Boob. No President Hillary.

[Tom]

The Left is up in arms as apparently ATT blocked a few lines from a Pearl Jam broadcast that were anti-Bush - not that I'm thrilled ATT apparently felt the need to do that:

You can stop right there Dan. A for profit company didn't want the listeners of the concert to hear an American express his opinions - so they edited it out. They also lied about it at first claiming it was a mistake. So true to the republican way of doing things: Destroy the 1st amendment rights of an American, Censor the content of what the listener hears, Lie about how the censorship occured, Lastly blame the left for expecting anything different. Hmmm, hows that war going for you guys anyway - pretty good from what I hear. The preznit says so...

[TheSpartan]

"Were they signing on to a political event from the jump? I doubt it."

Vedder wears his politics on his sleeves, they knew what they were signing up for they just wanted the benefit the association with Pearl Jam brings them without the headaches.

[docweasel]

Didn't we have a disagreement like this about your support of the OJ interview boycott? :p

[JLawson]

Maybe they were protecting Pearl Jam from the Dixie Chick Syndrome?

Seriously, folks need to be careful what they wish for - they might get it. A lot of folks in Iraq were looking for help to get the US out - and they didn't realize just what the cost of that 'help' would be.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children-part-2.htm

[Purple Avenger]

The 1st amendment has no guarantee of venue or specific audience. If Eddie wants to be heard unfettered, let him stand on an orange crate in Harvard Square like everyone else.

[Fred Beloit]

"So true to the republican way of doing things: Destroy the 1st amendment rights of an American, Censor the content of what the listener hears, Lie about how the censorship occured[sic], Lastly blame the left for expecting anything different. Hmmm, hows that war going for you guys anyway - pretty good from what I hear. The preznit says so..."

I guess this is Tom's well-considered opinion. But it is clearly wrong. It is even in Dan's blog above that this is not at all a case of "1st amendment rights of an American". Do the name Don Imus strike a familiar note, Tom? A business Imus worked for fired him for not censoring himself. Here a business let a broadcast go forward after censoring itself. This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. By the way, Tom, the war is going fairly well. Thanks for asking.

[TheSpartan]

If AT&T wants to stay away from controversy maybe they shouldn't align themselves with controversial artists. Stick with Justin Timberlake or something.

[IslamoLlama]

'I guess this is Tom's well-considered opinion. But it is clearly wrong. It is even in Dan's blog above that this is not at all a case of "1st amendment rights of an American".'

This might hold some water if AT&T simply chose not to promote the Pearl Jam concert. Certainly, a company is within its rights to hire and fire whomever it chooses. No one is suggesting that AT&T is censoring Kos because it failed to post DKos links on its website. No one is suggesting Dems are censoring FOX News because they don't show up at FOX Presidential debates.

However, AT&T decided to edit out a single snippet of text because they're a bunch of pussies. While not technically illegal, it does show a huge lack of cajones. This wouldn't be such a big deal, except that AT&T controls a vast expanse of media. If Pearl Jam can flip AT&T the bird, break its contract - no strings attached, and go air its show somewhere else, no 1st Amendment privileges have been violated. However, if AT&T can compel Pearl Jam to perform exclusively for them and has the power to edit what they say, then AT&T - acting with the blessings of the US Government as a monopoly on content - is violating Pearl Jam's freedom of speech. Same as if your next door neighbor came across your yard and cut your phone line, or duct taped your mouth shut. The lack of government action to preserve freedom of speech is no different than an offensive government action that suppresses freedom of speech, particularly when the agents doing the suppressing are affiliated with the party in power.

[nowingker]

It just goes to show how pervasive the climate of fear is today that anyone would even consider editing out lines of a song from a live webcast relating to George Bush, let alone go ahead and do it.

As usual, Dan and the wingnuts are wrong and show their absolute ignorance of the law. There is no parallel between asking for a boycott of content by advertisers and a corporate sponsor censoring a concert in advance.

ATT has apologized, has said this is not their policy, the lyrics should not have been censored and that it was a sub contractor who made the mistake.

So much for the winger argument that ATT was well within their rights to censor material they've agreed to run.

Idiots indeed

[JLawson]

Climate of fear?

Dude, you want a climate of fear, try saying ANYTHING not totally supportive of the Party in the USSR (admittedly these days it's much less so, though Putin wouldn't mind seeing that sort of crap reestablished) or go to North Korea and call Kim Jong-il a fat little bastard in public, or maybe go to Kos and try to put up a diary saying Bush is right and the WoT is a good idea. You'll be 'disappeared' real quick.

Maybe you'd rather try criticising FGM and women's subjugation under Islam very publically in Holland? That'll earn you a knife in the chest.... better to stay silent, right?

As it is, the only 'fear' anyone's got of critising Bush is that their sponsors or fans might find them distasteful - and they might lose a contract or fan support. No jail time, no midnight 'visitors' breaking down your door and dragging you off to a gulag, no discomfort will ensue... unless you count as discomfort the realization that maybe YOUR views weren't shared by your fans and sponsors.

Was AT&T's subcontractor trying to censor Pearl Jam? Who knows? It might have been done by a fan that didn't want to see them Dixie Chick their following.

But fear?

Dude, you really got the wrong country.

[nowingker]

I can say with complete confidence that Pearl Jam's following is anti-Bush, anti-corporate and as liberal as they come. The idea that Vedder was censored to protect him from the wrath of his fans is pure fantasy, as I'm sure you know.

Notwithstanding the igorance and laziness of the American public and the utter cowardice of the Democrats and Republicans outside of the White House, the Founding Fathers put in A LOT of checks and balances. It has taken Bush almost his entire two terms to effectively get all the legal pieces in place. We will never become exactly like Nazi Germany, there is too much of a tradition of free speech, it will be more subtle than that.

Like censoring a Pearl Jam concert because Eddie Vedder put in a lyric about Bush. Like ticketing people who put up anti war signs. Like a 'free speech' zone. Like arresting people for wearing political T-shirts. Like spying on Americans without showing cause to a third party. Like increasing the president's ability to declare martial law. Like calling for boycots of law firms who defend alleged terrorists. Like instituting legalized torture.

Dick Cheney is going to get his Iranian air raid, one way or the other. He will either fool the Israelis into doing it or he will find a way to get our own military to do it. And then, all bets are off.

[JLawson]

Ah. Okay.

Sure.

Just remember, the Dixie Chicks were pretty sure of their fans too.

As far as the rest of your rant goes - let me guess, no elections in '08, right? Evil Bush-Hitler/Rove/Cheney conspiracy boilerplate insertion. That tells me where you're coming from, and I'm not as nuts as you are, so I'll just pass on the rest. I'll not waste my time or yours arguing.

Thanks anyway, guy.

[TheSpartan]

"It might have been done by a fan that didn't want to see them Dixie Chick their following."

These aren't knuckle dragging country music fans we're talking about sport.

[JLawson]

TheSpartan:

Isn't it nice to have a subclass you can feel superior to?

Don't you wish everyone did?

Oh, wait. That was using 'Dial' soap...