Mediaboss Marketing

Malik Newson, junior in journalism and mass communication, asked a crowd of students gathered on Central Campus, "What does the First Amendment mean to you?"

Let me put that in a simpler way, do you know what the First Amendment means? If you know all five of them, raise your hand, Newson said.

Awkward silence fell upon the crowd as some hastily sat on haystack seats, while others stepped closer to the podium. It gradually dawned on each of them them that Feast On the First had begun.

Celebrated with soap boxes, sidewalk chalking and free food, the event was organized by the Greenlee School of Journalism and Mass Communication to honor the First Amendment.

The amendment recognizes the freedoms of speech, press, religion, petition and assembly. Newson provided facts that he thought were vital for people to think about.

This survey had been done since 1997, and it reported that 86 percent of those who responded have favor protecting speech, while 10 percent have favor limiting speech and protecting people from hearing things that offend them, Newson said.

In the religious freedom aspects, Newson believes there should be an improvement in the current numbers.

Fifty-nine percent believe they should be allowed to freely practice the religion they want," Newson said. "I believe there are lots of religions out there, so I dont know why people would want to limit that.

Before leaving the podium, Newson left his audience with a final message that he believes all Americans should hear.

We are united under this flag because we believe that all Americans are incongruent, not similar but congruent, Newson said. Not everyone knows whats going, but we need to know that we have the First Amendment for a reason.

Jen Coppoc, professor of American Indian Studies, approached the soap box podium with a guitar.

After a three-minute acoustic performance of Cheers to Someday, a song she wrote to commemorate the regrets of losing those who were once dear to us, Coppoc recounted her time at the Dakota Access pipeline protests.

I knew better as an outsider than to insert myself and so I wasnt going to participate in this direct action, and I didnt know what it was because I had just arrived to camp," Coppoc said. "I wasnt yet oriented, so I wasnt going to be a part of it.

Those who did participate went to the far side of camp where there was a little body of water [that] had burial sites on it. So the group of water protectors came together to build a bridge across this body of water to get to the island, to bring elders to do the ceremony.

However, above the protesters stood law enforcement officers with guns and rubber bullets, ready to fire upon them.

Its important to remember that this was happening on Thanksgiving Day, Coppoc said. They continued building, crossed the island and held the ceremony against the instructions and threats of law enforcements.

As a result of the protesters persistence, the camp was alerted by Lakota horse riders that law enforcement officers threatened a raid upon the camp.

And it was beginning to snow that day," Coppoc said. "And I ran because they said your life depended on this. I ran to the dome and I stood there with native and non-native women and children. But the rest of us, especially those who have knowledge of Native American history, stood there weeping because we were remembering Wounded Knee.

For Coppoc, the experience was eye-opening and taught her some valuable things about time and history.

The event further welcomed other speakers at the soap box, including Austen Giles, who was president of the group ISU 4 Trump.

Giles emphasized the significance of challenging ones mind in terms of freedom of speech.

My neighbor votes for someone else, and then Im pissed at him? I just dont get that, Giles said.

Giles said voting for a candidate should not interfere with how people treat one another.

He also recounted the times that people had thrown insults, cusses and other abusive language on social media.

Giles was supposed to host a Milo Yiannopoulosevent on campus that was later cancelled.

The university didnt want to cancel my event but they want to use mafia tactics, Giles said. Im just asking you to take the time to listen to my ideas and challenge yourself.

Michael Norton, university counsel, also took over the soap box.

He said the university respects the freedom of speech and encourages it for every individual.

He further addressed the Milo event cancellation, which was supposed to occur at a reasonable fee because the organization was not student based.

They chose to not to pay the fee," Norton said. "If they had paid the fee, the event will definitely had happened."

Read the original:
Greenlee School celebrates First Amendment Rights by utilizing them - Iowa State Daily

College is often talked about as grounds for pushing boundaries, being exposed to new perspectives and sticking up for what you believe in. Its a place where many start to identify that some of their beliefs dont align with their parents, friends or peers. Its a place where many identify where their political, religious or social views stand. Its a place where we are bombarded with diverse thinking and life experiences that help educate us.

But it is not the space of a public university itself that enables such opportunities, but rather the First Amendment and its freedoms accessible across the United States.

Today, Iowa State once again celebrates these freedoms through the annual First Amendment celebration. The event is meant to remind us that most of us use our freedoms of religion, press, speech, assembly and petition on a daily basis, but often take advantage of them. As a matter of proof that we often take advantage of them without knowing, statistics from a survey conducted by the Newseum Institute show that most Americans cant name all five freedoms.

In some ways it is sad that many Americans dont know the five freedoms because then we can never truly appreciate the value they provide us. The First Amendment is so ingrained in our society that protests, watchdog journalism and religious practices are just common practice. But if we dont take the time to think about what our nation would be like without them, we risk the chance of not knowing what there is to miss until its gone.

In essence, thats the very purpose of the First Amendment celebration: to recognize and celebrate our freedoms, while also recognizing that it is our duty as Americans to stand up and protect those freedoms.

Beyond this, the celebration on campus today is meant to remind us that the First Amendment is not in place simply so we can express ourselves, but so that others even those we strongly disagree with may do so as well. The celebration is just as much about the fact that we can express ourselves as it is about living in a society where we are constantly exposed to differing perspectives that help enrich our nation.

It is because of the First Amendment that we can stand up and fight in the face of injustice without fear of the government prohibiting us from doing so. It is also because of the First Amendment that we can stand up and say that we want to keep our traditional values without the government prohibiting us from doing so.

The First Amendment is arguably the most necessary part of an effective democracy and an American society that all citizens can participate in. It's necessary for all American communities, including the Iowa State and Ames communities, to function to their fullest potential.

But if we dont take the time to celebrate this, to think of our lives without these freedoms and to understand that each day we face opposition to holding these freedoms we could lose them without even knowing.

Go here to read the rest:
Editorial: Celebrate the First Amendment - Iowa State Daily

Supreme Court Hears Major First Amendment Case

This week the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a major religious liberty case, and a number of observers are hopeful the justices will rule in a way honoring the equality of religious citizens. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer features a Missouri church-run preschool that was discriminated against in a public playground re-surfacing program by the state of Missouri solely because it is a religious entity. Even though the preschool ranked as a highly qualified candidate for a grant under the programs rules, the state cited a provision in its constitution known as a Blaine Amendment that prohibited it from supplying aid to a religion.

Representing Trinity Lutheran Church before the Court was NRB member Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman told the justices that Missouri had conceded that his client being a church is what led to its denial of the playground re-surfacing benefit. This admitted discrimination against religion violates this court's free exercise principles, he said.

Judging by their questions, a number of the justices seemed uncomfortable with the position of the state. Justice Samuel Alito pressed on whether houses of worship should be left out of security and post-terrorism rebuilding programs. The states attorney, James Layton, replied, In the State of Missouri, it would not be permitted, provided that those were actually church buildings. Reacting to the states arguments, Justice Elena Kagan said, As long as you're using the money for playground services, you're not disentitled from that program because you're a religious institution doing religious things. And I would have thought that that's a pretty strong principle in our constitutional law.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor sounded perhaps most sympathetic to Missouris argument. Notably, she raised the idea that the preschool would not be denied a playground by not getting a state grant. The state simply didnt want to give money to the church. However, Cortman responded, There's government coercion when you say there's a public benefit, and the only way you could receive that public benefit is if you do not exercise your religion.

After the oral arguments, Annette Kiehne, director of the preschool, told reporters, Here is something you learn very quickly, working with children: A kid is a kid. Playground time, for a child, is about play. And play should be safe; safety shouldnt hinge on whether a child is religious or they are playing on a playground at a religious school or at a secular or public institution. She added, We arent asking for special treatment. We are just asking to not be treated worse than everyone else.

At a rally on the Supreme Court steps during the oral arguments, NRB President & CEO Dr. Jerry A. Johnson said, People of faith, religious people, are not second-class citizens. He demanded, Supreme Court, its your job to stop the bullies there is a bully on the playground the state of Missouri. Stop them. Make this right.

Notably, last April, NRB joined several other organizations in filing an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief pushing back on this example of government discrimination against people of faith. A final ruling on the case is likely to come in June.

By Aaron Mercer, Vice President of Government Relations

Published: April 21, 2017

Excerpt from:
Supreme Court Hears Major First Amendment Case - NRB Today

First Amendment Day, which will be celebrated at Iowa State on Thursday, is a time to appreciate some of the freedoms that Americans possess every day.

The First Amendment is one of the founding principles of the United States. It provides five essential freedoms: religion, speech, press, assembly and petition. College campuses provide settings where these freedoms, especially freedom of speech, can be exercised.

[Iowa State University] is a governmental agency, so we have to act within the bounds of both the federal and Iowa Constitution, meaning we arent allowed to put in place restrictions that would violate the First Amendment, said Michael Norton, Iowa States legal adviser who oversees the universitys counsel office.

Iowa States Facilities and Grounds Use policy states that ISU embraces the sharing of knowledge and ideas through public discourse and free speech.

And even though what someone says might be rude, disgusting or upsetting, it can still be said legally, according to the Constitution.

Hate speech is absolutely protected by the First Amendment, said Ken Paulson, dean of the College of Media and Entertainment at Middle Tennessee State University and president of the First Amendment Center.

Free speech is not entirely inclusive, however.

Over the years, the U.S. courts have found that obscene speech, speech that incites action to harm others, speech that promotes illegal drug use at school events and articles in student newspapers objecting the school administration are not allowed.

Iowa State has run into its own issues regarding free speech.

There have been two separate incidents at the university where posters were found on campus, each featuring messages that could be interpreted as hateful, yet that alone did not cause them to violate free-speech rules.

The content of the posters, while repugnant and personally reprehensible, are clearly protected speech, so if [the university] were to act on that speech based on content, that would violate First Amendment rights, Norton said.

The university does, however, have some right to place policies restricting the time, place and manner of any speech that happens on campus, Norton said.

[Iowa State] is allowed to restrict speech that interferes with the regular responsibilities of the university, not based on the content alone, such as speaking with a bullhorn outside of a classroom, Norton said. There are no restrictions on what you can say. It's only where, when and how you say it."

Natasha Oren, multicultural liaison officer for the Iowa State Police Department, said hate speech can still have real consequences.

In Iowa, you cannot threaten violence toward another legally, or you could be charged criminally, Orensaid.

Orenadded that harassment is illegal as well.

If what youre saying causes fear for someone else, and they believe you can carry out what youre saying, that isnt allowed, Oren said.

While what one says may be free speech, if what they're saying is considered assault, harassment or a discriminatory threat toward someone else, they could face criminal charges.

The Iowa State Police Department strives to help and protect people, Oren said, and even if something is said that is legally free speech, the department will try to make any party feel safe if need be.

Freedom of speech continues to play an integral role on campuses, and during the 2016 presidential election cycle, posters and messages could be spotted all across Iowa State.

Free speech needs to be protected above all else, Paulson said. Schools often need to act as an epicenter of free thought and expression. With the polarization of the country right now, it takes more and more effort to find the truth, because anyone can say what they believe."

One problem that surfaced during the last election cycle was fake news, which is an issue students must sift through to determine what is correct in the media.

Fake news is completely protected by free speech, but consumers of news have to think for themselves, Paulson said. I believe fake news is a product of intellectual laziness.

At Iowa State and other colleges, Paulson urges students to read the news and understand for themselves what is going on.

We cant have news portrayed through memes," Paulson said. "You have to put in effort and consume real news sources. It worries me when people say their main news source is social media."

Free speech extends to social media and internet platforms the same way it does anywhere else.

Iowa State doesnt constantly monitor social media use by students and staff, but it is still responsible for keeping an eye on any harm that may arise from what someone says online.

If free speech crosses lines that make it harassment or discrimination and social media is used as the tool for that harmful speech, [Iowa State] would investigate and respond if appropriate, Norton said.

Norton said police have a bigger role in monitoring any harmful speech that may happen online, and they report it to the proper offices for handling of the situation.

Oren said the main goal of the police, and certain policy restrictions by the university such as the time, place and manner rules, are ultimately in place to protect students.

There is a reason free speech is protected, and speaking out against anothers speech is the best way to disagree with it, but speech, both with criminal and civil repercussions, can affect the campus climate negatively, which isnt good for the community, Oren said.

The goal of the university, Norton said, is never to restrict speech, especially not to restrict speech based on the content of what is said.

We have to be able to run the school in a way that allows people to achieve their educational goals as well, Norton said.

View post:
Understanding the First Amendment and its role on campus | Politics ... - Iowa State Daily

Andrew Anglin Wiki Commons

ID: 10918809

The right to free speech protected under the U.S. Constitution gives Americans broad allowances to say extremely bigoted, mean-spirited and disgusting things online about other people. Perhaps nobody understood just how broad hose allowances were than leading neo-Nazi blogger Andrew Anglin who refers to Jewish people on his site as kikes, black people as niggers, gay people or those he perceives as gay as faggots, and has a whole section called The Jewish Problem.

Last last year, the self-proclaimed white supremacist decided to take his hateful rhetoric a step further. On December 16, Anglin authored a post on the Daily Stormer goading his readers to engage in a troll storm. The target: a Jewish realtor in Montana named Tanya Gersh, who Anglin was convinced was extorting Sherry Spencer, the mother of leading white supremacist Richard Spencer.

In the post, titled Jews Targeting Richard Spencers Mother for Harassment and Extortion TAKE ACTION!, Anglin writes, Lets Hit Em Up. Are yall ready for an old fashioned Troll Storm? Because AYO - its time, fam. The post contains a substantial amount of contact information for Gersh who he calls a whore her husband, and one of her sons, a 12-year-old who Anglin calls a scamming kike and creepy little faggot.

Anglin asks his readers to contact the Gershes and make your opinions known. He asks them to call them, email them, tweet them, or if youre in the area, maybe you should stop by and tell her in person what you think of her actions. He explicitly writes that no one should do anything violent, but adds, It is very important that we make them feel the kind of pressure they are making us feel.

And hit em up his followers did, which legal experts said could land Anglin in trouble in court.

In a lawsuit filed this week, Gersh alleges more than 700 instances of harassment directed at her and her family in connection with the troll storm orchestrated by Anglin. These include emails to her reading, Ratfaced criminals who play with fire tend to get thrown in the oven, and This is the goylash. You remember the last goylash, dont you Tanya? Merry Christmas, you Christ killing Jew, and one that simply reads Death to Tanya repeated in the message about 100 times.

In the months after Anglins call for harassment, Gersh also received phone calls at home. According to complaint, when she picked up one caller said, You should have died in the Holocaust with the rest of your people. Another call consisted only of the sounds of guns being fired.

And how did Daily Stormer readers respond to Anglins call to target her son? One person tweeted at him, psst kid, theres a free Xbox One inside the oven and included a photo of an oven.

On a call with reporters on Tuesday, Gersh said that the threats have caused her to gain weight, her hair to fall out, and said shes had to quit her job. At one point during the troll storm campaign, she said she came home to a dark house, her husband waiting inside with the bags packed. We really thought we had to run for safety in the middle of the night, Gersh said.

Since the first post on December 16, according to the lawsuit, he has published 30 posts calling for actions against Gersh. This was really terrorism, Gersh said Tuesday. We didnt get teased, we got terrorized.

According to court records, Anglin has not responded yet to the lawsuit. One of Gershs attorneys, Richard Cohen, the legal director at the Southern Poverty Law Center, told BuzzFeed News on Wednesday that they havent served Anglin with the suit yet. Anglin is a resident of Ohio, but reportedly could be residing in the Philippines or somewhere in Europe.

When he does respond, legal experts expect Anglin will raise some sort of First Amendment defense. However, in order to win in court, he will have to prove to a jury that the speech he engaged in was not intended to cause harm.

Speech that a reasonable person would construe as harm, thats not protected. In our system, you can hold discriminatory views, you cant act on them, David Schulz, a partner at Levine, Sullivan, Koch, Schulz, who has 35 years of First Amendment litigation experience.

If [Anglin] can say, Im just expressing an opinion and try to pull this into the sphere of free speech, it gets back to what a reasonable person would understand as protected speech Schulz says.

To prove that he was just expressing his opinion, Anglin might argue that he was merely republishing Sherry Spencers Medium blog post in which she accuses Gersh of attempting to extort her as part of a real estate deal to sell off a piece of property in Whitefish, Montana.

In November 2016, according to the lawsuit, Gersh reached out to Sherry Spencer about a planned protest outside a building that Spencer owns in downtown Whitefish. Gersh claims that she informed Sherry Spencer about the demonstrations, which were being planned in response to a viral video of her son, Richard, leading a Hail Trump! chant, and offered to help Spencer sell the building. According to the lawsuit, Gersh and Sherry Spencer began to discuss working together to sell the property. But then a month later, Sherry Spencer apparently had a change of heart, and published the Medium post accusing Gersh of extortion.

Montana Law School Professor Eduardo Capulong points out that if Anglin could prove that he was merely commenting on this purported feud between the Spencers and Gersh, he would be protected. But using it as basis to attack without verifying is reckless, he added.

Its one thing, if Anglin said: Oh, look at this blog post, and fuck them. Thats arguably protected by free speech, Capulong said. But then, you go beyond that and say: target this family.

Asked if Anglins calls for his readers not to be violent would protect him, Capulong said, I dont think so. Given everything that he was doing, and invoking Nazi ideology, images, I think any reasonable person would see that as a call to violence.

In this case, Anglin is accused of four charges invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, malice, and violation of Montanas Anti-Intimidation Act. All four carry the possibility of damages that Anglin may have to pay to Gersh if the case goes in her favor.

But in order to obtain punitive damages meant to punish Anglin in a substantial way that deters others Gersh will have to prove malice, which has a higher standard in court. However, Capulong believes that Gersh has a good case for malice. I was shocked to see those emails. Thats really malicious I think, he said.

Gershs attorneys have called for at least $75,000 in damages for each count the minimum amount necessary to file the case in federal court.

Cohen says that they have no idea how much money Anglin has which could factor into the judge or jurys final decision on how much he would have to pay out. However, if he loses and regardless of the award amount the law dictates two key things. One, Anglin will not be able to seek bankruptcy against a judgment against him. And two, a judge can enforce a judgment for 20 years essentially going after future money he makes off the Daily Stormer.

Well follow him wherever he goes, Cohen said.

Read the original post:
The First Amendment Gave This Neo-Nazi The Right To Be Vile But Then He Went Too Far - BuzzFeed News