Internet Free Speech Standards Proposed

Story

Internet Free Speech Standards Proposed

Special Report - September 17, 2012
New media companies, such as Facebook, Google and Apple, should “err on the side of free speech” in developing rules for what can and cannot be posted on their Internet communications platforms, according to a proposal released last week by the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB). The NRB’s Free Speech Charter for the Internet was released at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on September 12. The charter is described as a “solution to the current and potential clash between free speech on the Internet, and the free market power of new media giants like Apple, Google and Facebook to block viewpoints with which they don’t agree.”

“The free speech liberty of citizens who use the Internet is nearing a crisis point,” says Craig Parshall, Senior Vice President & General Counsel at NRB, and Director of the John Milton Project for Religious Free Speech, in a press release. Parshall cites last year’s NRB report, True Tolerance in a New Media Age, which documented a growing number of incidents and policies involving the censorship of Christian viewpoints on social media platforms, such as “Apple’s infamous removal of the Manhattan Declaration and Exodus International apps from its iTunes App Store.”

The NRB charter begins by documenting “a dangerous trend: namely, an emerging pattern, practice and policy by some new media ‘gatekeepers’ providing Internet communications platforms, of viewpoint censorship levied against otherwise lawful content, much of it religious, and often Christian and conservative in nature.” It offers two recent incidents as examples:

“Google-owned YouTube removed a video of a Christian pastor expressing his support for traditional marriage and his opposition to same-sex “marriage” on the grounds that it was ‘hate speech;’
Facebook’s temporary 12-hour removal of Governor Mike Huckabee’s pro-Chick-fil-A page (which Facebook later restored).

The NRB charter asks “major web-based media technology companies to voluntarily adopt robust, free speech standards” that:

“[P]ermit all manner of content, information, and opinions on their web-based platforms, regardless of the viewpoint expressed, unless that content, information or opinion fits squarely within one of the ‘traditional,’ ‘well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem.’”
Despite their good intentions, the “policies and practices of new media companies… should not limit or prohibit expression because a viewpoint or opinion is deemed to constitute ‘hate speech’ or is considered to be ‘hateful’ or is thought to be unacceptable under any similar formulation, as these types of limitations have been rejected by the Supreme Court.”
“New media platforms can establish some rules of civility and decorum regarding the manner in which content is communicated–e.g., ‘no personal attacks or ad- hominem rebukes;’ however, those rules should not be used as a pretext for viewpoint censorship.”
“The quotation from a religious or other text or sacred book, or statements of religious belief should never constitute a violation of such rules of civility or decorum and serve as a pretext for censorship; such statements are protected under both the free exercise of religion and free speech principles imbedded in the First Amendment.”

The NRB charter emphasizes that “new media companies should only be able to restrict or prohibit content that, under a good faith, view-point neutral analysis, is determined to qualify under…traditional exceptions to the First Amendment,” specifically the following exceptions:

Obscenity
Broadcast indecency if accessible to minors
Fraud
Incitement to violence
Speech that is integral to criminal or unlawful conduct

“If the standards we propose here are voluntarily adopted at this critical time, we believe that a truly free marketplace of ideas will flourish on the Internet, and in turn, generations to come will be the beneficiaries of expressive liberty in our digital age,” Parshall said. “If not, however, then we foresee a tyranny over ideas developing over web-based platforms, and a whole class of citizens of faith and others being shut out of this new electronic town square.”

Related resources:
New Media Censors Christian Speech - September 23, 2011
Students Fight for Free Speech - May 19, 2011
Court Upholds Free Speech - April 11, 2011
Groups Fight For Religious Freedom - October 31, 2010
Freedom Of Religion Statement Issued - January 20, 2010