The Houston Chronicle has removed....

[pziasd]

...the option of leaving comments/opinions at the end of each story. I guess free speech belongs to those who control the media. This was available as of yesterday and this morning...it was gone.

[kenw]

still works for me. Realize that not all stories have the option, and you must be logged in to see it.

[laanba]

I wish they WOULD take it away. People sometimes leave the most vile, vitriolic comments because they are essentially anonymous. I've had to train myself not to scroll down past the story, but I am not always successful.

[LoungeLizard]

Free speech is one thing. Uncontrolled, vile, offensive commentaries just add work to people.

Take this forum (and any other moderated one). While you may see it as "free speech" and such, it is a private enterprise that has many moderators spending many hours of their time to keep it moving smoothly.

Take a newspaper. They're not going to get employees to volunteer to monitor comments. It costs money.

It is the old "one bad apple" - and there is always at least one.

[kenw]

the chronicle does monitor the comments, i've seen more than a few removed. But they must have been way over the top based on what doesn't get pulled.

[brad]

Free speech means you have the right to speak. It does not mean you have the right to be heard. And it certainly does not mean you have the right to force someone else to spend money so you can be heard.

Now, when someone is telling you that you can't speak about a specific topic out in an open forum... then we'll talk about "free speech violations."

[Cope]

Originally Posted by brad

Now, when someone is telling you that you can't speak about a specific topic out in an open forum... then we'll talk about "free speech violations."

Unless you own the forum, you don't make the rules.

[Bill]

"I guess free speech belongs to those who control the media."

Yeah, always has been. The good news is you can control your own medium. Start a blog. A newsletter. Public access cable tv. Preach your topic on a street corner. Free lessons on this last possibility are often available in downtown Dallas.

Commentary on Dallas Morning News stories may appear in that newspaper at their discretion. It can also be found, outside of DMN control, in the Dallas Observer, D Magazine, dallasblog.com, Louie's Bar, and numerous other places. I'm sure the situation is the same in Houston.

[Howard Barlow]

Originally Posted by brad

Now, when someone is telling you that you can't speak about a specific topic out in an open forum... then we'll talk about "free speech violations."

Unless it is the government stopping you, there is no such thing as a "free speech violation." So called "open forums" are privately owned, and confer no rights to anyone other than the owner.

[Bill]

Or the forum owner could contract away some control to open forum participants, offering free speech of some kind as part of the deal.

[Howard Barlow]

Indeed, the owner can do anything he wants to do. The participants are at his mercy. However, if he says, "no politics," or, "no religion," then that's the rule. Those who transgress the rules can be summarily banned forever, 1st Amendment notwithstanding.

[Bill]

Right, the 1st Amendment is a restriction only on government, not privately owned organizations.

The participants and the forum owner are at each other's mercy. They have to reach an agreement on the terms of their engagement. As a practical matter, the forum owner sets the rules to which the customer agrees or not. If the terms are too odious, the customer can walk, thereby reducing business for the owner. If enough do not like the rules, the site may go bye-bye.

[brad]

Hehehe, let me clarify.. I meant "forum" in the context above as the 1782 definition... a place where people can peaceable assemble and others can speak out.. A physical place, not an online forum, which will always have an owner.

And "someone" in the context above, I meant as an authority figure representing a government of some kind.

Yes, freedom of speech does not protect you from any private entity... only from governmental entities... and newspapers are private entities.

[Bill]

It can be difficult to tell what constitutes a public forum as Brad meant it. For several years now shopping malls have been considered to be private as regards a right to speak. The owners can inadvertently turn it into a public forum by the nature of activities they allow. I recall that was a big topic among some of my firebrand friends a while back.

[Howard Barlow]

Originally Posted by brad

Hehehe, let me clarify.. I meant "forum" in the context above as the 1782 definition... a place where people can peaceable assemble and others can speak out.. A physical place, not an online forum, which will always have an owner.

And "someone" in the context above, I meant as an authority figure representing a government of some kind.

Yes, freedom of speech does not protect you from any private entity... only from governmental entities... and newspapers are private entities.

Oh, sure... N-O-W you tell me.