' Bong Hits 4 Jesus'

This story about a slogan is being defended on the bases of free speech. To me it is disrespectful and really disrespectful to religious organizations. Even though I think free speech should be exercise, like I said before it should not be demeaning or be exercised in an inappropriate manner. Negative free speech in my opinion should be restricted.

Read the whole story:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/19/scotus.bonghits.ap/index.html

Vote Different

The Internet: "Word of mouth on steroids?"

http://www.latimes.com/business/local/la-na-hillary21mar21,1,180701.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

The Los Angeles Times reports today, that people who post videos of any kind on Youtube are protected by their privacy rights to stay annoynomous. This report came about when a posting slamming Presidential candiadte Senator Hilary Clinton on the internet.

Micah Sifry, editor of TechPresident, who has corresponded by e-mail with the person taking credit for the Clinton spot, said he would like to know the producer's identity, but didn't believe such communication should be regulated.

Calling the Internet "word of mouth on steroids," Sifry said: "The striking fact today is the knowledge and skill to make a video like this has moved out of campaign headquarters. It is the beginning of something new in politics."

The Federal Election Commission last year issued regulations leaving Internet political communications all but unfettered.
None of it is traceable, at least not without a subpoena. YouTube assures its users their privacy will be protected."Free speech. That simple," said Andrew Rasiej, founder of Personal Democracy Forum of New York, which tracks the confluence of politics and the Internet. "Posting a video is no different than sitting in a coffee shop and voicing your opinion."

Yahoo! in Hong Kong not in trouble...

I thought this was interesting, something about Freedom of Speech that happened in Hong Kong this past week. It is even more interesting because China does not have the right to Freedom of Speech or the press check this story out about a Chinese journalist who is accused of leaking information about state secrets.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/14/asia/AS-GEN-Hong-Kong-Yahoo-Jailed-Reporter.php

Principal Says the word 'vagina' is Inappropriate

On Monday March 12, 2007 Students were suspended for saying the word vagina.

A Westchester, New York high school Principal said that when a group of students performed the play the "vagina monolougues" in front of an audience that may have had some young attendees, the word vagina should not have been used.

The Principal said he was not trying to restrict the students free speech but he said the word was just not appropriate for some of the audience and he said that the word should not have been said out of respect for the community and the performers young guest.

Check out the whole story-http://www.cbc.ca/arts/theatre/story/2007/03/10/vaginamonologues-ensler.html

I agree with the respect point of view but this Principal is a little wierd because how many young kids not in high school already know what the word vagina means?

Dreamgirls Gone too Far...

In more cheerful news about restricted Freedom of Speech it seems that some comments that singer Smokey Robinson stated during an interview with Access Hollywood, led to a public apology to Motown Records Executive Berry Gordy. Robinson felt that if the movie Dreamgirls was supposed to depict the legendary music mogul and the other people who have been represented by the company, than it was a terrible portrayal and very untrue.

The producers and directors of the film publicly apologized to Berry Gordy and Gordy accepted, stating that the film was a good film.

In a way you have to give Smokey Robinson some credit for setting the record straight, because when I watched the movie I was wondering was this movie really about Diana Ross and the Supremes. I still think the film has some truth to it. But what happened, definitely shows how careful even if you put something in writing or show something if someone is offended by it, the right to these things might just be taken away.

In this case I feel like The freedoms the producers and directors had for this film was appropriate and was just stripped away for nothing because someone thought that it was an actual portrayal of a real person, but for the record the film is fictional. Bottom line: Settle down Smokey!

The answer to Freedom of Speech being restricted

Hello fellow bloggers I thought this reading from the U.S. Department of State about what is democracy was interesting . Especially read about what they suggests is the answer to unrestricted Free Speech.

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/whatsdem/whatdm3.htm