Home | News | Hate Crimes Act Is Veiled Attack on Free Speech Over Airwaves & Internet

Hate Crimes Act Is Veiled Attack on Free Speech Over Airwaves & Internet

By
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font

 By Brad O’Leary

The proposed Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HR 1913), which would make it a “hate crime” to criticize “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,”  is a thinly veiled attack on free speech – both over  the airwaves and the Internet.

In 2007, shortly after the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Protection Act of 2007 (H.R. 1592) passed in the House of Representatives, congressmen John Dingle (D-MI) and Edward Markey (D-MA) sent a letter to the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunication and Information Administration calling for an NTIA study and report on “the role of telecommunications in the dissemination of speech that may encourage or advocate hate crimes.”

The congressmen complained that the 1993 NTIA Role of Telecommunications in Hate Crimes report was essentially outdated.  Dingle and Markey wrote:  “Technology has changed dramatically since the 1993 report, which was completed when online information services and the Internet were in their nascent stage of popular adoption. The Committee believes an updated report, to reflect changes in telecommunication technologies as well as their impact on mass media marketplace participants, would illuminate important issues for public discussion.”

This statement by Dingell and Markey not only reflects their disdain for free speech on the Internet, but their distaste of the popularity of conservative talk radio. The 1996 Telecommunications Act uncapped the number of stations a telecommunications company could own, allowing for the explosion of nationally-syndicated conservative talk radio programs to flood the airwaves by popular demand.

Their letter reflects this.

“The Committee does not wish to erode the First Amendment protections or to infringe upon the fundamental liberty of any citizen,” they write.

“Rather, we seek information about the current uses of telecommunications media, particularly uses by broadcast facilities licensed on behalf of the public by the Federal Communications Commission, and whether such uses convey messages of bigotry or hatred, creating a climate of fear and inciting individuals to commit hate crimes.” (Emphasis mine.)

In other words, Dingell and Markey don’t really want to trample on free speech, but for the sake of protecting citizens from so-called “hate crimes,” they find that they simply must.

Proponents of censorship have wasted no time in linking talk radio to hate crimes.  A little more than a week after President Obama’s inauguration, Georgetown Law’s Institute for Public Representation submitted a petition on behalf of the National Hispanic Media Corporation (NHMC) to the FCC requesting “that the Commission invite public comment on hate speech, inquire into the extent and nature of hate speech, examine the effects of hate speech, including the relationship between hate speech in the media and hate crimes, and explore options for counteracting or reducing the negative effects of such speech.”

The NHMC did not stop there. In the spirit of Dingell and Markey, the NHMC “officially requested that the Secretary of Commerce, or in the alternative, Congress, direct the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to update its now outdated report,” according to their release.  “It is hoped that the use of new scientific methodologies in updating the NTIA report will help determine whether there are, in fact, causal relationships between hate speech on radio/TV and violence against vulnerable groups.”

What “new scientific methodologies” are they speaking of?  To add fuel to their radio-burning fire, the NHMC conveniently released a “pilot study” funded by the Ford Foundation on Hate Speech on Commercial Talk Radio in February of this year.  This study, utilizing “five trained readers (undergraduate and graduate students)” analyzed transcripts from a mere three talk radio shows (The Lou Dobbs Show, The Savage Nation, and The John and Ken Show). From this “study,” the NHMC identified different types of “hate speech,” such as the use of metaphors that evoke “warfare, enemies, biblical characters, criminality, persecution, corruption, evil, animality, disease, and conspiracy.”

In other words, “hate speech” can be defined as anything the establishment left considers a threat to its prevailing wisdom. 

See Brad discuss this on Fox and Friends here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um5WTeTKZe4

 

Best Selling Author Brad O’Leary serves as President of ATI-News, Chairman of the Board of PM Direct and is the former President of the American Association of Political Consultants.

 

Brad is also the publisher of The O'Leary Report, http://www.olearyreport.com.  From 1993 to 1997, Brad hosted a talk show program on NBC Westwood One that boasted two million listeners a day. He was also a cover story and feature writer for USA Today Weekend Magazine with 100 million weekly readers. O’Leary is also the executive producer or producer of 11 television series and 27 television specials, including award-winning shows on President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II. O’Leary is the author of 11 books, including Presidential Follies, Are You a Conservative or a Liberal?, Triangle of Death and The Audacity of Deceit:

SHUT UP, AMERICA! The End Of Free Speech. www.EndOfFreeSpeech.com

 


Subscribe to comments feed Comments (0 posted)

total: | displaying:

Post your comment

  • Bold
  • Italic
  • Underline
  • Quote

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Captcha

Log in

  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

No tags for this article

Rate this article

0
Powered by Vivvo CMS v4.5.2