A Wall Street Journal headline caught my eye: CHALLENGE TO
FALSE-SPEECH BAN IS REVIVED by Jess Bravin, 6-17-2014.
This caught my eye because I have been bitching about all
those political TV ads, especially from the Republicans, that lie outright or
take things so out of context that what the ad says is misleading (on purpose)
which to me, makes it like telling a lie.
I have always decried those methods that do influence many
people who just don’t know any better or think that since it is on TV it has to
be true.
The problem is that since our speech is protected by the
First Amendment, it appears that everyone has a license to lie their heads off.
I suppose one can sue for defamation of character if the intent to defame is
clear and can be proven (hard to do) but otherwise anything goes.
In Ohio, a law was passed banning false statements in
political ads. An anti-abortion organization challenged the law as
unconstitutional because one of the candidates that the organization accused of
sponsoring federally funded abortions challenged their claim as false.
The problem with this ban on falsehood is who gets to decide
what is false and what is not. In the Ohio case it is a panel of people that
are either Republican or Democrat and so is politically biased.
Other states have similar laws which may be in jeopardy depending
on the outcome of the challenge to the law. The Supreme Court basically said in
a unanimous vote that the anti-abortion party can proceed with the challenge as
to the constitutionality of the ban on false statements in political ads.
I know politics are dirty but outright lying should somehow
be brought under control with possible legal action if proven. The problem is
time and during a campaign, lies may have their desired effect on the outcome
of an election before those who propagated the lies can be legally stopped and
reprimanded.
Is there an answer?
No comments:
Post a Comment