Principled Perspectives: Freedom of Speech, Con and Pro in Letters

Thursday, August 16, 2018

Freedom of Speech, Con and Pro in Letters

Following are excerpts of two letters published in the New Jersey Star-Ledger in July, 2017. Neither was posted online.

The first is titled Trump criticism should be banned [7/5/17]. First reminding us of the media “attack” on Sarah Palin, David F. Lipton writes:

Well, I think the attack on Palin was “gentle” compared with the hate-filled, vicious, nasty, never-ending attack by the media and Democrats on Donald Trump as candidate and president.

It is time for new constitutional statutes, and new case law to unfold, to redefine “freedom of the press” and possibly “freedom of speech” if what we read and hear (nasty and untrue) is “legal” under our present statutes.

In Letter subverts our free speech and press [7/7/17], Paula Zevin responds:

May I suggest to reader David F. Lipton of Toms River to open his eyes and really take a look and listen around him (“Trump criticism should be banned,” letter to the editor, July 5)?

A free and strong press is vital to our democracy, and the Founding Fathers knew that in the 18th century. That is why The Star-Ledger publishes reader letters such as his.

[I]f he wants only “nice” things to be said about those in power, . . . he can move to Russia or North Korea, where you can say only “nice” things about the leaders.

I will take the give-and-take of our own press from both sides and defend the precious freedoms of speech and of the press as we have them today. They need no “repeal and replace.”