first amendment; censorship; artistic expression; Grand

Tonight have a drink and give a Tweet to the man who spent four years in an Egyptian jail, and remember that he is not the first, nor the last, blogger or writer to be silenced. Be thankful that we live in a nation where “highlighting inappropriate aspects” about your country won’t get us thrown in prison (it might actually get you a TV show).

After more than four years in an Egyptian prison, Kareem Amer was released, having finished out his sentence. Kareem was jailed as a result of articles he’d published on the Internet that were secular in nature and critical of the Egyptian government. He was officially charged with “spreading data and malicious rumors that disrupt public security,” “defaming the president of Egypt,” “incitement to overthrow the regime,” “incitement to hate Islam, and breach of public peace.” And finally, he was accused of “highlighting inappropriate aspects that harm the reputation of Egypt and spreading them to the public.”

The many people of various ideologies who threw their support behind Kareem will be celebrating his release tonight, including CEI. While you toast to the liberation of an innocent man, remember that there are many others who are currently being silenced and that freedom, even here in the United States, is something that requires constant and serious vigilance. There are more insidious ways to silence free speech than simply locking someone up in prison.

Intellectuals of the libertarian bent are often painted as being reactionary, inflammatory, and petulantly idealistic. In some cases, that might be true. Yet, what we seek to do, some with more finesse than others, is defend individual rights and freedoms from every threat, no matter how small it may appear.

Forcing artists, writers, or any individual to alter or eliminate his or her work, whether it is a video game, TV show, movie, play, or blog, is also a threat to free expression. It may not seem like much at first — and Americans would not stand for a blogger being thrown in jail simply for saying something the government didn’t like — however, they have stood by while state, local, and federal government officials, wielding their pens like knives, cut into our freedoms with a thousand tiny pen strokes. After enough of those cuts, the fabric that maintains our liberty in this country and separates us from Egypt begins to fall apart.

They silenced Kareem because he said things they didn’t like. There are ways even in the “liberal West” in which one group can use the government to silence or limit the speech of another group or individual, simply because they don’t like what they hear (for example, the recent discussions about reviving the Fairness Doctrine.) That is why, while we celebrate one man’s freedom, we must remember that the fight is ongoing and that the best way we can defend liberty around the world is to defend our right to speak up here at home.

Image credit: MohammedMaree ???? ???? mar3e’s flickr photostream.

 

Apple's 1984  "Big Brother" commercial.

Apple's 1984 "Big Brother" ad

An article over at Ad Age brings up an angle on the whole auto industry bailout probably not considered much before.  The fact that a yet-to-be-appointed “car czar” will have control over a multibillion dollar advertising budget for the big three.  Under the guise of “oversight,” this would effectively “Create World’s Most Powerful Marketing Exec[utive].”  

The draft rescue plan for Detroit sent to the White House by Congress yesterday calls for the appointment of a “car czar” who will oversee the Big Three automakers’ expenses over $25 million — which, by extension, would include media buys. Based on Advertising Age’s estimates of spending by General Motors Corp., Chrysler and Ford Motor Co., that would give the as-yet-unnamed car czar control over some $7.3 billion in marketing spending in the U.S. alone.

The most disturbing thoughts about this (particularly to those concerned with liberty) are provoked here: 

The car czar would wield a budget more than double those of AT&T, Verizon, Unilever and Johnson & Johnson, which round out the nation’s top five marketing spenders, and give the car czar more clout with media and agencies than such famed names in marketing as Walmart Chief Marketing Officer Stephen Quinn and Anheuser-Busch VP-Marketing Dave Peacock.

…If the bailout goes through, agencies that work for the Big Three will essentially be toiling on a government account, with all the associated red tape and strictures that involves.

So there you have it.  We should all be concerned about this for many reasons.  As mentioned, the large ad budget that comes with a czar-controlled U.S. auto industry will allow a government bureaucrat to wield unbalanced and unchecked influence over not only who gets ad contracts, but what media outlets get ad money. The czar can simply refuse to give business to an advertising agency who works for a foreign competitor of the big three (or a “non-compliant” corporation), or refuse to pay money to show ads on outlets that they deem “unfriendly” to the administration or its mission.   This will be an unequivocal disaster.  We have already seen the lengths to which administrations (and pre-administrations) have gone to influence and/or silence media they do not like.  What kind of power plays do you think are possible when the administration’s appointee controls a major source of media outlets’ ad revenue? Whatever it ends up being, it won’t be pretty.