Trump Administration: Absurd Censorship
U.S. President Donald Trump has sued newspapers that have been critical of him for large amounts of money and has indicated that he is considering revoking broadcast licenses from television stations that do not align with his views. This is nothing less than censorship, a violation of the freedom of speech protected by that the U.S. Constitution.
Trump has filed suit against media outlets such as The New York Times, seeking damages of $15 billion while claiming that the outlet has damaged his reputation with “Fake News.”
Grievances unrelated to legal issues made up a large portion of the legal complaint; a federal judge dismissed the suit on the basis that a “[legal] complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective” and “not a megaphone for public relations.” Such highly financially punitive lawsuits surely cripple the media.
Trump also claimed rhetoric from the “radical left” was “directly responsible for” the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a political activist who was close with Trump.
Although many of Kirk's words and actions were seen as problematic during his lifetime, conservative diehards are using the event as a political tool, and many television commentators who point this out have been forced from their jobs, one after another.
Trump has alluded to revoking the broadcast licenses of television stations that criticize him. He said he thinks that such reports are “really illegal.” Among Trump's supporters, there has also been a spreading trend of searching for and going after posts on social media networks that are critical of Kirk and others.
Freedom of speech is a foundation of a democratic society, and targeting any expression of views is not acceptable. Criticism of Kirk's tenets, as well as of Kirk himself, must be protected.
From the start, Trump viewed media critical of him as hostile and “fake news” and has fanned the flames of antagonism and hatred.
Even if Kirk is a factor in this situation, it is not a good reason to use his death for censoring free speech; suppressing opinions critical of Kirk must not be allowed. Powerful people are using the unfortunate incident as a political tool; censoring personal criticism and such other acts is absurd.
Even in Japan, Sanae Takaichi — currently a candidate in the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election — during her tenure as the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications in former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's cabinet alluded to punishing broadcasters who repeatedly violated Japan's Broadcast Act by taking them off the air, a move criticized as detrimental to media.
The U.S. president's words and actions impact the world. Vigilance in safeguarding free speech against its further decline must be strengthened.
Trump has filed suit against media outlets such as The New York Times, seeking damages of $15 billion while claiming that the outlet has damaged his reputation with “Fake News.”
Grievances unrelated to legal issues made up a large portion of the legal complaint; a federal judge dismissed the suit on the basis that a “[legal] complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective” and “not a megaphone for public relations.” Such highly financially punitive lawsuits surely cripple the media.
Trump also claimed rhetoric from the “radical left” was “directly responsible for” the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a political activist who was close with Trump.
Although many of Kirk's words and actions were seen as problematic during his lifetime, conservative diehards are using the event as a political tool, and many television commentators who point this out have been forced from their jobs, one after another.
Trump has alluded to revoking the broadcast licenses of television stations that criticize him. He said he thinks that such reports are “really illegal.” Among Trump's supporters, there has also been a spreading trend of searching for and going after posts on social media networks that are critical of Kirk and others.
Freedom of speech is a foundation of a democratic society, and targeting any expression of views is not acceptable. Criticism of Kirk's tenets, as well as of Kirk himself, must be protected.
From the start, Trump viewed media critical of him as hostile and “fake news” and has fanned the flames of antagonism and hatred.
Even if Kirk is a factor in this situation, it is not a good reason to use his death for censoring free speech; suppressing opinions critical of Kirk must not be allowed. Powerful people are using the unfortunate incident as a political tool; censoring personal criticism and such other acts is absurd.
Even in Japan, Sanae Takaichi — currently a candidate in the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election — during her tenure as the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications in former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's cabinet alluded to punishing broadcasters who repeatedly violated Japan's Broadcast Act by taking them off the air, a move criticized as detrimental to media.
The U.S. president's words and actions impact the world. Vigilance in safeguarding free speech against its further decline must be strengthened.
Previous article![]( "Can Benefits from TikTok and Taiwan Be Evaluated the Same Way?")