Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Saagar Enjeti: NYT SMEARS Private Blogger As Racist In Latest Bid To CONTROL All Speech Online" video.

  1. Why do they think they can lie, when all of this stuff is online and can be verified?
    7
  2. In fact, if having a blog under a pen name does not make you a "public figure," then NYTimes malice doesn't apply. BUT, if having a blog, real name or no, makes you a public figure -- is blatantly misquoting someone to smear them reckless enough to meet the malice standard? I think so!
    4
  3. And should be.
    2
  4. Don't worry, it's not.
    2
  5.  @gregjames9875  Wait a second, that isn't the case. In the workplace, your boss has a lot to say about your communications. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. You can say what you want, and your boss can say, "you're fired." Some of the same standards of discrimination based on hostile environment have migrated to the university, the more university is being run "like a business."
    1
  6.  @gregjames9875  But that is part of the legal theory. Certain classes of speech aren't protected. If they were, government could not make laws against workplace harassment, set up an EEOC to consider evidence, allow defamation suits and intentional infliction of emotional distress suits to proceed, etc. Every time they pass a law that creates a possible penalty for speech, especially speech that is not criminal (conspiracy to commit crime, incitement, etc.), they have to think about how it squares with the First Amendment.
    1
  7. What's the subtext? These people can't afford their mortgages, either?
    1