Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday March 02 2020, @12:36AM   Printer-friendly
from the or-social-media dept.

First Amendment doesn't apply on YouTube; judges reject PragerU lawsuit:

YouTube is a private forum and therefore not subject to free-speech requirements under the First Amendment, a US appeals court ruled today. "Despite YouTube's ubiquity and its role as a public-facing platform, it remains a private forum, not a public forum subject to judicial scrutiny under the First Amendment," the court said.

PragerU, a conservative media company, sued YouTube in October 2017, claiming the Google-owned video site "unlawfully censor[ed] its educational videos and discriminat[ed] against its right to freedom of speech."

PragerU said YouTube reduced its viewership and revenue with "arbitrary and capricious use of 'restricted mode' and 'demonetization' viewer restriction filters." PragerU claimed it was targeted by YouTube because of its "political identity and viewpoint as a non-profit that espouses conservative views on current and historical events."

But a US District Court judge dismissed PragerU's lawsuit against Google and YouTube, and a three-judge panel at the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that dismissal in a unanimous ruling today.

"PragerU's claim that YouTube censored PragerU's speech faces a formidable threshold hurdle: YouTube is a private entity. The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government—not a private party—from abridging speech," judges wrote.

PragerU claimed that Google's "regulation and filtering of video content on YouTube is 'State action' subject to scrutiny under the First Amendment." While Google is obviously not a government agency, PragerU pointed to a previous appeals-court ruling to support its claim that "[t]he regulation of speech by a private party in a designated public forum is 'quintessentially an exclusive and traditional public function' sufficient to establish that a private party is a 'State actor' under the First Amendment." PragerU claims YouTube is a "public forum" because YouTube invites the public to use the site to engage in freedom of expression and because YouTube representatives called the site a "public forum" for free speech in testimony before Congress.

Appeals court judges were not convinced. They pointed to a Supreme Court case from last year in which plaintiffs unsuccessfully "tested a theory that resembled PragerU's approach, claiming that a private entity becomes a state actor through its 'operation' of the private property as 'a public forum for speech.'" The case involved public access channels on a cable TV system.

The Supreme Court in that case found that "merely hosting speech by others is not a traditional, exclusive public function and does not alone transform private entities into state actors subject to First Amendment constraints."

"If the rule were otherwise, all private property owners and private lessees who open their property for speech would be subject to First Amendment constraints and would lose the ability to exercise what they deem to be appropriate editorial discretion within that open forum," the Supreme Court decision last year continued.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 02 2020, @04:21AM (9 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 02 2020, @04:21AM (#965292) Journal

    Bullshit.

    Just like the day of the Big Three, there are a very limited number of forum or media on which to get a point of view out to the world. Those major forums are biased, and they are squelching all messages that they don't like. It is no different than the '50's and '60's when the Big Three Broadcasters could have chosen sides, and blocked the opposition from getting any message out.

    Imagine where me might be today, if those Big Three had decided to not cover Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. - at all. His only means of addressing the people of America would have been a couple of newspapers, and word of mouth. That is exactly where we are today - a handful of tech companies can turn the squelch up or down, depending on how much they like your message.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday March 02 2020, @04:35AM

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday March 02 2020, @04:35AM (#965303) Journal

    Nope, it's not like the big three at all. Here you have a transmitter that can reach anybody who wants to see. You didn't have anything like that before, not even close. So please, save it...

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @04:50AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @04:50AM (#965309)

    The difference is that ABC, NBC, and CBS, and the other broadcast media at the time were the only choices by law. You literally cannot create a new broadcast television channel without a government license and taking the opportunity away from someone else. Anyone can set up an alternative to YouTube, Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, etc. that everyone else is free to go to instead, unlike with the broadcast media. This isn't the days where there were only 4 or 11 slots available for an entire geographical region to use.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @07:50AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @07:50AM (#965391)

      Since certain parties developed "deplatforming", you cannot honestly argue that there ARE "other choices". There aren't, until and unless said parties will be held responsible for their bullying and harrassment like common criminals they are.

      • (Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @08:49AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @08:49AM (#965403)

        You just wrote that on one. Literally.

      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @02:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @02:47PM (#965494)

        So Nebula is just vaporware then?
        https://help.curiositystream.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034158291-CuriosityStream-Nebula-FAQ [curiositystream.com]

        Seems that people that have gotten fed up with YouTube can and have created alternatives.

        It does require effort, however.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @05:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 02 2020, @05:49AM (#965348)

    The flip side of the fair and balanced meme is Edward R Murrow giving equal air time to the smoking industry and their smoking is safe propaganda of the 1950's.
    At that time it was already well known smoking is not doing anything good for your health.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1955/06/01/archives/tv-cigarettes-and-cancer-murrow-gives-first-of-twopart-report-on.html [nytimes.com]
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6287298_The_Cigarette_Controversy [researchgate.net]

    This is an industry that kills about 450,000 people a year in the USA alone. It's not unlike the global warming deniers getting equal time on fox news these days.
    Not all sides are always presenting factual information.

    It's really unfortunate that Youtube has no real competition. Just because anyone can start a competitor doesn't mean it's not a monopoly.

  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday March 02 2020, @05:55AM (1 child)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday March 02 2020, @05:55AM (#965350) Journal

    However, sir, there is possible precedence in your favor, all of ours actually.

    See the AC's comments to my first post above on Marsh vs Alabama.

    We may just have a winner.

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 02 2020, @06:24AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 02 2020, @06:24AM (#965364) Journal

      From SCOTUS, no less.

      And, I see little if any difference between a digital forum, and a physical forum, or a broadcast forum.

  • (Score: 1) by DimestoreProstitute on Monday March 02 2020, @06:54PM

    by DimestoreProstitute (9480) on Monday March 02 2020, @06:54PM (#965608)

    YouTube doesn't owe you some inherent right to post your videos or make you money.