This week’s assignments, with discussion leaders noted…
Resolved: Freedom of speech is properly restricted by the FCC in order to insure that public broadcasting in the United States properly serves the public’s interest, convenience, and necessity.
Roberto J. con/discussion ldr -- post final essay Laura pro Chad P. con John pro Lauren M. con Jeffrey D. pro Garlyn M. con/ Keenan R. pro/discussion ldr -- post final essay Megan con Jason pro [without response, will drop]
For this week: Same grading criteria as previous weeks. Remember that you will post your initial essays on your individual blogs, with links to those blogs through the class Twitter account.
You should also be able to leave sharedcopy pages of your blog postings through the class Twitter account link — see examples from the previous week. You will now find a sharedcopy link in the list here.
While your position paper should refer directly to the FCC’s authority over over-the-air broadcasting in the USA, you may also wish to consider the now well-known Neda video as an example of potentially objectionable content broadcast globally. Should access to the Neda video be “properly restricted” in any way? (Equally relevant: liveleak.)
Note that the Neda video was initially censored by CNN — “out of respect for the family” — but that CNN’s position was subsequently reversed. The Neda video raises broad questions as to exactly what sort of authority, if any — moral, legal, or other — should restrict either news organizations or individuals from freely distributing whatever is available to them.
