Hours After FOSTA Passes, Reddit Bans 'Escorts' and 'SugarDaddy' Communities
The great content crackdown has begun.
The great content crackdown has begun.
The vigorous debate over censorship shows how much Iran has changed in recent years.
"The classroom should never be a place where students feel that they are picked at, bullied, intimidated."
The measure will "make it harder, not easier, to root out and prosecute sex traffickers," said Sen. Ron Wyden, one of only two senators to vote no on FOSTA.
"Keep fighting for free speech, the great meme war," said Count Dankula.
There is, it turns out, more to the Stormy Daniels Affair than meets the eye.
The National Lawyers Guild refused to run a congratulatory advertisement submitted by an Israeli organization -- the organization is suing for discrimination in "public accommodations," and a New York court has let the case go forward.
There's no reason for alarm (yet) over a Facebook data "breach" that benefited a firm with ties to Trump's campaign.
"Everything we think about the political correctness debate is wrong," says Vox's Matt Yglesias. Not exactly.
Declining support for unfettered debate among politicians, academics, and the public doesn't bode well for the future of free speech.
"If voters are making [stupid] decisions," says Senior Editor Jacob Sullum, "that's not the Russians' fault."
Nobody has the right to force bakers to print speech they hate. The debate is over what counts as speech.
Rep. Michelle DuBois wants to remove a statehouse sign that reads "General Hooker Entrance" because it is an affront to "women's dignity."
Under Stalin, people could be killed for carrying joke books about him. They did it anyway.
ACLU steps in to fight zoning regulations that appear to let officials veto art based on content.
A web developer's First Amendment lawsuit says Sibley, Iowa, officials conspired to silence him.
"Would that be allowed by the administration?"
For months, Penn Law has resisted calls to punish Amy Wax for her public comments on race. Yesterday, they caved.
"We do not do this lightly, but they have repeatedly posted content designed to incite animosity and hatred against minority groups."
Rallying to call for restrictive laws is a whole lot easier than getting people to submit to them.
Princeton University's Keith Whittington explains why it is sometimes wise -- even necessary -- to expose students to potentially offensive material
Marking the 54th anniversary of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
A lawsuit leads to a suggestion that the president engage in a kinder, gentler ignoring.
That is what students at the University of Miami School of Law are reporting. [EARLIER UPDATE: The Dean tells me that things are more complicated than at first reported, and they're trying to see if things can be worked out; I hope to have more from the Dean in a few days.] [UPDATE 3/15: The University has agreed to pay the security fee.]
It's not just the Second Amendment in their crosshairs.
Rybka has spent the past several years as a protegee of pickup artist and seduction coach Alex Lesley-and picked up a plausible claim to 2016 election dirt along the way.
A very interesting piece by Stanford Prof. Michael McConnell on the Masterpiece Cakeshop case.
Can the government prevent drug firms from telling patients true facts about the medicine they prescribe?
Device makers would be required to block porn, prostitution hubs, and all content that fails "current standards of decency."
Cody Wilson on his war against power, the irreversible course of the 3D-printed gun, and America's Weimar moment
How can a company be expected to arbitrate "fake news" when it can't even tell ancient artifacts from porn?
Mandatory fees are an assault on free association.
The charges -- for "distribution of violent images" -- could lead to up to three years in prison and a $90,000 fine.
"We wanted to capitalize on the real groundswell of support behind free speech from all walks of life."
The bill makes "promoting prostitution" a federal crime, holds websites legally liable for user-posted content, and lets states retroactively prosecute offenders.
But such a content-based tax would violate the First Amendment.
"It seems to me your argument doesn't have much weight."
John Stossel picks the best and worst political performances of the year.
The National Constitution Center invited Alicia Hickok and me to debate Janus; Ms. Hickok wrote an amicus brief supporting Janus, and I signed an amicus brief supporting the AFSCME.
He'd also like everyone to trim their hair so it doesn't touch their ears.
Yes, kooky rumors can spread quickly online. In this case, the angry reactions to those rumors may be spreading even faster.
The "information warfare" described in Friday's indictment is not an existential threat to American democracy.
The government always compels taxpayers to fund the management side of management-labor bargaining in public workplaces. Given this, why should there be a First Amendment problem with compelled funding (through agency fees as well as taxes) of both sides?
A year after fiery political protests erupted on campus, we visited to find out when students think it's OK to respond to words with violence.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks