Government Will Protect Us From Bad Speech? That's the Fakest News of All.
When government officials suppress critics, they do so only to help themselves.
When government officials suppress critics, they do so only to help themselves.
Critics of free speech use the same old arguments on new technologies.
Boing Boing has filed a motion to dismiss.
Sharing arrest and accident info on Facebook before cops can tell "official" media is not OK, say Laredo police-and nevermind that one of their own was the source.
As people worry about the net neutrality vote, public officials threaten our rights to free speech.
A related measure would open digital platforms to liability for past crimes committed by users.
An appeals court defends anonymous speech.
An investigation would've taken months, so Larksville Police decided to skip that part.
Elizabeth Nolan Brown argues in The New York Times that we can thank "feminism, but also free markets" for the ongoing purge of predatory men.
The government is regularly excluded when we use the word "violence."
Information-and, yes, misinformation-flows more easily and cheaply than ever, making access nearly universal. That's a good thing.
Do not ignore the self-interest of elected officials in controlling online political messaging.
Stop scapegoating Russia for America's divisions—and stop using Moscow as an excuse to call for restrictions on speech.
If our democracy cannot survive another 43 hours of political videos on YouTube, it is already doomed.
Russian panic is the excuse to try to control online speech.
Department of Homeland Security
Government's thirst to know more about you is unquenchable.
Court rejects Title IX complaint against University of Mary Washington over failure to ban the social-media platform from its campus
The day everybody got angry at the equivalent of an upgraded hotel mini-bar
What exactly does it mean to treat 'online' crimes the same as those committed in person?
"Words must do more than offend, cause indignation, or anger" to be illegal, says judge in bear-hunter harassment case.
Techno-panic finds a new target in Jean Twenge's "Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?"
What happens when you think privacy and speech are just tools of the enemy
A federal judge says personal pages used for public purposes implicate the First Amendment.
Our media consumption is increasingly personalized. But personalized does not mean isolated.
Studies showing an ostensible link between watching porn and committing rape are full of flaws.
Film favors martyrdom over careful analysis.
Using fear of terrorists to try to control what you can see online
The rules would apply only to videos-for now.
Washington, D.C. bar pulls drink named for TV star after "highly predictable outcry."
"We were not living in a digital dystopia in the years leading up to 2015."
This week in 'Privacy for me but not for thee.'
Facebook may be forced to evaluate whether content complies with laws; huge costs if they get it wrong.
A bill related to sex trafficking and Section 230 could have far-reaching consequences for web content, publishers, and apps.
A bridge between Old Media fake news and New Media fake news
Man faces possible prison time for triggering a journalist's seizure.
Coincidentally, a panel at SXSW today is about social media surveillance
New studies blame Instagram and gluttony as causes of food waste.
The idea that Twitter should be run by the federal government is silly. But perhaps the platform isn't best operated as a for-profit public corporation.
Perpetually raging about the world's injustices? You're probably overcompensating.
The company argued that it had a free-speech right to text users unauthorized birthday reminders.
Or does power need to be more dispersed?