Russ’s Ravings: You Don’t Understand The First Amendment

Editor's note: The following is Patch Field Editor Russ Crespolini's, hopefully, weekly column. It is reflective of his opinion alone.

It has become a war cry over the past two weeks that the First Amendment rights of Americans have been taken away by social media platforms.

This is nothing new, people have been decrying the inability to say whatever they want wherever they want for a long time.

When I first started in this business, we would get letters to the editor that were full of racist remarks, vulgar language and libelous statements. And we simply wouldn’t publish them. Because it is part of our job to be discerning about public discourse.

As time went on, more and more communication came across electronically and comments and op-Ed submissions became the new standard.

However, there are terms and conditions that people must acknowledge and agree to in order to post things.

It’s true on Patch. It’s true on Facebook and its true on Twitter. If you violate them your information can be removed and if you continue to violate them you can face punitive action.

Because these are private companies.

Sure, we get a lot of complaints of “censorship” and the like, but as a private company we get to decide what is best just like we would have decided with letters to the editor.

But the wall of noise arising off of President Trump being banned from Twitter or Parler being removed from Apple is just that.

Noise.

There is no violation of the first amendment here, because the first amendment was designed to stop the government from stamping out critical speech. No one, not even the President of the United States, is guaranteed a platform from a private company.

He can still share his thoughts, write them down or maybe even, you know, use the press secretary he has dedicated to this function.

Freedom of Speech restrains the government. But it does not force anyone to give you an echo chamber. It also does not free you from the consequences of that speech. Here is what it actually says:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

No one is stopping you from starting your own internet hosting company and running it however you like. But you are not automatically entitled to say whatever you want and act however you want in someone else's venue.

Think of it this way: if you own a store and someone comes in and causes a ruckus and incited violence you could refuse them service. And call the police.

Many places require a certain dress code. You don't play by their rules, and you aren't allowed in. It is a pretty simple concept.

So please, before you continue with the complaints or send me another email about why a post comment was removed, do yourself a favor and learn the basics of civics.

And review the terms of service you agreed to.

Russ Crespolini is a Field Editor for Patch Media, adjunct professor and college newspaper advisor. His columns have won awards from the National Newspaper Association and the New Jersey Press Association.

He writes them in hopes of connecting with readers and engaging with them. And because it is cheaper than therapy. He can be reached at russ.crespolini@patch.com