|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Guy Page
An angry exchange House Republicans and the ACLU of Vermont over the extent of the First Amendment rights of a pro-Hamas Columbia University student last Thursday was just one of four recent State House discussions about bills involving free speech and freedom of the press.
Campaign advertising restrictions – The Senate on Thursday, March 20 passed a bill that would limit the use of ‘synthetic media’ in political campaigns. The bill now goes to the House.
S.23, The use of synthetic media in elections, would “require the disclosure of deceptive and fraudulent synthetic media within 90 days of an election.” The bill was introduced into the House today.
The bill states that “Synthetic media means an image, an audio recording, or a video recording of an individual’s appearance, speech, conduct, or environment that has been created or intentionally manipulated with the use of digital technology, including artificial intelligence, in a manner that creates a realistic but false representation of the candidate.”
It is a common campaign practice to run unflattering photos of opposing candidates with the use of digital editing. Where this editing process crosses the line to illegal misrepresentation would be subject to the discretion of an elected official who in many cases receives the nomination and support of a political party. The bill allows fines of up to $15,000, and gives the Attorney General or a state’s attorney the right to bring additional legal action against anyone charged with (in their opinion) creating false representation of a candidate.
Medical advertising crackdown – As reported yesterday by VDC, another Senate-approved bill empowers the Attorney General to take legal action against medical advertising he/she deems “untrue.”
Last month, the Senate passed S.28, which would ban “advertising about health care services in this State that is untrue.” The says “Advertising includes representations made directly to consumers; marketing practices; communication in any print medium, such as newspapers, magazines, mailers, or handouts; and any broadcast medium, such as television or radio, telephone marketing, or advertising over the internet, such as through websites and web ads advertisements, and social media.”
Bill would spend State of Vermont advertising dollars instate – Still another bill coming to the floor this week could have both positive and negative impacts on freedom of the press. H244 would require a report on where the State of Vermont spends its advertising money, and would require state government to spend 70% of its substantial advertising budget on in-state media (except job search and tourism advertising).
The bill has passed out of the Government Operations Committee by a 7-4 vote. It’s up for review by the full House this week.
Supporters like Rep. Ken Wells (R-Brownington), the former publisher of the Newport Daily Express, say keeping advertising money in-state will strengthen Vermont’s financially struggling news media. The original “ask” of instate spending was 80% was downgraded to 70% in committee.
Secretary of State said that when she was a legislator from Bradford, the availability of a strong local community newspaper was essential to keep her constituents informed, and to learn what they cared about. The Journal-Opinion is the longtime, independent community newspaper serving Bradford and surrounding towns.
At today’s press conference called to promote the bill, VDC, noting that ‘there are no government shekels without government shackles,’ asked if news media increasingly reliant on government revenue would be hesitant to cover government fairly? Press conference organizer Paul Heintz (formerly VTDigger editor, now a Boston Globe reporter) said in his experience reporters aren’t influenced by advertisers. WCAX station manager Chris Barton said the law would help provide the financial freedom news media needs to stay strong and independent.
ACLU-VT says Hamas sympathizer deportation violates First Amendment – Finally, the First Amendent rights of government-identified terrorist sympathizers and activists became the subject of a lively conversation between Falko Schilling of the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont and several Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee.
Schilling was there to testify in support of S.44, another Senate-approved bill that would limit the governor’s powers to work with federal immigration officials. As Schilling noted, it also would limit state government interaction with the feds and other states, offering protections for abortion rights and transgender services.
But it was the high-profile case of the soon-to-be-deported Columbia University student, Hamas sympathizer, and Syrian national that got the attention of Rep. Zachary Harvey (R-Castleton). Transcript via goldendomevt.com lightly edited for speaker attribution and readability.
[Harvey]: I assume that you’re talking about what’s happening at Columbia as an example of this.
[Schilling]: Yes. That’s a very good example.
[Harvey]: The individual who was detained was aiding and abetting and essentially was a terrorist sympathizer with Hamas. So I just think we wanna be kind of careful because I’m all for protecting Vermont citizens and making sure that we set up those guardrails, however, when that extends into potential terrorist sympathizers and terrorist organizations, I think we just wanna be really careful.”
“People that are gonna be watching this and hearing about this, could be taken as supporting a terrorist organization.”
Schilling bristled.
[Schilling]: “What we’re supporting is the right to exercise free speech…. I would disagree with the characterization he’s a terrorist sympathizer, and that’s also our concern here. Who gets labeled a terrorist and what does that do to erode their due process rights?”
What followed was a lengthy exchange in which Chair Martin LaLonde lost control of the meeting, Democrat Rep. Ian Goodnow dropped the F-bomb, and Rep. Kenny Goslant (R-Northfield) asked what the immigration restrictions were doing to protect the rights of him and his family. Dissatisfied with the answer, he stalked out of the room in anger, ignoring LaLonde’s request for him to return.
Goslant, a member of Judiciary since his first term in 2019, returned several minutes later. The exchange can be seen on YouTube.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Media, State House Spotlight
I’m all for our 1st A rights, but let’s say Vlad P. sends a few shills in to convert and energize a base with which he can raise cane with in this country, and they get caught implicating a plot to destabilize/overthrow our government, we should give them a podium, and microphone ?
It is amazing what some people can dream up when they do not have a real job. Has the Vermont state house got you confused yet????
ACLU I was a dues paying member when I was in Jr High School in Burlington….and for years thereafter. NEVERMORE……
Watch the video, folks! For background start at 31:44, drama begins shortly after. I cannot believe the manner in which Falco Schilling is addressing Representative Harvey. Where was Schilling two weeks ago on protection of First Amendment rights???
Amen, Renee! What a horrific double standard.
What does the attorney general know about medicine? This all cover and protection for big pharma, and big medical……
Speaking about synthetic…..ads….what about COVID??????????
They are working steadily in Vermont to stifle any dissenting information, politically and medically……tell me who wants transparency???Which party in Vermont? Any political leader???
Why do we have a D- in ethics, one of the lowest grades in the nation? Why wouldn’t we want the highest? An A+?????
Thieves and liars like the cover of darkness.
If you don’t have a marxist decoder ring in Vermont, you’d think everything was bucolic and free.
Hey Guy,
Don’t look now, they want to have state run media!!!! Who do you think will criticize the governor or leaders when they pay for “free press”? This is like big pharma paying 75% of the ads on cable tv……here it is from Vermont Digger, who’s a big sponsor of the bill, ALONG JOHN RODGERS.
How do they spin it? We need to support free press with ads. Vermont taxpayer money needs to go to ads and if you don’t pay the taxes we’ll garnish your wages.
This is like Bush granting church organizations federal money, what did they use Billions of dollars for? Transporting illegal immigrants under the cover of religious organizations. clip below from Digger. They may run out of money soon, NGO’s may be g“From my experience here in the building, we need more investigative reporters, not less.”
SEE BELOW FROM DIGGER, quote:
Perhaps a counterintuitive sentiment from Republican Lt. Gov. John Rodgers — a politician advocating for more scrutiny of public officials. But on Tuesday he was joined by Democratic Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas, a House rep from each major party and a smattering of local media leaders to call on the state to invest more of its advertising dollars in Vermont news organizations.
Marxist Decoder ring…..We’ll have more control of the media.
H.244 would require state government to spend at least 70% of its ad dollars with in-state media, allowing carve outs for certain campaigns targeting a broader audience. Local media jobs have dwindled in recent decades amid crumbling ad revenue, supporters noted, increasing the need for a new and steady stream of funding.
Marxist Decoder ring….this is like big pharma spending on cable news.
The legislation, which passed out of the House Government Operations Committee on a 7-4 vote, would also require the state to detail its ad spending annually. Currently, the bill’s supporters said, it’s unclear how much the state spends on advertising and where those dollars go.
Marxist Decoder ring: they have no idea what they are spending money on.
VTDigger is among the outlets backing H.244. We hope to earn a few more government bucks, but in the meantime, consider donating to our annual Spring drive to keep us reporting.
going broke from not receiving tax payer money would be my guess.
See Canadian media then see Rebel News if you want to see where this ends up.
See Canadian media then see Rebel News if you want to see where this ends up.
Spot on, Neil……..This is precisely the BBC model. NOT for any actual Americans….nor will we tolerate such a thing.
The good news? : Maybe theyll keep pushing this through….and we’ll get a real clear shot st the SOBs right out in the “public square”…
–DM
Idiocracy – Exhibit A: ACLU – which does stand for American Civil Liberties Union, if I’m not mistaken. Falko Schilling, Esq. is asserting the United States Constitution First Amendent rights apply to a Syrian national attending college on a VISA? Furthermore, asserts the first amendent rights of government-identified terrorist sympathizers and activists?
First, a foreign national’s allegience is to the country of his/her origin. You did see all the illegal aliens parading into the USA flying their national flags of origin, did you not? I don’t believe Mahmoud Khalil has sworn allegience to the USA or applied for legal citizenship. I don’t believe his actions portray a desire to assimilate, find employment pursuent to his graduate degree, or pursue the American dream (which you have to be asleep to believe anyway.)
Secondly, the ACLU is mute and no where to be found when J6 “protesters” were raided, rounded up and sent into Federal gulags, held as political hostages for years with no due process whatsoever.
Thirdly, the ACLU is mute and no where to be found when the FBI pursued American citizens speaking out at school board hearings, praying on sidewalks, or infilitrating Catholic churches to spy on parishoners.
Lastly, I can’t wait for the day the founders and funders of Hamas are exposed, and all the lies are revealed about that fateful October surprise. It goes hand in hand with the September 11, 2001 “surprise” as well. The real axis of evil – mirror, mirror on the wall – who is the “richest country in the world, spreading freedom and democracy around the world” afterall. Currently, in Syria, Christians are being targeted and slaughtered. The destabalization and slaughtering commenced in haste since Assad bailed out. Yet, Americans are being hoodwinked to ignore who is actually behind the slaughtering going on in Gaza, the Ukraine, and anywhere else bankers and investors seek big returns for blood letting. They have to have WWIII – it is the only way to achieve depopulation, wealth transfer, reset. Taking it to the streets is a mirage, a side show, a theater of the absurd. Yet, so many are taking the bait – hook, line, and soon the ultimate sinker.
No honor among thieves and reprobates.
Where was the ACLU when little MidVermont was exercising their first amendment rights? Odd the bedfellows they keep.
So, true, Aaron. More like selective liberties their leftist worldview agree with.
That said, I was glad when they stepped in a couple of months ago stick up for the woman who was apparently going to be made to have a c-section against her will at Copley Hospital. But do we really know the full story about all that happened in that case?
Hey folks, we have an adversarial system of jurisprudence. Someone makes a claim. Someone challenges the claim. That is called ‘due process’. The debate over free speech rights and to whom they apply is ongoing, and likely (IMHO) to change from time to time.
Please keep in mind that no one is perfect. The SCOTUS has made some really contentious rulings throughout history, later corrected or modified, as imperfect people are inclined to do.
As Michael J. Fox opined: “I am careful not to confuse excellence with perfection. Excellence, I can reach for; perfection is God’s business.”
Is ‘due process’ a cumbersome institution? Well, compared to what – totalitarian despotism and anarchy?
The answer is, of course, ‘it depends’.
Oooops, my popcorn is ready. Enjoy the show.
There is nothing wrong with supporting Israel.
There is nothing wrong with criticizing Israel.
There is nothing wrong with verbal support of Palestinians.
It’s ok to criticize Hamas.
There is nothing wrong with talking about trans issues
There is nothing wrong with saying that people regret transitioning.
And it really is OK to be white.
And some people believe “Islam is right about women”
Free speech rights have been reduced to allowing the dissemination of filth to kids. That’s it. That’s all free speech is today.
Anything else is “supporting turr-ristorante, promoting genocide, nazi sympathy, misogyny, communism…. Take your pick.
It’s boring.