Freedom of Speech Must Apply Equally to All

I previously commented on the firing of Juan Williams by National Public Radio.

I now find myself again commenting on another attack on free speech, where once again, the victim is a liberal commentator, where once again, the perpetrator is a liberal media outlet, and where to my great suprise, the cheerleaders appear to be largely conservatives.

In this case, MSNBC suspended indefinitely and without pay, liberal commentator Keith Olbermann for making three $2,400 campaign contributions to Democratic candidates.  Before commenting further, I will note that on Sunday, MSNBC announced that Keith Olbermann would be returning to the air on Tuesday night.

MSNBC justified their action by asserting that their Corporate Policy was violated.  They specifically discourage their reporters and commentators from contributing to political campaigns, since the candidates may be covered by MSNBC.  The essential provision reads "You should report any such potential conflicts in advance to, and obtain prior approval of, the President of NBC News or his designee."

MSNBC's policy clearly tramples on the 1st Amendment, by making its employees' 1st Amendment rights subject to the approval of the President of NBC News.

I have to wonder how MSNBC would react if told that their 1st Amendment right to publish news and commentary were to be subject to review and approval, in advance, by a government bureaucrat.  That is what they do in China.

Keith Olbermann should be able to contribute to any campaign he may wish to support, from dog catcher to the President of the United States.  And no, I am not making comparisons.

Now, that having been said, if he contributes to a candidate who has appeared, or to a candidate who is going to appear, on his show, he should promptly disclose that contribution to the viewers so that they can judge whether his commentary and questions are neutral or biased in some fashion.

In this particular case, Keith Olbermann reportedly did have at least one of the recipients of his campaign contributions on his show.  That being the case, he should have promptly disclosed the campaign contributions to his viewers.  As I understand it, he did not do so.

I am no fan of Keith Olbermann.  However, I strongly disagree with those conservative commentators who have gloried in his suspension.

I suggest that my fellow conservatives consider that if corporate entities are permitted to impose limitations on the 1st Amendment rights of liberals, then under a different administration, they could just as easily impose either the same or more stringent limitations on the 1st Amendment rights of conservatives.

Consider the following scenario as a warning.

Democrats have long sought to eliminate right-to-work laws in many states, including South Carolina.  These laws protect the rights of individuals to work without being forced to join a union or to financially support its activities.

If right-to-work laws are eliminated, then union organizing can establish closed shops, where in order to work you must join the union.

The danger arising from the Keith Olbermann case is that, in theory, a union could do the same thing.  If a union member makes a political contribution without obtaining the prior approval of the union, the union member could be expelled from the union, meaning that in a closed shop, he loses his job.

It is a simple way to establish one party control of a political system.

This is what makes the Keith Olbermann case so troubling and so dangerous.

Both conservatives and liberals must look beyond their feelings about Keith Olbermann.

Corporate policies such as those enacted by MSNBC are a threat to our democracy, and it is only through eternal vigilance that we will retain that for which our ancestors, our brothers and sisters, and our children have fought and died to protect.