I've been at a number of rodeos, with different companies in different places. Some were newspaper-only, others were combination media in some way, shape or form.
But, in general, at least among old media, support for the First Amendment is selective.
And, that means we need to first look at exactly what the First Amendment says — including ALL FIVE different phrases for different "intellectual expression freedoms" it supports.
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.
Most people know only the first three, and know them imperfectly, like the Religious Right claiming America is a Christian nation.
The media is established on the third freedom.
Over the past decades, this has become problematic in several ways.
First, "old media," especially old print media, was slow to accept blogs, or even full online-only news websites, as "journalism." Shamefully slow. Parochially slow.
And, ultimately, capitalistically slow.
That leads to what I'm really getting at here.
At various media organizations, I've been asked to sign papers about personnel policies, etc. Invariably, part of this involves social media.
Some companies are less hinky on this, others more so. The more hinky ones basically want you the media employee to throw away your First Amendment free speech rights — just because you work for a media company.
Now, to some degree, I'll bet other businesses try this, at least if you're a rung or two up their white-collar ladder. (Does the trash company make its pick-up people sign such policies?)
But, it's more egregious with media companies for several reasons.
One is that, per the header, they're being selective about the First Amendment.
Another is that, when they get into image management, they're now getting into public relations. Oh, sure, any company has to do that somewhat, but when a media company wants its employees to be tohu w'vohu (Google it) on opinions, then, no, we're at PR at the expense of journalism.
The third is when said media companies extend the spirit of this idea to employees being asked to write columns, do opinion-like podcasts, do opinion-like takeout videos — but actually say as little as possible.
And, of course, the hardness of said media stances are going to be doubled down upon in right to work get fired states.
In a sidebar, at least in the media world, it's easy to tell exactly how a company has been burned by its employees in the past, by looking at two things:
1. Their personnel policies and
2. Their access restrictions on what can or cannot be on computers, what server portions are accessible by whom, etc.
Let's get back to the First Amendment, though, as months or years from now, that may become its own post.
Media at the national level are also selective in their defense of the last two clauses of the First Amendment.
Unions get shorter and shorter shrift, even from allegedly liberal newspapers. That includes said newspapers overlooking national Democrats cutting them shorter and shorter shrift.
Well, part of the power of organized labor has traditionally come from a robust interpretation of what "peaceably assemble" covers.
But, that's just one problem.
The mainstream media has remained silent for more than a decade as presidents and presidential candidates have used "security" as a claim, especially at political conventions, to herd peaceably assembled protestors a half a mile or more away from them.
Boycotts, too, are a form of peaceable assembly. Yet, the mainstream media, when confronted with a New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo talking about criminalizing the Boycott, Divest, Sanctions movement against Israel, has managed to keep its collective mouth totally shut.
The real bottom line on this issue IS "the bottom line."
When the First Amendment meets capitalism, the media bread will always have capitalist butter on it.
Of course, this is one small chip in why media is dying, in my opinion. And, it's a big boulder in why "old media" SHOULD die more.
