This letter of mine is published in today’s New York Times:
Re “Freedom to Offend” (letter, Aug. 1):
Disagreeing with your
claim that the Federal Communications Commission ruling in the Janet
Jackson Super Bowl case was an arbitrary assault on freedom of
expression, a letter writer mysteriously finds comfort in the fact that
government policy is that “our public airwaves are to be used in the
interest, convenience and necessity of the public.” How does this
regrettable fact justify government oversight of private expression?
And
make no mistake: this fact is regrettable. To see why, imagine if all
newsprint and ink were owned by the government and leased to newspapers
and magazines. Imagine further that official policy regarding the print
media was governed not by the First Amendment but by the proclamation
that “our newsprint and ink are to be used in the interest, convenience
and necessity of the public.”
Finally, suppose that these
glorious words were enforced by the Federal Print Commission. Would
anyone pretend that America then would have a truly free press?
Donald J. Boudreaux
Fairfax, Va., Aug.1, 2008
