There is nothing sacred about “the press.”
Their freedom of speech does not supersede that of individuals.
Their freedom of speech does not supersede that of individuals.
A “press” was the technology of mass dissemination of information and opinion which was extant at the time of the adoption of the First Amendment. For the First amendment to contain any mention of computers and the internet would, obviously, have been an anachronism which would mark the document as a fraud.However, the framers of the Constitution anticipated the internet in principle when they declared that
The “press” mentioned in the First Amendment is therefore merely one example of the technologies of information/opinion dissemination, all - or none - of which are covered by the Constitution. And if none, then the freedom of the press is meaningless today, seeing that even the printed newspapers of today are created with vastly superior technology now than in the Eighteenth Century. “None” is also excluded by the proper reading of the Ninth Amendment
- Article 1 Section 8.:
- The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . .
makes plain that the First Amendment is to be understood only as a floor under our rights. And not as a ceiling above them.
- Amendment 9:
- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
We all have freedom of the press, whether or not we actually own a printing press yet. And we all have freedom of the press via the Internet. The confusion, deliberately propagated, is that you are only part of the press if you are a member of the Associated Press. That is the implicit claim - and it is hokum. Pure bunk. Arrogance, and nothing more.