Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
This anti-Brexit newspaper first launched as a pop-up, but it’s doing well enough to continue indefinitely
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
April 29, 2012, 12:30 a.m.
Audience & Social
LINK: arstechnica.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Joshua Benton   |   April 29, 2012

Ars Technica’s Venkat Balasubramani and Eric Goldman note the case of Bland v. Roberts, where three sheriff’s department workers argue they were fired because they had “liked” the Facebook page of their boss’ electoral opponent. The court says a Facebook like does not qualify as protected First Amendment speech:

It is the court’s conclusion that merely “liking” a Facebook page is insufficient speech to merit constitutional protection. In cases where courts have found that constitutional speech protections extended to Facebook posts, actual statements existed within the record.

First Amendment jurisprudence, of course, has held that many non-verbal, non-written acts qualify for protected status (memorably flag burning).

Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
 
Join the 15,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
This anti-Brexit newspaper first launched as a pop-up, but it’s doing well enough to continue indefinitely
“If I were a U.S. journalist, I would be looking to launch The Trump Watch.”
Brazil’s own Politico? Supported by paid newsletters, Poder360 digs into the country’s power structures
Revenue from a three-times-daily insider newsletter for corporate clients supports a newsgathering operation of more than 20 writers.
How to cover pols who lie, and why facts don’t always change minds: Updates from the fake-news world
“Putting others’ words in quotation marks, to signal, ‘We don’t know if this is true, we’re just telling you what they said’ or even ‘Nudge, nudge, we know this isn’t true,’ is a journalistic cop-out.”