Donate Now       Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
After 5 years, San Antonio’s Rivard Report finds that being a nonprofit is better than being a “no-profit”
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.
After 5 years, San Antonio’s Rivard Report finds that being a nonprofit is better than being a “no-profit”
“To recreate it would have been prohibitively expensive for even the most generous philanthropic organization.”
Are those creepy web ads that learn your preferences and follow you around online also discriminatory?
Floodwatch, a new tool from the Office for Creative Research, is hoping it can collect enough data from users to help researchers answer questions around just how users are being targeted by ads online.
Tarbell, launched by an ex-health insurance exec, will focus on corporate cash’s political influence
“There’s not enough written about how these processes actually take place. Who is writing the checks? What’s in it for them? What are the consequences of all of these for individuals and our way of life?”