Re:Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act
by Aelinsaar on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @07:52PM
(#11866630)
I'm not sure that we're among them as much as we'd like to think. Certainly if your speech is "Whistleblowing", you don't want to be in the US.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act
by 2bitencryption on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @07:59PM
(#11866660)
Well if you whistleblow in the US, you end up in front of a judge (after a probably very unpleasant stay in a cell for a bit). You end up in prison forever. Really bad time. As for the journalists who published what you leaked? Free speech yo!
Whisleblow in China. You don't end up in front of a judge, you end up at the bottom of the ocean. And the journalists who published what you whistleblew? Likewise. And the people who tweet about it, or talk about it at work, and the websites who previous hosted it are suddenly down for maintenance...
So is the US a free speech utopia? Probably not, but I don't know of any other countries where the Westboro Baptist Church could last for so long...
Re:Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act
by Aelinsaar on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @08:41PM
(#11866816)
Actually the government here pretty regularly tries to dick over journalists too. In any case, your false dichotomy is neither accurate, nor compelling.
Re:Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act
by 2bitencryption on Thursday June 09, 2016 @02:45AM
(#11867937)
example?
Re:Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act
by Aelinsaar on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:01PM
(#11870661)
Just a few http://www.rcfp.org/jailed-journalists