Speaking freely | Letters to the Editor | Indy Week
Pin It

Speaking freely 

As an attorney who serves on the editori- al board of Southern Exposure, an investigative magazine known for challenging the status quo, I cherish the First Amendment. Perhaps that is why Hal Crowther's misconceived tirade in defense of John Rocker's "right to be an idiot" [Feb. 23] so enraged me.

Crowther's argument that major league baseball (aided by public "multicultural SWAT teams") infringed on Rocker's free-speech rights by sanctioning him for bigoted statements is simply wrong.

The First Amendment does not guarantee unlimited speech on private property--for example, I can forbid anyone from coming on my front porch and shouting racial epithets. Nor does it protect you when you work for private employers like the Atlanta Braves.

The First Amendment is designed to protect us from government-sanctioned censorship. But it is emphatically not designed to shield us from accountability.

Just as tiresome as Crowther's incorrect interpretation of the First Amendment is the gleeful tone with which he joins the chorus of hip anti-P.C. standard bearers who decry attempts to hold individuals accountable as thought-policing. Specifically, his dull and failed attempt to argue that workplace rules that protect women and others from historically hostile environments broadly infringe on free-speech rights combines powerful rhetoric with ghastly little substance.

Crying wolf about the First Amendment is dangerous. It belittles its true value. As a journalist, Crowther should know better. In Rocker's case, it also risks confusing the issue. Since no mayor or sheriff told Rocker what he could or could not say, the only real question is whether he should be held accountable for his comments.

On this question, Crowther seems to suggest we should dismiss Rocker's remarks as the unimportant ramblings of yet another bigot in a world marred by violence and hatred. I happen to think that we can protect free-speech rights and hold Rocker accountable as someone who benefits from every ticket sold for an Atlanta Braves game in the diverse county of Queens, N.Y.

As often before, Hal Crowther got it almost just right. He's right about the excessive vilification of John Rocker in a world full of real villains. Crowther also brilliantly reveals the hypocrisy and dangers in our society's eagerness to suspend First Amendment protections when offensive speech is involved (i.e., precisely when such protections are needed).

However, there is more than a little irony in the key reason Crowther cites for being tolerant of Rocker's "idiotic" remarks. He argues that one could hardly expect intelligence, sensitivity or anything other than ignorance from Rocker because he is from a rural community and went to rural schools. Having spend my adult life working and sometimes living in rural communities across our state, nation and world, I can assure Independent readers that the level of prejudice, stupidity and poor judgment is no greater among rural people than among their urban and suburban counterparts.

Crowther's offensive stereotyping of rural people--while also fully protected by the First Amendment--is not particularly different in kind or magnitude from Rocker's equally ill-considered remarks. The only difference I see is that blanket condemnations of rural people, places and schools are far more socially acceptable these days among the media and the largely metropolitan public than parallel slurs based on race, sexual orientation or ethnicity.

Crowther's remarks about rural people do not make him an idiot, but they do undermine his moral high ground in an otherwise perceptive commentary.

  • Letters to the Editor

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Letters to the Editor



Twitter Activity

Most Recent Comments

Please, Mr. Keen, inform us on what kind of person Hilary Clinton is. But please leave out the innuendo, unsupported …

by GorSun on Smug Revisionism (Letters to the Editor)

Thank you cleverweist1 and Cristel Gutshchenritter Orrand for the opportunity to stand up for what I believe in as a …

by half full on A Massive Scar (Letters to the Editor)

Mr Pollock makes some good points .
Noam Chomsky and Ron Paul have similar views on wars we have waged …

by CHHS Tiger on History you won't like either (Letters to the Editor)

Sadly, this letter, while well-meaning, is deeply flawed. The background check gun control law has failed but it can never …

by ProudlyUnaffiliated on No new gun laws! (Letters to the Editor)

For the life of me, I do not understand why folks keep yelling about their 2nd Amendment rights as though …

by cityfox on No new gun laws! (Letters to the Editor)

Comments

Please, Mr. Keen, inform us on what kind of person Hilary Clinton is. But please leave out the innuendo, unsupported …

by GorSun on Smug Revisionism (Letters to the Editor)

Thank you cleverweist1 and Cristel Gutshchenritter Orrand for the opportunity to stand up for what I believe in as a …

by half full on A Massive Scar (Letters to the Editor)

Most Read

  1. Smug Revisionism (Letters to the Editor)
  2. Dot-con (Peripheral Visions)

© 2016 Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation