Arch Puddington from his early years was fascinated by freedom of speech. He explained that he and his family often watched freedom of speech issues on television and read about them in the newspaper. When he was older he moved to Europe where he worked for, Radio Free Europe, which deals with speech issues internationally. He now works for, Free Press, as the vice president of research. My group and I got an interview with him, in a building not far from wall street, over looking the river. We commerce over multiples of topics such as, limitations of the first amendment, imprisoned writers, foreign restrictions and policies, internet censorship, and citizen journalism. He provided well thought out and abundant answers to our group and seemed fairly knowledgeable about this topic. I thank him deeply for sharing his time and thoughts with us.
We asked about how foreign governments with out freedom speech control the internet and news. This is becoming increasingly harder with the rise of mobile phones, computers, and social networking. Mr. Puddington replied with how, specifically about Russia, that some governments use television as a propaganda provider. He expressed how some countries rarely look at the internet for their news needs, making it easy for the government to use television as a opportunity to warp reality and to censor any information that they interpret as hurtful. He then went on to explain how China does have analysts looking for any information against their government. These analysts do have the technological capabilities to erase hurtful data before it spikes an uproar. Other countries are more aggressive in their approach to defeating individuals opinions. Countries in the middle east for example, will imprison anyone who speaks against their political leaders. Utilizing a fear tactic, they only need to do this a to a few people before the public starts to retreat and understand that the government is demonstrating it’s authority. We did discuss America’s handling with free speech, with our current situation with Edward Snowden and how he is currently seeking asylum in Moscow. America is charging him with treason and he will face 30 years in prison if and when he returns. America, in my opinion, didn’t deal with this situation with our constitution rights in mind.
While speaking about Edward Snowden, it sparked a discussion on government mass surveillance. We thought about the intrusion on privacy and discussed matters of national security. He brought up the, “Right To Be Forgotten.” This was a right granted to some one who needed something personally hurtful removed from the internet’s servers. He used the folowing example: If you were 15 years old at a party, and you became intoxicated, this could lead to some regretful acts later on. Let’s say a friend takes a video of you in this state and posts it on social media, in this case YouTube. Now flash forward 15 years when you are applying for for a job. They may deny you this becuase of the actions posted on the Internet. You can then go to google, or whoever the cooperation is that has this information, and ask to take it down. If it no longer has relivence in the present, they will most likely have it removed. 40% of people who had this problem had this information removed. But , with government programs like prism, this is no longer possible. Google and other cooperations are handing this information over to the NSA. The government then keep this for years to come, making it impossible to disappear. We know this thanks to Snowden and his effort to educate to public.
On the topic of free speech limitation, we asked him if he thought weather or not any speech should be limited. He explained, quite explicitly, how he is generally tolerant of free speech, expression, religion and press. He talked about the “piss-christ,” case, this involved an artist who had filled a transparent cross with urine. He was greatly criticized by the public and chastised on social media. Mr. Puddington said this case was truly controversial and that he didn’t see the need to limit it. He only said that hate toward a specific individual should be stopped. Whether on the news or on any social media application, he believed it was wrong to express a negative or hurtful opinion towards that individual. He perceives targeting a person is not the same as targeting an ideology or group. Stating opinions is one thing, but attacking an individual is another.
I would like to thank Arch Puddington once again for allowing us to use his space to conduct our interview. You can find find him at the Free Press website along with many other helpful individuals.
