Veteran broadcaster thought feds
could have stopped candidate
with 'hate speech' legal theory
CNN's Christiane Amanpour, while interviewing James Comey, asked: “Of course, ‘Lock her up’ was a feature of the 2016 Trump campaign. Do you in, retrospect, wish that people like yourself, the head of the FBI, the people in charge of law and order, had shut down that language, that it was dangerous potentially, that it could have created violence, that it kind of is hate speech?" she asked. “Should that have been allowed?”
The Washington Times and Fox News both threw a spotlight on the Amanpour-Comey exchange.
"Lock her up" was a chant aimed at Trump's election rival, Hillary Clinton. She had been accused of escaping criminal charges in the FBI investigation of her handling of official emails.
Comey answered that the government's role does not include control of speech.
“That’s not the role for government to play,” he replied. “The beauty of this country is people can say what they want, even if it’s misleading and it’s demagoguery. The people who should have shut it down were Republicans who understand the rule of law and the values that they claim to stand for. Shame on them, but it wasn’t a role for government to play.”
Amanpour hosts Amanpour, CNN International's flagship global affairs interview program, which also airs across the United States on PBS.
It appears that Amanpour, who has for decades been based in London, had the notion that America has "hate speech" laws that are similar to those of Great Britain and Canada, whereby the government can punish citizens for publicly airing speech deemed to be hateful. She may have gathered that impression because of the post-Trump election pressure from both Big Tech and big corporate media to muzzle internet speech on grounds the speakers are spewing hate.
Nevertheless, it seems bizarre that a journalist who has worked for an American network since 1983 would pose such a question, even though the British Iranian spends most of her time outside the United States. Amanpour obtained a journalism degree from the University of Rhode Island, summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.
One might say Amanpour's gaffe is one of those things, embarrassing but of not much overriding importance. Yet, I have to wonder whether she really has a sense of what America is all about, which would not be an issue were she not broadcasting to millions of Americans. Has she been spinning her interviews and stories based on some foreign ideology? It should be understood that the cultural background ideology of "nice, respectable Europeans" includes the right of the government to shut down "hate speech," as she was suggesting the FBI might have done.
The real problem here is how CNN never noticed Amanpour's unfamiliarity with American ways over the decades. After all, one can't make a blunder of that magnitude without having a rather hazy understanding of what makes America tick.
No doubt CNN and Amanpour will play down the significance of the question by saying it was a hypothetical. Yet, under what scenario would such a hypothesis even be brought up at all by a news person familiar with America and America's continual preoccupation with the First Amendment right of freedom of speech?
The Washington Times and Fox News both threw a spotlight on the Amanpour-Comey exchange.
"Lock her up" was a chant aimed at Trump's election rival, Hillary Clinton. She had been accused of escaping criminal charges in the FBI investigation of her handling of official emails.
Comey answered that the government's role does not include control of speech.
“That’s not the role for government to play,” he replied. “The beauty of this country is people can say what they want, even if it’s misleading and it’s demagoguery. The people who should have shut it down were Republicans who understand the rule of law and the values that they claim to stand for. Shame on them, but it wasn’t a role for government to play.”
Amanpour hosts Amanpour, CNN International's flagship global affairs interview program, which also airs across the United States on PBS.
It appears that Amanpour, who has for decades been based in London, had the notion that America has "hate speech" laws that are similar to those of Great Britain and Canada, whereby the government can punish citizens for publicly airing speech deemed to be hateful. She may have gathered that impression because of the post-Trump election pressure from both Big Tech and big corporate media to muzzle internet speech on grounds the speakers are spewing hate.
Nevertheless, it seems bizarre that a journalist who has worked for an American network since 1983 would pose such a question, even though the British Iranian spends most of her time outside the United States. Amanpour obtained a journalism degree from the University of Rhode Island, summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.
One might say Amanpour's gaffe is one of those things, embarrassing but of not much overriding importance. Yet, I have to wonder whether she really has a sense of what America is all about, which would not be an issue were she not broadcasting to millions of Americans. Has she been spinning her interviews and stories based on some foreign ideology? It should be understood that the cultural background ideology of "nice, respectable Europeans" includes the right of the government to shut down "hate speech," as she was suggesting the FBI might have done.
The real problem here is how CNN never noticed Amanpour's unfamiliarity with American ways over the decades. After all, one can't make a blunder of that magnitude without having a rather hazy understanding of what makes America tick.
No doubt CNN and Amanpour will play down the significance of the question by saying it was a hypothetical. Yet, under what scenario would such a hypothesis even be brought up at all by a news person familiar with America and America's continual preoccupation with the First Amendment right of freedom of speech?
No comments:
Post a Comment