Analysis of media issues, politics and current events.
The Supreme Court ruling from Citizen’s United that corporations are people, money is speech and companies shouldn’t be restricted in their ability to speak (with money) was a horrible ruling that gave birth to the current SuperPacs.
There is a difference between having a freely heard voice in politics and being the one with a bullhorn that drowns out any other conversation. That difference in the size of voices in which to speak is different than the actual issue of free speech. And that’s not good for Democracy. Because, in that environment, ideas in this environment aren’t propelled forward because you have convinced others it’s the best idea, it moves forward because it’s simply the loudest and limits other voices.
The ruling was never a free speech issue for groups and corporations. Corporations or unions can easily petition government for grievances and needs. They do have lobbyists. The average person does not.
Also if you don’t have money, like being broke, does that mean that your free speech is less or restricted? Or don’t have speech at all?