Commentary by TrueDialog.org's Founder, Carl Lindemann

July 14 - As Maine Goes for Censorship

Scott Fish, the Editor/Owner of As Maine Goes, the state's conservative "public square" for discussion, presents himself as a supporter of First Amendment rights. He prides himself on providing opportunities for free expression. He is a go-to person in the state media for comments about online ethics, and is frequently published in the various newspapers on various political topics. He is successful in coming across as someone who upholds the kinds of values that legitimate journalists and news media people are supposed to embrace. 

Sadly, it seems that Fish only believes in free expression as long as it does not embarrass his political allies. This past week, when free expression on As Maine Goes came with a political price, suddenly this "Editor" took on a new title: CENSOR. 

For Fish, supporting the First Amendment is apparently little more than public relations posturing. I came to discover this after he publicly solicited my participation in a discussion of an opinion piece I'd written that was published in the Portland Press Herald on June 21 (here's the original, unedited version submitted). The question it raised was simple. Maine Heritage Policy Center, the "think tank" central in promoting the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in Maine last year, was factually inaccurate in its testimony to the State Ethics Commission about its conduct in that campaign. Given that, how accurate are the other facts and figures it uses to lobby the legislature? 

Much of what you might call the "discussion" on As Maine Goes about this amounted to little more than personal attacks mixed with occasional paranoid presumptions about funding for my efforts. My responses to the few substantive questions offered were apparently unexpected, unbelievable and unacceptable. Time and again, I offered the opportunity to examine the facts behind my piece and the argument built with them. I put forward four statements made by MHPC's Bill Becker or attorney Dan Billings and asked for the As Maine Goes participants to decide whether or not these statements were true or untrue, factually accurate or inaccurate. Click on each for documentary evidence that compares the Ethics Commission transcripts and material that either affirms or undermines the statements:

1.) Mr. Becker: We don't take any pro or con stance on any issue.

2.) MHPC did not expressly advocate for the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR).

3.) MHPC has not specifically solicited or accepted any contributions to support TABOR.

4.) The November 6 letter from Bill Becker is not a form letter used by the MHPC to thank donors for contributions or other funds given to promote TABOR.

Going back-and-forth for over a week, only one person claimed that any of these statements made by MHPC were true. Unfortunately, that person was unable or unwilling to state the reasons for her opinion. When you look at the documentation, it's easy to see why that might be problematic. MHPC's statements here simply do not hold up under examination. 

Yes, asking As Maine Goes readers to wrestle with whether MHPC has been forthright and honest with the Ethics Commission is asking a great deal. These are hard truths for them to confront. Apparently, it became too hard when the discussion turned to the IRS implications. A non-profit public charity that engages in substantial, direct political advocacy may well come under scrutiny. As this subject started to surface, Fish intervened. He removed my final posting, then locked out further discussion. As the discussion "thread" drifted down off the top listings (it has been one of the most popular discussions - over 4,200 views) out of sight, Fish removed it altogether. Repeat e-mails to him to explain this have gone unanswered. No, he can't explain himself and there is no excuse for such censorship.

There is a valuable lesson here. Freedom of speech is not well served by what amount to online gated communities like As Maine Goes where censorship is just part of the landscaping. It is a mistake to confuse true expression of difficult, challenging views in authentic public discussion with pseudo discussions that reinforce shared preconceptions and prejudices. No, freedom isn't free and those that earnestly and honestly support freedom of speech better brace themselves for dealing with uncomfortable truths. 

What happens if you like the idea of the First Amendment, but prefer the hard truths "edited" out? As H. L. Mencken observed "Where all think alike, little is thought." With minor editing, the As Maine Goes' Editor/CENSOR might have the perfect motto for this vision for his so-called "public square": "Here, all think alike and little is thought." 

Of course, this critique of these gated virtual communities applies to progressive ones, too. Censorship also occurs exists in more subtle, insidious ways than Fish's grotesque, heavy-handed, wholesale removal of "disturbing" discussion. We'll revisit this soon looking at other polarized media outlets such as talk radio.

All materials on this website are copyright © 2007 by TrueDialog.org. All rights reserved.