NFL VS Big Tech 1A

This area is for discussions that do not fit into the formal firearms discussions of the website. Common sense and non-controversial contributions are expected. Certain topics are forbidden. See the forum rules for more details.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

NFL VS Big Tech 1A

Postby troy bilt » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:36 pm

So I have been looking at the NFL morons and I say they have no 1A right to protest on the job. The 1A does not protect your rights from your employer. It protects your rights from being trampled by the government.

Then I have looked at the big tech media that has banned, shadow banned, and suppressed conservative speech on there sites. I also believe that conservatives 1A rights have not been violated for the same reason as with the NFL. Big tech is not the government.

I was almost convinced that big tech media was in violation of 1A rights violations when I listen to folks talk about them having a monopoly and being a public utility.

Today after thinking about it a bit I thought doesn't the NFL also hold a monopoly? Does that give the protesters a right to protest protected under the 1A? Where else are football players support to go where they have such a huge platform to exercise there right to free speech?

I only bring this here because there are a lot of extremely smart folks here that I have learned a lot from over the years. I am interested in what you guys think of the situation. I am in no way defending the protesters nor the media giants.

Thank you for your time.
I have struggled with dyslexia my entire life. I know it's spelled wrong but thanks for pointing it out.
User avatar
troy bilt
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:53 pm
Location: Norwalk

Re: NFL VS Big Tech 1A

Postby WestonDon » Thu Sep 06, 2018 7:25 am

The appropriate solution to both situations IMHO is a free market solution rather than a governmental solution. That is to say that we the people can simply not consume their product if we don't like their practices, or for no reason at all if we see fit. Neither the NFL nor Big Tech are truly monopolies nor are they necessities. Both have potential competitors ready to fill any void created by our unwillingness to support the current dominate entities. I suspect the NFL owners would would assert their employer/employee authority real quick if NCAA decided to play some games on Sunday. The same goes for Big Tech if their market begins to shrink.
I believe in American exceptianalism
Fear the government that fears your guns
NRA endowment life member
WestonDon
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 2558
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:30 pm
Location: Wood county

Re: NFL VS Big Tech 1A

Postby bignflnut » Thu Sep 06, 2018 10:27 am

Troy Bilt, thank you for bringing this up.

Let's begin by understanding the difference between Negative and Positive Rights (5 minute video).

Negative Rights, such as the 1st Amendment Right to Free Speech, impose a duty of non-interference. Otherwise known as Liberties, all that needs to be done is to refrain from blocking the act. Negative Rights do not conflict with the Negative Rights of others. We can all live together harmoniously if we simply refrain from squelching others Negative Rights. Of course the 1st Amendment includes "Congress shall make no law..." and aims at restricting the force of government.

Positive Rights, sometimes called entitlements, impose a positive or active duty on someone. This is where contracts enter the picture. You give me X and I'll provide Y. You pay your AARP membership fee, you are entitled to certain benefits that AARP provides. Pay a retainer to a lawyer, you can expect certain performance from the lawyer.

It's no secret that I enjoy watching pro football. The NFL (and other sports leagues) made a deal with the Dept of Defense, received funding/personnel/jet fuel/training runs and puts on a mini-salute to the DoD/#TEAMAMERICA during each game. Without knowing the details of the deal, the NFL has a rule stating that players shall stand during that mini-salute. Leaving aside the misappropriation of the People's cash to achieve whatever...two entities can enter into a contract such as this.

We have to know that NFL teams tell players what to say while in the press conference regarding injuries, how not to give away the game plan, how to speak about team struggles, hold-outs, etc. So, as an employee under contract, NFL players have a positive duty to perform as expected. That said, NFL teams cut players and dump contracts all the time. These facts go unchallenged without the fervor of patriotism and the political climate, properly so.

What I would disagree with is that there are many employees being fired for what they put on social media that is unrelated to job duties. (no matter how odious the speech)

In short, while NFL players are wearing an NFL logo, behind team microphones, at the complex, on NFL time, they have a duty to perform in such a way that pleases to owners, growing the NFL's revenues. Running afoul of the pleasure of the check signers brings consequences, properly so. The NFL is paying for and expecting a certain level of behavior.

If an NFL player is sitting on his own couch, in his own living room, posting on social media (or his own website) about his political views, it would be a different story. They don't seem smart enough to make this distinction, because that's not where the cameras are.

===================================================================================

As to the Social Media stuff...while no money is being exchanged, the service is being provided and there are terms to that service (hello OFCC overlords). Some topics are off limits, some are encouraged, based on the community the site providers are attempting to build.

Claiming that anything on the internet is a monopoly is a bit puzzling. There are so many opportunities to begin another site, build a bigger, better brand....MySpace is dead in 2018...but was once the biggest damn deal out there.
“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”
-Thomas Jefferson, 1774

Tweed Ring: "...we should have all done more to elected Republicans..." Agreed
User avatar
bignflnut
 
Posts: 6366
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Where Black Sheep and Black Swamps meet


Return to Jeff Kirchner's Korner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests