Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Local governments not respecting first amendment on sign ordinances; more on privacy loss
On Sunday, April 3, George Will wrote (in the Washington Post, at least) an important op-ed, “In St. Louis, a protest sign meets government arrogance”, link here.
A property owner in St. Louis, serving low income people, put up a sign on his property protesting eminent domain. The local government demanded that he seek a permit for his sign and then denied the permit. The sign was motivated in part by the notorious Kelo case, discussed in my book review blog (Sept. 8, 2009, discussing a book by Carla Main and the Freeport TX case).
Will makes a point that government here is deciding what it’s power is; it’s no longer deferring to the consent of the governed.
And this is about an Old World problem: signs and banners. It pre-dates the Internet.
As I type this, I’m overhearing a discussion on the NBC Today Show about the dearth of privacy (or its death). We’ve created a world where real privacy is impossible. There are no “take-backs” because digital images are permanent, somewhere).
And we know what Ben Mezrich said about the invention of Facebook and other social media, making a few “accidental billionaires”: “All they wanted was to meet some girls.” (See my books blog, Jan. 8, 2010.) It’s more than that. All we wanted was some public attention, to be noticed! I started that with “do ask do tell”.
The “don’t ask don’t tell” world is gone forever.