Interview With Christopher M. Finan
Introduction
Christopher M. Finan is president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression. He has worked for free expression groups since 1982 and is currently chair of the National Coalition Against Censorship and a trustee of the Freedom to Read Foundation. Finan is also the author of “Alfred E. Smith: The Happy Warrior.” He lives in Brooklyn, New York.
Please tell us about your new book, "From the Palmer Raids to the Patriot Act: A History of the Fight for Free Speech in America."
I started work on the book in 2003, a time when there was a lot of despair about the future of free speech in this country. Without minimizing the threats, I wanted to show that free speech remains one of the great achievements of American democracy. It wasn’t handed to us. People had to fight for it.
In your opinion, what is the greatest threat to free speech—the First Amendment-- in America today?
The growth of government secrecy and surveillance. This has been a lethal combination in the past. In the 1950s and 1960s, government used the power it gained from secrecy and surveillance to attempt to destroy the nation’s “enemies,” which included communists, the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the movement against the Vietnam War. We must ensure that the new powers that we have given the government to fight terrorism are not abused.
Would you agree that in troubled times, when people are afraid and are kept afraid—by their government, by the media, by their religious leaders, whatever—free speech suffers? Examples?
There is no question that fear is the greatest enemy of civil liberties, including free speech. While free speech has grown strongly in this country since World War I, there has been a serious erosion of our freedom during times of war. However, fear is not the only problem. Some individuals and groups have called for limiting free speech in an effort to improve society.
What about the relationship of free speech to the profit and loss of corporations? Doesn’t free speech become cautious speech when a (media) corporation might lose money if someone on its payroll voices unpopular opinions? Don Imus comes to mind, but wasn’t that hate speech? Was he fired only after his sponsors dropped out?
Media companies have not always been paragons of bravery. In the 1950s, the broadcasting industry honored a blacklist that barred hundreds of performers from the airwaves because of their suspect political ties. Fear of lost profits certainly played a major role in the firing of Imus. However, it is also true that large companies have shown great courage at times. CBS’s Edward R. Murrow challenged Joseph McCarthy. In recent years, CBS broke the story of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and ABC helped reveal the use of torture against terrorist suspects.
When does free speech become hate speech, like the widely heard radio broadcasts of Father Coughlin in the 1930’s?
From the beginning, free speech has been used to abuse individuals and groups. It was only a few years after the passage of the First Amendment that one half of the Founding Fathers was trying to throw the other half in jail for being traitors because of their support for France. The Ku Klux Klan was an important early test for the American Civil Liberties Union. The civil libertarians decided to oppose restrictions on the Klan’s First Amendment rights, while encouraging its critics to fight it with words. The only answer for bad speech is good speech.
How can we have free speech if the media won’t embrace it? What about last fall’s Muslim cartoon, originating in Europe I believe, which supposedly defamed Muslims (and which Muslims considered a form of hate speech)? Who had the courage to print it in the US? If no one did, why not?
Most major newspapers in the United States did not publish the so-called Muhammad cartoons. It was their view that they did not have to reproduce the cartoons to be able to report on the controversy, particularly since the cartoons were widely available on the Internet. However, several major daily newspapers did publish at least one of the cartoons (the Austin American-Statesman, the Akron Beacon Journal, the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Rocky Mountain News). If I’d been an editor, I think I would have published a representative cartoon. But this is a decision that has to be left to individual publishers. If the First Amendment means anything, it means we have the right to publish what we want.
Are there countries that have more free speech than we do here?
The United States protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press to a greater extent than any other country. However, there are still serious threats, including a growing effort to force reporters to reveal their confidential sources. A recent ranking of press freedom around the world put the U.S. several notches from the top because we have imprisoned reporters for refusing to cooperate with the authorities.
What is the effect of the Internet, where everyone has a voice, on free speech?
The Internet has encouraged a dramatic growth in free speech throughout the world. Because it is unregulated, it has also invited abuse. Congress has tried twice to censor sexual material on the Internet. But we already have all the tools we need to protect ourselves and our children. Parents can use software filters to screen out sexually explicit and other material that they believe is inappropriate. Meanwhile, the rest of us can sharpen our critical faculties to meet the challenge of the misinformation that is found on the Internet.
What about pornography? What about child pornography?
The word “pornography” has been applied to some of the world’s greatest works of art. Therefore, the Supreme Court has limited the power of government to censor it. Sexually explicit material is protected by the First Amendment unless it is “obscene,” according to the Supreme Court’s three-part test. No material with serious literary, artistic, scientific or political value can be declared obscene. Most but not all states ban the sale of obscenity.
The Supreme Court has declared that any depiction of a child engaged in sexual conduct is illegal, and all states have banned the creation and sale of child pornography.
Can you tell us the number of books that are banned annually in the U.S.? And, to end on a positive note, how can we preserve--and exercise--our First Amendment rights?
The American Library Association last year counted more than 500 challenges to books around the United States. Almost all of these cases involved books that are used in the schools. Many objections relate to a book’s sexual content or use of vulgar language. However, Harry Potter books have been challenged for encouraging a belief in magic. Last year, the Miami school board banned a picture book for children aged four to six because they believed it presents a positive portrayal of life in Cuba.
Free speech fights occur every day in many places around the country. People should watch for conflicts in their areas and assist those who are defending speech. They should write letters to the editor, circulate petitions. In short, they should demonstrate to their elected officials that people in their communities care about this issue. We will enjoy free speech only as long as we are willing to fight for it.