The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech January 18, 2023 Click here to subscribe to the Daily Media Update. This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected]. In the News Orlando Sentinel: Judge allows more partisanship in Florida elections. Things are about to get uglier. By Scott Maxwell .....[A] school board candidate in Escambia County who’d been fined $200 for telling voters he was a “lifelong Republican” sued the state, claiming the law violated his right to free speech. The federal judge agreed, saying the state law was an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment. I think the court got it right. Government has no business telling you what you can or can’t say — whether you’re running for office or staging a protest. FEC Washington Post: FEC dismisses GOP complaint over Gmail spam filter By Isaac Stanley-Becker .....The Federal Election Commission dismissed a complaint brought by Republican campaign groups arguing that Gmail spam filters disproportionately flagged GOP fundraising emails in a way that amounted to a prohibited in-kind contribution to Democrats. “The available information indicates that Google’s spam filter is in place for commercial, rather than electoral, purposes,” the federal regulator wrote in a factual and legal analysis approved by at least four of the FEC’s six members, who are split evenly by party. Fundraising Politico: Billions at stake as online fundraising practices turn off voters By Jessica Piper .....[There is] a recognition among digital campaign staffers that text and email programs have gone from innovative to out of hand, to the point that it’s harming the campaign ecosystem. The rate of return on individual appeals is falling compared to a few years ago, as candidates and outside groups find themselves targeting the same pool of donors. And congressional campaigns spent more on fundraising as a share of their total spending in 2022 than in the previous election cycle, according to a POLITICO analysis of FEC records. Doubling down on mass emails and texts is still a way to raise significant cash, and federal candidates and committees raised a combined $3.3 billion on ActBlue and WinRed, the parties’ primary online fundraising platforms, during the 2022 cycle. But people who work in the field are growing concerned that fundraising appeals are crowding out newsletters, volunteer efforts and other forms of communication amid the insatiable and never-ending hunt for cash. Free Expression New York Times: After Lecturer Sues, Hamline University Walks Back Its ‘Islamophobic’ Comments By Vimal Patel .....Hamline University officials made an about-face on Tuesday in its treatment of a lecturer who showed an image of the Prophet Muhammad in an art history class, walking back one of their most controversial statements — that showing the image was Islamophobic. They also said that respect for Muslim students should not have superseded academic freedom. The Hill: Topping Americans’ new enemies list: The other political party By William Moloney .....A recent report by the Rasmussen polling firm illustrates just how deeply these divisive attitudes have permeated our polarized national politics. In this poll, likely voters were asked who is the United States’s “greatest enemy” and the results showed that “nearly 40 percent of Americans don’t choose a foreign power but name a domestic political party.” ... This tendency to view those with differing political opinions or voting habits as “enemies” has not occurred in isolation; it has been a part of broader trends, such as the criminalizing of policy differences and efforts to suppress the free speech of those who express viewpoints different from a reigning political or cultural orthodoxy. Individuals who criticize a particular government policy may be accused of spreading “misinformation,” which can justify suppressing such criticism. Online Speech Platforms Nature Human Behaviour: A 2 million-person, campaign-wide field experiment shows how digital advertising affects voter turnout By Minali Aggarwal, Jennifer Allen, Alexander Coppock et al. .....We present the results of a large, US$8.9 million campaign-wide field experiment, conducted among 2 million moderate- and low-information persuadable voters in five battleground states during the 2020 US presidential election. Treatment group participants were exposed to an 8-month-long advertising programme delivered via social media, designed to persuade people to vote against Donald Trump and for Joe Biden. We found no evidence that the programme increased or decreased turnout on average. The States Washington Post: Free speech or out of order? As meetings grow wild, officials try to tame public comment. By Karin Brulliard .....Across a polarized nation, governing bodies are restricting — and sometimes even halting — public comment to counter what elected officials describe as an unprecedented level of invective, misinformation and disorder from citizens when they step to the microphone. As contentious social issues roil once-sleepy town council and school board gatherings, some officials say allowing people to have their say is poisoning meetings and thwarting the ability to get business done. “I’m not denigrating the concept of acknowledging true questions our community has. That’s vital. That’s what I’ve spent my entire adult life doing,” said Rochester Mayor Kim Norton, a former school board member and Democratic state lawmaker. But, she added: “Do I think we have an obligation to have the same personal attacks be made week after week, year after year? No.” ... But some legal experts and lawmakers worry some restrictions are overreactions by thin-skinned officials that skirt unconstitutional limitations on free speech. Even if legal, they argue, reining in comment runs contrary to the American ideal of letting the public express views to representatives chosen and funded by taxpayers — even if those views include threats, bigotry and falsehoods. “Access to public meetings and that face-to-face, whether virtual or in-person, opportunity for the citizenry to talk to their elected officials is foundational to our democracy,” said Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts. Her organization filed a brief in support of a challenge, which was recently heard by the state Supreme Court, to the public participation policy of the town of Southborough’s select board. Rolling Stone: New York Lawmakers Protest Madison Square Garden Over Facial Recognition Controversy By Ethan Millman .....Eight New York lawmakers — including Congressman Jerry Nadler and seven state senators and assembly members — penned a letter to MSG Entertainment CEO James Dolan, stating that MSG is using the technology for “non-security purposes,” and expressed concern that the tech can be discriminatory and inaccurate. “We are gravely concerned that MSG Entertainment is using facial recognition technology against its perceived legal enemies, which is extremely problematic because of the potential to chill free speech and access to the courts,” the group wrote to Dolan. The group also asked for MSG to stop using face-scanning tech altogether, and more firmly demanding that at minimum the company establish a policy to destroy biometric data it collects as soon as it’s served its purpose. Virginia Mercury: Virginia Senate panel blocks campaign finance reform bills, again By Graham Moomaw .....Shortly after a Virginia Senate committee voted Tuesday to defeat a bill creating an across-the-board $20,000 cap on donations to political candidates running for the General Assembly and executive branch offices, the same panel took up another bill that would have only banned political donations from publicly regulated utilities like Dominion Energy. Read an article you think we would be interested in? Send it to Tiffany Donnelly at [email protected]. For email filters, the subject of this email will always begin with "Institute for Free Speech Media Update." The Institute for Free Speech is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that promotes and defends the First Amendment rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government. Please support the Institute's mission by clicking here. For further information, visit www.ifs.org. Follow the Institute for Free Speech ‌ ‌ ‌ The Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 801, Washington, DC 20036 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by [email protected]