Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

KOPEL: McCain protester coverage limited

Obama campaign's restrictions overlooked

David Kopel

Published July 12, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

More stories »

Media coverage of an anti- John McCain protest in Denver on Monday raised important free speech issues - but failed to provide a full picture of the speech suppression problem.

Former Denver Post reporter Carol Kreck received a ticket from the Denver police when she carried a large sign in the Galleria walkway outside the building at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts, where John McCain was inside taking questions from a town hall meeting.

The Post's Web site on Tuesday featured a video of the incident filmed by ProgressNowAction, an organization created to promote pro-Democrat, anti-Republican activism. The source of the film was not identified until near the end of the film, and it would have been better had the Web site noted the source immediately.

MSNBC television featured a slightly different version of the same video on a segment in its nightly opinion program Countdown with Keith Olbermann, in a segment hosted by Rachel Maddow. MSNBC, like the ProgressNow Web page touting the Kreck case, created the false impression that the elderly librarian was acting on her own. They neglected to mention that Kreck was participating in a group demonstration organized by ProgressNow, and was carrying a sign which she had been given by the organization. (This latter fact was brought out in a sympathetically pro-Kreck column by Bill Johnson of the Rocky.)

On Wednesday, the Post provided perspective from legal experts. Precedent from the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has specifically held that, even though the DCPA Galleria was partly built with tax dollars, it is not a public forum where speech cannot be limited.

The Post also quoted Kreck's attorney David Lane, who pointed to a Colorado Supreme Court precedent saying that private shopping malls were, despite being privately owned, required to allow some free speech activities on their property. For the benefit of readers who are not First Amendment experts, the Post should have explained that the 10th Circuit decision about the Galleria involved the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, whereas Lane is arguing for a more pro-speech rule pursuant to the Colorado Constitution's free speech provision.

Kreck is identified by the media as a 60- (or, sometimes 61-) year-old part-time librarian, and sometimes the articles say that she is a librarian for an education think tank. It would be interesting to know which one.

Most media coverage has very closely followed the framing created by ProgressNow's edited video, focusing exclusively on Kreck. A more complete picture was provided by the Colorado Independent Web site, which on Monday reported that Kreck was one of several ProgressNow protesters who were told to desist. Among them was a man dressed as a peapod, who was making the point that McCain and Bush are two peas in a pod.

Thus far untouched by the Colorado media is any report on the Obama campaign's policy regarding the bringing of anti-Obama signs into places where Obama is speaking. Although ProgressNow has no obligation to put things in perspective, the mainstream media do. While MSNBC's host and guest expert from the left-wing Huffington Post Web site mused about the McCain/Bush hostility to protests, a more serious journalistic approach would note that the Obama campaign is also guilty of suppressing protests.

For example, according to the venerable left-wing magazine The Progressive (Dec. 12, 2007), police acting at the behest of the Obama campaign expelled three peaceful anti-nuclear waste protesters from the area outside a University of South Carolina stadium where Obama was scheduled to speak.

Post columnist Susan Greene made a start at examining the Obama side of Colorado speech control. On Thursday, she wrote that "Kreck's citation came the same day Englewood's police chief convinced the City Council to pass an anti-picketing ordinance meant to control protesters in August. A note written by the city's attorney's office inexplicably says the language of the measure was 'recommended by the DNC' " (Democratic National Committee.)

The Colorado media should follow up by asking the Obama campaign (or its proxy, the DNC) whether they intend to allow anti-Obama signs inside or outside Invesco Field when Obama gives his acceptance speech in August.

Instead of just accepting the "librarian" frame of ProgressNow, the Colorado and national media should have - after four days of covering the same story - gone further in examining the anti-free speech inclinations of both major-party presidential candidates. Although Keith Olbermann would never tell you, the evidence suggests that when it comes to squashing protesters, McCain and Obama are two peas in a pod.

Dave Kopel is research director at the Independence Institute, an attorney and author of 10 books. He can be reached at kopeld@RockyMountainNews.com.

Comments

  • July 12, 2008

    12:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    iG writes:

    Who is the suit???

  • July 12, 2008

    5:34 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    LOUIE writes:

    First time Clinton ran, I voted against the kid; second time I voted for the kid. I will always vote for the best man, regardless of the all the media, regardless of all the polls, and regardless of all the kings horses and all the kings men. When it comes to protesters, sticks and stones, I'll still vote for who I feel is best able to lead this nation.

  • July 12, 2008

    6:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    Louie? "I will always vote for the best man"? What if a woman runs? What if the best man is at a wedding? Will you attend?

    Party trumps person every time.

  • July 12, 2008

    6:49 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    LOUIE writes:

    Mike, although I question her as far as her politics, make no question I believed along Ms. Hillary was the smarter of all 3 canidates now running. In world politics, I always had a deep adoration for Golda, girl led Isreal through her darkest days. Golda was unflinchingly courageous, and her first love above all was her people. Find me a Golda, and I'd do my damnest to put her in office. Ms. Hillary, although intelligent, has too much baggage. I believe she thought she'd be a shoe-in; and it was hers to lose by underestimating the power of youth and vigor. Remember when Ms. Hillary offered the second in command to Mr. Obama? She really underestimated not only her opponent, but America desire for something fresh, without baggage. I dunno, I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer on politics.

  • July 12, 2008

    8:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    vet64 writes:

    I'm not a political expert either, Louie but I do know the difference between right and wrong, something most politicians have failed at. I have also learned by watching and listening that all politicians, whether on the local or national level, have only one objective -- to forward their own careers. Once elected, all campaign promises are just cannon fodder and quickly forgotten. History bears me out on that. Politicians don't want to hear any opposing views to their own, someone might find a glaring hole in them.

  • July 12, 2008

    9:56 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ksells writes:

    Dave Kopel has written 10 books so he is an expert about suppression of freedom of speech and the benefits to those who do not support anyone who respects the 1st amendment. Well dude, I don't get your point that the DCPA wasn't paid for by the city and public events can be controlled by Republican party thugs who claim to be from the Secret Service. The point is that there is a level playing field. You can't ban anti McCain posters if you allow pro McCain posters. But then, the Republican party is much happier with Soviet type control of the media then the Jeffersonian idea of liberty.

  • July 12, 2008

    10:03 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    samsmargolis writes:

    "...it is not a public forum where speech cannot be limited." Huh?

    What David Lane didn't tell you (big surprise) was the whole story regarding the "mall" requirements. He hints at it by saying they are required to allow "some" free speech, but public building owners can regulate the time, manner and place of the "speech." Bottom line, most of these people are attention whores that do this on the off-chance that someone (MSM) will make a big deal out of their insanity. Guess who always bites...?

  • July 12, 2008

    7:27 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    GetReal writes:

    Is Obama going to let in a group holding signs reading "Obama = Carter" or "Obama = Osama" in his Denver appearances?

    And if he doesn't, will there be outraged Progressives whining about free speech rights with the Press gleefully over-covering it?

    Don't hold your breath.

  • July 12, 2008

    9:36 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    wow writes:

    "And if he doesn't, will there be outraged Progressives whining about free speech rights with the Press gleefully over-covering it?"

    I hope so. I fugure, it doesn't matter too much who is sitting behind the desk. 4/8 years of any one party is not enough to create the huge changes that every one blames/praises the President for. The representatives here are the people we need to watch. When they all get together, they are the ones who excercise our power. All of them need to be reminded that supression of speech is not going to be tolerated.

  • July 13, 2008

    5 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jlbiggs101 writes:

    After seeing thObama photos of Mizz Kreck I can see why she is for Obama. She needs the government to take care of her because she cannot do it for herself.

  • July 13, 2008

    9:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    bsregistration writes:

    The Dems partial honesty in reporting is eerily similar to Palestinians and now the Iranians (3 missiles become 4) Photoshop journalism.

    Journalism which resonates with the lower intelligence classes.

  • July 13, 2008

    11 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jbowen43 writes:

    McCain spent years cultivating the media with his back of the bus chats and BBQs. There is little chance any of them will have anything to say that is critical or factual about the "straight shooter". This election's press coverage will be another farce.

  • July 13, 2008

    11:06 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Brain writes:

    There was NO suppression of free speech at this event. From what I understand, Kreck and her party were there for well over an hour before being asked to leave. And also, correct me if I'm wrong, (I wasn't there) NO SIGNS were allowed in the event.

  • July 13, 2008

    4:46 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Dingoangst writes:

    Mr. Kopel's description of Ms. Kreck's sign as being a protest sign is interesting. It merely said "McCain=Bush". While if someone had a sign with "Dingoangst=Bush", a fight would surely ensue,Mr. McCain has done nothing to separate himself from Bush. It was not a protest sigh, simply the truth. Once again, Republicans consider truth telling to be a crime, common sense to be unpatriotic.

  • July 13, 2008

    6:24 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Brain writes:

    Really, the truth is McCain=Bush? It is impossible for that CAMPAIGN SLOGAN TO BE TRUE!

  • July 13, 2008

    6:40 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Dingoangst writes:

    Mr. Brain, I hope you don't mind me using your first name, Doesn'thava, but there's an implied and obvious meaning to the sign that is clear to those whose first names are "Igotta." Surely, no kin of yours.

  • July 13, 2008

    7:49 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    seeingeyeseesall writes:

    It appears the real story here has been ignored completely... and that is, the "mainstream media" has NO actual coverage of the event but instead relied on a blog and someone with a home video camera to get the story. Ed Murrow has to be rolling in his grave.

  • July 14, 2008

    10:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    Why should we be surprised at this kind of biased attention? The media is liberal, progressnow is hypocritical, and too many people like to be told something instead of finding the truth out themselves. Thanks Dave for exposing the liberal hypocrisy! The U.S. Constitution trumps the Colorado Constitution and Kreck was wrong, and if she claims to be innocent and a victim in this, she takes some of you for fools that can be told something and you'd believe it just because she's not a fan of Prez Bush.

    For me, the idea of voting for someone who may be more like Bush than voting for someone who my be quite similar to Jimmy Carter is a no-brainer....... I'll take McCain. Carter was the worst President of the 20th century, easily!