Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
> In message<firstname.lastname@example.org> Ed
> Stasiak<email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> Ed Stasiak
>>>> Unless the film critic signed some kinda “approved disclosure” agreement,
>>>> they’re free to say whatever they want about the movie or tv show.
>>> Either way, has *nothing* to do with the 1st Amendment.
>> “More than just a kerfuffle over one superhero movie, the incident raises
>> larger questions about the relationship between reviewers and the public,
>> the editorial objectivity of aggregators and how much studios should be
>> _empowered to control the pre-release messaging_ of their films.”
>> The above implies the studios have some kinda right to control what
>> movie critics say about their flicks and that IS a 1st Amendment issue.
> No it is not. Not in any imaginable way.
You apparently have a very limited imagination. It would be a 1st Amendment
issue because if the studios are indeed asserting a right to control what
movie critics say about their product, then the implication is that if it's
a right, it must be guaranteed and enforced by the government or its a
meaningless as a right. And the idea of the government enforcing such
nonsense is indeed a 1st Amendment issue.