Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
On 12/5/2017 3:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Lewis<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> In message<email@example.com> Ed
>> Stasiak<firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.
So it becomes a First Amendment issue right after we make up an
imaginary scenario where the government is involved. Neat trick.