Social media wrap: Juan Williams, Sarah Palin and the 1st Amendment. Haven't we been here before? [Updated]

Politicians reacted swiftly as news of NPR's firing of Juan Williams grew from a tweet to becoming the week's hottest media story, with once and presumed future presidential candidate Mike Huckabee chiming in, among others. 

But the political tweeter that really got our attention was Alaska's Sarah Palin, who invoked the 1st Amendment in her post about Williams, who was fired Wednesday as a senior analysts at NPR for saying that Muslims made him nervous when he was flying. 

Palin tweeted: NPR defends 1st Amendment Right, but will fire u if....

...u exercise it. Juan Williams: u got taste of Left's hypocrisy,they screwed up firing you 

Haven’t we been here before with Palin? Twice? 

[UPDATED 11:10 a.m.]

In a post to her Facebook page Thursday, Palin wrote that "speaking honestly about these issues isn’t just [Williams'] right, it’s his job." She also called for NPR to lose its public funding. 

Cogent arguments about political correctness aside, Palin again seems to have her 1st Amendments mixed up. A bit like Delaware senatorial candidate Christine O'Donnell (whom Palin has endorsed).

NPR terminated Williams' contract as his remarks were "inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR," the organization said in a statement.  

Although NPR is publicly funded, there isn't a constitutional issue here at all, just a simple case of a media organization making a decision that a commentator who ran afoul of its editorial policy shouldn't work for it anymore. 

But wait: Palin has shown she knows her freedom of speech from her separation of church and state, as on Wednesday she also tweeted the latest Ann Coulter column about O'Donnell and the 1st Amendment, headlined "Chris Coons lied, granny died."

Clearly, the 1st Amendment is alive and well. It's just a bit misunderstood.     

-- Craig Howie

It's well within your 1st Amendment rights to click here for Twitter alerts of each new Ticket item. Or follow us @latimestot or @craighowieLAT. Our Facebook Like page is over here. Also available on Kindle now with a two-week free trial. 

Comments

[Dr. Carol Hopson]

NPR should stand for National Progressive Radio. It no longer represents the American people as a whole (but then it hasn't for a long time). The Juan Williams comments were truthful of how he felt and he continued to say we shouldn't be so judgmental. He was fair and voiced his truth. NPR should have applauded his honesty and used that as a discussion point to say that even the most liberal people may have fears that they must work to overcome. However, some fears are justified. All people recognize that in some cases it is wise to be fearful or cautious. But that fear should be toward a possible threat, and not toward any total group of people. I believe that was what Williams was saying.

It is too bad that we have become so concerned with not offending those who are unlike us that we destroy those who are. We are afraid to say that legal immigrants deserve our respect and help, but illegal immigrants are breaking our laws. We need to support American muslims, but shouldn't be afraid to challenge extremist muslims who openly admit they want to take over our laws and our freedoms.

Americans need to stand up for Juan Williams and those of us who still want to live in a free country.

[Mike Rehling]

This is lame. The first amendment applies directly here, and if Juan Williams sues his lawyer may well educate you! His 'opinion', expressed with disclaimers of tolerance, is protected speech, and unlikely to have violated any policy at NPR, with the possible exception of 'political correctness'. Andrew, you can't rewrite the constitution, or a body of law, because you do not like the person expressing it.

[NO_MORE_CENSORSHIP]

This is a badly articulated article. You say Palin does not know the First Amendment without saying what it is, which is "Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech"

NPR, as a publicly funded organization, is an agent of the government. They should not be censoring anyone for their ideas. The firing is a reflection of that.

[manonthestreet]

Palin is absolutely correct,Craig is probably reading the 1 st amendment according to George Soros.

[Eric]

I'm still trying to figure out how expressing a personal feeling (whether politically correct or not) on another media outlet was grounds for terminiation by NPR, considering it was not in anway w/in physical proximity of NPR outlets (unless Fox is such?)

But otherwise, I have to disagree w/ the author. If NPR was a private company, I'd say he was right, but NPR is a quasi-gov't funded media outlet. It's too grey an area to dismiss the Freedom of Speech claim outright.

If you do indeed believe FoS is not a factor here, then you should also believe in removing the gov't assisted element too. (Re: Sarah - NPR should lose public funding)

[NO_MORE_CENSORSHIP]

You guys are amazing. You think NPR's excuse is adequate. Juan was fired for his views. Then you have NPR who receives government funding. This is censorship from a government entity.

[Amy]

the twit doesn't know when to quit -- oh, wait ...

[Caldwell]

Sarah Palin has an opinion on everything--but actual knowledge about little. She just looks at what the person the previous day has said and then acts if the original opinion came from her. Her show on Alaska is a real joke--earlier this year we saw some pictures of the Palins in their little boat with the bears in the background. It was so obvious that the background with the bears was added to the picture --you could almost see the splicing marks. So now her series to start next month has the same "lifted picture" slipped into the background of a different picture of the Palins in their boat. First off, any Alaskan is smarter than what we see in this picture--they would think about their own safety first rather than what would look good for getting votes or selling a show. Apparently Sarah Palin thought nothing of putting her family up close to two fighting bears that are already at the edge of the water. Then Sarah makes the dumb comment about the two bears: "this is two mama grizzlies fighting to protect their cubs." Oops--wrong picture in the background--no baby cubs on the film when she makes this remark and the two bears are not female bears. What a dumbo!

[omomma]

People, people, people. The Constitution and its amendments regulate government, not employers! If you say something your employer has asked you not to say in public, he/she may fire you, but you don't lose your civil rights, just your job. You're still free to say anything you want, and your former employer is still free not to hire you.

[Lu-ee]

say what?

….the NPR ceo did say it was partially due to this being their fund-raising week that what Juan said was most troublesome.

i still dont understand how much thought control a commentator has to have. I mean his contract didnt say he couldnt say what he did. also why is what he said taken out of context. He included comments that there are radical and non-radicals in the muslim religion, just like in other religions. what is the offense?

thats what is so hurtful & shocking. these werent off the cuff non-thought out comments. they were thoughtful and conscientious comments. Also he wasnt speaking as a NPR commentator, but as Juan Williams, a commentator.

its not that he said “whatever he wanted to…” he was trying to bring a calm reasoned & rational approach to a difficult topic.

also a publically funded entity cannot just fire whoever they want to because individuals in leadership positions dont personally agree with what Juan said.

“inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR,” what are those “standards” ???? are they whim and fancy or are they written down in some other kind of format?

i would think the political & cultural range of people who are offended by this act of censorship and intolerance proves that NPR is a publically funded entity wrongly promoting one point of view. how does that close-minded & intolerant mentality represent the democratic & mutli-perspective American experience?

a very sad day & week for the 1st amendment in the USA.

in regards to seperation of church and state, it is not found in the constitution ANYWHERE. It is a phrase found in a letter of Jefferson's. The 1st amendment addresses that the government shall not impose itself on religion or set up a national church, as was done in Europe. But discourse and the influence of religion on the nation's politics is not "outlawed" or "forbidden" anywhere in the constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" what is so hard about this? where is religion exorcised from politics or the government due to this statement?

I mean come on...O'Donnell and Palin are correct on this. Or is that whats really the problem. that they may be right? wink wink

ps

Mickey Kaus (no conservative) posts "Should NPR’s CEO Fire Herself in the Juan Williams Debacle,” having committed thoughtcrime herself: Here’s some punditish speculation: Schiller’s in trouble. Whatever her intent, she fired a black man for not abiding by his second-class speech status! Then she snarked at him. Might not play well, no matter how PC she was trying to be...."

...what the liberals @ NPR did was, is, and will always be wrong as per the civil rights enshrined in the US Constitutions. NPR is in trouble and O'Donnell and Palin are are correct in their interpretation of these crucial issues.

[Arctos]

So everyone here who thinks NPR violated free speech rights for firing an employee who violated their policy thinks it would be fine if say, Mara Liason appeared on Rachel Maddow's show and said that every time she hears Sarah Palin speak she winces because Palin proves that all conservatives are pandering, divisive, ignorant idiots who squall about the Constitution but don't actually understand what rights it confers. And if NPR fired her because they don't want their reporters to mix opinion with journalism, you'd be outraged, right?

And you were also offended at Sarah Palin's obvious PC sensibility when she urged the president to fire Rahm Emanuel for calling people "retarded" in a private conversation? Surely you complained that she was attempting to violate Emanuel's free speech rights and was demonstrating how political correctness was rotting America.

Right?

Right.

[Carol Bautista]

palin the quitter from Wasilla represents the demise of intelligent thought and political correctness.The lobotomy surgery has failed miserably on her!the nurse forgot one thing during palin's birth.....oxygen!
What a dumb ex half term half wit!

[Trent]

NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government. Less than two percent of funding comes from federally funded grants. Conservatives have already stripped almost all of the federal funding to NPR. It is a fully functional stand alone business free to decide their own policies and to punish violators. The 1st amendment does not protect citizens from being fired from private companies over political statements. Conservatives wouldn't stand for it... unless of course it happens to be a political statement they agree with. So much for their "principles" they beat their chests over.