The Israel Anti-Boycott Act

This is an image of the flag of Israel, one of the largest power brokers in the middle east and one of the central players in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Imaged licensed under Creative Commons, some rights reserved. Image credit: Ron Almog. Creative Commons

 

Upon searching the internet a few weeks ago I stumbled upon an article discussing a new Senate bill that, in my view, clearly violates the First Amendment.
The “Israel Anti-Boycott Act” seeks to make it a Felony with punishments including a fine (up to $250,000) or imprisonment (for up to 20 years) for any business OR individuals that participates in a boycott against Israeli businesses that operate in the West Bank.

Regardless of where you stand on the Israeli / Palestinian situation, I see this bill as a grave danger to freedom of speech, and it’s particularly troubling in a world where in which the term “corporate person-hood” is allowed to be a thing.

But let’s back up a second, and stress that the “Israel Anti-Boycott Act” is bigger than the Israel / Palestine situation, and let me also stress that NOT supporting this bill DOES NOT make you anti-Israel. Israel is going to be fine without this bill.

This bill does not just affect business owners; the text of the bill also includes “any U.S citizen” making the idea that it could pass a terrifying prospect.

I’ll put it simply: If this bill were to pass, (and it had 43 co-sponsors in the Senate, and purportedly 235 in the House of Representatives, making that possibility wholly reasonable) it would create a dangerous precedent of fining or imprisoning U.S citizens for political opinions.

After all, not supporting Israeli businesses in the occupied West Bank territories is a political decision, and one that you should 100% be able to make in the United States without fear of punishment or retribution by the United States government. In addition to banning the act of refusing to buy products from Israeli businesses in the occupied West Bank, it would also be illegal to make social media posts about your decision not to purchase these products, which is an even more cut-and-dry case of a violation of the First Amendment.

In fact, you as an individual should be able to decide not to support any business, anywhere, for any reason at all, and face no fear of punishment from the United States. This falls firmly within the realm of the First Amendment, and I’ll explain why.

In our current system, much to my dismay I might add, money is classified as speech. It is the reason for Supreme Court cases such as the now infamous “Citizens United vs. FEC” or “McCutcheon vs. FEC”. This doctrine of money as speech was first established in the language of the decision of “Buckey v. Valeo” back in 1976, where in which the Supreme Court ruled that banning campaign contributions limited free speech because money is political speech.

Imposing fines and jail times on making political statements using money (which is free speech, under the Supreme Court) is clearly in violation of the First Amendment, and is completely ridiculous.

You shouldn’t even be able to impose limits on corporations. Corporate personhood, the idea that corporations have some rights that individuals have has been a court doctrine since the late 1800s. I’m not in love with corporate personhood, particularly their ability to contribute to political campaigns, but they should have the right to post about, or boycott any business at any time.

If I don’t like that they boycott Israeli businesses, I’ll boycott them. That’s how our “Free Market System” is supposed to work.

For example, I won’t shop at Hobby Lobby because of their Supreme Court case. I won’t eat at Chick-Fil-A either. I 100% support Chick-Fil-A’s right to make the comments they did, and they should not face any actual government sanctions for them, but I boycott their business, and encourage others to do the same because I don’t agree with their message. I’m voting with my dollar. That’s how this works.

Thankfully, the ACLU has taken issue with this bill and is getting some results in getting Senators to reconsider the language of the bill. 29 Republicans and 13 Democrats are co-sponsors, making this a bi-partisan bill. If this bill manages to come into the spotlight again, I think it poses a grave danger to Freedom of Speech moving forward and needs to be reworked or completely removed. Bills like this have no place in a country that has the robust First Amendment protections like the United States.

Here are a few good articles if you want to learn more about this bill like I did.

Here’s an article from The Independent on the issue. Click here to read it.

Here’s an article to New York Magazine covering the issue. Click here to read it.

My Top 10 Favorite News Sources

All images are of the logos of the news organizations of which the top 10 is covering. All images are licensed under fair usage.

Image result for cnn

10. CNN

Political Leaning: Center

Complexity: Very Basic

Pros:

  • Fantastic mobile app
  • Covers every major issue
  • High production value

Cons:

  • Lacks complexity and deep analysis
  • Shows bias for establishment

Created in 1980, CNN is one of the largest media networks in the world. In the last two years they have come under fire by Donald Trump for bias and for creating fake news. My main criticisms of CNN are that their news reporting and analysis tend to be pretty basic; they lack the deep analysis that many high placing news sources have. CNN’s placing on this list is largely based on their solid reporting on most issues, and the appearance and ease of use of the CNN mobile app. If you’re looking for an easy to use, good looking news app that provides you with the basic information for any breaking story, CNN is a good place to start.

 

 

Image result for usa today

9. USA TODAY

Political Leaning: Center

Complexity: Very Basic

Pros:

  • Investigative journalism team is great
  • Mobile app is easy to use
  • Large amount of coverage

Cons:

  • News analysis lacks depth
  • Opinion section can get a bit dodgy

USA Today takes the ninth spot just above CNN primarily due to their infrequent investigative journalism pieces. USA Today is very similar to CNN in analytical depth, (ergo, they’re both lacking) but USA Today has an investigative journalism team that does great work and their pieces are fascinating. (I’m a sucker for great investigative journalism)  USA Today also has a great mobile app for reading news on the go, and is one of my go to’s when I’m travelling.

 

 

Image result for the economist

8. THE ECONOMIST

Political Leaning: Center-Right

Complexity: High

Pros:

  • High level of depth in analysis, great breakdown of topics
  • One of the best for economic news / business news

Cons:

  • Mandatory subscription / paywall

If you’ve got some money to spend and you are really only interested in news about business, finance, and how that affects global affairs, you can’t get much better than The Economist. I don’t read a ton of their articles (I only get 3 free articles per week) but their articles are of very high quality and if you’ve got some money burning a hole in your pocket then The Economist could be a great investment.

 

Image result for bbc

7. BBC

Political Leaning: Center Left

Complexity: Medium

Pros:

  • Third party coverage of U.S issues
  • Excellent world news coverage
  • Different perspective from U.S media
  • Free

Cons:

  • Less coverage of U.S issues than other sources
  • More fluff pieces than most
  • Radio coverage is only on overnight in U.S (time zone differences)

The British Broadcasting Corporation or BBC is an excellent source of free news. I love their U.S news because they aren’t a U.S media company. This gives them a perspective that isn’t always completely on the U.S’s side and that is always interesting. The BBC is always worth a read as long as you avoid their quite extensive amount of “fluff” pieces. Their radio news programs are also excellent but you can only catch them late at night or very early in the morning. (Usually NPR plays the BBC broadcast during the overnight hours, if you ever want to catch it) I listen to these programs a lot, which is one of the reasons the BBC is rated so highly.

 

Image result for fivethirtyeight

6. FIVETHIRTYEIGHT

Political Leaning: Center

Complexity: High

Pros:

  • Statistical information is fantastic
  • Polling is (usually) accurate (except for 2016 election)
  • Great analysis of statistics, great breakdown

Cons:

  • News coverage can be lacking
  • Some writers are lacking
  • A bit sensationalist with the titles

 

FiveThirtyEight is a great source for what it is great at: statistics. Nate Silver, the websites founder, tries to use statistical analysis to predict and analyze what is going on around the world. The problem is, statistics aren’t infallible, and not everything can be quantified. When it comes to issues that can be easily defined with numbers and statistics, FiveThirtyEight is a phenomenal website and news source, but sometimes their coverage can be a bit lacking in scope. During election season, FiveThirtyEight becomes one of my go-to news sources, and every other year is an election season, so I’m around a lot.

 

 

Image result for the wall street journal

5. THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Political Leaning: Center-Right

Complexity: High

Pros:

  • The best in the business for economic news and business news
  • Great news coverage in general, one of the most prestigious news papers
  • Great for left-leaning people to get other perspectives

Cons:

  • The Op-Ed section can get a little too partisan for me
  • Pay wall

 

The Wall Street Journal is one of the most well-known news sources in the United States today. They’re a great source of news, and the only reason they aren’t ranked higher is because of the pay wall. I only have a certain budget I’m willing to spend on news, and there are other news sources I rank higher that I am willing to pay for. The Wall Street Journal is great for almost any news coverage, and the only knock against them is the editorial board sometimes lets some partisan op-eds through that aren’t based too deeply in fact, or are sensationalist.

 

 

 

Image result for the washington post

4. THE WASHINGTON POST

Political Leaning: Center

Complexity: Medium

Pros: 

  • Free for desktop viewers
  • The best in the business at covering Washington D.C, and what government is doing

Cons:

  • Pay wall for mobile viewers
  • Scope of news coverage is limited if it doesn’t have to do with Washington D.C

The Washington Post is a great news source for knowing what’s going on in Washington. Thankfully for the Post, that’s most everything. They have great coverage on the health care debate, and the issues of the day that Congress is debating. If something happens in Washington, the Post is on it, with a generally high quality of reporting. The level of complexity is higher than some others on the list, and just like FiveThirtyEight, the Post is the best at what it does, and not great at what it doesn’t, but what it does is bigger than FiveThirtyEight, making it land higher on this list.

 

 

Image result for the new york times

3. THE NEW YORK TIMES

Political Leaning: Center-Left

Complexity: Medium

Pros:

  • Largest and most prestigious newspaper in the world. Truly THE newspaper.
  • Has most stories, great coverage domestically and world wide

Cons:

  • Pay wall after 10 free monthly articles (has a student discount)

The New York Times is the only news source that I actually pay to subscribe to. It truly has it all and covers nearly anything you can imagine. Because it is such a prestigious news paper, it attracts some great writers and puts out consistently great content. My only criticisms for The Times is the pay wall. The New York Times is in a class of it’s own for news coverage and is truly the only news organization that I believe everyone should subscribe to. The two news sources that beat the Times win out only because I read them more often, and it all comes down to personal preference.

 

Image result for the atlantic

2. THE ATLANTIC

Political Leaning: Left

Complexity: Very High

Pros: 

  • Amazing complexity and analytical depth: really breaks down issues and brings them to the forefront
  • Great topic selection
  • One of the easiest to read
  • Has my favorite writers

Cons:

  • Less scope and size compared to the Times or the Post
  • Has quite a few fluff pieces

The Atlantic is a great news source for someone who wants to read a smaller amount of articles but really understand whats going on after reading it. For someone who doesn’t closely follow the news, The Atlantic is one of the most readable news sources. They use a lot of quotes, stories, and write more “feature” style stories than news stories. They contain tons of information but are far more accessible. My only problem with The Atlantic is that there isn’t enough of it’s content.

 

Image result for NPR

1. NPR

Political Leaning: Center

Complexity: Medium

Pros:

  • Radio content is fantastic
  • Free app that allows access to radio broadcasts and written stories
  • Tons of content, large amount of scope
  • Local content, state content, and national content

Cons:

  • Quality of content can vary depending on local NPR hosts

I’m showing a bit of my bias here, but in terms of news sources I consume the most, NPR definitely takes the cake. Their radio programs are fantastic, particularly “On Point”, “1A”, and “All Things Considered”. NPR can provide you with as much content as you can ever hope to recieve and consume, with a sufficient level of complexity and without going too far in one direction or the other.