By Jonathan W. Emord
Overview
Jonathan W. Emord, a constitutional and administrative law attorney, explores the intersection of technology, free speech, and government regulation in Freedom, Technology, and the First Amendment. The book critiques how government agencies, particularly the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), have restricted freedom of speech in the name of regulation.
Emord argues that technological advancements, rather than increasing liberty, have often led to greater government control over communication, threatening the core First Amendment protections of free speech and press. His work warns of censorship, overregulation, and the consequences of allowing government bureaucracies to decide what information the public can access.
Key Themes & Arguments
The First Amendment as a Protection Against Government Censorship
Emord firmly believes that the First Amendment guarantees an absolute right to free speech, and any government restrictions on speech should be viewed as unconstitutional.
- The Founders intended for free speech to be unrestricted, fearing that any government regulation could be used as a tool for tyranny.
- Government agencies like the FCC and FDA often justify censorship under the guise of “protecting the public”, but in reality, these restrictions limit knowledge, innovation, and dissent.
- Freedom of speech is the foundation of democracy, and once the government begins restricting communication, the public is at risk of becoming uninformed, manipulated, and controlled.
Government Regulation as a Tool for Censorship
Emord exposes how federal agencies, particularly the FCC and FDA, have used regulatory power to suppress speech rather than protect the public interest.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
- Created to prevent monopolies and ensure fair access to airwaves, the FCC has instead become a gatekeeper of information.
- Emord argues that “public interest” regulations allow the government to control political speech, favoring certain viewpoints while silencing others.
- Restrictions on broadcasting, advertising, and media ownership create an environment where only state-approved narratives thrive.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
- The FDA censors scientific speech by prohibiting health claims unless they pass through government approval processes, limiting innovation and access to medical knowledge.
- Pharmaceutical and natural health industries are severely restricted in their ability to discuss the benefits of their products, even when backed by science.
- Emord argues that the FDA’s speech restrictions harm public health, as patients are deprived of vital medical information that could empower them to make informed choices.
Technology and the Expansion of Government Control
One of Emord’s most important arguments is that technological advancements—rather than expanding freedom—have led to greater government control over speech.
- Regulatory agencies use new communication technologies (TV, radio, internet) as justification for imposing stricter speech controls.
- The rise of the internet and digital media has created new opportunities for government censorship, especially under the guise of “combating misinformation.”
- Instead of protecting free speech, technology has given the government the ability to monitor, regulate, and even suppress speech on an unprecedented scale.
“Every new medium of communication, from the printing press to the internet, has faced immediate attempts at government regulation. What we are witnessing is not the evolution of free speech, but its slow death by bureaucracy.”
The “Marketplace of Ideas” vs. Government Regulation
Emord champions the marketplace of ideas as the best safeguard for truth and progress.
- Instead of the government deciding what speech is “true” or “false,” the public should be free to debate and decide.
- The free flow of information fuels progress, especially in medicine, science, and politics.
- Regulations that limit speech in the name of “safety” or “public good” often serve as tools for suppressing dissent.
For example:
- The FDA’s ban on certain alternative health treatments prevents public debate on potentially life-saving remedies.
- The FCC’s broadcast regulations suppress independent journalism and promote narratives that serve government interests.
- Censorship in political speech ensures that only certain viewpoints gain mainstream attention.
“The greatest danger to liberty is not the individual with a microphone, but the bureaucrat with a rulebook.”
Emord’s Solutions: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age
Emord offers concrete solutions for restoring the First Amendment and ensuring technology enhances freedom rather than restricts it.
Deregulate Speech in Medicine & Science
- Repeal FDA speech restrictions so that scientists, doctors, and innovators can freely discuss medical advancements.
- Allow natural health companies to share truthful information without fear of government censorship.
End the FCC’s Control Over Broadcasting
- The FCC should stop regulating speech based on “public interest” and instead allow a free marketplace of information.
- Media ownership restrictions should be removed so that independent voices can compete with large corporations.
Protect Free Speech on the Internet
- Emord warns of increasing government control over digital speech (social media censorship, misinformation laws, etc.).
- He advocates for strict constitutional protections to ensure the internet remains a platform for free expression.
Relevance Today: Emord’s Predictions & the Modern Struggle for Free Speech
Emord’s work, written in 1991, has become even more relevant in the modern era of internet censorship, social media regulation, and government overreach.
- Government censorship under the guise of “misinformation”: Big Tech, in coordination with government agencies, now controls digital speech.
- The suppression of alternative medical speech: The COVID-19 pandemic saw an explosion of censorship on alternative treatments and dissenting scientific opinions.
- Social media “fact-checking” as a new form of speech control, often influenced by government partnerships with tech giants.
- The push for digital ID and surveillance to track online speech, raising concerns about mass censorship and a government-controlled “truth” narrative.
“Once the government decides which ideas are acceptable, the First Amendment is dead.” – Jonathan Emord
Final Thoughts: A Call to Action for Defenders of Free Speech
Freedom, Technology, and the First Amendment is a powerful warning about the danger of allowing government to regulate speech in the name of public interest, misinformation control, or safety.
- Emord argues that the First Amendment must be absolute—no exceptions, no loopholes, and no regulatory agencies acting as “truth arbiters.”
- Government agencies like the FCC and FDA should not control speech—the people should.
- Technology should empower free expression rather than serve as a tool for mass censorship.
As government overreach into speech regulation continues to expand, Emord’s insights remain essential for those fighting to protect free speech in the digital age.
