Before endorsing corporate censorship, the Anniston Star should consider its own circumstances

In a Friday editorial, the Anniston Star gave its readers a lesson on the First Amendment.

Correctly, the Star explained that even though conspiracy radio talker Alex Jones was denied access to platforms hosted by Facebook, Apple and Google, his First Amendment rights had not been violated.

“Alex Jones’ First Amendment rights have not at all been hindered, hampered, silenced or denied. He can still (and most certainly will) continue to make outrageous claims about the government and launch untrue attacks on his political foes,” the Star editorial says. “But, as free market entities, Facebook, Apple, Twitter and all other media have every right to tell Jones that he can’t use their bullhorn to spread his fake news.”

That’s such a bold statement from a media outlet that doesn’t solely rely on web advertising to sustain itself and instead can hide behind an $8 a month paywall. It’s also a bold statement from an outlet that is on the approved list of print newspapers that make it a legally acceptable publication for legal advertisements.

The Star offers a list of Alex Jones’ indiscretions and suggests it is perfectly reasonable these tech giants to act as they had. It also dismisses the notion of a potential slippery slope that may lead to other outlets being banned because of their political stripes given the new creation of this new subjective standard.

What if we applied a subjective standard to the Anniston Star? Let’s play this game to a logical extreme and consider the implications for the newspaper launched by Col. Harry M. Ayers in 1911.

Earlier this year when it was revealed then-Anniston Star publisher H. Brandt Ayers, the son of Harry Ayers, had allegedly sexually harassed female employees by spanking them, what if certain entities determined this bastion of progressive liberalism in Alabama should be punished? It certainly wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibilities given the Star had burned a lot of bridges over the years.

Even though these supposed indiscretions happened decades ago, what’s to stop someone from saying, “They should be punished! We need to show this kind of misogynistic behavior should not be tolerated and therefore, we must make an example out of the Star. Let’s make it so that they can no longer satisfy legal requirements as an acceptable forum for legal advertising,” and therefore deny the Star a revenue stream?

That would not be preventing the Star from exercising its First Amendment rights – but that doesn’t make it right.

The Anniston Star shouldn’t be expected to defend Alex Jones, nor shouldn’t anyone.

But do us all a favor first: Spare us from your urge to use your opinion page as an avenue for a victory lap and sanctimonious justification for Alex Jones’ setback.

@Jeff_Poor is a graduate of Auburn University and is the editor of Breitbart TV.