Post in Is the Internet legally a "public forum?" Limited public forums and e-government

Mar 25 20:41 UTC

1. In the U.S. context does anyone know if the courts have found the
Internet to be a "public forum" like courts recognize public sidewalks or
public parks as "places" historically recognized for free speech.

I know of no cases, but it's unlikely that the "Internet" would be
considered a forum, anymore than "the telephone" is a forum.  The Internet
is really a medium for information flow, and the hot policy topic these days
is whether ISPs should be forced to act as "common carriers," like telephone
companies, or whether they have some editorial control over what they
transmit, like cable companies.  (Recall also that the networks comprised in
the Internet are not publicly owned resources, like the land on which parks
and sidewalks are located.)

Even if the Internet were conceived as a "place," like a sidewalk, it would
be hard to argue that something invented by the government within the last
thirty years as a vehicle for scientific communication would amount to a
traditional space for free speech.

* * *

2. I've noticed a number of government websites with policy statements
attempting to establish that their websites are not "limited (or designated)
public forums." I bumped into one federal government online consultation
that declared a limited public forum online for X days. Does anyone know of
research in this area?

(Due to the power of "one-way" e-government, I can imagine citizens pushing
for two-way "designated public forums" on government websites within the
context of public meeting agenda items for example in my lifetime.)

* * *

Again, I know of no specific research -- except for a paper on which I am
currently collaborating -- but I think that, absent express disclaimers,
government consultation web sites may already qualify as "designated public
forums."  This does not make them free speech corners in the same way we
think of Hyde Park; they can still be policed for subject matter relevance,
and other norms appropriate to the purpose of the forum.  What the
designation would mean in a U.S. context is that the government could not
limit speech in the forum according to viewpoint.  Thus, for example, if New
York City created an online consultation on public security issues, they
could refuse to post comments about sports teams moving to New Jersey.  They
could not, however, decide to post comments in favor of more community
policing, but refuse to post comments in opposition.