CBS’s weekend programming focused on Germany’s language norms and censorship. first, Facing the country Host Margaret Brennan argued that the freedom of the press has strengthened the power to take over the government and implement the Holocaust. then, 60 minutes In an interview with the German authorities, we explained not only the Nazi speech but also the efforts to curb bad information, gossip, and insults for politicians.
The amazing degree of the media’s principle of the media was amazing. News groups can freely prove their preference for intimacy policy in Europe, but their criticisms in the secretary of JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were very valuable.
CBS is also wrong. Brennan’s argument that “free speeches have become weapon to perform massacre” in Nazi Germany are a profound misunderstanding of history.
Brennan’s remarks came from an interview with Rubio, where she challenged Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference. It is fair to criticize Vance Too much kind Germany’s right party, German alternative (AFD) while visiting Europe; However, most of the speech focused on the freedom of the European Union’s freedom and betrayal.Some of the most fundamental values. “In fact, EU commissioners took more and more shameless actions for police speeches on social media and were criticized by free organizations of American citizens.
Brennon urged Rubio to defend Vance’s actions, and the Nazis argued that they had “inorgan the free speech” to perform massacre.
Margaret Brennan’s entirely bizarre claim. She made the Nazi Holocaust more concerned about Vance’s opinion because it occurred in Germany because of a “free speech inorganation.” As a result of excessive free speeches, it is entirely Bonkers to cast the Holocaust again. pic.twitter.com/2VEFGLZT6S
-Michael Tracey (@mtracey) February 16, 2025
But Brennon is wrong.
At the time between World War I and World War II, Germany was a paradise for the media and used Nazi Gai was completely false. In fact, historians during the war have the name of this false claim: Weimar Oldacy.
On the contrary, because of the fear of the increase in the influence of the Nazis, Weimar Germany took authoritarian measures to prohibit and censor Nazi speeches in the 1920s. Greg Lukianof, Chairman of Personal Rights and Expression Foundation, I wrote a great article Lukianof, unlike the Nazis’s free speech in the media in 2022, has closed hundreds of Nazis for two years. “They accelerated the crackdown on speeches when Nazis rose to power. Hitler himself banned what he said in several German states from 1925 to 1927. “
Similarly, Nadine Strossen, former president of the United States Citizen’s Freedom Union, found almost the advantages of the idea of an effective strategy for Nazi speeches and advocacy. Instead, She wrote. The German government did not take appropriate measures to reduce Nazi violence. Violence is not a speech, and the government has actually been able to do more to prevent political terrorism and have to do more.
In any case, Brennan’s claim was that the free speech gave Nazis. It is clear that she is wrong because there was a significant restriction on the Nazi speech during the relevant period. The German government desperately tried to censor Nazis. It didn’t work. Of course, when the Nazis achieved political power, they were able to silence their critics using the government’s vast censorship.
To this day, Germany still prohibits certain types of Nazi speeches. Another CBS show, Sunday evening news program 60 minutesThe German authorities paid attention to the current efforts of the police. It was quite surprising that they released. Indeed, the German government censors hate not only Nazi speeches, but also more broadly, and they don’t like “insults” of wrong information, gossip, and even politicians.
Posting or re -publishing false information in Germany can be a crime, and the punishment for repeated criminals can contain prison time. pic.twitter.com/25OLFOLFNA
-60 minutes (@60 minutes) February 17, 2025
The interviewers explained that the Germans could be accused of sharing and favoring illegal content in social media.
CBS reporter SHARYN ALFONSI We offered minimal push bags. At some point, she suggested that it is a kind of Nazi to monitor and think about it. But no one could be too critical of Germany’s approach to online speeches.
Nevertheless, the German prosecutor clearly undermined his case by showing what restrictions on language inevitably caused slippery slopes. Progressives start by saying that they are all for free media. They just want to create unprotected speeches with new and narrow protection categories. Next, it is inevitably widened to include hatred, extremism, and wrong information. In Germany, the authorities also ban insults with politicians. The interviewers explained in detail the infamous 2021 incident that attacked the individual’s house, which the police called the ugly name (nickname of male reproductive institution).
Alfonsi summarized the German approach as follows: “So it sounds like you are talking. It’s okay to criticize the politician’s policy, but ‘I think you are stupid.”
This is a textbook example of why Americans are proudly proud of our strong first crystal tradition. Do not forget that European officials, who claim to be important to censor Nazi speeches, say that politicians are the same as those who want to arrest citizens.
