I live in Bend Oregon. EO Media has a monopoly on the three major print media publishing in Central Oregon, 2 newspapers and one Nickel ads. They are refusing to take my ad which presents opposing viewpoints to a constant stream of nonsense. The issue
is there is no other place to advertise. The ad was a small classified ad. The main paper has total control over the news and opinion and it is all on one side of the issues. There must be something about monopolies I can legally use to attack their
rejection. It looks like the last posts on this thread are more than 20 years old...maybe someone will pick it up....

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/24/2022 9:31 PM, Peter wrote:

I live in Bend Oregon. EO Media has a monopoly on the three major print media publishing in Central Oregon, 2 newspapers and one Nickel ads. They are refusing to take my ad which presents opposing viewpoints to a constant stream of nonsense. The

issue is there is no other place to advertise. The ad was a small classified ad. The main paper has total control over the news and opinion and it is all on one side of the issues. There must be something about monopolies I can legally use to attack
their rejection. It looks like the last posts on this thread are more than 20 years old...maybe someone will pick it up....

The EO Media Group is a private entity. They have pretty much complete
freedom to publish what they want(*), and to refuse to publish what they
don't want. That comes from the First Amendment to the US Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a

redress of grievances.

There *might* be an exception for a "Newspaper of public record" -- some
states might require them to accept all "legal notice"-type ads:
"Not responsible for any debts but my own"
"George Williams and Frank March, doing business as "Wilmarch Porcelain"





--
I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"Peter" wrote in message news:cd0ba9f9-ab55-4b09-9cc1-be601aaa03b7n@googlegroups.com...

I live in Bend Oregon. EO Media has a monopoly on the three major print >media publishing in Central Oregon, 2 newspapers and one Nickel ads. They >are refusing to take my ad which presents opposing viewpoints to a constant >stream of nonsense. The issue is there is no other place to advertise.
The ad was a small classified ad. The main paper has total control over
the news and opinion and it is all on one side of the issues. There must
be something about monopolies I can legally use to attack their rejection.
It looks like the last posts on this thread are more than 20 years >old...maybe someone will pick it up....

Freedom of the Press doesn't mean you have carte blanche to demand any newspaper publish your views. It means that you, as a citizen, have a right
to start your own newspaper or self-publish to present your views. Also, in the modern world where virtually anyone can get access to the internet, you
can easily find ways to express your views online.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

It appears that Peter <ptworkshopmusic@gmail.com> said:

I live in Bend Oregon. EO Media has a monopoly on the three major print media publishing in Central Oregon, 2
newspapers and one Nickel ads. They are refusing to take my ad which presents opposing viewpoints to a constant
stream of nonsense. ...

In 1974 in Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974), the Supreme
Court unanimously voided a Florida law which a right to reply to
political candidates, that if the newspaper attacked the candidate, it
had to publish the candidate's reply. Nope.

That was a very different court. I suppose we will see what the
current court thinks about publishers and compelled speech when it
considers the Florida anti-moderation law, which was blocked by a
sensible 11th circuit opinion, and the Texas anti-moderation law which
was upheld by a deranged 5th circuit opinion. A lot of the current
court seems to want to stick it to big Internet companies, but it's
hard to see how they could do that without also screwing up 1st
amendment law for everyone else. (No, there is no way to make Facebook
a "common carrier", whatever you might imagine that to mean in
practice.)

I can imagine an interesting corner case if a newspaper of record
refused a legal notice. For example, here in New York, when you set up
an LLC, you have to publish a notice in two newspapers of record in
your county. In my county, there are exactly two such newspapers and
if one refused to publish it, you'd be out of luck. But I expect that
if such a case ended up in court, the court would tell the government
to change the requirement rather than to force the paper to publish it.

In practice it seems hard to imagine a realistic legal notice
scenario. Counties publish lists of upcoming real estate foreclosure
sales and maybe if the paper's owner was on the list, he might not
want to publish, but the sale would go ahead anyway.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

Peter <ptworkshopmusic@gmail.com> said:

I live in Bend Oregon. EO Media has a monopoly on the three major
print media publishing in Central Oregon, 2 newspapers and one
Nickel ads. They are refusing to take my ad which presents
opposing viewpoints to a constant stream of nonsense. ...

In 1974 in Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974), the
Supreme Court unanimously voided a Florida law which a right to
reply to political candidates, that if the newspaper attacked the
candidate, it had to publish the candidate's reply. Nope.

That was a very different court. I suppose we will see what the
current court thinks about publishers and compelled speech when it
considers the Florida anti-moderation law, which was blocked by a
sensible 11th circuit opinion, and the Texas anti-moderation law
which was upheld by a deranged 5th circuit opinion. A lot of the
current court seems to want to stick it to big Internet companies,
but it's hard to see how they could do that without also screwing
up 1st amendment law for everyone else. (No, there is no way to
make Facebook a "common carrier", whatever you might imagine that
to mean in practice.)

That's not a phrase I hear very often, "sensible 11th circuit
opinion."

I can imagine an interesting corner case if a newspaper of record
refused a legal notice. For example, here in New York, when you
set up an LLC, you have to publish a notice in two newspapers of
record in your county. In my county, there are exactly two such
newspapers and if one refused to publish it, you'd be out of luck.
But I expect that if such a case ended up in court, the court
would tell the government to change the requirement rather than to
force the paper to publish it.

What does it take to become a "newspaper or record" in New York? In
California a paper has to apply and get a court to recognize it as a
"newspaper of general circulation." Applying to publish legal
notices implies recognition of the duty to publish legal notices.
Though you're right, the current Court has done things I think are
loopy and inconsistent with recognized precedent.

In practice it seems hard to imagine a realistic legal notice
scenario. Counties publish lists of upcoming real estate
foreclosure sales and maybe if the paper's owner was on the list,
he might not want to publish, but the sale would go ahead anyway.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

According to Stuart O. Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com>:

That's not a phrase I hear very often, "sensible 11th circuit
opinion."

Well, compared to the 5th, pretty much anything seems sensible

What does it take to become a "newspaper or record" in New York? In >California a paper has to apply and get a court to recognize it as a >"newspaper of general circulation." ...

The New York LLC law (sec 206) says the newspapers are designated by
the county clerk, one daily and one weekly. If there is no designated
paper, you can publish in an adjoining county. I suppose if one of
our newspapers misbehaved the clerk could un-designate them and we
could use an adjacent county newspaper but the whole thing seems
pretty far fetched.

The next county over where Watkins Glen is located is so small that it
has no daily paper at all, so I guess they use ours.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)