A Great Day For Free Speech

Two days ago, Dubner and Levitt, the Freakonomics authors, moved their blog to the Opinion section of the NY Times website. There was a big announcement on the Times home page. Dubner posted a short and modest note about the move ("we are excited and flattered"). It got over 100 comments, mostly about the lack of full RSS feed ("I thought this move would be good news but the truncated RSS feed pisses me off") along with a few formulaic congratulations.

So I'll say it: This is a fantastic accomplishment. Two days ago was a great day for freedom of speech. For the first time ever, someone -- actually two people -- can say whatever they want as often as they want however they want (long, short, funny, serious, video, text) in the most coveted spot in the entire media world. Levitt took the new freedom out for a spin by posting a what might be considered a big help to terrorists. Nothing like that has ever appeared in the Times or any other major newspaper in the whole history of newspapers, I'm quite sure. Nor anywhere else with a big audience.

David Brooks earned his Op-Ed column, yes, but he was also given it. His influence went way up when he started that job. Were he to lose his column, his influence would clearly diminish. He can be fired, in other words, and being fired would hurt him. Dubner and Levitt, on the other hand, can upset the people who control the Times as often and as deeply as they wish. They can be removed from the Times but it will make little difference to them -- it might even help them. No matter what they say, no matter how many powerful people they offend, they will always be able to find a hosting service for their blog and will always have a big respectful audience. If anyone should be worried about offending anyone else, the people who run the Times should be worried about offending Dubner and Levitt. That's taking freedom of speech to a whole new level.

To the right of David Brooks' column -- which appears twice a week and has a fairly constant length, format, and tone -- on the Times website is a blank area. David Brooks controls none of it. Whereas to the right of the Freakonomics blog is the largest set of links ever to appear on the Times website, completely under the authors' control. One section (5 links) is titled Organ Transplants. Dubner and Levitt believe that the regulations about organ transplants are too restrictive. Given its visibility and prestige placement, that little section is not just a constant reminder of their position but a powerful force for change. It is a new kind of activism. The rest of the Times's dozen-odd blogs have tiny blogrolls if any, always narrow-focus and never activist.

Quite apart from the tangible power, there is also the symbolism of it: A blog is being given the utmost respect. Blogs are inherently about diversity of voices and the notion that everyone has something to say. Editorials are not (of course). Newspaper columns are not (they are almost always by journalists). Now that the Times has shown a blog such respect, other important places will do the same. The esteem of blogs will rise in the world and, inextricably, so will the beliefs they embody.