Vice President Kamala Harris has been excluding certain news outlets from her campaign events, and people are questioning whether this is a free speech violation or not! Here's what we know so far: First off, let me ask you this: Should politicians be able to decide who gets to cover their public events? It seems like a pretty shady practice if you ask me. I mean, isn't the whole point of having a free press in this country so that everyone can get access to information and form their own opinions? But apparently, Harris's campaign thinks otherwise. 

Now, here's where it gets interesting: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette claims they've been blocked from all future events because of some labor dispute at their paper. And to make matters worse, the Harris camp seems to be siding with this union that has a history of making controversial posts on social media (I'm talking about things like calling out the governor for wanting more police officers and joking about running over cops). But wait, there's more! The New Hampshire Journal is also reporting that they were barred from attending one of Harris's events in their state. 

And apparently, this isn't just a Harris thing - it seems to be happening with other Democratic candidates too. So here's my takeaway: If politicians are going to start blocking certain media outlets from covering public events, then how can we really trust what we're hearing? It feels like they're trying to control the narrative and keep information from getting out there. And that, my friends, is a dangerous

Harris Campaign's Press Blacklist: A Dangerous Threat to Free Speech?

Actions