The First Amendment's primary concern, and therefore the courts' concern, always has been

the preservation of free and uninhibited dissemination of information and ideas.

If the restrictive view of corporate speech taken by the Massachusetts court were accepted,

the government would have the power to deprive society of the views of corporations on all issues,

other than those that could be proved to affect adversely their property or business interest.

Corporations thus could be prohibited from expressing views by advertisements otherwise on all

matters of general public interest.

Review the Massachusetts court's decision as seriously restricting public access to major

sources of ideas and educational information.

That is the late Justice Lewis Powell, reading his majority opinion in the Supreme Court case

first National Bank of Boston versus Bellotti.

It was April 1978.

The US had just weathered the OPEC oil embargo but was about to be plunged into another

energy crisis spurred by revolution in Iran.

President Jimmy Carter was in the White House pushing energy efficiency programs and installing

solar panels.

Exxon was ramping up research on renewable energy, lithium batteries, and this new thing

called the greenhouse effect.

At mobile oil, Herb Schmarts was focusing on controlling the narrative, which required

bending, not just the media itself, but also the law's governing media to his will.

It seems to me that society has given the press a great privilege.

That privilege is embodied in the First Amendment.

...