Not...exactly. She could, it simply appears she has an extra hoop to hop through.

Ellen Goodman (How'd the Boston Globe let her escape the pasture?) writing in today's Washington Post says that due to an arcane law, even dissident voices from countries like Iran have trouble getting published in the USA.

Will Her Voice Ever Be Heard?

Now, it certainly sounds like a silly law. I say "sounds like" because I wouldn't say that it is for sure until I hear the counter-point that Goodman does not, and is under no obligation to, provide - although it wouldn't have hurt the piece and the point as we shall see.

Thing is, we get to this:

Now, if this were a blog-post, writing a graph like that would have a tendency to drain the outrage right out of the rest my post. Happens all the time, in fact. I'm hopping along, happily writing a mess of snark, when I start to anticipate the objections and address them - then it hits and I start seeing some of the other side, a little doubt enters the equation and before you know it the high dudgeon strikes the bottom of the shallow pool.

So maybe it is a silly rule, but I read that graph and think, "Oh, so our rules aren't good enough for her, eh? Can't be bothered to fill out some simple paperwork then? We need a jurist from the Shah's Iran to come lecture us, the USA, on freedom of speech? Pffft...I don't think so..." And there it is...suddenly I'm having trouble taking the rest of the piece seriously.

Of course, I could just turn the blog post into a pointer. If you're actually getting paid for your print, I suppose you soldier on regardless. The cash is worth the credibility drain...I guess.