What happened to Sterling was wrong

Marc J. Randazza: Donald Sterling's First Amendment rights weren't violated in scandal Government isn't punishing speech, he says, but Sterling's ideas failed in marketplace He says problem was recording of Sterling may have been illegal, leaking it morally wrong Randazza: This could happen to any of our private conversations today and it's chilling

Editor's note: Marc J. Randazza is a Las Vegas-based First Amendment attorney and is the managing partner of the Randazza Legal Group. He is licensed to practice in Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts and Nevada. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- This past week, my inbox blew up with e-mails asking whether Donald Sterling's First Amendment rights were violated in the uproar over the Los Angeles Clippers owner's racist remarks about black people. After all, he was simply expressing his views, however unpopular.

While he did have some rights violated, his First Amendment rights remain intact.

The First Amendment protects you from the government punishing you because of your speech. The NBA is a private club, and it can discipline Sterling all it wants.

Marc J. Randazza

What about the chorus of criticism? Are we all violating his First Amendment rights by criticizing him? We are punishing him for his speech.

Nope. The First Amendment does not insulate you from criticism. In fact, that's the First Amendment in action. That is how the marketplace of ideas works. We float our ideas in the marketplace, and we see which idea sells.

Most everyone would agree that Sterling's ideas fail in the marketplace of ideas. Nevertheless, I reluctantly stand on Sterling's side today. What happened to him may have been illegal and was morally wrong.

Start with illegal. In California, you can't record a conversation without the knowledge or consent of both parties. The recording featuring Sterling and V. Stiviano may be the result of a crime. Once she gathered this information, someone leaked it (she denies it was her) -- and it went viral. This is where I think things went morally wrong.

We all say things in private that we might not say in public. Sometimes we have ideas that are not fully developed -- we try them out with our closest friends. Consider it our test-marketplace of ideas. As our ideas develop, we consider whether to make them public. Should we not all have the freedom to make that choice on our own?

Crisis guru on NBA racism controversy Ex-NBA star: No room in sport for bigotry Bigotry a symptom of generational divide?

The Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy made his own stupid and bigoted statements, and he's been nationally pilloried, too -- but he chose to make those statements to the world. He deserves every ounce of obloquy heaped upon him.

But does Sterling? Think about what his public character execution means. It means that we now live in a world where if you have any views that are unpopular, you now not only need to fear saying them in public, but you need to fear saying them at all -- even to your intimate friends. They might be recording you, and then that recording may be spread across the Internet for everyone to hear.

Isn't it bad enough that the National Security Agency can spy on all of us? How can we complain when we condone giving our closest friends the ability to do worse -- perhaps just to try and destroy us.

In the novel "1984," George Orwell wrote of the Telescreen, a device that beamed information into the home but that also spied on people constantly. Even if we were to stop the NSA in its tracks, would we still now live in a world where the Telescreen watches us? Only instead of an oppressive government installing it in our apartments, it is conveniently placed in the hands of our dear friends.

The Sterling story is not that we found a bigot and dragged him to the gallows in the middle of the marketplace of ideas. The Sterling story is about how there is no more privacy. We live in a world where you can share your intimate photos with your lover, and they will wind up on a "revenge porn" website.

We live in a world where our intimate conversations will be recorded and blasted to billions of listeners. We live in a world where, say a gold digger can spy on her sugar daddy, and the world says that the creepy old guy is the bad guy.

Don't get me wrong. Sterling does seem to be a bad person. But sometimes the bad person is also the victim, and he stands in for us. As you applaud Stiviano for bringing the racist old man's views to light, consider if it were you speaking to a woman friend in what you thought was a private conversation.

Do we now live in a world where we can trust nobody? Where there is no privacy?

In this story, there are two villains. Sterling represents the bad old days. But Stiviano's behavior represents the horrifying future. Shouldn't we condemn the complete breakdown of privacy and trust at least as loudly as we condemn some old man's racist blathering?

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

Opinion: Black Jews remark is trouble

Robin Washington looks at comments attributed to Sterling that slam black Jews in Israel "You go to Israel, the blacks are just treated like dogs," said a voice reported to be Sterling's Black Jews face adversity, but to compare them to "dogs" is out of bounds, he says

Burglar caught wearing WHAT?

Burglar caught on camera wearing WHAT? - CNN.com Video

See ferry captain flee in underwear

Confusion, anger in ferry disaster - CNN.com Video

Girl dies after apparent bullying attack

Two of Cofreces' alleged attackers were her classmates, officials say The 17-year-old student went home after attack, was taken to hospital the next day A friend said one of the alleged attackers told the victim she had a snobby face

Why you'll hate Internet 'fast lane'

The FCC might allow Internet service providers to charge more for a "fast lane" Corynne McSherry: High costs will go to customers; Internet competition will be stifled She says other advanced countries pay far less and get faster service than Americans McSherry: On May 15, the public can weigh in on FCC's decision and voice concerns

Editor's note: Corynne McSherry is the intellectual property director at Electronic Frontier Foundation. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Recently, Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, came under fire for reportedly proposing exceedingly weak "open Internet rules." If the reports are correct, the FCC will allow broadband providers like Comcast to make special deals that give some companies preferential treatment, as long as those deals are "commercially reasonable."

In other words, rather then requiring broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic more or less equally, the FCC will permit them to create an Internet "fast lane" and shake down content providers like Netflix, Google and Amazon for the right to travel in it.

Guess who will really end up paying for the fast lane? Yep -- you, the customers.

The price will be higher than you think. Not only will you have to pay more for the services you already use, but you will also lose out on emerging services that will be crushed by the new costs.

YouTube and Netflix may be able to "pay to play." But innovative competitors -- the next Facebook, Twitter or YouTube being dreamed up in someone's garage right now -- may not.

The proposed rules aren't all bad. The FCC will also require ISPs to be more transparent about the deals they make so customers will know what they are getting. The FCC will also caution ISPs against making deals that favor their own affiliated businesses (we're looking at you, Comcast -- no special favors for your friends at NBC Universal).

Court ruling might make Netflix cost more

Unfortunately, even "transparency" is tougher to enforce than many might think, because so much of our connectivity depends on secret agreements between various kinds of Internet service providers.

The devil is in the details. The good news is that we will have a chance to look at those details in a few weeks and tell the FCC what we think. The FCC will be voting on the new rules at its May 15 meeting. If it votes to adopt them, it must publish the proposed rules in advance and respond to public concerns about them. The problem is that most people don't know how this process works, and so they don't participate. (The Electronic Frontier Foundation is building a tool that will make that easier; visit our site next month at www.eff.org)

The Internet is too important to leave to bureaucrats who seem more beholden to the ISPs than the public. We need to let the FCC know we will not tolerate rules that let ISPs pick and choose how well Internet users can connect to one another.

If we really want to stop net discrimination, we need to foster a genuinely competitive market for Internet access. Right now, subscribers have few ISP options in many markets. If subscribers and customers had adequate information about their options and could vote with their feet -- i.e., switch providers -- ISPs would have strong incentives to treat all network traffic fairly.

Moreover, they would also have an incentive to improve our Internet speeds. Most Americans don't realize it, but the United States is falling behind when it comes to high-speed Internet. We pay much more for much less than subscribers in other developed countries like Sweden, South Korea and Japan.

Subscribers in those countries are getting Internet service that is 100 times faster than the fastest connection in the United States -- for a fraction of the average U.S. cable bill. That's appalling. We can do better, but only if we start demanding more from ISPs.

Already, our lagging Internet speeds are likely to have serious consequences. "What's at stake is whether the new jobs, new ideas, new services of the 21st century will come from the United States or they'll come from Stockholm, Seoul, Beijing, where kids are already playing in the virtual sandboxes of these very high capacity networks," noted Susan Crawford, a legal scholar who has served on President Obama's science and tech team.

Our ISPs have no incentive to invest in building powerful, competitive, networks. Why should they? It's not like their customers are going anywhere.

Fortunately, efforts are under way to address this. For example, all around the country, cities are investing in their own broadband networks, some successfully. Fostering strong alternatives in high-speed Internet access won't be easy, and community broadband alone won't be the panacea. But it's a start, and a movement the FCC should support.

We'll need more experiments like these if we want the Internet to continue to be an extraordinary platform for free expression, innovation and commerce. So let's make sure the FCC hears us loud and clear: Reject "pay to play" and resist monopolies so that everyone benefits, not just the powerful Internet service providers.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

Black Jews remark may dog Sterling

Robin Washington looks at comments attributed to Sterling that slam black Jews in Israel "You go to Israel, the blacks are just treated like dogs," said a voice reported to be Sterling's Black Jews face adversity, but to compare them to "dogs" is out of bounds, he says

Jindal: Now who's the 'stupid party'?

Bobby Jindal once warned the GOP to stop being the "stupid party" He says Democrats now need to heed that advice He points to changes in the rollout of Obamacare and delays in the individual mandate He argues the Obama administration thinks Americans are "delusional" or "dimwits"

Bundy hurts GOP with black voters

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Who will blink first, Putin or the West?

Russia and the West locked in match of wits over eastern Ukraine Russia moved thousands of troops to border and is accused of stirring unrest in east Ukraine Speck: West must unite to pass severe sanctions on Russian regime Speck: Ukrainian government attempt to retake buildings could spark Russian invasion

Should it be legal for politicians to lie?

Ilya Shapiro says that political speech should not be regulated by states The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on an Ohio case that outlaws political lies Shapiro: Idea that a censor would vet speeches, ads against Truth-o-meter is a joke Ohio's ban of lies and damn lies, he argues, is inconsistent with the First Amendment

See helicopter pilot defy physics

Watch helicopter pilot defy physics - CNN.com Video

NBA, show spine: Sterling has to go

Mel Robbins: After racist audio, NBA should publicly strip Donald Sterling of franchise rights She says the audio not yet authenticated, but Sterling trails racist history unchecked by NBA She says team showed outrage by altering uniforms; they should have boycotted game instead Robbins: There will be a lot of talk; what's needed is bold action. NBA, go big or go home

Editor's note: Mel Robbins is a CNN commentator and founder of inspire52.com, providing daily "good news" stories and viral videos. She hosts "The Mel Robbins Show" Sundays from 7-9 p.m. on WSB 95.5 in Atlanta and News 96.5 in Orlando. In 2014, she was named Outstanding News Talk Radio Host by the Gracie Awards. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- It's time for someone in the NBA to show some backbone. Donald Sterling, the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, has got to go and he has got to go in a very public fashion.

Listen to the audio recording that is alleged to be of his voice spewing vile reproach at his mistress about her associating with black people in public, and taking photos with black people (Magic Johnson and Matt Kemp, in particular). The audio has not been authenticated as Sterling, but he has not denied it.

Listen to the entire five minutes of unhinged ranting and you'll hear a man forbid a woman (Sterling's girlfriend, V. Stiviano, TMZ alleges) from bringing black people to NBA games, as well as some very strange, offensive opinions about "black Jews" being treated worse in Israel than "white Jews."

Mel Robbins

By the way, racial discrimination issues have trailed Sterling for years, with the NBA getting red flag after red flag on this guy and doing nothing about it.

There are many questions about the legality of the recording and how TMZ got its hands on it (my money is on Stiviano, who is embroiled in legal troubles with Sterling's wife, is almost 60 years his junior, and also happens to be of mixed race and part black).

If the recording is proven to be Sterling, the NBA has a wide open court and one shot to shatter the glass on this dunk. Forget the short suspension paired with "pressure" to sell the team -- a la Marge Schott, who in 1999 was forced out as owner of baseball's Cincinnati Reds after making comments about blacks, Jews and gays.

NAACP: Don Sterling must pay a price Obama dismisses 'ignorant folks' on race Johnson: 'Moral issue here'

The Players Association's demand that Sterling be barred from all playoff games this season isn't enough. What the players in the league deserve is for Sterling to be suspended for life and publicly--and unprecedentedly--stripped of his franchise rights.

If they merely "suggest" he sell the team, he'll just complain that he was set up by a crazy mistress and will make out like a bandit. He bought the team in 1981 for $12 million. Fortune recently put the value of the team at $575 million.

We can admonish Sterling all we want, and there has been plenty of that coming in: from LeBron James ("I couldn't play for him") to Michael Jordan ("sickening") to the President of the United States ("incredibly offensive"). But talk is cheap: It's time for someone to be bold.

The players have already missed the opportunity to send the NBA, its owners and its fans a powerful message. Just days after the story broke, the players, most of whom are black, had game four in the league series on Sunday night in Oakland. They showed up and they got shellacked.

They found ways to make statements of protest: turning their practice jerseys inside out, piling their warm-ups in the center court and wearing black socks in solidarity with other teams. It was noteworthy, but once again, Sterling got a pass. The players would have done the league, the country and themselves a huge favor if they had just not shown up to the game.

With the momentum of this story, and the outrage building, a boycott would have been the principled stance that the league has been missing all these years. The nation would have been 100% behind the players. The Clippers jerseys would have been reclaimed by the players as a symbol of power, rather than a reminder of its racist owner.

But now there will just be more talk. Should fans boycott the games? Should people not wear the jerseys? The public, the Clippers fans and the players need a way to show their support for the players and their disgust for Sterling.

For now, we wait to see what Commissioner Adam Silver and the NBA decide to do. They might as well play to win. As they say in sports, go big or go home.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The week in 30 photos

"http://schema.org/ImageGallery" lang="en-US"> The week in 30 photos - CNN.com .cnn_dyncntnt1 { height:552px; } SET EDITION:  U.S. INTERNATIONAL MÉXICO ARABIC TV:   CNN CNNi CNN en Español HLN Sign up Log in Home TV & Video CNN Trends U.S. World Politics Justice Entertainment Tech Health Living Travel Opinion iReport Money Sports

LZ: Racist remarks not the issue

Granderson: Bashing Cliven Bundy's remarks is easy, but he's not face of today's racism He says politicians denounce remarks even as they push or abide de facto racist policies He says gerrymandering, stand-your-ground laws, voter ID laws all are Racism 2.0 Granderson: Look for real racism in spending on jails, not schools

Editor's note: LZ Granderson is a CNN contributor, a senior writer for ESPN and lecturer at Northwestern University. Commentary by the former Hechinger Institute fellow has been recognized by the Online News Association, the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association. Follow him on Twitter @locs_n_laughs. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Bashing Cliven Bundy for his remarks regarding race is like LeBron James dunking on a 5-foot rim: Pointless.

And the same is true for Los Angeles Clippers owner Don Sterling, if you believe that he made the remarks attributed to him by TMZ and Deadspin.

As President Barack Obama said, "when ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, you don't really have to do anything, you just let them talk." Still talking about the talk of the ignorant is fun. After all, few things are more entertaining than well-executed memes and a hashtag in front of stupidity.

The problem is that while men such as Bundy and Sterling may be racist, they are not the face of racism.

LZ Granderson

Not today's version.

But we'll place that yoke on their shoulders anyway because it's easy, like James dunking on a kiddie rim.

Some conservatives will quickly pedal away from the Bundys and the Ted Nugents of the world, insisting that they are not like those rodeo clowns. They don't have a racist bone in their body because they would never make such outlandish statements. But then they turn around and marvel at how "well-spoken" or "articulate" a black person is and think nothing of it.

Politicians of all stripes will publicly denounce the offensive things that Bundy says but continue to construct policies that cater to his sensibilities. Today, racism isn't a crazy old white man with a dead calf on his shoulders proclaiming he's "unracist." No, it's elected officials such as U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin saying inner-city men are "not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work" and then feigning shock that people saw a racist element to his statements.

Bundy and Sterling are just the lightning rods of the moment. Not too long ago, Paula Deen was the social pariah.

Obama on NBA owner's alleged comments 'Magic' Johnson responds to racist rant Cliven Bundy defends comments on race Bundy: I want what MLK wants

Meanwhile, Racism 2.0 is busily working in the shadows, gerrymandering away voting rights and creating legislation that makes pre-emptively shooting dead a young black man who makes you nervous synonymous with standing one's ground.

The longer the media allow ignorant relics like Bundy to continue to hog the spotlight -- and the public points at him as the face of conservative racism -- the longer the current incarnation can go unchecked.

That doesn't mean Bundy's fight with the government should be ignored. That doesn't mean Sterling's alleged remarks -- and well-documented past of discrimination -- should be overlooked. Only that their views -- and thus, importance -- should be kept in perspective.

For mispronouncing Rosa Parks' name pales in comparison to the politics of courting a racist electorate. It pales in comparison to the lack of compassion for the five children who were shot Easter Sunday at a park on the south side of Chicago or the characterization of poor people as takers.

During the height of the recession, according to an analysis in The American Prospect, 33 states increased spending on prisons while decreasing spending on education, and we're to believe the disproportionate number of minorities in jail is a coincidence?

So, yeah, yuk it up at Bundy's expense.

Keep tweeting #boycottClippers if it makes you feel better (though I'd be more prone to use my 140 characters to ask why the NAACP thought Sterling was a good candidate for a lifetime achievement award).

But don't make such people out to be anything more than what they are -- the few remaining voices of oppression from years past. Today racism has a different look. A different sound. A different voice -- though the song is still the same.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

Will cops be free to search your phone?

Supreme Court to hear two cases on whether police need warrant to search phone Danny Cevallos says people should pay more attention to Fourth Amendment cases If you're arrested, police can get access to much about your life on your phone, he says Cevallos: Fourth Amendment was passed to limit ability of law enforcement to search

Editor's note: Danny Cevallos is a CNN legal analyst, criminal defense attorney and partner at Cevallos & Wong, practicing in Pennsylvania and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Follow him on Twitter: @CevallosLaw. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases testing the authority of police to conduct a warrantless search of an arrested person's cell phone.

For the most part, the justices' rulings in cases dealing with the Fourth Amendment go largely unnoticed by the public. Most citizens are not interested in these cases the way they are in issues like same-sex marriage or gun control. On the whole, Americans don't worry too much about search-and-seizure issues because they think these cases don't apply to them

"Those cases only apply to criminals."

Danny Cevallos

"I'm not planning on getting arrested."

"I have nothing to hide."

The sentiment is understandable. Most of these cases involve application of the "exclusionary rule" to throw out evidence like guns or drugs, based on the way it was seized. By definition, suppressed evidence is always incriminating -- after all, if the police only found something innocuous, like a pack of smokes, there never would have been an arrest in the first place!

This does not mean that only criminal defendants have an interest in these cases. The rest of us should pay attention for two reasons. First, most people don't realize how easy it is for the police to arrest a person and seize their property. Second, our private information is no longer on a piece of paper in a safe. It's in the form of data, and it's on our person, or in that thing they call the "cloud." If police can access your cell phone without a warrant, they can access your entire life.

Don't believe me? What's in your cellphone right now? Is there anything you wouldn't want a stranger swiping through? How about the apps on your phone? Do you do any banking or other transactions on there? Cell phones not only contain data -- they are now becoming a portal beyond the device itself, into a third-party world, whether that's your health information, your finances, or anything else out there in the cloud.

And if you're like most people, you're not immune to arrest. Police can potentially arrest you for minor infractions like littering, jaywalking, and traffic offenses. And just because they arrest you, should they be able to swipe through your pictures and text messages? Police can search containers on your person without a warrant if they contain evidence that might be destroyed, or a potential weapon. Unless you can throw your iPhone like a ninja shuriken, it's probably not much of a weapon.

In one of the pending cases, police seized Brima Wurie's Verizon LG phone (remember those?) after a warrantless arrest for a street sale of drugs. The phone began ringing at the station during the booking process, and, without a warrant, police decided to start going through the photos and the call log, using a reverse phone directory to look up addresses associated with numbers, and comparing the residents' likenesses to pictures on the phone.

Police eventually used this information to obtain a warrant to search a house, where they did find drugs and firearms. The question is, should this evidence have been suppressed? Where evidence is the result of an unconstitutional search, it is considered "fruit of the poisonous tree," and courts should throw all the evidence flowing from that bad search.

This is not to say that police can never search for evidence of crimes in a cell phone. They just need to adhere to the Constitution to do it, which means that a neutral magistrate must approve a request for a warrant, and that warrant must be supported by probable cause.

The Fourth Amendment was drafted specifically in response to the perceived injustice of the British "general warrant," which allowed the Redcoats to freely search a citizen's home and papers.

Arguably, a search of an iPhone is an even more invasive search of a person's papers, even when it doesn't occur in a home. Whether it's that crinkly Constitution paper, or the modern-day tablet, the spirit of the "papers" the Fourth Amendment sought to protect is the same.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

At least 18 people dead in 3 states

Deaths reported in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Iowa 'It's chaos here," Vilonia mayor says In Mayflower, a highway was littered with crushed and overturned vehicles Oklahoma emergency dispatcher: "Please tell the public to stay away"

8 ways this city is better than Paris

Lyon is France's "second city" but it leads the way in a number of cultural categories Paris has Notre Dame but Lyon's Basilica of Notre-Dame de Fourviere is more beautiful Paris has one river; Lyon has two Lyon's Auguste and Louis Lumiere are credited with creating the first film camera

Editor's note: World-renowned chef, best-selling author and Emmy-winning television personality Anthony Bourdain has returned for the third season of "Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown." The series, shot entirely on location, airs on CNN on Sundays at 9 p.m. ET/PT. Follow the show on Twitter and Facebook.

(CNN) -- Paris, we can all agree, has a lot going for it.

It has splendid museums, grand avenues, a famous pointy tower and thousands of cafes where you can order a minuscule coffee for a fairly large amount of money.

But Lyon is a supremely qualified rival.

In Lyon, a hearty serving of tradition

Bourdain visits Daniel Boulud's farm Bourdain: Marshland in the morning mist Tony breaks bread with second graders

Smaller it may be, but France's second city has a sophistication that makes it a hugely intriguing option for visitors.

While the following suggestions may cause rioting (or, at least, mild shrugs of indifference) along the Champs-Elysees, there are a number of ways Lyon outshines the French capital.

Eight, in fact.

1. Wine

Just about everyone in France loves wine.

But in contrast to Paris -- which sips anything fruity put in front of it, but doesn't produce anything of its own -- Lyon brings a bottle to the party.

A lot of bottles.

Lyon is the gateway to the Beaujolais viticultural region, which fans out immediately to the northwest.

From Lyon, you can explore these whispering vineyards yourself.

Or you can take the easy route and make a few wise purchases in the excellent wine shops around the city.

Cave Chromatique does flavorsome reds and whites, while La Cave des Vins Magnifiques is hardly short on confidence when it comes to the contents of its stock list.

2. Notre Dames

Paris's Notre Dame Cathedral is an inimitable French icon, especially if you like long lines and pigeons.

Lyon's Notre Dame -- the Basilica of Notre-Dame de Fourviere -- is, simply, a more beautiful church.

A young maiden (built 1872-1884) compared with Paris's grande dame (built 1163-1345), she sits prettily atop the city's main hill, offering views down to the riverside streets below, and, on clear days, across to the snowcaps of the Alps.

3. Outdoor music

Lyon knows how to put on a summer extravaganza.

The Nuits de Fourviere festival sees 60 or so shows -- rock, classical music, drama -- stretched across the warm evenings of June and July.

Alumni of this wide showcase include Lou Reed, Bjork and Sting. The 2014 lineup includes French pop stalwarts Phoenix and U.S. indie veterans the Pixies.

Better than any band, though, is a setting that Paris can't match.

The French capital may have modern venues befitting its size and status, but it can't dance the night away as if Caesar Augustus were still in the posh seats.

The majority of the Nuits de Fourviere performances take place amid the sturdy tiers of Lyon's main Roman amphitheater, which dates to 15 B.C.

4. Cinematic history

Paris has been in many movies. "Moulin Rouge." "Amelie." "Midnight in Paris."

But Lyon pretty much invented the movies.

Or, at least, two of its most famous sons did.

Auguste and Louis Lumiere are credited with creating the first film camera (the cinematograph) in 1892.

You can pay tribute to their vision at Lyon's Institut Lumiere, with its museum and cinema.

5. Food

Paris is very good at cuisine.

It's just that Lyon believes it's better.

It may well be.

Its restaurants include L'Auberge du Pont de Collonges, a fabled temple of Gallic gastronomy which has three Michelin stars.

It's overseen by French uber-chef Paul Bocuse, who is now 88, but still a master at his signature truffle soup.

Then there's La Mere Brazier, which exists under the gaze of Mathieu Viannay.

The restaurant has two Michelin stars, but Viannay is only 46, so can be excused his shortfall.

6. Parks

Paris doesn't have a large central green space -- unless you count the Jardins des Tuileries, which are predominantly surfaced in gravel, and are therefore white.

But Lyon has the Parc de la Tete d'Or, which -- with its 117 hectares of grass and trees -- cozies up to the Rhone in the sixth arrondissement.

Here, you can go boating on the lake, cycle along winding pathways, or simply lie in the shade and remark on the fact that this metropolitan lung's name -- Park of the Golden Head -- sounds a bit silly in English.

7. Roman history

In numbers, this is basically a tie.

Julius Caesar stomped his sandals into the fledgling Paris in 52 B.C.; Lyon had its first date with expansionist toga-wearing proto-Italians when it was founded as Lugdunum a decade later in 43 B.C.

But Lyon was the more important city under Roman rule -- a teacher's pet that became Rome's head boy in ancient Gaul.

This still shows.

Lyon's Roman structures are almost as impressive today as they were in the days of the gladiators -- especially the remnants of its public baths and the giant amphitheater on Fourviere hill at the Gallo-Roman Museum.

8. Rivers

Why did the Romans plonk Lugdunum onto the map where they did?

Because the place was ideal for a settlement. West of the Alps, it was a decent stop-off point halfway up France and not too far from the mother city.

But above that, because it had -- and has -- two rivers.

The Rhone, which is so long that it has to travel from Switzerland, curves through the center of Lyon.

So does the Saone.

The two meet in the aptly titled district of Confluence.

Paris, by contrast, has just one river, the Seine. Ah, c'est dommage.

Best airport restaurants

Top chefs are starting to use airports for new ventures Breweries, like Airbräu in Munich, have been successful offering a 'sense of place' in the airport In Germany's Stuttgart Airport, Michelin-starred Top Air offers seven-course menu for €132 ($183)

LZ: Watch out for Racism 2.0

Granderson: Bashing Cliven Bundy's remarks is easy, but he's not face of today's racism He says politicians denounce remarks even as they push or abide de facto racist policies He says gerrymandering, stand-your-ground laws, voter ID laws all are Racism 2.0 Granderson: Look for real racism in spending on jails, not schools

Editor's note: LZ Granderson is a CNN contributor, a senior writer for ESPN and lecturer at Northwestern University. Commentary by the former Hechinger Institute fellow has been recognized by the Online News Association, the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association. Follow him on Twitter @locs_n_laughs. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Bashing Cliven Bundy for his remarks regarding race is like LeBron James dunking on a 5-foot rim: Pointless.

And the same is true for Los Angeles Clippers owner Don Sterling, if you believe that he made the remarks attributed to him by TMZ and Deadspin.

As President Barack Obama said, "when ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, you don't really have to do anything, you just let them talk." Still talking about the talk of the ignorant is fun. After all, few things are more entertaining than well-executed memes and a hashtag in front of stupidity.

The problem is that while men such as Bundy and Sterling may be racist, they are not the face of racism.

LZ Granderson

Not today's version.

But we'll place that yoke on their shoulders anyway because it's easy, like James dunking on a kiddie rim.

Some conservatives will quickly pedal away from the Bundys and the Ted Nugents of the world, insisting that they are not like those rodeo clowns. They don't have a racist bone in their body because they would never make such outlandish statements. But then they turn around and marvel at how "well-spoken" or "articulate" a black person is and think nothing of it.

Politicians of all stripes will publicly denounce the offensive things that Bundy says but continue to construct policies that cater to his sensibilities. Today, racism isn't a crazy old white man with a dead calf on his shoulders proclaiming he's "unracist." No, it's elected officials such as U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin saying inner-city men are "not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work" and then feigning shock that people saw a racist element to his statements.

Bundy and Sterling are just the lightning rods of the moment. Not too long ago, Paula Deen was the social pariah.

Obama on NBA owner's alleged comments 'Magic' Johnson responds to racist rant Cliven Bundy defends comments on race Bundy: I want what MLK wants

Meanwhile, Racism 2.0 is busily working in the shadows, gerrymandering away voting rights and creating legislation that makes pre-emptively shooting dead a young black man who makes you nervous synonymous with standing one's ground.

The longer the media allow ignorant relics like Bundy to continue to hog the spotlight -- and the public points at him as the face of conservative racism -- the longer the current incarnation can go unchecked.

That doesn't mean Bundy's fight with the government should be ignored. That doesn't mean Sterling's alleged remarks -- and well-documented past of discrimination -- should be overlooked. Only that their views -- and thus, importance -- should be kept in perspective.

For mispronouncing Rosa Parks' name pales in comparison to the politics of courting a racist electorate. It pales in comparison to the lack of compassion for the five children who were shot Easter Sunday at a park on the south side of Chicago or the characterization of poor people as takers.

During the height of the recession, according to an analysis in The American Prospect, 33 states increased spending on prisons while decreasing spending on education, and we're to believe the disproportionate number of minorities in jail is a coincidence?

So, yeah, yuk it up at Bundy's expense.

Keep tweeting #boycottClippers if it makes you feel better (though I'd be more prone to use my 140 characters to ask why the NAACP thought Sterling was a good candidate for a lifetime achievement award).

But don't make such people out to be anything more than what they are -- the few remaining voices of oppression from years past. Today racism has a different look. A different sound. A different voice -- though the song is still the same.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

Maine couple attacked by moose

Maine couple attacked by moose - CNN.com Video

Fuzzy guests get frisky on live TV

Anchors bring bunnies on air and ... - CNN.com Video

India's voters won't get fooled again

A commercial shows India voter catching a politician recycling old, unfulfilled promises Ravi Agrawal: The power of mobile technology is helping shape India's elections He says other key trends include the new prominence of rural areas and of young voters Agrawal: It's a mistake to try to predict the outcome based on these trends

Editor's note: Ravi Agrawal is CNN's New Delhi Bureau chief and was formerly senior producer of the network's "Fareed Zakaria GPS." Follow him on Twitter: @RaviAgrawalCNN

New Delhi (CNN) -- Here's the best way to understand the new India in 30 seconds. Watch this commercial—or better yet, if you don't understand Hindi, read on.

A smarmy-looking politician addresses a rural gathering, promising to give the people access to water. His speech is interrupted by a boyish young man, a villager, who pulls out his smartphone and plays a YouTube video for all to see: it's the same politician, making the same promises at the last election, years ago.

"I might be from the village," cries out the young man, "but don't think you can fool me!" The commercial—marketing an Indian mobile service provider—cuts to its familiar Hindi jingle, loosely translated as "no making fools of us anymore, no making fools of us."

Ravi Agrawal

The story struck me because it weaves together some important trends and forces in India as the nation undertakes the biggest elections in world history.

The first trend is the immense proliferation of Internet-enabled smartphones. In most Western countries, people have discovered the Internet and grown with it in stages: from painfully slow dial-up connections, to broadband, to Wi-Fi, to 4G mobile Internet.

India's story has been very different. Until recently only a small elite—about a tenth of the population—could access the Internet, mostly through PCs. Even today, there are only 57 million broadband subscribers in the country, according to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, or TRAI.

Inflation key factor for India elections 'Indian Spider-Man' campaigns for office Millions of voters head to polls in India

By comparison, there are about 900 million mobile subscribers—a recent boom. Many of these mobile users are buying cheap smartphones and data packages to access the Internet. The offshoot is the opposite of what happens in the West: Hundreds of millions of Indians have never used a PC—and likely never will—but they can now begin to access the Internet on their phones. The Internet is aspirational in India; it's the new motorbike or washing machine.

The second trend is the rise of rural India. Again, according to TRAI, 40% of mobile subscribers are now in villages and small towns. Even with the recent boom, rural subscriptions are still growing at more than twice the rate of urban ones.

These rural subscribers, as the commercial shows, often don't speak English. But there's no longer a great shame in being unable to speak the language of their colonial masters; instead, there's a new pride and confidence in India's many regional dialects and languages. There's new rural money, and a yearning to be stakeholders in their futures and to fight for more accountable government.

The third trend is India's youth bulge. More than 100 million voters in India's elections are first-timers who turned 18 in the last five years. Half of all Indians are under age 30; the average age in India is 28.

Many of these young, brash Indians have cast off the fatalism of their forefathers. Growing up in an India of fast growth and development, they have more confidence in their culture, identity and language. Put that together with trends No. 1 and No. 2, and the result is amplified. For the first time in India's history, a majority of Indians are connected and engaged. They know about the skeletons in every politician's closet—and that information is power.

Some suggest that these trends mean India's elections will be fought and decided on social media.

Politicians have taken their cue, rushing to every platform available: Twitter, Facebook and Google Hangouts. The numbers seem staggering at first. Facebook says Narendra Modi, the front-runner to be India's next prime minister, is the second most "liked" politician in the world (13 million likes), after U.S. President Barack Obama (40 million likes).

According to Twitter, there has been a 600% increase in political Tweets from India in the last year. Since January the two biggest parties, the BJP and the Congress, have grown their Twitter followings by 55% and 351% respectively.

India's Internet and Mobile Association says a strong social media campaign could swing up to 4% of votes.

Commentators have cited that data to brand India's elections the country's first-ever "social media election."

For now, I'm skeptical. Some of the outreach attempts have been amateur at best: As Vox.com pointed out, the BJP's Twitter handle last week auto-tweeted anyone who mentioned the party on Twitter, including me and hundreds of others. In any case, the number of actual social media users represents a tiny percentage of the Indian electorate. Facebook says it has 100 million users in India: it sounds like a lot but it accounts for less than a tenth of Indians.

One reason for this -- apart from limits to Internet access -- could be that Twitter and Facebook remain English language services, relatable to a small subset of Indians.

Unlike China, which has a Chinese-language microblogging service called Sina Weibo, with hundreds of millions of users, India for now has no such indigenous, umbrella platform.

Why? India is no monolith. There are dozens of languages, and an equal number of different Indias. Despite India's growth and increased connectivity, which suggests a more unified nation, the country may actually be becoming more regional-focused, with more pride in local languages, trends and politicians. This is also why I think it's far too early to call India's elections for any one politician or party. The three trends of mobile reach, the rural rise and the youth bulge are each combustible forces bubbling in a cauldron of uncertainty.

Indians may want accountability and change, but it's too soon to tell which way that will manifest itself. It remains unclear whether Indians will vote for their regional interests, or cast their ballot thinking about a macro national picture.

Watch India's elections very closely. They're immensely consequential—for India, and the world. But placing too much importance on social media chatter could be misleading. Calling these elections too early could be embarrassing, too. It is, as the ad-jingle goes, a fool's errand.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.