- Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
- It's the (Democracy-Poisoning) Golden Age of Free Speech
- Explore the November Issue
- Cass Sunstein: Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech - Jack Miller Center
- Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech
Personally, I generally believe that people should have a right to express their opinions with little to no repercussions up until their opinion infringes on the rights of others. The United States Supreme Court has tried many cases where people have claimed that they were just using their right to free speech whenever they were conducted whatever activity got them sent to court in the first place.
Throughout the trying of these cases, the Supreme Court often used the clear and present danger test and later incitement to imminent lawless action also called the Brandenburg test to determine whether they remained in the rights given to them by the Constitution. I think that hate speech would fall under this category. Hate speech is often threatening others for something that they can not control such as skin color or religious beliefs.
Generally, these threats cross the line of being a lawless action- because they often involve threatening to assault or kill someone both of which are illegal and therefore lawless. I understand people not wanting to have their Freedom of Speech limited, but I think it is necessary to combat the current state of affairs of our country, and even our world, where hate is causing a large number of unnecessary deaths.
Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
Freedom of speech is something America was built on and something many citizens hold with pride. The article brought up good points in how we are supposed to have the right to say what we want, but sometimes that amendment seems to use favoritism. The article mentioned how people have been assassinated and some thrown in jail for not having the popular opinion, even though this is technically against the law. The government showing favoritism does not make freedom of speech equal.
The article also brought up how people use a lot of hate speech on social media. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think there is a way to show how you feel with being negative or aggressive. Free speech is a very important part of democracy.
It's the (Democracy-Poisoning) Golden Age of Free Speech
How could people vote and have a say in their government if they are not free to express their opinions and learn about the opinions of others. However, some speech can create panic and make people fear for their lives. Take the classic example of yelling fire in a crowded movie theater for example.
Speech must be limited on some level or people can cause panic and fear that could impede the safety of others. Hate speech can absolutely cause panic and make people feel unsafe but, it can also absolutely be used as a political weapon. People may stretch and abuse the term, or it may be used to help maintain the peace and safety of others, it can be looked at in a case by case manner. Overall, I believe that freedom of speech is very important to democracy, but should have some limitations to ensure safety and prevent panic.
I believe we all have a right to free speech. Free speech is being tested almost on a daily basis now for anything you say.
Explore the November Issue
Freedom of speech should not include threatening someone in any way, however having your own opinions should be not be shunned. With that being said, you must be wary of what you say and where. I do believe employers have a right to hold what you say against you especially if it is out in the happen on social media. I would not say it is necessarily limiting freedom of speech, but I see it more as holding the people in these higher positions to be more responsible and held more accountable with what they may say.
Now these are in more of terms of hateful, abusive or threatening speech. If it is something as simply stating how you think on social media platforms I see no wrong in that. Freedom of speech is something that people can easily abuse at times. I believe that sometimes it is our society that makes comments acceptable, however that does not make them right. Personally, I whole heartedly agree with the article that free speech is a fundamental issue that continues throughout the country.
I find it concerning that such an important amendment such as the first can be perceived in various ways. After reading the same wording of the amendment, two individuals might show two completely different views.
- The Sociology of the Colonies [Part 1]: An Introduction to the Study of Race Contact: Volume 16 (International Library of Sociology).
- See a Problem?.
- The Value of Free Speech?
- The Elegance of the Hedgehog!
- Die verschollene Flotte: Ein teurer Sieg: Roman (German Edition);
I believe that is why hate speech even exists today. I personally, cannot believe that an individual would find it appropriate to harass other individuals by threating their life and maybe even their family. I wonder if the founding fathers intentionally made this amendment so vague? The founding fathers were not saints. Some were notorious for their negative views and attitudes regarding people of other races. As future educators I believe it is important to understand that we cannot contribute to hate speech.
The stopping of hate speech starts in our classroom. We should teach students to realize that even though we may disagree with someone, we should be respectful of their views. Children are the future and by teaching them to respect each other and their beliefs we are helping to minimize hate speech as a whole. Your article brings up some good points.
I have many thoughts and opinions on this topic, like: Is there even really free speech anymore? Everything you say is put under a microscope and criticized, and some people take things the wrong way. I am heavily addicted to the show 13 Reasons Why, and in this show a group of girls that were raped, storm onto the football field during a football game in which one of the rapists were playing in to make it a topic that the whole school needed to talk about.
- About This Item;
- Democracy and the problem of free speech / Cass R. Sunstein | National Library of Australia.
- Featured categories.
- Find a copy in the library.
- A Doctor of the Old School!
- Democracy and the problem of free speech.
- Customer Reviews!
They got carried off the field by police. Whether good or bad, words are powerful; words are inerrantly designed to hold authority.
Cass Sunstein: Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech - Jack Miller Center
Biblically, The Word and words as a whole are compared to a sword, and interestingly, that is the only weapon of metaphorical offense used in the Bible. Who can fight without their weapon? While it does hurt me to see people be afflicted or harmed under the arm of hate speech, I do think that the good outweighs the bad. Some of the most progressive moments in American history were bred under the rights to freedom of speech.
Personally, I strive to use my voice to be constructive in any way I can, and while I wish my fellow citizens would make that same choice, that is almost inevitably impossible. I agree with the statement made in the article about America being set-apart and different than other governmental systems because of these rights and how at the same time people abuse this right to promote violence.
I think the thing that is stopping the supreme court from banning hate speech is, what is hate speech? Something that I find perfectly acceptable another person could find offensive and vise versa. This is why i can never support a law that limits word because the potential harm vastly out ways the current problem. People all around the world are arrested and imprisoned or even killed for things they say about the government or a group of people.
While I know this is America and people can freely speak about whoever they want with a law like this things could quickly escalate. Freedom of speech can be such a wonderful thing, but it can also be a toxic right. The majority of the time I see no issue with freedom of speech, people are just trying to express themselves and their beliefs, so what is so wrong about that? Well, sometimes people abuse their right to freedom of speech and say horrible things. I understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but is saying hurtful things, or threatening others really the best way to express that?
Social media has made quite an effective shield for people who decide to spew hate. Screens, whether phone or computer, have made it easier than ever to say horrible things to and about other people.
Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech
I think that maybe certain things should be monitored, for example threatening others lives, or just talking hatefully about others. Although I also know that if that were to start happening that a grey area would be formed and make it difficult to navigate what would follow those guidelines. Like I said before freedom of speech is such a wonderful thing, it is a shame that others have to ruin and taint that right.
Freedom of speech has always been very important to me especially in high school and college. In high school I was the founder of the debate team at my first high school and we loved to debate hot button topics, but we had rules to keep us from crossing those boundaries of hurting other people. I feel like everyone should have the freedom to say what they want but when it comes to hate speech and purposely attacking who someone is it becomes more like bullying.
Freedom of Speech is a big topic in the United states right now because of the big divide that is taking place. People should be able to form their own opinions on things that they believe in, even if not everyone will agree with it. However, I do believe that if the opinions they are speaking can cause harm to an individual it should be limited. For instance, look at the Michelle Carter case. Her words and opinions cause a person to take their own life and she is now dealing with the consequences.