The Effects of Technology on the Right of Freedom of Speech Essay

Most who argue against censorship believe that it goes against a person’s right to freedom of speech. Within this argument, most people wonder “just when, and on what grounds, the state is justified in using its coercive powers to limit the freedom of individuals” (West). When thinking in this mindset, individuals tend to antagonize the government, because they come to believe that it suppresses their individuality and fail to consider the fact that it unites people who share its similar beliefs. As a result of the recent spike in technology and use of the Internet, the public must continually alter its definition of freedom of speech and expression. As the media offers more and more methods of communication, many of which are relatively self-regulated by users, more methods of expression develop, which may render other forms of expression obsolete, or even socially unacceptable (Qazi). Without understanding how much freedom of speech one is entitled to, one may never hope to defend that freedom if it ever comes under attack. Because technology develops so quickly that one definition will hardly suffice for a short period of time, people will find it increasingly difficult to understand how much right to expression they are allowed and will therefore fight for any and all that they may attain, never considering the benefits of censorship in the slightest. In America especially, people idealize the idea of democracy, the investigation of truth, and independence (Fieser). In

Its first display is a video using Ethos and Pathos means to incite feelings of intense emotion the site does have authors for itself but instead is a mass display of several links videos and articles that aid the pro-life movement and support their idea hoping to give the viewer the information they want them to see to support the movement with monetary support shown but the several links to donation boxes on the site some for the site directly and other organization they don't bedecked the site but instead choose to flood you with information they believe necessary shown by the layout of the site being that of a single white slate of white exclusively displaying videos, article/website links and the only text written by the original authors are general descriptions or headlines giving a faint hint of what the article is.

Censorship is very important in maintaining government authority which helps in stabilizing the society. The society enjoys freedoms, rights and privileges due to the stability of the ruling body. Without this stability, the society would lapse in to a condition of scenery where the lives would be solitary, poor, and brutal and short as put by Thomas Hobbes (Merryman & Elsen 564). The stability of the government and society is always assumed to exist without understanding the causes of this stability. The exposure of the social upheavals poses a great threat to destabilizing the government through free speeches from the opposition and parties. Since the criminalization of homosexuality in some African states, there have been free speeches that have posed threats to the individual government from the west that require to be concealed before being released to the public because they may spark hatred and distrust. Some of the expressions which are offensive attack the traditional values of the society and are considered harmful (Caso 13). Censorship helps to protect these values from attack.

It is very important to be aware that the media is capable of controlling the flow of information that citizens receive. Furthermore, much of the content suppressed in this country is for fear of retribution from others. When governments and other institutions suppress information, citizens are not able to address matters concerning their country, as well as around the globe. In ‘The Decline of American Press Freedom’ by Anne Applebaum, Applebaum explains a recent controversy with Yale University and the publishing of a contentious comic in a scholarly report on the global consequences of political comics. The comics in question were satirical in nature and displayed the Islamic prophet Muhammad in an offensive manner. In an aniconic religion where visual depiction of the prophet is inherently blasphemous, the Islamic response to these comics were violent. When an analysis of the comics and the cultural backlash was written, instead of publishing it, Yale University swept it under the rug for fear of offending Islamic extremists. Applebaum argues that if “Yale University Press refuses to publish [the comics], then that makes it much harder for anybody else to treat the cartoon controversy as a legitimate matter for scholarly and political debate” (Applebaum 640). By not allowing the publishing of this analysis, Yale University is censoring what the American populace have access to in terms of global controversy. The issue becomes trivialized because institutions fear retribution from extremist groups. Without these scholarly points of reference of this issue and others, it is difficult to have a serious conversations about the ramifications of political and religious satire. This leads to people remaining uneducated and ignorant of these serious issues, and liable to repeat these same actions that so sorely offended an extremist

Fahrenheit 451 is a novel that has widely used satire of censorship to depict the situation in the real world whereby human beings use censorship to hide whatever they find not pleasant to expose to the masses. Due to the idea of hiding some issues from the masses, much important information and the truth is hidden from the society. This paper will discuss how people use censorship to omit to expose all the information that dissatisfy them. The thesis statement is that, in the novel, Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury has highlighted different issues, but the most controversial issue is the oppressing social media about entertainment, technology, minds and culture that uses censorship to leave the citizens into the allegory of the cave.

Many people come to the United States looking for freedom and liberty and where their essential rights are protected under the Constitution. However, freedom should not be taken for granted as for every rule there may be limits. The First Amendment of the United States’ Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (Corwin 48). In other words, the First Amendment granted freedom of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly, and petition. The First Amendment is clear enough for anyone to comprehend and process easily; however, people sometimes misunderstand their rights by doing what their First Amendment right does not protect, especially when it comes to freedom of speech. Seven of the most important law cases in the United States’ history are what shaped the American’s society and allowed people to hopefully know and recognize their limits and restrictions when it comes to their speech whether it was a literal speech or a symbolic speech.

According to the Bill of Rights, we are afforded the freedom of speech through the first amendment. But this awarding of freedom is only allowed if it goes along with what the general population deems “normal”. During the middle part of the 1900’s many books were banned on political, religious, and moral views. While our society has changed these issues are still prevalent in today’s public views and opinions of author’s work. These books are not “normal” and that is why they play an unprecedented part in literature today. Books written in this era had a different political, religious, and moral atmosphere than those written in the modern day; but these same issues arise in today’s society.

Censorship, which is often described as the destruction of free speech, generally encompasses the altering or deleting information in a message or communication between the sender and receiver, often without their notice or consent. On the other hand, free speech, is defined as “the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint”. These two concepts which contradict one another often cause disagreements, especially over finding a balance between the two. There are many different forms of censorship. Some forms might completely and utterly change the original message, while some forms might be just simply hiding the actual truth. Though balancing free speech and censorship is difficult, allowing the destruction of information is no different from the form of censorship that was the job of Winston Smith in the dystopian community of 1984.

The internet became a very popular and huge way of getting millions of different kinds of materials and information for everyday use in the later 80's early 90's. It became easy for anyone to access millions of different kinds of materials ninety nine percent of which is decent according to our governments standards and one or less percent which is considered to be material the is indecent or harmful to minors.(ABC) These facts maybe deceiving however because there are millions of internet sites so the internet may only be one percent indecent but that means there are thousands upon thousands of sites that are indecent.(ABC) The biggest question is how can we protect our children from these indecent sites? The government believed that

The freedom of expression is an idea that all humans want. However, the same people that cherish this freedom will try to regulate and infringe on the rights of others to express themselves. One of the main methods of expression is through the usage of written words. Many people try to censor words by banning books and documents. An example of this is Art Spiegelman's graphic novel Maus II. In this novel, Art describes his grandfather's experience in the infamous concentration camp known as Auschwitz. Spiegelman uses a graphic choice that turns nationalities/religions into specific animals and many other methods. Maus II should not be banned for its graphic choices because these decisions do not lessen the seriousness of the message, nor does it provide an image too dark for the audience

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

  Abstract:  The issue of free speech has been around since the founding fathers first ratified the constitution of the United States.  With the emergence of new technology, especially the Internet, freedom of speech has been redefined and its limits tested.  What are the limitations of free speech on the Internet, and how can they be enforced?  These are the constitutional questions for the digital age.

The founders of the United States government tried to protect our liberty by assuring a free press, to gather and publish information without being under control or power of another, in the First Amendment to the Constitution. We are not very protected by this guarantee, so we concern ourselves on account of special interest groups that are fighting to change the freedom of expression, the right to freely represent individual thoughts, feeling and views, in order to protect their families as well as others. These groups, religious or otherwise, believe that publishing unorthodox material is an abuse of free expression under the First Amendment. As we know, the Supreme Court plays an important role in the subject of free speech and

Freedom of speech had a link of positive impacts to the world. One positive impact would be the citizens questioning the government about their personal interests and opinion on free speech. This means that before freedom of speech was questioned, many citizens did not have a voice. The government was not concerned with increasing individual’s voices based on personal opinions and beliefs. When citizens began to question the government, the government had not one motive behind not giving individuals the opportunity to speak freely. This arouse more questioning and thoughts amongst citizens and government officials. The United States implemented the first amendment which is applied to all state and local governments. No one is restricted or

Proponents of censorship seem to believe that they alone can determine what is and isn’t offensive to everyone. They believe that their own freedom of speech will remain intact when they have successfully silenced those that they oppose. They don’t seem to understand that once one group’s rights are taken away, we are all subject to loss of our constitutional right to speak and think freely.