Social Media Freedom Of Speech Essay

The purposes of schools include protecting and educating its students. Therefore, naturally, when a student is cyberbullying someone else, the school seeks to intervene. However, many argue that a school’s intervention of its students’ online speech is in violation of their First Amendment rights. Should schools be allowed to limit students’ online speech? That is, should schools be allowed to punish the things its students post online, even if they are done outside of school, and from their personal devices? The answer is clearly yes. From the concept, to the precedence, to the data, to a letter from the US Department of Education, evidences everywhere supports limiting students’

In order to find truth to anything, one must make multiple suggestions, ask many questions, and sometimes ponder the unspeakable. Without doing so, there would be no process of elimination; therefore, truth would be virtually unattainable. Now, in our attempts to either find truth, express our beliefs and opinions, or generally use the rights we are given constitutionally, we are often being criticized and even reprimanded. Our freedom to voice our opinion(s) is being challenged, as critics of free speech are taking offense to what seems like anything and everything merely controversial and arguably prejudice. As people continue to strive for a nation free of prejudice and discrimination, where everyone is equal, safe and

Social media in the 21st century has altered behind the shadows of Regina George. Americans use the First Amendment as an excuse for unlimited speech, however, free speech is not absolute since the Supreme Court has allowed certain limits on that freedom. These limits include clear and present danger, fighting words, obscenity, conflict with other important interests, and time, place, and manner. Today, many free speech controversies are centered in the use of technology including cellular phones, text messages, Twitter, Facebook, and email. These effects of online speech can deluge into schools, and administrators are responsible for maintaining an appropriate environment. They

Trolling is the new title that has been given to harassment that takes place on the Internet. A common example of trolling would be sending provocative messages via a communications platform for the pure entertainment of the sender, which then has a harmful effect on the recipient. There are different types of trolling; messages sent to harm others for the sender’s gratification are called ‘flame trolls’, and those to entertain others for their gratification have been given the title ‘kudos trolls’ (Bishop 2012a, 2012b). Where these actions have the resource to legal remedies they are called ‘electronic message faults’ and where the message fails to constitute an offence ‘electronic message freedoms’, and there is quite rightly nothing to

Social Media has become a huge part of our lives. It is a way to connect to those far away, or to share things that we find interesting or exciting and can be a very personal presentation of who we are. But in both positive and negative ways we can share our opinions and our view on certain events in the world. These can lead to rallies, protests, uprisings or in some cases revolution, the internet has become one of the most influential forces in this world and a large part of that is due to social media. In the case of the Michael Brown shooting, social media focused on the positive and negative relationships between minorities and cops in the United States of America. Sites such as Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Vine were all used to show

Social media can connect millions of people together, in any instant location. However, many of these platforms, like Facebook and Twitter, have blasphemous users who fire up heated debates, following up with explicit language. Such opinions often times involve incitement and defamation targeted against the opposing party. However, because the First Amendment protects the freedom of speech, the U.S. Government has not strictly reprimanded the misuse of the amendment. Some citizens view hate speech as a form of speech that attacks and offends an individual or group based on their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or ethnic origin while others see it as a part of the First Amendment, and having it appealed, will precede with negative criticisms. There are others who are not concerned of the topic at hand completely which identifies how impactful this problem is. It has been apparent more so on social media, where people demonstrate their right to freedom of speech because they are more likely to voice their opinions individually when others are not present. The debate still continues to decide if the First Amendment should be revised due to hate speech on social media since it has promoted indirect violence, incivility amongst the online communities and has lowered ethical codes in the American society.

Also, social media is an invasion on personal privacy and can lead to difficult consequences such as internet backlash and identity theft. An article written by Charlie Claywell emphasizes that, backlash is an online challenge which involves the process of releasing potentially offensive content and then obtaining excessive feedback from individuals about certain subjects. The content is often and most commonly political or religious. As soon as the content is posted, the backlash begins and it can potentially turn into a world debate and widespread affair. Claywell states that “Even high school students are learning that comments they post on social media can influence whether a college approves their application for admission” (par. 7).

Though the First Amendment protects the freedom of expression [1], not all speech is protected by law.  What if material on the Internet advocates illegal conduct or issues threats of violence?  What if information such as bomb-making instructions helps someone carry out a threat of violence?  As stated in the preceding scenario-report, the controversial website Anarchist Fever inspired amateur anarchist Paul Berkowicz, to build a bomb (with instructions found on the internet) and blow up a federal courthouse.  Obviously, he will be punished for his actions, but the issue now is what will become of the websites that helped him etch his name in infamy?  What can be done about digital conspirators who hide behind free expression?  Often, there can be no direct link established between such websites and physical crimes they inspire.  When deciding about these gray areas of free speech on the internet, we must consider issues such as regulation of the Internet, the extent of free speech, and established legal precedent.  These are the real factors that determine whether or not content of the Internet is objectionable enough to be censored or even criminally punished.

"America is supposedly the land of the free. This country houses people from all backgrounds and walks of life. It is an ethnically and culturally rich place that takes pride in its melting pot status when necessary. People come here searching for freedom, which includes freedom of speech. With the rise of technology, the internet has served multiple purposes and been an avenue for mass communication. Many use this for good, but others have utilized this tool to create problems. When something on the internet poses a real, tangible threat, the government must interfere; otherwise, they should stay clear of the cyberspace.

With the rise of violence and technology we are able to view all the terrorist attacks, suicides, and protests going on in today’s world from just a click away. Becoming more educated on these topics, allows people to form opinions on these current events. This has pushed some Americans into believing that their needs to be a limit on free speech, to help prevent the catastrophes around the world. What makes America so great is that we are able to use our voices to express whatever we believe in order to educate others. Does America want the government being able to step down your throat on what you can or can’t say?

First, Zimmerman argues that successful platforms, without fail, turn into publications, such as Facebook and Twitter. Declaring that these successful platforms should accept responsibility for hate speech on their sites; rightfully so, the more eyes seeing the publications means the more influence upon those viewers. Claiming that Twitter could monitor what is published on its sight to be a better platform, even thought they are not legally forced to care, means twitter needs more overseers. Whether or not this monitoring is high up on Twitter’s priority list, most people would agree that morally, overseeing the publications would be a site improvement. Using the metaphor of a megaphone handed to society as Twitter’s

Social media is the pumping heart that gives life to the information that citizens receive. It is not the only form of communication, however it has become a fundamental method to present our thoughts, ideas, beliefs, and opinions to other people. It has become a necessity in American society to use media sites such as Facebook and Twitter to instantaneously access or send information.When words are censored, it strangles our ability to effectively communicate what we may be thinking. Similarly, when ideas are censored, our ability to progress as a society and as a nation is hindered. Censorship has been employed by other governments in the past as a method to influence the way a people may think about or view a topic. Therefore, government censorship of social media runs the risk of encroaching upon constitutional rights due to overreaching information control policies.

The purpose of this report is to identify how “Freedom of Speech” can affect people and inform how the freedom of speech movement started. The questions that I want to answer is how the freedom of speech movement started, how people are affected by freedom of speech online and how freedom of speech affects a society. Freedom of speech has played a major role in history and has been important to the building of our society. There have been many different ways people have taken freedom of speech to the extreme and this is intended to ask ourselves the importance of these free speeches.

No One can ever say that there is going to be perfect speech I have a high doubt that humans will ever get the point of being able to take in others opinions and look at their views from another perspective. This is a big threat recently on college campuses as this reality sunk in to people all around the United States, that maybe your free speech isn't as free as one would believe. As the word free is defined as not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes. Can we confidently state that we have this on all college campuses today? Can we say that we will ever have Free Speech in our society?

Social media. We have all heard of it. We have all raved about it at some point in our lives. There is no doubt; it plays an imperative part of people’s lives today – users are reliant on social media. It is great that Mark Zuckerberg reminds us to say, “Happy Birthday” to our friends. Yet, we have all seen the dangers it can cause. From identity fraud to cyberbullying - we become exposed to the dangers of the internet. Not only is it hackers and frauds that cause destruction, but social networking posts. Every day, you scroll through Facebook, or Instagram - liking, sharing and commenting on posts. What people don’t see is how words on a ‘status’ or ‘tweet’ can hurt someone. They can’t see that a person’s feelings behind the screens on a computer have been destroyed, because they can’t see what they don’t want to see.