Personal Values Of Morals, And Legal Issues Of Bullying

Having demonstrated how the use of technology can influence young generations, Stryker goes on to say that punishing those who make bad and or racist remarks only breeks further hatred. Stryker uses a hypothetical example to support his claim and explain why. He continues to go further and give real world examples of how a New York City EMT was fired because of his racist tweets on his online profile (Stryker 588). This strengthened Stryker’s position on how publicly shaming an individual only causes more harm and problems.

A reoccurring issue that has been detrimental in today’s society is racism. Today, many people have used social media to speak out against this troublesome topic. The article “Black Tweets Matter” tries to explain how social media has been used in the fight against racism. The text talks about multiple hashtags that have been used on social media to bring these racist events to light. “Black Tweets Matter” is a very short article that can be at times hard to read. However, Jenna Worthin was ineffective in parts of “Black Tweets Matter” by her unprofessional word choice, misused quotes, and inability to stay on topic.

With the popularization and expansion of the internet in recent years, America and other Western countries have found themselves developing into media-dominated cultures. Social media platforms, forums, and other types of online interaction are becoming primary forms of communication between people with similar or differing views, bringing political topics into daily discussion. However, the implications of such a broad and unrestrained network lead to negative outcomes. Whether it be in the form of a direct slur used on Twitter or a slight jab in a discussion board, the ongoing presence of racism on the internet cannot be denied. Although some forms may appear more indirectly, the effects are not diminished; implicit forms of racism are just as impactful as direct attacks. This paper argues that the internet serves as a carrier of racism by allowing racism to thrive through forms of racial microaggressions and cloaked websites. Toward the end of the essay, possible solutions for this issue will be discussed as well.

After everything I have learned from class and the readings, I am confident in my opinon that our country and it citizens alike place a high value children and there lives. The reason I believe this is because of not only the laws we have in place to ensure the safety of children but the laws we have in place to ensure they finish there education. I always seem to hear from the older generation how our kids are the future of our country. That they are the ones who will shape what happens in this world. Our newest generations are so important to us that we have put anti-bullying laws in place to ensure they grow up without fear of dealing with that kind of hardship. Our kids are protected even more than adults. It is without a doubt that our country puts a

The topic of free speech and expression continues to make the headlines. Popular topics of the day range from the legalization of gay marriage; to the practices of Planned Parenthood; and the disruptive Black Lives Matter movement. A commonality between all these movements is the media driven bias that only one view is legitimate and the other as intolerant. This view clearly forgets that the ability to offend is the very definition of free speech and expression, a gift of free will. It evolved as a result of decades of oppression and violence, and is recorded in many governing documents of the Free World. This positive evolution has achieved actual change; however, today this hard fought battle

To these theorists, online hate speech is a danger to human rights, as it fosters a fear based climate for the victims. Additionally, when white supremacists and other hate groups target minorities online, it rarely remains just “free speech.” In these cases, the internet acts as a medium for individuals to gather support from others, and this often results in encouragement for action. When a right to free speech results in minorities having to stay in their homes in fear of being assaulted, we must ask ourselves who’s speech is free. Speech free from government regulation benefits white supremacists and attackers because it allows them to come together to form communities which is far more dangerous than an

In “Free Speech and the Paradox of Tolerance” (Medium, February 6, 2017), Julia Serano addresses the flaws in activists’ Richard Spencer’s and Milo Yiannopoulos’ actions against freedom of speech, as well as the flaws in free speech absolutism. The author explains how free speech absolutism cannot fully be achieved because of the laws that protect our privacy, and how free speech absolutism can only make matters worse. Because there are no laws against Milo Yiannopoulos campaigning for actor/comedian Leslie Jones to delete her personal website, people are allowed to use their freedom of speech to take away that same right from others. Serano explains how she was scared to express herself as transgender during her childhood because she witnessed people being harassed for their identity. The author calls this the paradox of free speech. Another paradox she highlights is the paradox of tolerance. If those who are tolerant do not defend against the intolerant, then the tolerant will one day disappear. Serano believes everyone should be a moderator. People who believe in an open and positive, free speaking society should collectively stand up against those that are intolerant to opposing ideologies, and possibly even incarcerate those who cannot present reason for their beliefs. This, however, is where the line must be drawn. Serano is wrong to believe that free speech absolutism will cause intolerance of fester and one day erupt, and that the minority should be treated like

Free speech is important. It enables humans to openly express any thoughts, opinions, or ideas one may have without the risk of government oppression or censorship. Social media act as platforms that promote free speech, as social media allow any person’s thoughts, opinions, or ideas to be shared with the world at the simple click of an “enter” key. However, there do exist limitations to free speech when threats or hate speech become involved. In these instances, ramifications and legal actions can be taken as a means of combating verbal threats and hateful statements. With this in mind, the Elonis v. United States sase is of particular notoriety due to its exemplification of both the role in which social media play in free speech, as well

The 2016 release of the movie Ghostbusters which was noted as a rarity in the male dominated action genre since the majority of the cast was female; led to controvery among social media. One of it’s stars, Leslie Jones who is African American, was harrassed online for no other reason that being in a movie. She received messages calling her an “ape” and a “savage” which left her realizing that the internet can be filled with hate. A problem noted here was that social media was giving voices to racists and sexists. Their hateful viewpoints can now reach a new audience and can be quantified

Twitter has been a prominent social media platform since its development in 2006. Recently, censoring posts, or “tweets” has been hotly debated around the world as many celebrities and politicians have been attacked by users. Ghostbusters co-star Leslie Jones became the center of the argument over the summer, as she has been subjected to racist and sexist tweets with the premiere of the movie. Shortly after this situation was brought to light, Twitter began taking down tweets and removing the accounts of the offenders. Another high profile example was New York Times editor Jonathan Weisman being bombarded with anti-Semitic tweets by neo-Nazis and white supremacists in June. Twitter should be allowed to censor

1William Jefferson Mr. ArmstrongEnglish Comp 223 September 2017Speak No EvilFreedom to the people has been Americas greatest accomplishment, the border placed between the lines of freedom are not clarified. Freedom of speech is the right for the American people to express their opinion without any intervention from the government. Freedom of speech is not a privilege, it is our general right for all people regardless of their religion, nationality, or race. The restrictions for free speech is a current event that keeps the American people questioning why is it even necessary.In addition, this argument is seen from two different viewpoints. First, who agree with the fact that our freedom of speech should have restrictions to keep others from expressing their opinion to avoid an argument and criticism. On social media, people around the world have used social media to spread hateful slurs or clichés to express their opinion. Whether its racist,

Tears are shed while family members and friends clutch onto each other whispering words of wonder to God. Parents watch their treasure as they get buried only this time they can never recover their precious gem ever again. Friends lose one, or their only, trustworthy outlet to vent out all their problems and secrets to. The Earth loses one more person that could’ve made some sort of difference, that person that had a life to live. All these problems have become a national issue and are the results of the large percentage of pretentious posers in American society that cause children, teens, and adults to opt out of enforcing their natural birthright; to live.

In addition to supporter shaming being abundant in daily face-to-face interactions, social media, such as Twitter and Facebook, become a breeding ground for supporter shaming. On Twitter, Kevin Allred, a professor at Rutgers University, wrote, “If you’re white & claiming being called racist for supporting Trump is a ‘bias incident,’ you 've lived the most privileged life ever! Ever!” The supporter shaming on social media, however, did not stop at the individual level; it grew to a systematic banning of vocal and enthusiastic Trump supporters on Twitter. Charlie Nash wrote in a Breitbart article, “…It appears that Twitter’s war on free speech is directed at a specific generation of libertarians and alternative conservative voices, many of whom are…supporters of Donald Trump…they’re going after the social network’s most influential Trump supporters…” While vocal Trump supporters were being banned on Twitter, there did not seem to be an issue with death threats being posed toward Donald Trump and his supporters, seeing as composers of such tweets were not banned. This type of behavior, engaged in by social media platforms, made political discourse hostile, but the opposite should be the goal of such media platforms. It should be a duty of the media to encourage political discourse and to encourage people to actively participate in politics, since it affects everyone, not to punish those who have opposing beliefs.

In essence, social media should allow constitutionally protected speech within their content. Believe it or not, there are nuances under the first amendment that shields certain element of hate speech. As Kaminer explained, “the threat of unwelcome speech and demanding protection from the emotional disturbances” is something to consider (Kaminer). Nevertheless, this type of speech should only be guarded if factual backing is provided. Discussing such speech is healthy so long as both groups are willing to respect and consider each other 's viewpoint. There is a clear distinction of “racist speech and speech about racist speech, between racism and discussions of racism” according to Kaminer (Kaminer). Discussion stimulates healing as it allows for the release of tension and anxiety bottled up inside one’s mind. Also, due to the surging new political terms such as alternative facts, and fake news, the notion of what constitute as free speech and what is not is becoming a problem. For the first time in history, most people have access to any information within their fingertips. Social media platforms are gradually becoming a center for people to distribute articles and express their own feelings and opinion. Provided that

Bullying has been escalating to a certain degree that it has affected as many as 160,000 students that reported staying home from school every day, because they were afraid of being bullied (www.stompoutbullying.org). Bullying does not only stops one from wanting to go to school, it also makes one feel anxious, insecure, and unhappy at school, isolated and at times severely depressed (Young, Shin Kim, and Leventhal). Schools must have better resources available to students; this includes the victim and the bully. The victim should have both better counseling and stricter laws to protect them. Bullies also need counseling due to research which states “that many bullies tend to come from families where parents are more