Persuasive Essay On Freedom Of Media

As American universities and colleges grow their demographics, diversity and ideas there is a continued and an accelerated debate regarding freedom of speech within these higher education institutions. College campuses are struggling to simultaneously provide a learning environment that is inclusive to traditionally unrepresented students while also providing an environment that allows for ideas to be challenged and debated no matter how offensive or controversial.

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

What is free speech? Does the term ‘free speech’ cover offensive words? Painful ones? Words that disrespect others? What about objectionable, or even wrong beliefs? When is speech illegal? What is exactly meant by free speech? According to Rampell, the term ‘free speech’ includes ‘hate speech’, and is therefore protected by the first amendment (np). This means that even messages we don’t like, agree with, feel uncomfortable about, or even are disgusted by, are legal. Unfortunately, many college students consider harmful words an assault, and some students believe that such verbal attacks can and should be met with violence (French np). Students and speakers today are discriminated against in classrooms and other scenes where free speech and debate should be especially cherished.

All U.S citizens have First Amendment rights. They all have the right of freedom of speech, religion, press, petition, and assembly. Freedom of Religion enforces the separation of church and state. Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without the interference or regulation by the government. Freedom of the Press allows people to express themselves through dissemination and publication. Freedom to Assemble allows individuals to get together for lawful and peaceful purposes. Freedom to Petition give people the right to ask government to correct a problem. Even though there might be certain hate groups, protesters, or discriminators, they can also be protected by their rights only if it doesn't interfere with other people's rights or gets those rights taken away. I believe that all U.S citizens should be able to practice any right they choose to.

Another reason as to why I believe The Catcher in the Rye should be available to all students above elementary school is because censoring it would be ignoring the first amendment rights of free speech. “If librarians caved into every demand to remove materials from their collections, they would not have much left to put on the shelves. Only materials that offended no one would be spared. Such a situation might appeal to some people, but it would not serve the needs of our democracy or satisfy the constitutional requirements for free speech.” (Steffens). Including a diverse selection of books in a library or school setting would be the promotion of free speech and a diverse selection of opinions and views. However, if books keep getting censored and removed, that would be ignoring the first amendment and almost all opinion-based materials would be gone. Secondly, “As agents of the government, libraries are bound by the Constitution to promote free speech and diversity of opinion.” (Steffens).

The life of the typical American citizen is completely built upon the first Amendment, and one Micheal Chabon explained, " The First Amendment has the same role in my life as a citizen and a writer as the sun has on our ecosystem." The life led in America reflects the beliefs of freedom in all aspects of the American way of life. The real debate comes to light when both sides of an argument is fueled by the protective power of Amendments. In the article "Private License Plate Scanners Amassing Vast Databases Open to Highest Bidders"(Private), and "Who Has the Right to Track You?"(Track) To test the idea out.The decision between these cornerstone beliefs depends greatly on personal belief, but anyone with a belief in democracy and freedom will see clearly in the discussion between the ideas pushing the first and fifth amendments. It is clear that the development of these arguments is built on the use of ethos, pathos, and/or logos; style, word choice, and tone; and the author's purpose to shift the view of the reader towards the preferred view point.

The First Amendment one that is watered down, serves as example of the freedom we as Americans have. It is best known as the amendment that lets us say what we want when we want. There is more to it that gets overlooked. It blocks government from establishing a theocracy, grants the people the right to peacefully assemble and protest the government for a redress of grievances. Our press is independent and is given freedom to publish at will. Our freedoms embolden us to speak out and organize for progress and against society's wrongs. Sometimes groups will organize to speak out but will sink to extreme measures as a means of expression. The first amendment has seen challenges in recent months. “Donald Trump referred to the press, and I'm quoting his exact words, as "dishonest, disgusting, and scum."Just ten days ago, you might have heard in a press conference, President Donald Trump said that the "press is out of control."(Chemerinsky, 553). To clashes between different ideologies on college campuses with some initiating riots. The first amendment grants many freedoms, however it does not grant protection from consequence.

The functionality and success of the American democracy is dictated by the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution. These rights have been utilized by American citizens on numerous occasions throughout the centuries when advocating for these critical rights. However, questions started to arise when high school students started exercising these rights in their high schools, specifically their right to free speech and expression. The right of high school students to freedom of speech became an issue when their speech began to disrupt the school day and, as a result, teachers began to restrict it. Tinker vs. Des Moines, the landmark case advocating for students’ right to free speech, as well as Bethel vs. Fraser, the case ruling that students don’t have the same first amendment rights as adults, have been instrumental in dictating the outcome of future court cases regarding the right to freedom of speech of high school students. The exchange of information and exposure to new and different ideas is critical to students’ education and should be protected. However, if the freedom of speech infringes upon the need to maintain a safe learning environment, should it be protected? In my opinion, interpretations of Tinker have proved to be too restrictive on the First Amendment rights of students. The right to freedom of speech is a core right of the American

As of right now, there are 27 US amendments with all kinds of rules. But I’m only going to talk about the main 10. Some may be outdated and need to be updated while others after 241 years still work in this modern world. Who knows maybe after 100 or 200 years some of the amendments will stay the same with no updates or tweaks.

The NFL protest is a silent protest to police brutality and institutional racism. In Between the World and Me, Coates brings attention to institutional racism and police brutality. They are both extremely common in America. The NFL protest is an act of patriotism and brings awareness to institutional racism, but some Americans find it disrespectful to the national anthem.

If it is uncomfortable to read and discuss, so be it. Most things that matter deeply are.” -USA Today. Today Censorship also affects more than the children though. It really affects everyone equally. It allows the government to have too much control over what we learn and know. What if we lived in a dystopian society. For example, if you’ve ever seen the movie or read the book The Giver by Lois Lowry, the city kept everyone from learning about the world’s past and why they have to obey their rules and only their rules and do whatever job they assign them. Private groups and public authorities in various parts of the country are working to remove or limit access to reading materials, to censor content in schools, to label controversial views. Most people believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. Another touchy topic about they types of censorship we have is open religion. We have the Freedom of Religion. But many schools don’t allow religious practices, teachings, or even how they dress. What’s wrong with anyone expressing their religion and how they think of God peacefully and freely? America is

Freedom of speech in America is defined by the right to express any opinions without any censorship or restraint. But it isn’t just defined by the words people speak aloud. It’s the actions they take part in to support the words they express. The writing of books and essays, creating artwork, giving speeches to grand crowds, voting, protesting. But do all people have the right to speak their mind? Should people be able to speak freely, to express opinions and thoughts, as promised in the United States constitution? A controversial topic, with many different opinions weighing in from around the world.

It is no secret that the news has always been known to be bias toward a certain opinion, but experts can trace acts like this all the way back to the nineteenth century in early America (Thornton, 2016). During this time period most of the well-known newspapers were explicitly linked to political parties and economic interest. Respected historian Chilton Williamson writes this about the early 1900’s, “The presentation of facts simply as facts, editors and writers reasoned, cannot accomplish the exalted goal of saving civilization” (Thornton, 2016). But what if a leader comes along and believes that the best thing for their country is to use extreme media bias? In 1933 Adolf Hitler changed the meaning of media bias by completely controlling what people saw and read. Hitler eliminated papers against his control, and promoted the ones in favor. By doing this, he forced people to only see what news was being presented in one way, instead of an accurate and fair representation of the entire news (The Press in the Third Reich). This statement is not insinuating that bias with Nazi Germany is the same as modern America, but it is suggesting that bias amongst media allows for a misrepresentation of the truth to the people.

Freedom of the press is part of the five main freedoms represented in the first amendment of the constitution of the United States. The constitution was ratified in 1791 putting freedom of the press in full development. Since then many cases have evolved with this freedom, and the freedom had some role of developing future amendments and technology in modern day. Freedom of the press had a history even before its ratification, it helped to solve many court cases, and is used throughout modern times.

Why spend money that is really needed for other things? Why live uncomfortably? Why be trapped in this hole called a home that belongs to another person? Why not live free and peacefully? When a person rents he or she usually throws away money that could be used to purchase something that belongs to them. Money is not easy to come by so why pay out hundreds toward something that is not benefit to the person paying it out. There is no good explanation for making a decision like this. The best option in a situation like this is to buy a house. Buying a house is a better option than renting an apartment.