The Freedom Of Speech And Freedom Of The Media

Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. Whether or not on a college campus, people (especially college students) should have the right to speak freely. Everyone does have the right to speak freely, because it is one of the twenty-seven amendments. Colleges all around the United States are now home to many restrictions on free speech. For example, the idea and use of “free speech zones” has made its way to colleges everywhere. A “free speech zone” is a sidewalk sized place where students are allowed to speak their minds freely on college campuses. I know what you’re thinking. This sounds ridiculous. Why are there specific places for people to speak their minds? Aren’t colleges suppose to be a place where students speak their minds and learn new things? Universities should not be able to put any restrictions on free speech.

I think that the constitution was a triumph in republican government for many reasons. The constitution guaranteed basic rights for people, guarded against tyranny and established a new type of government. The basic rights for people included all the amendments. They guarded against tyranny in several ways such as separation of powers and checks and balances and lastly it created a new government by making the power of national and state governments equal.

The media could be determined a tremendous and powerful weapon. If used properly, it can provide society with great benefits, but if used in negative ways, it can destroy. In a modern world where information can spread as fast as wildfires, a reason to monitor or limit types of media appear rational, but along with that, irrational cases still exist. This argument has circled in the United States for a while and a decision needs to be made. Parents and citizens around the United States think concerningly about what our eyes witness on the news, in stores, on billboards, etc. When the government determines what appears in the media, it not only belittles citizens, but it denies the First Amendment, which states the basic rights of an American. Censorship of the media, as displayed in 1984, clearly exhibits the violation of the First Amendment, rightfully given to the citizens of the United States, by the founding fathers of this country.

The media has always been a widespread river of constantly flowing information. People have counted on the media to give them their news for years. Recently, it’s been coming into question how accurate the news is. With the recent Fake News epidemic, (a surge in news, primarily circulating through social media, using falsities that are being passed off as fact) people have been concerned about the validity of the news they receive daily, and people have been wondering what to do about it. The person with the most influence over the country currently is Donald Trump, and he has chosen to respond by haphazardly accusing reputable news sources of being fake. This puts a strain on the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The First

The first amendment grants us the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, petition, and press. Freedom of speech and press allow us to express ourselves and our opinions. The media however is constricted in this right due to the fact that they let the government decide how they express themselves and how they present this to the public. When the government controls the media, they control what we the people see happening in our country and

The United States of America is a democratic society in which people are encouraged to have a voice through various outlets. We are share our opinion on various political topics through debates and quizzes. The way of advocating our opinion, and the platform in which it stands, has changed dramatically since the Europeans came to the United States. There are various ways for one to express opinions, although they do come with downsides that include lack of education and understanding how our system works.

Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are two principles key to the core of the American society. The Bill of Rights is a piece of literature that Americans pride themselves on, however it can sometimes raise more questions than answers. The recent protesters in Charlottesville exercised their unalienable rights, but approached an all too familiar line with these rights. A question that is commonly asked is “Where should the line be drawn regarding free speech?” Freedom of assembly is clearly stated in the Bill of Rights, where it is stated that people have the right to peacefully assemble. When discussing freedom of speech however, there is a much larger gray area. Whether freedom of speech protects everything a person says, or up until a point when it restricts the rights of another, has incited many debates. The protests in Charlottesville only worked to revive the debate surrounding this hot topic. In Politics, Aristotle discusses the meaning of speech within the human. Aristotle examines how speech is used by humans to make up for deficiencies in their instinct, as well as how we can effectively use our speech to best suit our community. How would Aristotle describe the speech used by those involved in the Charlottesville protests?

To anyone looking to avoid fake news, Leonard Pitts says to read a newspaper. Pitts points out that there is a difference in satire and fake news such an SNL skit being made to poke fun at news sources being compared to a story about Donald Trump being assassinated. The New York Time's recent case study explains that fake news arises due to people not bothering to fact check the articles they share online. Fake News has become popular in conservative communities and in those looking to confirm that they are the true victims. The alt-right movement and its supporters have lead us into a spiral of misinformation and fake reality.

Established in the Constitution, written in 1787, the Constitution guaranteed the citizens of the United States the rights of freedom of speech, religion, press, and assembly in the First Amendment etched in the Bill of Rights. Throughout history, many Americans have experienced restrictions of freedom of speech during the United States earliest years as a country. John Adams, the second president of the United States, established the Alien and Sedition Act, which impeded upon Free Speech by restricting citizens from criticizing the government and president of their actions. Therefore, through the 1st Amendment, citizens should remain protected of their liberties in every aspect until they confiscate others of their liberties, and it should protect hate speech unless an individual’s liberties are in danger or under threat. The Supreme Court should define hate speech as threats that present another individual in obvious peril.

Freedom of speech is the most paramount aspect of establishing a functioning government. The right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint, or freedom of speech, has its origins dating back to the creation of the United States. Although the Articles of Confederation, the first form of government America instituted, did not acknowledge free speech, the new form of government that came subsequent, the Constitution, stressed the importance of freedom of expression. Consequently, a prosperous, and working society was forged out of the desires of the founding fathers to add free speech in America. Nonetheless, similar to most freedoms, there are limitations to the right of free speech. Because the United States grants freedom of

Recently, many NFL players have been protesting the national anthem in hope to bring awareness to oppression of black people. However, many people have been claiming that these acts are disrespecting the military and the country. Part of living in the U.S.A. is having the freedom to protest and not being stripped of that right because someone doesn't think it's the appropriate time.

One of the most important American documents is the Bill of Rights. This Bill of Rights essentially protects Americans from the government. Among the ten original amendments, the first amendment is often looked at as one of the most important, protecting the right to practice religion, to assemble, to petition the government, and the freedom of the press. The protection of these rights is essential to help maintain the United States a free and democratic country. I believe the most important rights are the right to practice religion and the freedom of the press. As I will explain in my essay, these two rights are paramount to the success of a democratic country.

In “Foundations and Limits of Freedom of the Press, “ Judith Lichtenberg explores the ongoing controversial argument surrounding the regulation of the press and mass media. She evaluates the ability of the press to shape our opinions and values through an examination of the interdependent relationship between freedom of speech and press. Furthermore, she notes that, while the two rights appear similar as they are both considered as forms of self-expression, it is important to differ between the two.

"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." This quote by A.J. Liebling illustrates the reality of where the media stands in today's society. Over the past twenty years there has been an increase in power throughout the media with regard to politics. The media's original purpose was to inform the public of the relevant events that occurred around the world. The job of the media is to search out the truth and relay that news to the people. The media has the power to inform the people but often times the stories given to the public are distorted for one reason or another. Using slant and sensationalism, the media has begun to shape our views in society and the process by which

“Freedom of the press” refers to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which protects the right of the press from government censorship but is all too often oversimplified when being discussed in our modern democratic society, and is often referred as, ‘free speech.’ The meaning of ‘freedom of the press’ as I’ve understood is the right of the individual to think and speak without censorship by the government. To be clear, this right does not apply to private institutions, which are not bound by the first amendment but by their own policies and promises. What this means to me on a more personal level, is that individual citizens have the right to express their opinions no matter whether I agree or disagree, and that I as an individual have the same equal right to voice my opinion.