The Pros And Cons Of Government Conflicts

In the past, freedom was not being persecuted for having different opinions and it was a new start, where everyone is equal. Freedom wasn’t in most parts of the world; in fact Freedom House showed the statistic of the freedom of the press from 1987 and 2014 and in 1987 fifty-seven percent of the worlds freedom of the press wasn’t free and in 2014 only thirty-two percent of the press wasn’t free. This show that people are learning the importance of freedom

Is the freedom of speech given to everyone? Or is preferential treatment given to those of the majority? It can be said that when people speak of censorship, they argue that such offensive speech is harmful to the oppressed, or the minority. But by definition, the oppressed minority have little to no political power. The powerful majority who have the power to make restrictions on speech will do so in a way that oppresses the minority’s freedom of speech. The purpose of free speech is to protect the minority, often unpopular, viewpoint from being overpowered by the majority, or by the government. In New York Times v. Sullivan 1964, the idea of libel was creating. Libel states that if you are a public figure, you can only collect damages from someone if you have a very convincing and indisputable argument that (a.) the intention was to hurt, and (b.) statements were made with reckless regard for the truth. In contrast, if you are a private person, you must only prove that the published statements were false and easily verifiable to collect damages. This could be seen as favoring the majority (private persons being protected) over the minority (public figures not being protected). (New York Times v. Sullivan

Indirectly, or directly, one can argue, public schools are controlled by the federal and state governments. Several issues have emerged, because of the conflict between federal and state requirements for education. “Under the Tenth Amendment, any authority not given specifically to the federal government is reserved to the states. Thus, the federal government has no authority to regulate education directly; that belongs to the states” (Underwood, n. d., p. 2). To get around this, the federal government controls the schools through funds for complying with certain initiatives, procedures, and policies (Underwood, n. d.). Ironically, both the state and federal levels of government hold the district liable for implementing different agendas and legal obligations. The federal government, however, can ensure that no citizen is denied their rights or privileges, even in a private institution, because of the Bill of Rights and other amendments. Failure to comply by these amendments or statutes can lead to the loss of federal funding and legal reproductions for schools.

The government can not censor the press, even if what is published is against the government. The free press helps to protect citizens’ rights and hold the government in check. Also in accordance to the First Amendment, people have the right to join any organization of their choosing and come together as a group, peaceably. The last right that the public has is the right to present the government with petitions or letters that tell of their unhappiness and complaints against the government. This is a right that our founding fathers did not have back in England. When they declared independence from the King, they laid out all of their grievances for the world to see. In contrast, our citizens today do no have to wait for a historical event to vent their frustrations.

“Words of Fire,” by Anthony Collings, details the lives of different journalists in regards to free press and covering potentially dangerous stories. Anthony Collings is a former CNN reporter who shifted his focus from reporting to telling the story of journalists who have come under fire in a power struggle between government and free press. Collings puts free press into a spectrum, on one side there is the United States, where the press is largely free, and on the other side there are places like North Korea or China where press is largely restricted by the government. Collings does not focus on these extremes, but rather the places in the middle where there is an ongoing struggle between state power.

Even in the early stages of American history there was an urge to put legally protected freedoms into written government documents. The result was the drafting of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, by James Madison. The applications of the personal freedoms described in the Bill of Rights, particularly the freedom of speech, have been challenged repeatedly in American courts of law and elsewhere. These incidents and challenges of authority reflect the defensive American attitude toward the ever-important freedom of expression and the growing significance of personal rights throughout American history.

The case New York Times Co. Vs United States in summary was a first amendment battle between the United States government and the prominent newspaper cooperation New York Times in 1971. The premises of this legal battle was based on the New York Times reporter Daniel Ellsberg publishing in excerpts illegally leaked, classified documents containing the United States involvement in the Vietnam War specifically on the anticipated death counts (Institution, 2015, p. n .p). However, The United States government finding out about leakage placed a prior restraint also known as “government action that prohibits speech or other expression before it can take place” on New York Times cooperation based on National Security grounds (Prior Restraint, 2015). The case, despite the over powering strength of the nation and the accusations against the New York Times Cooperation the case was ruled in favor of the New York Times by the Supreme Court (Curry, Riley, & Battistoni, 2015, p. 458).

What does freedom of expression really mean? Why is it important to our democratic society? In the landmark case of R. v. Keegstra (1990), the issues of freedom of expression

John Peter Zenger’s case was not only significant to to the journalists, but it was also very significant to the rest of the colonists in the American colonists. John Peter Zenger’s case sparked a rebellion into the colonists, which eventually led to them wanting their freedom and fighting for it against Britain in the American Revolution (Linder 2). John Peter Zenger claimed that his writing was, in fact, accurate. Although, the jury could still convict Zenger even if it was true or not, the judge convinced the jury not to convict on the grounds of publication alone (Kennedy 1). When the court decided to accept the truth as the truth, it laid the work for the future which eventually was put into the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution (John 1). “His trial establishes the principle that truth is a defense to libel and that a jury may determine whether a publication is defamatory or seditious,” (First

In the past, there has always been conflict between the free press and the government. This conflict was very evident in the Pentagon Papers case, also known as New York Times Co. v. United States. Historically, the Supreme Court has disagreed on the limitations that can be placed on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court faced these issues in the case of The New York Times. The newspaper obtained a copy of a Defense Department report that explained government deception in the Vietnam War. The Pentagon Papers emerged when the American people disagreed on the United States involvement in the war. Under the First Amendment, The New York Times argued

In the book Freedom for the Thought that we Hate, author Anthony Lewis takes a simply phrased law, the First Amendment and shows how complex freedom of speech really is once put into the real world of freedom, as we know it. He shows through his rejections of absolutism, strong support towards freedom restriction, and objective analysis of Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, that the United States press is unlike any other in the world.

  No matter how fervently someone believes in the justice of his cause, suppression of the free exchange of ideas is failure at best or downright wrong. The power or might behind an idea does not make the idea right. Many powerful people throughout history have been wrong. Few people, if any, would judge "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" to be subversive or wrong. In 1939 Ambassador Kennedy was so caught up in the fears of the times that he was willing to use the power of his money to protect the world against a film. When people are caught up in the movements of their time, all people must be extra zealous to guard and encourage freedom of expression. Otherwise, a mob mentality reigns, and people

As stated in the Constitution of United States of America of 1789; 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. Focusing on the freedom of speech , or of the press it’s important to note that the media holds powerful entities whether that be individuals, government, businesses, or the Catholic Church accountable for their illegal or dishonest behavior. To analyze this statement, I will be focusing on the film Spotlight and how this film reiterates the idea of holding and exposing wrongdoings through use of the

The conflict theory approach emphasizes issues of inequality and change in relation to social class, money, race ethnicity and gender. The conflict theory pinpoints the belief that these social classifications are parasitic: only benefiting one group while negatively affecting another. In particular, the social conflict approach focuses on the struggles that lower-class people face in a world where the rich and powerful benefits at their expense. Persons of the lower-class are often disadvantaged, since they are not given a chance to move ahead and are always stuck at the bottom of the social ladder. Upper-class individuals are able to fully educate their children, and hence, their generation will always be rich and powerful. However, a weakness

As always, there are those individuals that oppose the power to censor. There are members of society that believe in the freedom to speak publicly and to publish. This is a basic belief in the freedom of expression and is to be protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. On the eve of the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, the first wave of a nationwide survey, comprising more than 1500 citizens was conducted. Through this survey it was found that American rate free speech as their second most precious First Amendment right and regard a free press highly in the abstract. Although there are strong cases made for and against censorship, the rising trend calling for censorship can threaten our basic rights to free expression and the right to be informed. At the center of the debate is the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees our right to read, speak, write, and communicate freely. The government at the state or federal level cannot