The Threat of Censorship Essay

According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).

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

Censorship is the act of filtering what an audience of something hears and sees. This is an effective method for mothers to protect their children from being exposed to things they do not fully understand, however it can be harmful once it is put into the hands of the government, because it crosses some moral and ethical lines. It violates the people’s right to freedom of expression. It would also make it much simpler to hide information from the people or to give them false information in the form of propaganda. Therefore, censorship is both positive and negative and its power should be left in the hands of parents rather than the government.

There has recently been a renewed interest and passion in the issue of censorship. In the realm of the censorship of books in schools alone, several hundred cases have surfaced each year for nearly the past decade. Controversies over which books to include in the high school English curriculum present a clash of values between teachers, school systems, and parents over what is appropriate for and meaningful to students. It is important to strike a balance between English that is meaningful to students by relating to their lives and representing diversity and satisfying worries about the appropriateness of what is read. This burden often falls on teachers. The purpose of this research paper is to discuss

     Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the

Censorship has been used since the beginning of man’s history and is still prevalent in today’s modern world. First it is important to have an agreed upon definition of what censorship is. To give a basic definition of what censorship is: the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society. Many believe and argue that censorship is a violation of human rights which include freedom of express and speech. Those that argue this viewpoint also believe it is a government’s job to ensure the safety of their citizens the best way possible, which really contradicts with the concept and purpose of censorship. The best way to handle the situation of censorship during a time of war, in the United States, is to have the government release an outline to what is considered appropriate to be published to the public. Also have a committee overview the work of journalist reviewed before it is released and have the journalist sign an agreement to not break the code they must use to decide what information they can publish. The best way to handle the situation of internet censorship, in the United States, is to take a hands off approach and allow the internet to be freely accessed with no restraints by all those who choose to use it at their own risk.

Censorship is defined by Caso as the suppression of speech or any other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive politically incorrect as determined by the government or any other control body (3). Censorship may be justified from the conservative view whereby the free speech can be maltreated where it undermines the customary principles and communal solidity as withheld by a particular community.

In a perfect world, student publications wouldn’t be censored, but as many people know, the world is far from perfect. Censorship is an unfortunate reality for many student publications across the nation and although it is perfectly legal for them to be censored, many advisors and publications staff members are unhappy.

Much of the act was struck down in a 1997 Supreme Court decision due to it’s conflict with the First Amendment, although it left standing a section similar to that above but with the “intent to annoy or harass”. The judges indicated that the Internet should have those

landmark cases for future legal actions. One of the most famous of those cases was Pico

Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been

  Abstract:  The issue of free speech has been around since the founding fathers first ratified the constitution of the United States.  With the emergence of new technology, especially the Internet, freedom of speech has been redefined and its limits tested.  What are the limitations of free speech on the Internet, and how can they be enforced?  These are the constitutional questions for the digital age.

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

The freedom of speech that was possible on the Internet could now be subjected to governmental approvals. For example, China is attempting to restrict political expression, in the name of security and social stability. It requires users of the Internet and electronic mail (e-mail) to register, so that it may monitor their activities. In the United Kingdom, state secrets and personal attacks are off limits on the Internet. Laws are strict and the government is extremely interested in regulating the Intern et with respect to these issues.10 Laws intended for other types of communication will not necessarily apply in this medium.

Remember the day when you could say anything you wanted without worrying about someone telling you, “That’s not correct”or “don’t say that.” Yes? Everybody does. Many long to live in that era once more; they long to be able to speak their mind in public without anyone thinking they are weird or crazy. Lately it seems as though you have to retain your thoughts inside your mind and not say anything. Many college campuses and websites have started to establish rules which prevent people from saying what’s on their mind and writing or saying something which may harm others.