Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Powers of congress
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Powers of congress
Congress had given the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) certain amount of power, many would argue that the FCC was given too much power. The Federal Communications Commissions was created under the Communications Act of 1934 to regulate foreign and domestic communications, and under this act, the FCC is to benefit everyone and to strengthen the national defense by asserting authority into foreign and interstate communications. (“Communications Act of 1934” 1) While this law had involved a number of people, some would question their views on this matter. Professor Robert Garmon, at Dongbai University, China, questions the idea of authority on what is said in the media. In Garmong’s essay, “Why We Need to Abolish the FCC”, he claimed that the no one has the authority to violate our individual rights (Garmong 1). Garmong’s article surrounds individual rights, but does not look take into account other views. Garmong’s main point is on the FCC’s violation against the First Amendment, mainly, he describes how, in the past, men were only allowed to speak well of the government. Then when America had passed the Bill of Rights, people were allowed to speak freely of any issue, with the amendments guaranteeing the freedom of expression, speech and press. With both the FCC and the Bill in the public, many have argued that the FCC trespasses freedom of speech. Ignoring this freedom, others would also argue on how the FCC does not have the authority to assert its power within the public domain. Garmong had then raised the topic of “indecency”, he explains how the FCC cannot regulate what is said on the air due to the fact that individual voices are a part of the First Amendment. Garmong also reminds the reader about how Galileo, w... ... middle of paper ... ...armong’s article, it is implied that the FCC is looked upon as a negative however, there are some benefits, such as safer communities. Garmong had overlooked certain topics, but had provided several strong instances supporting his view. Congress had given the FCC power, perhaps too much, but they were unaware that they created some trouble, violating the First Amendment. Nevertheless, the Federal Communications Commissions retains plenty of power to correct certain wrongs such as the “wardrobe malfunction” (Garmong 1). Garmong had forgotten other views regarding the FCC, positive or negative. Works Cited "Communications Act of 1934." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 22 Feb. 2014. Web. 24 Feb. 2014. "Freedom of Speech." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 27 Feb. 2014. Web. 02 Mar. 2014. Garmong, Robert. “Why We Need to Abolish the FCC.” 06 Mar. 2014: 1-2. Print.
In the story, ”Gryphon,” by Charles Baxter, Tommy, a boy in the story, had sometimes defended Miss Ferenczi. I think Tommy defends Miss Ferenczi because he had interest in her and wanted to know about her more as a teacher. Miss Ferenczi told the students that she had seen an animal has its body half bird and half lion. While Tommy was going home on the bus, on line 413, Tommy said “She was strange.”. I think this has a part that meant Tommy started to have interest in her as a teacher because he felt something different from other teachers. Here are some reasons why I think that Tommy has interest in Miss Ferenczi and defended her. Why do you think Tommy had defended Miss Ferenczi?
In the Supreme Court case of the New York Times Co. vs. United States there is a power struggle. This struggle includes the entities of the individual freedoms against the interests of federal government. It is well known that the first amendment protects the freedom of speech, but to what extent does this freedom exist. There have been instances in which speech has been limited; Schenck vs. United States(1919) was the landmark case which instituted such limitations due to circumstances of “clear and present danger”. Many have noted that the press serves as an overseer which both apprehends and guides national agenda. However, if the federal government possessed the ability to censor the press would the government restrain itself? In the case of the Pentagon Papers the necessities of individual freedoms supersedes the scope of the national government.
Michael Parenti (2002) declares media in the United States is no longer “free, independent, neutral and objective.” (p. 60). Throughout his statement, Parenti expresses that media is controlled by large corporations, leaving smaller conglomerates unable to compete. The Telecommunications Act, passed in 1996, restricted “a single company to own television stations serving more than one-third of the U.S. public,” but is now overruled by greater corporations. (p. 61). In his opinion, Parenti reveals that media owners do not allow the publishing of stories that are not beneficial and advantageous. Parenti supports his argument very thoroughly by stating how the plutocracy takes control over media in multiple ways: television, magazines, news/radio broadcasting, and other sources.
From the opening sentence of the essay, “We are free to be you, me, stupid, and dead”, Roger Rosenblatt hones in on a very potent and controversial topic. He notes the fundamental truth that although humans will regularly shield themselves with the omnipresent First Amendment, seldom do we enjoy having the privilege we so readily abuse be used against us. Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”.
Over the centuries, the media has played a significant role in the shaping of societies across the globe. This is especially true of developed nations where media access is readily available to the average citizen. The media has contributed to the creation of ideologies and ideals within a society. The media has such an effect on social life, that a simple as a news story has the power to shake a nation. Because of this, governments around the world have made it their duty to be active in the regulation and control of media access in their countries. The media however, has quickly become dominated by major mega companies who own numerous television, radio and movie companies both nationally and internationally. The aim of these companies is to generate revenue and in order to do this they create and air shows that cater to popular demand. In doing so, they sometimes compromise on the quality of their content. This is where public broadcasters come into perspective.
Herbeck, Tedford (2007). Boston College: Freedom of Speech in the United States (fifth edition) Zacchini vs. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Company 433 U.S. 562 Retrieved on March 2, 2008 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/zacchini.html
First Amendment protections were upheld in the case of Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) (Reno, 1997). The Communications Decency Act of 1996 was found to violate the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech. In appealing the CDA, appellees were hoping that the court would determine that the CDA violated both First and Fifth Amendment rights. While the court agreed that the CDA violated First Amendment rights, they did not rule on the issue of Fifth Amendment rights violations. Both constitutional and criminal issues were being addressed in this appeal.
FREE SPEECH: We find that technology has given the government an excuse to interfere with free speech. Claiming that radio frequencies are a limited resource, the government tells broadcasters what to say (such as news and public and local service programming) and what not to say (obscenity, as defined by the Federal Communications Commission [FCC]).
The fundamental purpose of the first amendment was to guarantee the maintenance of an effective system of free speech and expression. This calls for an examination of the various elements which are necessary to support such a system in a modem democratic society. Some of these elements found early articulation in the classic theory of free expression, as it developed over the course of centuries; others are the outgrowth of contemporary conditions. More specifically, it is necessary to analyze what it is that the first amendment attempts to maintain: the function of freedom of expression in a democratic society; what the practical difficulties are in maintaining such a system: the dynamic forces at work in any governmental attempt to restrict or regulate expression; and the role of law and legal institutions in developing and supporting freedom of expression. These three elements are the basic components of any comprehensive theory of the first amendment viewed as a guarantee of a system of free expression.
The author provides many facts that support his argument and makes sure to explain how other solutions would not work to solve this problem effectively. The article provides a plethora of facts discussing how the use of censorship is not the way to go due to its negative connotation and how the law cannot do anything, because technically nothing wrong is really happening the law viewpoint. The author finally concluded his essay by discussing how the solution he proposed maybe the best one they can use at the moment and how the solution has been used and been proven successful. The weaknesses of the essay include lack of information regarding the Supreme Court readings and the fact that he did not cite any sources to show ethos, but he himself was the president of Harvard University so that might have been
The old proverb “the Pen is mightier than the sword” (Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Richelieu; Or the Conspiracy) still holds significance in protecting of public rights. Words such as freedom, and liberty engendered the idea for democracy. Such words formed into sentences and paragraphs enlightened the public to take action against tyranny and corruption. Freedom of the press is what ensured the general masses of their public rights. The exemplary case in which the freedom of the press played a role was the endeavors of Woodward and Bernstein to unravel the corrupted politics behind the Watergate Scandal. The movie All the President’s Men depicts the proceedings of the Watergate scandal, the scheme to attack the crux of democracy: “ the open election”. Also how the two journalists of the Washington Post progressed to unveil the relationship between the Watergate Burglary and the White House. On one hand, the movie represents the role of the media in its obligation to convey the truth to the masses. On the other hand, the movie reflects political corruption and conspiracy. The accomplishment of Woodward and Bernstein presents the importance of the interaction between the media, the government, and the general masses of society. The role of the media is not only to intervene between the State and the public, but also to take account of public ideas and to apply those ideas to new policies. Also, the media acts as a safeguard to prevent the corruption of the State. Thus, the Watergate scandal signifies the significance of the media as an intermediary between the government and the public mass.
Head, Tom . "Radio Censorship." About.com Civil Liberties. About.com, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. .
Zelezny, J. (2011). Communications Law: Liberties, Restraints, and the Modern Media. Boston, MA: Wadsworth-Cengage Learning.
One of the fundamental roles of the media in a liberal democracy is to critically scrutinise governmental affairs: that is to act as a watchdog of government to ensure that the government can be held accountable by the public. However, the systematic deregulation of media systems worldwide is diminishing the ability of citizens to meaningfully participate in policymaking process governing the media (McChesney, 2003, p. 126). The relaxation of ownership rules and control, has resulted in a move away from diversity of production to a situation where media ownership is becoming increasing concentrated by just a few predominantly western global conglomerates (M...
Since the foundation of the United States after a harsh split from Britain, almost 200 years later, an issue that could claim the founding grounds for the country is now being challenged by educators, high-ranking officials, and other countries. Though it is being challenged, many libertarians, democrats, and free-speech thinkers hold the claim that censorship violates our so-called unalienable rights, as it has been proven throughout many court cases. Censorship in the United States is detrimental because it has drastically and negatively altered many significant events. Censorship allows governments more control of society than they already have, slowly progressing governments utilizing censorship to a dictatorship. Often times, this censorship can lead to immense rebellions.