Freedom of the Press Although a cherished right of the people, freedom of the press is different from other liberties of the people in that it is both individual and institutional. It applies not just to a single person's right to publish ideas, but also to the right of print and broadcast media to express political views and to cover and publish news. A free press is, therefore, one of the foundations of a democratic society, and as Walter Lippmann, the 20th-century American columnist, wrote, "A free press is not a privilege, but an organic necessity in a great society." Indeed, as society has grown increasingly complex, people rely more and more on newspapers, radio, and television to keep abreast with world news, opinion, and political ideas. One sign of the importance of a free press is that when antidemocratic forces take over a country, their first act is often to muzzle the press.
The answer here is yes. If this nation truly stands for freedom, the American government cannot say that its citizens have the right to speak freely, write freely, or assemble freely, but then maintain an establ... ... middle of paper ... ...s both ways: Not only is the government kept out of religious matters, but religion is, likewise, kept out of government matters. There would be a true "separation of church and state." Religious freedom has always been an important part of American history. It is the concept, which originally divided us from England, and without it, this country might not exist today.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution: an amendment that guarantees two rights, one of which is the right to freedom of expression. Under this freedom, there resides the freedom of press, which assures that people are free to communicate through the means of publication and dissemination without governmental restraints. However, if the government desires to interfere in one’s expression, the government can do so, but only if it has proper justification. In such cases, a court case is necessary (“First Amendment”). One such case is New York Times Co. v. United States.
The right of “freedom of speech” allows individuals to express themselves without any interference or any constraints from the government; thus, this gives the people the right to express their opinions without feeling any kind of fear from the government. In addition, the Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification if there would be any kind of interference, with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. Thus, it is clear enough that the freedom of speech is protected under the US First Amendment; however, some of the courts can still find it hard to differentiate between what should go under that law and what should be considered as “crossing the line” of that law. Therefore, the Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit a particular speech that may; for example, cause a breach of peace or might cause violence. Furthermore, The First Amendment jurisprudence has never provided absolute protection to all forms of speech.
Freedom of the press is the right to circulate opinions in print without censorship by the government. Americans enjoy freedom of the press under the First Amendment to the Constitution, which states: 'Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech or of the press.
The very First Amendment provides freedom of religion, speech, and press to allow U.S. citizens to openly criticize any matter, political or not, and not be prosecuted for it. The freedom of defense with firearms allows the citizens to be on equal terms with any force against them is included in the Second Amendment. The protection of privacy of personal living space and belongings are protected by the Third and Fourth Amendments. Clearly the founders of the Constitution had the rights of the people at the forefront of their intentions, and not the potential power they could have gained for
Media plays a pivotal role in building the public opinion and views of millions on various topics of regional, national and international agenda and bringing into light the hidden injustices. Therefore the existence of an independent, free and powerful media forms the cornerstone of a democratic nation. Today the democratic integrity of a country is judged by the ambit of the freedom that the media enjoys in that country. It is worth mentioning here the Blackstonian concept of freedom of press which still forms the shell of the concept of press freedom. They are: 1) Liberty of the press is essential to the state 2) No previous restraints should be placed on the publications.
Although Article 19 of the UDHR ,which states that everyone has the right to freedom, does not create a binding effect to Malaysian law, Malaysia as a member of the United Nation should abide by this vow (Lim,2007). Newspaper publishers are restricted from writing fair and accurate information due to the strict regulations and government ownership of the firms thus misleading the public. Also, the government can misuse the laws that restrict the freedom of expression for their own political benefits.Wang (2001) argued that in order for Malaysia to remain as a democratic society; the press should have the freedom to write and criticize without fear from the government. Though the press may exploit their freedom to express, there is no reason for the Malaysian government to restrict them with regulations that only benefits the government.
Still, if a judge grants immunity testifying is mandatory but nothing said will be used against you. Free expression protects us from the government. Obviously the benefits outweigh the costs, but, the negative aspects are remedied through limitations on free expression so as not to interfere with a person?s life, liberty, and property. The right not to speak is protected through various Amendments in the Constitution most noticeably Amendment 1. It is through these guidelines that free expression has become fundamental law and establishes a truly free society.
These many things affected our right to freedom of speech in their own way, but always the American people have come out stronger because of it. Because these rights are guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States of America, the U.S. government should have no say whatsoever in changing or limiting them. If the government takes away our rights of freedom of expression, then what is the war in Afghanistan and Iraq's purpose? What are we fighting for if not the civilians rights to freely express themselves? Works Cited * No named author.