The Effects of Technology on the Right of Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democratic political and social institutions. It is responsible for the free flow of ideas and information to anyone who wishes to listen. Freedom of speech supports freethinking and sharing of thoughts, but along with these good characteristics there are also harmful ones. With the positive aspects such as art, journalism, and the pursuit of truth come negatives aspects such as pornography, gambling, and hate and shock sites. To continue with free speech people, must accept these negative aspects such as The Blackplague shock site, "The Blackplague", http://www.blackplague.org/. The contents of this site are repulsive, disturbing, and offensive to the majority of the population. There are countless pictures, texts, and videos of sex, death, and the most evil human behavior imaginable. No matter what is included in the site though, it is still a reflection of society and paints a picture of reality because of the people who maintain and contribute to the site. The creators of this site use digital methods to spread their message and raise some questions about free speech and the Internet as a whole. Should the Internet be regulated and more government control take place or should the Internet not be regulated and allow disturbing material such as "The Blackplague" to be accessible to everyone including little children? These are major social questions that are being raised with major implications for the future attached to the answers. Technology has changed the issue of freedom of speech because it has changed the amount of access and overall information people have available to them today. Technology, such as the Internet, ha...
... middle of paper ...
...iterate culture’s root metaphor, for the human mind"(pg. 11). Print-thinking’s boundaries cannot control digital thinking as print technologies regulations cannot control digital information. Hate and shock sites must be left uncensored because they defend a principle. They are one of the ugliest parts of that principle but they are still a very important and vocal part of it. Total freedom of speech is inevitable, as digital thinking will not tolerate boundaries because they are contradictory to its very nature of constant dynamic change.
Works Cited
Bolter, Jay David. Writing Space. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 1991
Gilster, Paul. Digital Literacy. Wiley Computer Publishing
Landow, George P. Hypertext 2.0
Lanham, Richard A. The Electronic Word. University of Chicago Press. 1989
"The Blackplague". 12-2-98. http://www.blackplague.org/
But the new landscape of ideas and their control leaves many people queasy and uneasy about media, morality, and responsibility. If censorship is wrong and impossible, how then to address the issue of people and companies that use media irresponsibly?
The Free Speech Movement protested the ban of on campus political activities and speeches. Thousands of students became involved in this protest and together they displayed how much power there was in student activism. In the fall of 1964, the Regents of the university enforced a new ban that blocked students from holding political activities at Sproul Plaza on Bancroft and Telegraph. This was unsettling to them because the Bancroft Strip was a key location that students occupied when trying to reach out, raise funds and speak up for what they believed in. Previous policies suggested that student life outside of the university wouldn't be tampered or interfered with, so this was an outrage to the students of UC Berkeley. When the regents took time to revise and tweak the ban, students were still unhappy with the decision, so a sit in at Sproul Hall was organized and it lasted for nearly 10 hours.
Gettings, John, and Cathrine McNiff. "Federal Gun Control Legislation - Timeline." Infoplease. Infoplease, 2014. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
The second amendment says, "A well regulated militia being necessary to security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The second amendment was made for two things. It is there for first, to guarantee the individuals right to have arms for self-defense and self-preservation. The second reason is related to the militia. The right to carry a handgun for self-protection is a privilege of citizenship. The confusion is the right of the state or the individual. The regulation of handguns could be looked at as unconstitutional. The amendment is for the people and not the state.
The 2nd Amendment has been a very controversial topic over the past year with the recent open carry law introduced to the public. This has caused much confusion amongst the right to bear arms and the overlooking Federal government’s role in controlling what it seems dangerous to the public. Our first eight amendments of the Constitution are direct restrictions on the federal government, and the 2nd amendment does not specifically grant the right for people to bear arms in a sense most would have believed. It does however forbid the federal government from infringing on your unalienable rights to defend yourself, it specifically says you shall not be infringed. This targets Congress, the Judicial and Executive branches of government and means they cannot pass a law, or sign anything that infringes on your right to bear arms or defend yourself.
In 1968 Congress passed the Gun Control Act. This act regulates interstate commerce in firearms, making it so that you must be a licensed manufacturer, dealer, or importer. The Gun Control Act was the first attempt at restricting easy access to a firearm. In 1976 the District of Columbia City Council prohibited it’s residents from owning a handgun. Dick Anthony Heller sued the district in 2007 for denying him the right to keep his handgun in his home on Capitol Hill. In June 2008, the Supreme Court ruled the District of Columbia’s handgun ban was unconstitutional. The people of this country believe in their reserved rights, Mr. Heller’s fought for his second amendment right and won, showing the spirit of democracy. Since the Columbine High School shootings in 1999, 27 separate mass shootings have left five or more people dead each time. These randoms acts of violence have taken place in schools (Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech), the workplace (Fort Hood), movie theaters(Aurora, CO) , and even in the church (Charleston, S.C.). Everyday seems to bring new tragedy involving guns, but is it the gun that is killing people or the operator? As with anything, there are pro and cons to the right of own a firearm. With a firearm in your possession, you can protect yourself and your family from just about any threat. Having a gun gives you power over your own life, but this power also extends over someone else life
"The History of the Right to Bear Arms." Gun Control: Restricting Rights or Protecting People?. Sandra M. Alters. 2009 Ed. Detroit: Gale, 2009. Information Plus Reference Series. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Feb. 2014.
Technology has provided our society with numerous innovations that have been created to improve the quality of life on a daily basis. One such innovation is the Internet. The access to a wide variety of information is perhaps the most valuable tool, as well as the most important tool, that we have entering the twenty-first century. There are virtually no limits on how much can be achieved through the use of the Internet. This is not, however, necessarily a good thing. Most people find that offensive material such as child pornography and hate-related propaganda can be viewed by people too easily via the Internet. While child pornography is a detestable subject, it does not have the sort of appeal that a hate group website does in that there are stricter guidelines preventing individuals from attaining child pornography material from the Internet. These stricter guidelines include the Communications Decency Act (1995), which forbids the use of the Internet for such purposes as attaining material of a child pornographic nature (Wolf, 2000). This law can also be used to monitor the hate group websites, but since the law is too broad, it is rarely held up in court. The hate group websites do, however, have a large enough following that there is legislation being formed to specifically target the material on the sites. Despite the highly offensive nature of hate group websites, the sites should not be censored because the right to free speech must be preserved. In this paper we will define what is considered to be hateful content; why this hateful content should be protected; what else can be done to monitor this material on the Internet; and when are the people cr...
Jordan, Stan. “The Common Sense 2nd Amendment.” Keep and Bear Arms.com. 2001. 5 April 2004
The Bill of Rights has gained existence since December 15, 1791. Being supported mainly by anti-federalists, the Bill of Rights upheld what was needed to protect individual liberty. From the ratification we have our first ten amendments. The most important and used today is the first amendment. The amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting… petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This amendment is very powerful but cannot be overly abused. Over time the freedom of speech has been constricted. There are many court cases that display the limitation of free speech. Environmental factors and certain materials are not covered in free speech. To understand our rights and know how and when our rights are limited, we must
First of all, there are several reasons as to why social media has the potential to be extremely addictive to users. Many believe that “as in the case of other types of addiction[s], there are
All in all, the popularity of social networking sites depends on copycat effect during people, convenience in themselves, and their good functions. When social networking sites are becoming an important part of people’s life, people should learn to make the most of these sites instead of wasting time. In other words, people are supposed to use social networking sites temperately but not be addicted to them. It is unwise to let the normal life of people be influenced by these sites. Remember that social networking sites are the joys of the life, but they are not all of the life.
There are two real issues at stake when looking at this controversial topic. The first issue is finding a way to protect our children from potentially damaging material. There are advocates to censoring the Internet and removing this type of material because it will help shelter our children from this type of content. On the other hand, Free Speech advocates believe that it is the individual citizens right to have access to this typ...
Today social media has become a big influence on society. There are many different social media sites that allow people to interact with others. Such social media sites are Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. There are many more different sites, but these are the popular networks that are being used today. These sites allow you to connect with anybody you want to. Social media sites can make you feel connected with others and seem like the best thing, but at the same time it can be a weakness that many of us have.
Social media has a positive impact on the world and is able to allow a better future. It is able to improve communication by making it easier to talk to people via Facebook chatting. Also augments education by making kids use websites that are similar to these social networking sites and giving them a feel of what is right and wrong. Finally it positively impacts the economy, and the fact that these sites are not used just for casual use anymore, but can create job opportunities. All of these reasons tie into the greater message that social media is positive for the world because it creates a better environment, a potential future in which we