Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Richard spinello Free speech in cyberspace
Richard spinello Free speech in cyberspace
Richard spinello Free speech in cyberspace
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Richard spinello Free speech in cyberspace
The Internet offers a much greater potential for interactive communication between information senders and receivers than the more traditional methods of communication such as newspaper, radio and television. Freedom of speech ascertained by the constitution is not an absolute right. Depending on the medium through which information is delivered various degrees of the freedom to express one's self is protected. Internet communication may be analogous to either a specific existing communication medium or even several. Current free speech protection begins to dissipate as it is applied to the uncertain confines of the newly developed Cyberspace.
The traditionalist approach to free speech protection is centered on core values and yields results that are basically neutral so that content allowed through one communication medium is permissible in all media.Freedom of speech and of the press is a basic tenant of United States constitutional law. Perhaps concern for the English use of prior restraint (licensing of press) and seditious libel was the reason for including the first amendment in our bill of rights. When the first amendment became law the printed page was the most widely used non-verbal medium of speech. Speech, as we understand it, involves more than verbal communication. Speecht includes pictures, movies, radio, television and expressive conduct [Shelton v. Tucker, 364 US 479 (1960)].
As technology advanced and additional communication medium developed, speech was given various levels of first amendment protection depending on the medium through which the information was delivered.Cyberspace is a network of computer systems permitting literally millions of people to communicate with one another on an hourly basis. Cyberspace may mirror other types of communication medium singularly or several at one time. Current free speech protection approaches break down when applied to Cyberspace since one may prohibit speech when delivered by one medium but permit identical speech delivered via a different medium. A core values approach protects identical speech regardless of the medium in which it is delivered. So it is a foundation for Cyberspace and promotes development of new technology.
That, "Congress shall make no law..., or abridging the freedom of speech", suggests an absolute right to speak. Justice Black dissenting in Konigsberg felt that freedom of speech was absolute [Konigsberg v. State Bar of California, 366 US 36 (1961)]. Justice Harlan writing for the majority rejected an absolute right, noting that protected freedom of speech was less than an unlimited license to talk.
This source supplies my paper with more evidence of how freedom of speech is in a dangerous place. American has always stood by freedom of speech, and to see how social media platforms try to manipulate and take off as the choose to increase slight bias is unpleasant. The article establishes a worry to the fellow readers that hold freedom of speech so high and that it is at risk. The article manages to explain why freedom of speech is in danger, and why there should be no limits to free speech.
The free speech clause in the Bill of Rights states: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” (US Const., amend I). This clause, albeit consists of a mere ten words, holds much power and affluence in the American unique way of life. It guarantees Americans the right to speak freely without censorship by preventing the government from restricting the rights of the people to express their opinions. Consequently, this freedom can encourage citizens’ participation in politics; promote an adaptable and tolerant community; facilitate the discovery of truth; and ultimately create a stable nation. However, how much freedom should be granted to an individual? Where should the line be drawn for the coverage free speech protection? (1) What happens when the exercise of free speech puts other constitutional values in jeopardy? What values should prevail? (2) In an attempt to address these questions, many opposing interpretations have been presented. While some construe this clause in an absolute, categorical approach, others take on a more lenient, balancing stance. (1)
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
In today’s society, free speech is a right guaranteed to every American in the U.S., but not all countries give their citizens that right. As computer and internet technology has grown, so too has the number of violations against free speech around the world. Some of these include censorship of the press by the government, punishment for speaking against the government, and punishment for voicing unpopular opinions. The computer and internet technology of the world is often used in these suppressions of free speech.
The evolution of the Internet started from the department of defense's project, and rapidly distributed to world wide. With the rise of the Internet age comes with the benefits and the concerns. Because of the easeness to communicate information and displaying data, the first amendment needs to be applied to this communication channel. How are we using and communicating information without offending and harm others? Since the evolution of the Internet, there has been acts from Congress to regulate the use the Internet such as the Communications Decency Act in 1996 and the Child Online Protection Act in 1998. These acts aim to forbid Internet users from displaying offensive speech to users or exposing children of indecent materials. The Internet raises other issues that people might have. The biggest and most debatable topic is the privacy issue. Is the Internet a safe place to protect personal information such as financial information, medical data, etc…? Some people who are computer literate or at least with some experience in software and technology would not trust to release the information on the web or at random sites . As a matter of fact, any unknown or small vendor on the web would have difficulty getting many customers to do business online. Big vendors such as Amazon would want to secure their network infrastructure to protect the users information, so that their server would not be hacked. However, even this style of protecting personal information is not enough. The users demand further protection such as ensuring their information is not being sold to other vendors for misuse, or spam the users mailbox with soliticing.
Freedom of speech might be the most useful and righteous freedom a citizen could be granted with. As technology improves and society becomes more and more modernized, people get more comfortable with the social media and tend to express themselves more on those tools.As one knows, there are specific ways to express opinion or address to people and social media require specific manners and would not advise publicly intimidating another no matter what the situation is or was. That is the case for Anthony Elonis whose case will be studied and elaborated in this assignment.
This paper explores the pros and cons of government involvement in controlling the content of the Internet. Everyday technology is getting more sophisticated, meaning that nowadays it is easy to explore about a certain issue via online connection and be near the world. In the present, as long as you have Internet connection, you have the ability to have access to all kind of information that is posted on Internet. There is a huge debate whether internet should be regulated or not, and this is excepted to continue in the upcoming years. Those who support the information epoch, tend to consider Internet to be essential and productive in educating its population. However, those who don’t favor content on the internet want to build limitations since they think that some of the content is unnecessary and which might have the power to negatively influence people. As a matter of fact, some of the governments don’t find reasonable for all the information to be posted on Internet, thus they want to censor some of it based on their beliefs. In this case, government as the ruling power selects certain issues, which they think might harm national prosperity. But, this action leads to empowering more the government and leave citizens behind. Llog time ago, our word have suffered form inequalities and now its time to respect and give everyone equal voice. Democracy is what the world values and aimed to achieve throughout years. Freedom of speech and equity is what people have always needed and are willing to fight for no matter what. As long as government tries to do the opposite, then there would be conflicts and disappointments among population. The Internet is a free domain as it should remain as such. Therefore, it can be argued that gove...
As the Internet has become more widely recognized and used by people all over the world, it has brought a new medium in which information can very easily be broadcast to everyone with access to it. In 1995 there was a projected 26 million Internet users, which has grown to almost 300 million today. One major problem with this is that everyone represents different countries and provinces which have different outtakes on certain types of freedom of speech as well as different laws about it. This proposes a new type of law that would need to be written in order to determine whether or not something is illegal on the Internet. A person in one country can express what they want to, but that expression may be illegal in another country and in this situation whose laws are to be followed? What I propose to do accomplish in this paper is to discuss the freedom of speech laws of the United States of America and those of France, China, and Canada. I will examine what about them is similar and what about them is different. The bringing of the Internet has brought many new types of businesses as well as ways in order to communicate with the world, but as with each new endeavor or invention, there needs to be a way in order to govern its use and policies. There must also be ways in order to punish those not following the new laws and policies of use, since that the country that the person is in may allow what they did, but it may not be allowed on the Internet or in a different country. In other words, there is the need for international laws governing the Internet.
The "Information Superhighway", or internet, is a powerful medium for today's information driven society. From it's humble beginnings as a series of networks established to help the military and government share resources, it has become a place for people to engage in commerce and also for people to interact socially in both business and personal faculties. Along with the excellent opportunities for meaningful communication in this new atmosphere, <cite>the Internet has evolved as an open, democratic cybersociety marked by free speech and volunteerism. It is a community gathering place for people to share ideas, concerns, stories and opinions, and to give help and assistance to one another.</cite> (Mills-Scofield) There has also arisen a series of problems. Whenever any major development in society is conceived, such as when telephones were introduced, problems ensue. The Internet, because of it's modern nature is not really well dealt with when it comes to existing ethical and moral issues. Being that the Internet has fostered a new class of community that requires a unique category of moral values and ethical considerations. Things are always going to be dealt with differently when it comes to any revolutionary type of medium. For instance how can interstate trade be regulated by the federal government when it is electronically transmitted information? It is a whole new category, How could the constitution have predicted? Although there are many differences, <cite>The Internet mirrors today's society to a large degree, with its blend of good and bad. Many of the issues facing the U.S. and the world, such as those related to race or gender, for example, are also issues on the Internet. And various subcultures, such as militias, GenX and philosophical movements, are represented.</cite> (Mills- Scofield) They go on further to say, <cite>Like all societies, the Internet has its unwritten rules--its"netiquette.
The first amendment to the constitution reads: "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." (Constitution) We as Americans have the right to speak our minds. We are able to criticize the government and voice our opinions in the form of voting and political debate. This is not only a right, it is vital for the survival of our country. The internet is no stranger to free speech debates. In early 1996 the Communications Decency Act was passed. This act prevented "indecent" and "patently offensive" content which included profanity and many works of classic literature that contained such material. No less than 6 months later, the CDA was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In 1997 the Supreme Court granted the Internet full protection under the 1" amendment entitling it the same freedoms of print media. Two sides are now battling on a new front: the abuse of 1" amendment in cyber space through the exchange of illegal material. I will discuss this issue in more detail later.
The Internet provides a gateway for an individual to speak freely and anonymously without being targeted to what he or she said. With this said, one of the biggest issues concerning the Internet today is freedom of speech. The issue of free speech on the Internet has been a topic of discussion around the world within the past years. It is a unique communication medium and is powerful than the traditional media[2]. Because the Internet can not be compared equally to other mediums of communication, it deserves the utmost freedom of speech protection from the government. The restriction of speech on the Internet takes away from individual's rights and freedom from experiencing the Internet's benefits and uses. Information found on the Internet is endless and boundless and this poses the question, "should the government be allowed to regulate the information and content being transmitted or posted online?"
Since the Internet burst free of academic cloisters into the public domain during 1990s, it has been thoroughly debated whether the individual’s remarks and comments on the Internet should be restricted. Also this has drawn increasing attention due to popularity of the emerging social net like Facebook and Twitter in recent years. While some advocate that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, others argue that an uncontrollable medium of anarchy may occur owing to the freedom of speech. This paper examines both the arguments for and against of the freedom speech in Internet and provides suggestions based on these arguments.
The Internet revolution it's starting to overwhelm us. It's antiquating our laws, reshuffling our economy, reordering our priorities and redefining our workplaces. The principles of the actual world are difficult, if not finally impossible, to apply to the Internet. Legislators and citizens are trying to apply the Constitution to the Internet, but the major problem is applying this document to the World Wide Web. For many citizens of the actual world, this is not a problem; they say just apply the constitution as we do to the actual world. For others however, this kind of thinking is part of the problem. Just applying it to a virtual world, they argue, is an unjust application that really, in the long run, cannot be implemented.
Accessing the cyberspace is the first right should be granted in order to have privilege of and exercise the rest of the human rights on the internet. The internet has a very big impact in people’s life and what they have become today, especially with all the opportunities this medium provide for them to exercise their basic human rights. It has allowed the freedom of many voices to be heard in ways that was merely impossible before this revolution. Not only it has given people the rights to express and associate, but also the right to education as it allows to access many educational materials. In fact, accessing this virtual place has become a necessity to fulfill many other human rights including the right to work, and the right to take part in country’s government. Therefore, internet access should be a public right that ensure information and internet accessibility, usability, and availability for all people regardless of gender, place, and income.
to the first amendment, the expression of free speech is applied to the internet. With all the