The Extent of Freedom of Speech
Introduction
Freedom of speech is crucial in society; it has several merits that are accompanied by its effective application despite contradicting opinions over the information shared with the public on different platforms. Over the years, media has been at the forefront in sharing information crucial in developing, advancing society, and preserving remarkable historical incidences. However, the approach by members of society has presented mixed reactions over the exercise of rights and freedoms of media personnel. Hosting past events and offering critiques has been championed by members of the public and individuals. However, approaches adopted in their responsibilities have been viewed as biased and unequally aligned to accommodate all members of society. Therefore, this has necessitated media houses, social platforms, and publishers in analyzing incidences by members of society.
Press Freedom and Radicalism presentations offered varied approaches that presented challenges associated with media houses. Sylvie Kauffman Le Monde’s efforts made the editorial director noted that several challenges were evidenced in society and among diverse cultures over the January attacks. Sylvie expounded those critiques using social media platforms were differently judged and charged by law. Instead, the law is expected to offer accommodative opportunities and facilitate residents’ protection aligned to religion and other cultural practices in
society. For example, Charlie, an activist, has openly criticized Muslims and prophets outlined in the Quran, yet none of the legal actions was taken to judge him.
Standard Comedian involved in critiquing Jews is exemplified to have faced the hard face of the law. Comedian’s coverage is faced with negative views that it aimed at glorifying terrorism; therefore, he was rendered before the law and judged and jailed for the actions. The discriminative application of law attracted heated debate on the critique by media associations and personalities. Similar episodes covered by the Comedian were noted to have in the preparation of the attack and may have resulted in future insecurity incidences. Therefore, contrary opinions emanated from the differing offered on Satirical Magazine and Jewish delicatessen in Paris.
The Europeans ought to have formulated approaches that facilitated the curbing of similar incidences in the future. First, launching a national plan on anti-racism aimed at coming clear policies that guided the actions by members of public and media experts on approaches to be adopted in selectively airing information to the public. Moreover, changes to be adopted involved offering education on new policies and requirements to eradicate instances that threatened national security and offered loopholes to terrorism attacks. Additionally, regulation of the internet may have offered opportunities that enhanced the realization of lasting solutions to the recurrent incidences. The approach involves setting up standards and quality of materials shared in social media platforms and those that would be published and shared with public members.
Social media policy formulators and facilitators had the sole responsibility to champion. They ensured the opening of debates that aimed to develop strategies that enhanced the
realization of French cultures and identity. The approach would have necessitated equality in society and eradication of negative criticism in society. Freedom of speech had to be regulated; this aimed at ensuring that members of the public are knowledgeable on expected adherence to policies and outlined regulations. Self-censorship emphasis necessitates that individuals exercise control over what they communicate and engage in to avoid criticism. The creation and intentions of using cartoons in social media platforms as exhibited by Charlie Hebdo.
The unique cultural and historical events that contributed to the European view of free speech comprised killing a middle school teacher in Paris. The teacher was noted to have followed students’ cartoons of prophet Muhammad (Downing & John 183). Later, two people were stabbed due to the rampant spread of materials that dissatisfied Muslims at former offices which hosted the magazine, Charlie Hebdo. Floyd Abrahams’s emphasis on first principles insisted on contagious issues that needed to be addressed, which comprised hate speech encompassed in international and foreign law. The first amendment law expounded on funding museums without interfering in their freedom of speech when selecting the items to exhibit. Essentially, the formulation of laws by congress was not expected to align with any religion or inhibit any specified religious practices. At the same time, the freedom of speech should be protected, and the rights of people to assemble were to be addressed effectively.
Hate speech is a form of expression whereby the involved speakers aim at humiliating or incite hatred against persons or groups composed of diverse religions, skin color, ethnicity, and races. The US should impose a ban on hate speech since it is not legal, as emphasized by the US supreme court (Downing & John 183). The first amendment in the US illegalizes hate speech which is viewed as a facilitator to unfairness and ill feelings among the members of US society. Furthermore, hate speech results in unfriendly relations at workplaces and results in terrorist
attacks due to controversial information shared on social media platforms; therefore, a ban on hate speech should be emphasized.
Heckler’s veto is the approach adopted by the government to suppress speech by government necessitated by un-peaceful reactions by hecklers. Explicitly, this may arise from contradicting opinions; hence listeners have the opportunity to hinder the speaker from being heard (Wright, 159). Actions by listeners’ rhyme with the article’s topic that they rely upon entitled to their freedom of expression. Limits should be placed on the internet; these regulate sharing of suggestive information that results in terrorism and unrest among the intimidated groups and ease tension during campaign seasons.
Conclusion
The article explicitly expounds on freedom of expression through publications and social media platforms. Moreover, the Freedom and Radicalism presentation by renowned activists and champions of expression freedoms and rights have dominated the ideas incorporated in the article. The critique approaches adopted by various groups and public members have shaped the ideas in coming up with clear ideas that protect diverse interests and opinions of members of society. Therefore, despite the contrasting opinions, social media platforms and publishers of different materials should develop accommodating diverse cultures.
