Essay On Freedom Of Speech On Media

In order to find truth to anything, one must make multiple suggestions, ask many questions, and sometimes ponder the unspeakable. Without doing so, there would be no process of elimination; therefore, truth would be virtually unattainable. Now, in our attempts to either find truth, express our beliefs and opinions, or generally use the rights we are given constitutionally, we are often being criticized and even reprimanded. Our freedom to voice our opinion(s) is being challenged, as critics of free speech are taking offense to what seems like anything and everything merely controversial and arguably prejudice. As people continue to strive for a nation free of prejudice and discrimination, where everyone is equal, safe and

In today’s society, it is crucial for employees to understand the significance in the use of social media outlets such as Twitter and Facebook. This subject will discuss the primary reasons companies allow the usage of social networking sites in the workplace. It will also explain the positive impact social media usage has in the workplace, such as allowing communication to a broader audience. In addition to the positive usage, this topic will also explore the negative implications usage can cause. Because social media is still relatively new, there are not many laws establishing the proper guidelines for these sites in the workplace. Scholarly articles such as the ‘Workplace impact of social networking” examine the effects of not establishing said policies, an error which results in an unhealthy work environment. Ultimately, employees can positively influence the workplace by using social media if they have the proper guidelines to follow.

A growing hot topic, and cause for concern is the increasing use of social media in the workplace. The landscape for communication has changed, and the line between personal and professional communications has been blurred. How will your employer manage the risks associated with the use of social media and at the same time, gain the benefits that this media form provides? While many employers were initially concerned that employees would use company time and equipment for socializing with friends, they are quickly learning that many social networks can also be used directly for work purposes.

When looking for prospective employees, employers do not enjoy rifling through Facebook pictures of obscene pictures and statuses with crude language. Bad behavior of employees, even off the clock, made public by social media

The regulations on social media policies limit the employer’s ability to place restrictions on the staff

These employees aired their frustrations on social media about the manager. The decision rendered in this matter was that Social media comments are protected concerted activity according to Section 7of National Labor Relations Act. Furthermore, because their postings were a continuation of the employees’ efforts to address concerns.

This paper addresses whether we should censor or block access to websites with controversial material. It looks at the issue from several sides: The relevant US laws that are in place, how censorship is used at the university and corporate levels, how other countries are attempting censorship, and finally what I feel about the topic.

The purpose of this literary review is to enlighten my viewers of the importance of the ethical idea of companies crossing the lines of business with your personal life, when involving social media accounts. Most of my research has operated from the ATU library using the find it tool. Furthermost, the researched information use was from peer-reviewed research journal. I will discuss includes social media cons in the work environment, if it is ethical to get fired over a post, and laws that protect both parties. Social media includes an assortment of electronic communications—most commonly networking sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Myspace, Pinterest, Instagram, and the likes thereof. Social media also covers all forms of blogs, including Twitter (a micro-blog), wikis, online journals, diaries, personal newsletters, and World of Warfare and YouTube also are included under the umbrella term of social media (Lieber 2011).

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

The United States constitution gives Americans many rights. One of those rights is the freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has started hearing arguments in a case that could rewrite the rules for television stations now prohibited from pushing nudity or profanity on public airwaves. In the United States, while most American families view television shows with nudity, violence, and profanity as a threat to the traditional family structure. Some see it as their right to have those programs available to them on television. In The New York Times article “More Than Ever, You Can Say That On Television” by Edward Wyatt, the author addresses that the issue is not that the language and content on television is more inappropriate that previous years, but that it is show during all hours. I believe that these programs do not reinforce family values; they have a negative influence on children, and should be show after 10:00 PM.

The founders of the United States government tried to protect our liberty by assuring a free press, to gather and publish information without being under control or power of another, in the First Amendment to the Constitution. We are not very protected by this guarantee, so we concern ourselves on account of special interest groups that are fighting to change the freedom of expression, the right to freely represent individual thoughts, feeling and views, in order to protect their families as well as others. These groups, religious or otherwise, believe that publishing unorthodox material is an abuse of free expression under the First Amendment. As we know, the Supreme Court plays an important role in the subject of free speech and

Freedom of the press is part of the five main freedoms represented in the first amendment of the constitution of the United States. The constitution was ratified in 1791 putting freedom of the press in full development. Since then many cases have evolved with this freedom, and the freedom had some role of developing future amendments and technology in modern day. Freedom of the press had a history even before its ratification, it helped to solve many court cases, and is used throughout modern times.

Walk into a library, you have a computer, you are most likely carrying a phone, at home, you most likely have a computer, laptop, tablet, or even all three. This shows that we have social media access at the tip of our fingers, making it so easy to open up the site or app and just type out a phrase or paragraph, letting hundreds, thousands, maybe even millions, of people know what you think. Back then, it was harder to let the nation know what you were thinking, and it took even take months before everyone knew, versus today, where the nation might know by the end of the day, and it’s because of this that companies regulate what their users are posting, attempting at keeping the online world free from threats, hate, harmful words, and more. Rutenberg quotes Jeffrey Goldberg as he says, “At a certain point I’d rather take myself off the platform where speech has become so become so offensive than advocate for the suppression of that speech” (2). Twitter also said that “everyone on Twitter should feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, but behavior that harasses, intimidates or uses fear to silence another person’s voice should have no place on our platform” (Rutenberg 2).

Social media. We have all heard of it. We have all raved about it at some point in our lives. There is no doubt; it plays an imperative part of people’s lives today – users are reliant on social media. It is great that Mark Zuckerberg reminds us to say, “Happy Birthday” to our friends. Yet, we have all seen the dangers it can cause. From identity fraud to cyberbullying - we become exposed to the dangers of the internet. Not only is it hackers and frauds that cause destruction, but social networking posts. Every day, you scroll through Facebook, or Instagram - liking, sharing and commenting on posts. What people don’t see is how words on a ‘status’ or ‘tweet’ can hurt someone. They can’t see that a person’s feelings behind the screens on a computer have been destroyed, because they can’t see what they don’t want to see.

Freedom of expression, and open access to media, are as fundamental to the survival of Progress as the sun and rain are to the survival of planet Earth. Yet censorship remains a traditional response of any group that finds itself offended at another's message or creative indulgence.