free speech

free speech

The Importance of Free Speech in Society

1. Introduction

However, another way to consider free speech is to look at when it is often used. Free speech can often be used as a defence against those who protest against an idea or policy that may threaten social justice or equality. An example of this could be Martin Luther King’s speech “I have a dream”. In this instance, the principle of free speech is a strong tool in challenging the criteria for what constitutes justice but one might argue in this case, free speech must be allowed in order to fight an even greater injustice. Free speech in this idea can be seen as a means to an end and definition can imply that public discourse on contentious issues can often be used to further some sort of agenda. With these factors in mind, it is clear to see that the interpretation of free speech can vary depending on the specific example and thus the ability to generalise a concept of free speech is difficult, given its complexities.

One of the key elements to understanding free speech is to consider the prevailing interpretations of the principle. When examining this issue, it is important to note that there are a multitude of factors that might restrict an individual’s rights to free speech and the definitions of free speech can often vary. One might consider the general public’s interpretation of free speech as an individual’s right to express an opinion without fear of censorship or punishment. This interpretation is very much in line with the universal declaration of human rights, which claims that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. This definition puts much emphasis on the right of the individual to express opinions without fear of reprisal and an extension of this is that anything censoring an individual would be a restriction of free speech.

This essay will primarily focus on the issue of free speech within today’s society. The aim of this essay is to illustrate the diverse opinions and ideologies constructed by media and how these considerations of free speech can often be used to defend self-interest in many cases. To construct understand the issue at hand, the essay will be broken down into several areas beginning with an overview of free speech, regulation of hate speech and the effects of media self-interest on the issue. These areas will provide a framework by which to understand the complexities of free speech and its implications in the context of modern society.

2. Historical Perspective on Free Speech

Without question, the principle of free speech within contemporary western liberal democracies is part and parcel of public life. But communication and the ideals of free speech are subject to vastly different constructions depending upon time, place and the economic and political structures within which such theories are formulated. As McDonald notes, there was no term for “freedom of speech” in ancient Athens because “it was a natural right of citizenship which had to be defended both individually and collectively”. Similarly, Socrates’ contention that “the unexamined life is not worth living” and his relentless questioning of commonly held beliefs resulted in his trial and execution on the grounds of “corrupting the youth” and of impiety. Albeit to vastly differing degrees, the political and economic power and social status of those who have had the ability to influence the formulation of laws and conventions have always impacted upon the degrees of freedom with which individuals and groups can articulate their dissent or proclaim their loyalty. The Christian Middle Ages philosophy of free speech was formulated upon the Stoic idea that humans have the capacity to reason, and that through the uncoerced and open exchange of ideas the truth can be arrived at and virtue can be taught. However, in juxtaposition to later liberal theory, medieval Christianity proposed a natural inequity between humans, and that free speech and action should be the domain of the wise and the virtuous, whilst the so-called “sceptics” should be met with legal restrictions. Then through processes of scholastic argument, theological exposition and the tradition of the judiciary and the “counsels of the realm”, idealised oratorial forms of free speech and debates over the constraints of conventional authority became integral part of the arrangements of bargaining, petitioning and at times, outright acts of defiance by which subjects sought to influence the policies and constraints imposed upon them by their rulers.

3. Benefits of Free Speech

Civil rights movements highlight the principal benefits of free speech, such as its role in empowering oppressed groups. For instance, the civil rights movements of the 1960s sought to end racial segregation and discrimination against African Americans. Family and childcare providers found that the best process of acquiring resources for children with disabilities who were excluded from receiving an education that met their needs in the public schools was to become familiar with the laws regulating education for their state and school districts. As they begin to get information in this area, it became clear that one of the best ways to learn what laws were in effect and what changes were being made to the law was to become involved in law and policy making. To do this, they needed to either learn how to advocate or hire an attorney to advocate on their behalf. Both the attorneys and the advocates would have to develop a comprehensive understanding of a complex set of laws and educate others about the laws. This was only made possible through the free flow of information and freedom of speech. In countless advocacy and litigation projects, the attorneys and advocates challenged various state laws that prevented children with disabilities from placement in regular education or that required the exclusion of children with disabilities from regular education. The ability to change these laws was contingent on knowing the current laws, understanding the ways in which the existing laws were creating barriers for their clients, and educating legislators and policymakers about their cause.

4. Challenges to Free Speech

In recent years, the belief that widely differing views should be the strength of democratic society has been increasingly called into question. Not only the traditional attitudes of intolerance have reappeared, not only via class and occupational snobbery, which is still rife in some countries, but the inarticulate intolerance of the new barbarism, often a form of social or racial bigotry. It is easy in these circumstances to see the dangers of an unrestricted free speech allowing hate speech or behaviour to incite hatred. The instinct often has been to clamp down hard on any speech which is an attack on some public or private good. Such an attitude was visible in a spate of legislation in the UK in the 1980s before being revisited by Tony Blair’s Labour government in new anti-terror legislation. This was seen at its most controversial with the banning of the American racist political figure Louis Farrakhan as well as pursuing banning his followers from the British National Party from appearing or publishing comments on race relations in the United Kingdom. This has caused much heated debate in the UK pressing what does and doesn’t attack public or private good and whether restrictions on this can in the long run be more or equally harmful. The danger of restrictions on this are often that it can either force these groups underground making any monitor or control impossible or drive behaviour into more radical means of action.

5. Conclusion

It is through the general acceptance of the importance of freedom of speech that a society is capable of progressing socially, intellectually, and culturally. By being open to people’s thoughts, ideas, and expressions, a society is given the opportunity to understand, change, and progress for the better. But it is in an environment with limitations or restrictions on free speech that can be reversed and revert to previous modes of thinking, attitudes, and social systems. Thus, it is through the existence of freedom of speech and the degree to which it is upheld and protected that a society can work to attain and maintain a level which is more advanced and progressive than its starting point. In this light, it is fair to say, without fear of contradiction, that freedom of speech is an essential element in the progression to a more advanced society and higher standard of living. This is the ultimate role of freedom of speech.