• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Argument Synthesis Paper on Free Speech

Extracts from this document...


Free speech and free expression has always been a hard pressed issue in society, whether it be in America concerning the Bill of Rights and the first amendment, or in Europe concerning the written works of great authors like John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine. All of the authors we have read so far throughout this course have had unique opinions on the issue, but still shared a common theme in their writings: how, if at all, should free speech be regulated in society? Arguments for both sides of this opinion exist in abundance throughout the course readings, but Paine, Fish, Mill, O'Neil and Abrams provide the most crisp arguments and well-founded opinions on the issue. A thorough understanding of their analyses along with a thorough examination of a case like the one involving the controversial school newspaper right here at Carnegie Mellon University will help bring us to an improved understanding of free speech regulations in our society today. In 2004, Carnegie Mellon's student newspaper, The Tartan, published its satirical April Fool's issue, The Natrat. Many readers took offense; the representation of gays, non-whites, and women included in this issue were viewed by many as hateful and obscene. ...read more.


Although, like O'Neil, the ACLU would likely agree that the editors of The Natrat should not be punished, the reasoning underlying their argument would be somewhat different than that of O'Neil. While O'Neil believes that hate speech should not be tolerated and would refrain from punishment in order to avoid enacting a speech code, the ACLU would take a more absolutist approach and avoid inflicting punishment to maintain their belief in free speech at all costs. The ACLU holds strongly to the belief that freedom of expression "deserves society's greatest protection", and understands that in order to guarantee freedom of speech for all of society; they are forced to defend all cases on the topic of freedom of speech, even if they do not agree with their actions. The ACLU's argument is law-based, and the prevailing standard today states: "Speech can be suppressed only if it is intended, and likely to produce 'imminent lawless action'. Otherwise, even speech that advocates violence is protected" (ACLU online). They do acknowledge that "freedom of speech does not prevent punishing conduct that intimidates, harasses, or threatens another person, even if words are used" (ACLU online). Within the context of The Natrat, r****t speech does exist, but it is neither threatening nor intended to cause violence. ...read more.


Since the content covered by "free speech" is not consistent, Fish insists that "we must consider in every case what is at stake and what are the risks and gains of the alternative course of action" (Fish: 111). He concludes that "right now, the risk of not attending to hate speech is greater than the risks that by regulating it we will deprive ourselves of valuable voices and insights or slide down the slippery slope toward tyranny" (Fish: 115). Although the basis of Fish's argument for contextually-based decisions differs from that of Abrams, his stance in The Natrat case would be in concurrence with Abrams: Fish would likely support a decision to punish the editors, because, according to him, greater risks would face the university if they did nothing to resolve the issue. So, how, if at all, should free speech be regulated in society? The answer is not a concise, one-sided answer by any means, as I hope I have just made evident. However, a thorough understanding of both sides of the issue, along with an understanding of ones own personal values can bring us to our own ultimate truth as to how free speech should be regulated in society. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Political Theories section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Political Theories essays

  1. What is truth according to Platos allegory of the cave?

    on to what to do, they may not even realise that they are required to look deeper to advance for a greater knowledge of truth. In a sense the chains are still on but the rope they are tied to gets longer.

  2. Is the role of the Far Right in influencing immigration policy-making in Europe exaggerated? ...

    campaign posters focused on the need to deport non-EU immigrants for security reasons. Ausl�nderkriminalit�t (Foreign criminality) has been a devisive issue on the Swiss political agenda for a decade, making it difficult for one to assess how much of Switzerland's increased xenophobia is due to the rise of the UDC or vice-versa.

  1. A Study of Nationalism and its relevance in Muslim States.

    We have also said already that in ... almost all countries with deficient economic development it is the countryside that offers ideal conditions for the fight. Therefore the foundation of the social structure that the guerrilla fighter will build begins with changes in the ownership of agrarian property.

  2. Every person who possesses both free will and reason has an obligation to take ...

    For example, the rich do not receive enough benefits as they do not make use of the National Health Service or the police force due to using private health organisations and private, more personal protection, through the use of bodyguards.

  1. Freedom of speech on the internet

    People presume that the internet is just a new form of communication, a new medium without any limits, but what are the consequences of this new medium? Does the internet works as a force for freedom of expression as people think it does, or is it used as a possible tool for control of the public?

  2. How is the idea of Jewish national identity portrayed in Meir Shalev's "The Blue ...

    Her death creates further resentment towards Mirkin because some members of the community blame him for his wife's demise. This raises the inevitable question, is the nation more important than the individual? After all it is a collection of individuals that make the nation and if they are discontented then this does not make for a healthy society.

  1. "Man was born free and is everywhere in chains." The nature of Anarchy.

    However given the complexity, diversity, and fragmented nature of 21st century society, an anarchist one in which all participants 'get along' is unrealistic. The Nature of Anarchy: On the Individual. According to Harold Barclay, Anarchists have: "provided a continuous and fundamental criticism of the modern concept of the state, and

  2. Power. A gets B to do something that he or she would not ...

    2D in one hand refers to all forms of successful control by A over B - that is of A's securing B's compliance. Indeed they develop a whole typology (which is of great interest) of forms of such control - forms that they see as types of power in either of its two faces.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work