Conclusion For Freedom Of Speech Essay

Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.

We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.

Essay On The First Amendment: Free Speech Is Free Speech




This is a sample college essay about freedom of speech, and the continuing relevance of the first amendment to the American constitution. For other sample essay please use the search bar.



Title: "Free Speech is Free Speech"



Two second-graders, little Timmy and Billy, are playing on the playground during recess. Timmy is playing with his toy car, and Billy comes up and grabs it out of his hands. Timmy starts crying and goes and tells the teacher. The teacher tells Billy to give the car back, and Billy says: “No! I can do whatever I want! This is a FREE country!” Although this example is a little extreme, many Americans know something about the principles of the Constitution of the United States, but they do not understand exactly why the were created.



Today, many ponder the usefulness of their freedom of expression when it is almost impossible for their voices to be heard by others without the access to TV networks. Few people realize that the first amendment to the United States Constitution was written to protect citizens from being incarcerated due to their beliefs or thoughts, and not to ensure every American’s voice could be heard by as many people as they would like. Understood in this way, the right to free speech is still valuable, even if getting others to hear your voice without having money or power is difficult.



The first amendment to the United States Constitution, concerning "Freedom of Religion, Press, [and] Expression," was written over 200 years ago, and ratified on 12/15/1791. It states:



"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."



The reason that this amendment was so important to the founding fathers was that it addressed a problem which had driven many from England in the first place. The idea of free speech was virtually unheard of during the time the constitution was created. At that time, in other places around the world, people were being persecuted for what they said. In many places it was unlawful to practice specific religions, hold certain beliefs, or speak out against the government. Citizens faced prison sentences, torture, or even death for violating such prohibitions. Even today, there are many countries that do not guarantee the basic right or privilege of freedom of speech.



An American soldier tells us about one of these foreign lands: “I'm trying to help provide to the Iraqi and Afghan people the same rights that every American has, which some take for granted. I believe in the right of free speech and people's right to protest and express concerns to their leaders.” Most of us Americans are guilty of taking some of our basic freedoms for granted. We are born and raised here, with no experience of living in a place without these freedoms. Some of us can’t even imagine what it would be like, for example, in a place like Qatar: “In reality, by Western standards, freedom of speech and a free press are severely restricted in Qatar. Public criticism of the ruling family or of Islam is forbidden. Even after formal censorship was lifted, newspapers have been shut down twice for publishing articles that ran contrary to Qatar’s interests.” By contrast, and even though it may be difficult to have one's voice heard by the masses, Americans can still benefit from the legal protection that the constitutional guarantee of our freedom of speech provides for us.



The term “Free Speech” implies that all speech is free from prosecution, which of course is untrue. Obviously, there are some forms of speech which are not protected, such as slander, obscenity, and speech that presents a clear and present danger, but other forms are “free”. For example, we have the freedom to walk down the street announcing anything we want. It costs nothing to express our opinions through whatever free means we have available.



But some still argue that this right is useless unless many others can hear what a person has to say. They point out that few Americans can afford to get their voices heard, and those who benefit most are still those who can afford television time. For TV stations typically do not just give away free airtime to whoever wants it. But television airtime is only valuable because people want to watch the programs that are put on, and production companies spend billions of dollars to make popular shows. They cover these costs with the revenue generated by the limited advertising space they have, which is of course sold to the highest bidder. Today, “advertisers are shelling out a record $705,000 per 30-second spot on Fox's American Idol, $560,000 for ABC's Desperate Housewives, $465,000 for CBS' CSI, and $350,000 for Survivor on CBS, Lost on ABC and The Apprentice on NBC.”



Even after these enormous costs to place advertisements, the networks are only going to accept advertisements with messages that do not conflict with the interests of the company. The networks are profit-driven companies, just like most other businesses in this capitalist economy. The only entities which can afford to purchase advertising space only do so because they believe that there will be some sort of economic return on their investment. Network advertising is expensive due to the demand from other competitive businesses, which all desire the same publicity. So it is not surprising that only businesses and wealthy corporations get to exercise their free speech on television.



But advertising on network television is not the only avenue to the goal of expressing an opinion to the masses. Many Americans forget to appreciate what's most important about the first amendment: the protection of the basic right to express an opinion without being punished by the law. Moreover, from national issues to local campus matters, the underdog group, even when they lack funding to publicize their opinions, can still effectively come out victorious. A good national example of people expressing ideas who didn’t have control over the media is the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, when “Sit-ins, freedom rides, the March on Washington, and Dr. King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech captured public attention and support.” This shows the public’s power to share its opinion with the rest of the world, without having to spend millions on advertising space.



An exemplary local case where a dissenting group was able to overcome adversity and change the majority opinion despite having the lesser means of advertising was the fee referendum that was voted down at Cal Poly by students last year. Associated Students, Inc., or ASI, proposed an increase in student fees to fund the building of new facilities. They took a poll to see what kind of support they would have: “66% of students surveyed said they would pay to renovate ASI facilities.” They started spring 2005 quarter with a highly publicized “Yes” campaign. This consisted of signs and posters everywhere around campus, ASI student employees and staff members wearing “Yes” shirts, buttons and pins, advertisements in the school newspaper, and flyers with convincing statistics encouraging everyone to vote "yes." ASI had communication resources that no other organization on campus had access to. Finally, in the last few days before the opening of the polls, one club on campus, the Progressive Student Alliance printed a few flyers which were then distributed around school. These flyers contained very convincing information as to why students should vote against the proposed fee referendum. Once the results of the vote were in, many students were shocked to hear that the fee referendum was voted down, despite ASI’s campaign efforts. The school newspaper, the Mustang Daily, reported that ASI spent well over $50,000 on their campaign, a budget that no other club could afford.



It would be faulty to assume that the United States is similar to a college campus, but the concept is the same. An organization may have the dominant means to communicate their ideas to the majority of the population, but this does not mean that their opinions will be accepted, or even considered by everyone. Without freedom of speech, the underdogs would not even be able to express their opinion to anyone. Dr. King would have been arrested for his opinion. The Progressive Student Alliance could have been expelled from school for expressing public dissent.



The founding fathers intended to grant equal legal protection to everyone with an opinion. That principle of free speech is still valid, but the implications are much more complex today than they were 200 years ago. The first amendment was written in the 18th century, when there was no television, radio, or internet. We were a country with only thirteen states, and since then, we have grown in area and population. In fact, “the population of the United States has grown continuously, from 4 million at the first national census in 1790, to 76 million in 1900, to 281 million in 2000.” It is hard to tell whether or not our founding fathers expected this growth, but we can be certain that there was no way for them to have any knowledge of upcoming technological advances such as television, radio, or the internet. Had they foreseen this development, and intended to write the first amendment laws not only for protection, but also to ensure each citizen had equal opportunity to express their opinion freely, the complications would be nearly impossible to address.



Say, for example, the government decided to create a television network intended for the use of citizens to state their opinion. Every person would only get about one tenth of a second of air time per year. Even if you could do something with your tenth of a second, it would not be fair to give one person their time at four in the morning, and another person their time on a Sunday evening. Also, how many Americans would actually watch such a network, instead of the season premiere of American Idol? The idea of free speech is just as valid today as it is was 200 years ago. But the concept of creating equality in the means that we use to get our voices heard is still as impossible and impractical as it was 200 years ago.



Our founding fathers created this country with the belief that everyone’s opinion should count equally. That is why they chose the system of voting to help our country make decisions. They knew that this structure would be the most fair and efficient means of hearing each citizen’s voice, while still allowing for a capitalist economy. One belief which had a strong influence on the way the constitution was written is that the proper role of government is to protect equal rights, not provide equal things. We must not forget to appreciate the freedoms that we have, including and especially our freedom of speech.


Submitted by: Tom

Tagged...critical thinking essay, freedom of speech essay, first amendment essay



Free speech is a massive step in human civilization. The ability to say something without fear of persecution and/or death is a big step in human society and is something that only around fifty countries have. My essay is about free speech in US colleges and how it is rapidly declining at a frightening rate.

In the case of Sweezy vs. New Hampshire in 1957 the Supreme Court said, “Teachers and students must always remain free to enquire, otherwise our civilization will stagnate and die.” Many would agree with that statement and consider it true, but in modern US colleges there is a massive restriction on free speech to the point where the comment made by the Supreme Court no longer applies in some places in the US. The US colleges are literally removing free speech from our futures by stamping it out in through what they teach younger people.

In 2010, there was a study by the Association of American colleges and universities. They found that over 70% of college students found it unsafe to hold unpopular positions on campus. This means they may have had opinions and thoughts about issues, but they did not feel safe expressing their thoughts in college.

Another troubling element of the 2010 is that the longer the student spends in the college, the less safe he or she feels about holding and expressing unpopular opinions. If we were to blame outside influences, then students would enter and leave college either as safe or unsafe as they like. However, it is clear that the longer a student spends in college, then the more restricted and repressed his or her freedom of speech is. The freshmen students feel safer using their freedom of speech, but they begin to feel less safe as they move through college.

To clarify, the feeling of safety is safety from repercussions and not from physical harm. The students feel safe from harm in college, but they do not feel safe from the penalization from professors. They feel uneasy about expressing their unpopular positions or opinions within their work and dissertations, and they do not feel as if they are free to speak their true feelings and opinions because they fear they will be marked down and/or looked upon unfavorably by the people that control their grades and ability to get their qualifications.

What is more worrying is the fact that colleges and universities in the US are blatantly restricting student’s freedom of speech. They claim they do it to help avoid people getting offended, which further proves the point that freedom of speech is less important to these colleges that the fear of people being offended. To cast freedom of speech aside for any reason, noble or not, is to shatter its very foundation and urinate in the faces of the people that died for it.

Speech codes are a common and blatant sign that students are having their freedom of speech restricted. The colleges and universities are not even hiding the fact that their speech codes are regulations that limit or bans expression. It literally says that in their regulations.

Conclusion

The first amendment in the US constitution states implicitly that people are allowed to speak and write what they wish, and yet colleges and universities are disregarding it when they set use speech codes. Yet, what is it that colleges are protecting students from? If it were from people writing instructions on how to build a bomb, then one could argue that the protection of life is more important than freedom of speech.

Yet, all of the speech codes in US colleges and universities are there to stop people writing or saying things that the college/university in question feels are offensive. They usually revolve around religion or political views. Colleges and universities in the US are banning students from speaking, writing and even holding opinions that contradict what the college likes, and that is a blatant middle finger to a US citizen’s freedom of speech.

0 thoughts on “Conclusion For Freedom Of Speech Essay”

    -->

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *