“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.”
Any student who passed even the most basic civics class would be able to identify these words as the first amendment, located in the U.S. Bill of Rights.
Although the first amendment is often pigeon-holed as simply the legal backing for freedom of speech, one can see that the one-sentence amendment actually guarantees much more.
Our founding fathers intentionally wrote the amendment with their signature vagueness, using generalizations and ambiguous language that allow for the amendment to be applied to a variety of circumstances. This vagueness, though beautiful in the way it’s sweeping language protects many important rights, leads to some of the arguments and filibustering found both legally and in politics because of the amendment’s lack of specificity.
Thus, it is left to the highest court to try to clarify what exact rights the amendment does and doesn’t protect.
As a U.S. citizen and journalist, I exercise the rights provided to me by the first amendment constantly and, I am ashamed to say, without much thought or gratitude. It is second nature for Americans to vocalize opinions, hold religious beliefs and criticize those in power, though citizens in other countries are consistently and unjustly persecuted for such acts.
Freedom of speech is straightforward in it’s intention: citizens have the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint. Since its establishment, some laws have come forward placing limits on the freedom, citing hate speech, slander, libel and threats as unlawful uses of speech.
For the previous centuries, freedom of speech has worked exquisitely in its role in society. But, now, in 2018, I humbly dare to say the amendment is broken.
What, you may ask, could undermine such a solid-built, straightforward right that has worked wonderfully in its role for hundreds of years? The answer is simple: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, 4Chan, Reddit and WikiLeaks.
The same things that have turned the world upside down have broken one of America’s most fundamental rights.
The internet and social media sites have magnified freedom of speech in such a way that it is no longer able to be enforced among those platforms. The internet is built on anonymous users posting as many lies, threats, hate speech and conspiracy theories their hearts may desire, without worry of repercussions.
Lawmakers are sluggish as always in creating legislation that combats violations of freedom of speech on the internet, desperately trying to catch up as the world becomes more and more reliant on the web and it’s content.
America has already run a marathon, the internet is now a place of unfiltered speech, and lawmakers haven’t quite tied their shoes yet.
A place of uncensored speech, in theory, would be a utopia of information and informed opinions and an absolute highlight of one of America’s greatest rights. But, instead, as we have discovered with Facebook and other outlets on the internet in general, giving citizens freedom of speech seemingly without repercussions results in a dumpster fire of lies, misinformation and hatred of minority religions and races.
Lawmakers need to create legislation to filter the hate speech spreading on social media, which, over time, will undoubtedly curb the extremist culture that has been plaguing our county and government.
Note: I understand the hypocrisy found within writing an article to voice a criticism of the first amendment. As a journalist and citizen, I am vocal in my absolute support of all of the rights provided by the first amendment. I simply find it to be critical to the well-being of Americans for our government to monitor the content being spread over social media and the internet to check for misinformation and hate speech, particularly in this period of hatred, bipartisanship and fear.