| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "INTERNET CENSORSHIP FREEDOM SPEECH VERSUS": |
|
|
Internet Censorship: The Freedom of Speech versus the Almighty Dollar, 2002.
This paper discusses the attempts of Congress to censor the Internet despite censorship legislation being struck down by the Supreme Court.
2,395 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the thesis that the government is playing a wild card in its attempt to censor the Internet. It discusses several laws and examines how public libraries who do not censor the Internet can suffer funding losses.
From the Paper
"In Antigone, Sophocles wrote, "There is nothing in the world so demoralizing as money." Today's society revolves around money. Without money, no person, organization, corporation, or entity can function. It is well known that in the hands of the government, when push comes to shove, money pushes, money shoves, and, more often than not, money prevails. In other words, if the government wants something done, money is the wild card. The issue of Internet censorship is no different. For years, the United States government has pushed to place censors on the Internet. After having censorship legislation stuck down by the Supreme Court, the government turned its attention to censorship of the Internet in public libraries and public schools. In recent months, the issue of censorship of the Internet in public libraries and public schools has reached a boiling point. When closely studied, it is obvious that the government has chosen to pursue censorship within libraries and public schools because all other censorship avenues have been blocked. Furthermore, it is also obvious that the government is playing their wild card in their attempt to censor, essentially backing libraries into a comer with legislation that denies public libraries and schools significant amounts of governmental funding if Internet censorship guidelines are not followed. Because the issue of Internet censorship centers on the First Amendment, it is important to understand exactly what the freedom of speech guarantees United States citizens. Since its inception, the First Amendment's guarantee of the freedom of speech has plagued all forms of."
| |
|
Hate Speeches: The Right to Freedom of Speech, 2001.
A look at freedom of speech with respect to 'hate' speeches' and whether or not these speeches are protected under the First Amendment.
1,168 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 5 sources, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that ?hate speeches?, however abhorrent, should be protected by the U.S. Constitution, that in the interest of free speech, they should be allowed. He suggests that this is synonymous with American freedom and refers to some specific examples in order to assess whether hate speeches should be protected under the First Amendment. The author contends that as long as we are free to judge the importance of what is being said for ourselves, then words should never be banned.
From the paper:
?Words are serious, not because they have any direct effect in their own right, but because words, and the ideas they express, are what we use to weigh up our own decisions, their likely effects, and our responsibilities. Words have consequences only if we choose to give them consequences.?
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2006.
The paper compares and contrasts freedom of speech and freedom of expression in the United States and Mexico.
4,520 words (approx. 18.1 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 117.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses freedom of speech in the American and the Mexican systems in light of the fact that the two countries are growing closer together in trade. The paper states that American individuals and businessmen need to understand the differences in the laws and customs on freedom of speech, as well as other cultural and legal differences between the two countries, in order to understand the meaning of actions and statements made by Mexican leaders. Examining the issue of freedom of speech in Mexico as compared to the U.S. can illustrate the differences and some of the reasons for those differences. The paper concludes that both systems are protected and neither can be seen as perfect in the degree to which it protects these freedoms. The Mexican government wants to be represented well in American thinking and to work with the American government for an improved economic situation for Mexico. Freedom of expression has been guaranteed by the Mexican Constitution, and now that promise has to be strengthened in order to assure that it is maintained.
Introduction
Mexico and the U.S.
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Expression
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The United States has a long tradition of political freedom, while Mexico does not. The United States as a nation is more than 225 years old, while Mexico as a nation is a little more than a century old. The United States emerged from its Revolution as a country with a new form of government, one crated as a counter to the kind of rigid and hierarchical society the settlers had known in Europe. In the U.S., freedom of speech is divided into freedom of speech and freedom of the press as related concepts differentiated largely by whether the expression is written in a publication or expressed verbally or through actions (in some cases). Case law has established both these types of expression as fundamental rights based on their inclusion in the Bill of Rights in the First Amendment."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2008.
An overview of the definition and importance of freedom of speech.
1,063 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how freedom of speech has become not just a value, but also a core American belief. It looks at how embracing freedom of speech has become an overwhelming belief of constitutional importance. It also contends that even though freedom of speech may give authorization to say or do whatever we feel, which might not necessarily follow the will of the majority, freedom of speech should be protected because it is an American value, it promotes the importance of self-expression and it's the single most important political right of citizens.
From the Paper
"Self-expression is one right most Americans treasure. As Madonna states in one of her songs "Independence to express yourself so you can respect yourself" is one of the benefits of living in the United States. For example, a Vietnam War protester may explain that when she chants 'Stop This War Now' at a demonstration, she does so without any expectation that her speech will affect continuance of the war...rather, she participates and chants in order to define herself publicly in opposition to the war (Wikipedia.org). This war protester provides a dramatic illustration of the importance of this self-expressive use of speech, independent of any effective communication to others, for self-fulfillment or self-realization. "
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2004.
A discussion of whether the issue of 'freedom of speech' has gone too far.
1,158 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper first outlines the definition of ?freedom of Speech? in one's own perspective and then defines it in the literal meaning by giving quotations of veterans, quotes from the Bible, and how government or other groups of people take this term. Followed by the definition, the paper provides an insight as to how and why various people or groups have exploited the freedom of expression/speech and raised sensitive issues, which resulted not only in social, political, or moral damage to the societies, but, at the same time, even death has been the outcome of such freedom of expression. The paper further discusses whether we have gone too far with the freedom of speech. This is argued in terms of the United Sates of America. This is followed by the conclusion that sums up whether freedom of expression is important and necessary in a society.
From the Paper
"The freedom of speech or expression is one of the most primary rights that are enjoyed by individuals. It is important to the survival of democracy as well as to the value of human self-respect. As freedom of speech means the liberty to express one's dissatisfaction with the status quo along with the need to change accordingly, it is one of the most dangerous and threatened rights, with governments, human rights groups; infact with all over the world, that is persistently trying to restrict it (Derechos Human Rights)"
| |
|
Freedom of Speech: Texts Compared, 2002.
A comparison of the issue of freedom of speech in John Milton's "Areopagitica" and the ACLU's "Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning?"
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
John Milton, in his 17th century essay "Areopagitica", is widely regarded as having written one of history's "noblest vindication of intellectual liberty ever penned" (Morison, 93) with respect to the issue of freedom of speech over printed text. Similarly, the 21st century ACLU online article "Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning?" also appears to present an argument in favour of freedom of speech. The primary difference between Milton's argument and that of the ACLU appears to be simply one of different mediums for information access. This paper will argue, however, that Milton's argument differs significantly from that of the ACLU in that Milton never actually advocates freedom of the press. Rather, as will be seen, Milton argues in favour of denying the state the possibility of placing "previous restraint" upon the publication of information. Within this context, Milton supported the possibility of the state banning books or prosecuting writers after publication. The key difference between Milton's view and that of the ACLU is that the latter group advocates a much more sweeping approach to the idea of freedom of speech from all prosecution. However, with respect to the issue of "blocking" access to sites, it is clear that both the ACLU and Milton would be in agreement. As will be argued, the insertion of "blocking" technology clearly places "previous restraint" upon information.
| |
|
Thomas Jefferson and Freedom of Speech, 2002.
A brief analysis of Thomas Jefferson's opinions on the freedom of speech through an examination of some of his writings.
750 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay examines Thomas Jefferson?s feelings about the concept of freedom of speech using some of Jefferson?s own writings as sources. It shows how Thomas Jefferson, who was one of the first proponents of freedom of speech, had strong beliefs and opinions on freedom of speech, many of which he put into writing.
From the Paper
"The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution guarantees four freedoms: freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly. It reads, ?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."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2006.
An assessment of freedom of speech, as protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
950 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the right to freedom of speech and discusses the threats to its protection throughout the history. The paper maintains that regardless of the source of threat -- whether academic, police or corporate -- the freedom of speech is essential to an open society and must be protected, regardless of public opinion. The paper cites several recent examples of such controversial speech, including by Professor Ward Churchill, who compared the victims of 9/11 to cogs in Hitler's war machine.
From the Paper
"The guarantee of free speech is both a sign of an open society and a protection that distinguishes the United States from other, less open societies that offer their citizens no such protections. Freedoms guaranteed United States citizens based on the First Amendment include freedoms of "speech; press; religion, assembly and petition" ("About the First Amendment"). Further, "Without the First Amendment, religious minorities could be persecuted, the government might well establish a national religion, protesters could be silenced, the press could not criticize government, and citizens could not mobilize for social change" ("About the First Amendment"). Freedom of speech also protects movies, videos, song lyrics, advertisements, and other communications that may not be to everyone's taste. The alternative to freedom of speech is government censorship. As Wikipedia points out, however ("Freedom of Speech"): "The philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville observed that people may be hesitant to speak freely not because of fear of government retribution but because of social pressures." That is, when an individual states an opinion that is not mainstream, or is considered unpopular, he or she might be subjected to peer pressure to change or retract the opinion; community rejection; disdain or ostracism, or even threatening or violent reactions from others. As Tocqueville correctly predicted, the fear of such reaction to the exercise of free speech, on the part of many individuals, even with the free speech protections granted by the U.S. Constitution, often functions as a sort of self censorship."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2004.
An analysis of the issue of freedom of speech in the United States, with a focus on internet pornography.
1,308 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses and analyzes the topic of freedom of speech. Specifically, it examines the question of whether freedom of speech should be abridged in order to protect children from pornography on the internet. The paper contends that internet pornography should not be a free speech issue, but rather a parenting and control issue.
From the Paper
"Many people in America that their right to free speech for granted. However, the people who founded our country fought for this right, among many others, and it is one of the most important and valuable rights we enjoy as a country. In fact, it was the first freedom mentioned in the Amendments to the Constitution (Editors). Unfortunately, freedom of speech is also one of the most hotly debated freedoms in many areas, because some people believe that some forms of speech and/or public display are not appropriate. Internet pornography is one of these areas, because it is so controversial, and because children can see pornography, anyone can if they know where to look online."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech in Public Schools, 2006.
An essay examining the limits on the right to freedom of speech and expression in a public school setting.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses five cases which deal with freedom of speech and expression in public schools. The paper looks at how the First Amendment is limited in one aspect in the school setting and discusses several cases where the courts placed limits on freedom of speech and expression in school.
From the Paper
"The topic I have chosen is whether or not a school has the right to prohibit certain speech and expression which although lawful, the school does not approve of from being disseminated on school grounds. I have chosen this topic because it is important for those in the school system to understand what the right to free speech in the school environments entails. Furthermore, it is important for school students to understand the extent of their First Amendment rights in a school setting to avoid possible problems. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that every citizen shall have the right of freedom of speech and expression."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2005.
This paper discusses Constitutional law cases relating to freedom of speech especially "Virginia vs. Black".
1,875 words (approx. 7.5 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that not all forms of speech are entitled to protection under the First Amendment's Freedom of Speech. The author points out that the Virginia vs. Black court cases determined that the Va. Code Ann. 18.2-423, which attempted to criminalize the burning of a cross, was unconstitutional not because burning crosses, which are intended to intimidate are entitled to Constitutional protection, but because this Virginia statute permitted an illegal presumption that a burned cross was prima facie evidence of intent to intimidate. The paper stresses that, nonetheless, in this case, the U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that it will no longer permit hate groups to hide behind the First Amendment when using speech or symbolic speech to threaten and intimidate.
From the Paper
"The circumstances behind the charges against Elliot and O'Mara were different. Unlike Black, Elliot and O'Mara attempted to burn a cross on another's property. Prior to the cross-burning incident, Elliot had been heard by the victim shooting firearms in the backyard. Elliot and O'Mara were not affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan. O'Mara pleaded guilty and Elliot was convicted at trial. All three defendants challenged the constitutionality of Va. Code Ann. ?18.2-423, and it eventually came before the U.S. Supreme Court."
| |
|
Freedom of Speech on the Internet, 2002.
This paper will discuss an argument for freedom of speech on the Internet.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
By asking moral questions and answering them accordingly, this paper presents an opinion on the topic of freedom of speech over the internet. By differing methods of parental responsibility, porn will be curbed but not controlled by outside governmental sources.
| |
|
Internet Censorship, 2002.
A look at the controversial topic of internet censorship.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 7 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This six-page-paper presents a discussion on the topic of Internet censorship. The legal, ethical and constitutional aspects are all detailed as well as the social responsibility issue.
| |
|
Freedom of Speech, 2005.
Examines freedom of speech within the framework of U.S. law.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This report discusses free speech, the constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights, and the interpretation of the laws. The issue of the interpretation by the Supreme Court is discussed, to include recent cases regarding free speech. The paper further discusses the history of free speech, and broaches on the topic of the issues, controversies, and concepts that will decide the future of free speech in the country.
From the Paper
"Freedom of speech in the United States has been a right that most Americans have clung to since the inception of the Constitution in 1787 ("Constitution"). John Paul Stevens discusses the fact that throughout history people have been persecuted for voicing their opinions about any number of concerns in their lives, and that they have been unjustly executed for allowing their voices to be heard (1293). Jesus Christ, Joan of Arc, and the Proctor family of Salem, Massachusetts were all victims of the world's intolerance of opinion. The Framers of the Constitutions believed that there were rights that each individual was entitled to, and that in the United States those rights had to be protected at all costs."
| |
|
An Overview of Internet Censorship, 2000.
A look at the law regarding Internet censorship and tools that are used to censor, as well as a debate about the extent of censorship that should be in place.
1,040 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 4 sources, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Countries with a history of limiting free expression, such as China and Singapore, are seeking to extend their controls into cyberspace. Meanwhile, countries with more democratic traditions, such as the United States and members of the European Union, are considering policies that seek to control problems like racism and pornography, which could end up restricting speech on the Internet."
|
|
|
