Free Speech On Facebook

It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that the development of the social environment is closely linked to the development of technology. That is why it is essential to make sure that the laws that guide the interaction in the society are updated in order to fit the new reality. Nevertheless, the progress of technology often poses some serious problems since it creates a new kind of relationship or phenomena that may not have been envisioned by the lawmakers before. Nevertheless, it is essential to make sure that the fundamental legal principles are properly adhered to even if a certain phenomenon is difficult to define. This paper will argue that threats made on Facebook should not be considered to be free speech.

To begin with, one should point out that threats, regardless of when and how they were made violate the so-called “offense principle”. It is worth mentioning that while the Constitution does protect freedom of speech, there are some reasonable limitations to it that include a wide range of circumstances (Miller and Jentz 136). The offense principle states that speech that is intended to hurt another person verbally should be prohibited. Nevertheless, this should be differentiated from hate speech: though the two seem to be similar, they have slightly different causes. So, returning back to the threats, it is obvious that a person who expresses them does mean harm to another person. That is why this kind of speech must not be considered to be free speech and, therefore, protected.

Another way to address the problem in question is to show that threats are incompatible with the original goal of freedom of speech protection. Thus, it is generally agreed that the First Amendment was adopted in order to facilitate proper exchange of ideas, including expression of one’s own opinion even though it may be different from the rest of the people (Engdahl 56). Therefore, it seems that when this principle was created, the lawmakers did not intend it to protect threats in any form. This leads to the understanding that threats on Facebook are not only violating the offense principle but are also incompatible with the original principle that guided the creation of the First Amendment.

Finally, one may also be interested in carefully examining the primary intent that freedom of speech has. It is generally agreed that the First Amendment served as a safeguard against censorship. However, one might suggest that it highlights every aspect that must not be censored while the remaining ones should be censored by default. Indeed, the majority of the society would agree that threats represent something that people will be better off without. That is why it would be logical to assume that censorship should be applied to threats since they have a negative impact on the social environment. Since they are not able to make a contribution to the well-being of the citizens, threats are not to be regarded as free speech.

Having examined all the points that were mentioned in the paragraphs above, one is able to come to the following conclusion: threats that are made on Facebook should not be regarded as free speech and, therefore, they will not be protected. There are several reasons to that. First of all, this kind of verbal behavior violated offense principle which prohibits protection of any kind of speech that is intended to hurt another person. Secondly, threats do not comply with the original intentions of the lawmakers when they created the First Amendment since the latter facilitates the exchange of ideas and expression of one’s opinion. Finally, it is obvious that threats should be censored.

Works Cited

Engdahl, Sylvia. Free speech. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Print.

Miller, Roger LeRoy., and Gaylord A. Jentz. Business law today. Mason, OH: South-Western, 2013. Print.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person