Disadvantages Of Freedom Of Speech

Censorships is harmful to people when it comes to communicating with each other which is demonstrated by Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451. People in the society do not communicate with each other like that use to. The society moves at such a fast pace “ a green blur, a pink blur, brown blurs are cows” (9) which is shown by how the people describe different objects. People in the society consider someone anti-social if they talk and ask questions which demonstrates it is not normal to socialize. In the society people are not suppose to ask why something is done they are supposed to just go along with everything.

If the government censors more and more, this could lead to war, secret deals that could jeprodize our freedom, and complete government takeover. During COVID, for example, if anything negative was said about the COVID-19 vaccine, they were immediately censored on Twitter, and this evidence is on the “twitter files.” Besides the constant cons to censorship, the people may rebel if censorship continues to get worse and worse. If the government is censoring things, shame can land on people that could have helped us get to a better place than where humans are right now. Usnews also said that “the alternative would be to allow a large corporation to wield

Does censorship violate freedom of speech? Well, even though the First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech and press in America, there are a few exceptions. The government can control many aspects of our lives. One piece that they are able to control is censorship, which there are many different types of. In the book, Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury illustrates how censorship causes people to be controlled by the government and does not let individuals have their own opinions; many of his predictions have proven to be true in recent years.

Freedom of speech allows Americans say what they would like to say without getting in trouble. There are a few exceptions such as no slander, threats, national security and some pornography. This means you can’t go around hurting people’s reputations and life with lies. You also are not allowed to give threats and share government secrets. Say if you had been in the Federal Bureau of Investigation and then you left your job, you still cannot tell the secrets of the government for the reason of national security.

By censoring them they deny their ability to freely express themselves as people and create huge controversy in the communities of many citizens. One example is comedian George Carlin who was forced to censor the content in his acts because people believed that it was too profane for his fans and other people in the audience. This, of course, created huge controversy due to the fact that forcing people to censor their words is a violation of their first amendment right to free speech. This was such a big deal because the people of America fought for years for that right. Another example is the riots and killings taking place in Ferguson, Missouri.

Another great example is social media which can portray many expressions. When using any type of social media you might feel violated of the first amendment when people can report your post to be “inappropriate”. This all goes back to not having 100% right to say or post whatever you'd like. Without the cues of body language and tone, a simple post can sound threatening and offensive. So how can you overpass the law of “threat to injure the person of another” if a post is made?

Censorship is dangerous, and too much of it can lead to an inevitable destruction of our

By true definition, censorship is the suppression and illegalization of speech, public communication, and other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, or politically incorrect as determined by the government in authority. The purpose of censorship is perhaps to protect the people, however, negative outcomes typically follow when this route is taken to control a governed people. Censorship directly attack the main characters of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 and George Orwell’s 1984. Although government censorship was perpetuated to create a whole and perfect society, Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 both demonstrate that censorship brought on by the government negatively controls a community’s thoughts, actions, and their people as a whole.

Censorship of The First Amendment This paper will discuss how censorship denies citizens of the United States our full rights as delineated in the First Amendment. It will outline how and why the first amendment was created and included in the Constitution of the United States of America. This paper will also define censorship, discuss a select few legal cases surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as well as provide national and local examples of censorship.

Censorship has affected this society by making books illegal and making people follow what the government says instead of living for themselves and being happy. Censorship can be dangerous because of the power it can have over people’s minds. If you tell people not to do something long enough, they’ll get used to it and that could lead to ignorance. Another reason why censorship could be so dangerous is because it could lead to a lack of information, an example of this would be in the book Fahrenheit 451, the society in that book isn’t allowed to read books so that leads to them only really knowing what the government tells them to know and nothing else. My final reason for censorship being so dangerous is because it kind of violates freedom

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech”. Some people in today’s time would argue the first amendment is one of the most important listed in the Bill of Rights. Many forms of speech are protected by the first amendment that one wouldn’t think would be such as flag burning and “adult videos”. Over the years there have been many different court cases that have debated and fought the forms of speech that are protected. Many people in society treat speech differently and this is given in the United States because there are such diverse groups throughout the nation.

The government is constantly attempting to take total control over society and its citizens, by regulating what is available, what can and cannot be done, and more. In America, it is believed that the citizens ' First Amendment right to freedom of religion, assembly, press, petition, and speech protects them from being able to be censored by the government and other figures with authority, but that is incorrect. The federal government has censored press on various occasions throughout history, contemporary censorship is practiced in non-governmental organizations and corporations, and in schools, as well as public libraries, books are continuously challenged in hopes of them being removed or banned. Censorship, and the government taking total control of what readers can and cannot read is a danger to society because censorship places limitations on the knowledge and creativity of citizens, hinders their right to freedom of expression, and shelters citizens from the harsh realities that are present in today 's world. Censorship places limitations on the knowledge and creativity of citizens.

Censorship can be very harmful to society but it also has the power to save it from creating negative

Is there negative and positive sides? History: The belief in the right to free speech is older than we believe it is. It actually goes back to the ancient Greeks (Antiquity).

I am undecided for Freedom of Speech. There are plenty of good and bad qualities, and as much as there are pros there are also an equal amount of cons to freedom of speech. According to the first amendment, we the people have the freedom of speech which allows us the right to speak freely without censorship. Freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, such as on “hate speech”. There are many pros and cons to freedom of speech, which is why I am only discussing three pros and cons, that I find that argues the opposite side, to the point it made me undecided on free speech.