Discussion: Free Speech and Social Networking

Introduction

Social networking is one of the most unregulated, ungoverned online platforms on the internet. Virtually, anyone on Facebook, Twitter or any other social network can post anything, even hate speech and manage to hide behind anonymity (Shaw 279 ). Semantics covers a lot about what is considered free speech, for example, 17-year old Katherine Evans page on Facebook titled "Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I've ever met" is criticism according to the magistrate's ruling (Phillips n.p.). From the verdict, it is clear the judiciary is unwavering as regards the First Amendment. The question is: Does the First Amendment offer too much protection for the speaker at the expense of the subject referred?

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Schools try to regulate the students' and staff members comments on social networking if the platform is theirs for instance during online classes like the University of Colorado: "The virtual classroom, like the physical classroom, is most likely a non-public forum and is therefore subject to reasonable speech regulation." (Loyd n.p.). However, the content and point of view of students (and tutors) are unrestricted even if it is offensive but there is institutional regulation regarding that. Universities and colleges may classify words considered offensive and abusive (Loyd n.p.). According to the California State University "speech that is "de minimis"--e.g., a student's complaint about a seating assignment, and that which promotes an unlawful end" is unprotected by the constitution (Office of General Counsel 2). If the manner of speech is threatening or otherwise leading to the unlawful end, the college or university has grounds to mete out punishment to the student or staff because free speech should not interfere with another's rights and liberties.

The limitation of the First Amendment right to free speech is increasingly falling in the hands of corporations and global entities. For example, Facebook and YouTube have an option for people to report a post and request its removal with evidence and reasons (Shaw 300-301). The United States government protects the speaker so long as they do not threaten or infringe another person's rights and liberties especially privacy. Some of the free speech on the internet is hard to classify if they are racist, misogynist, hate speech, cyberbullying and other forms of expression considered unconstitutional (Shaw 298-299). In a democracy, free speech is crucial; but seeing that social networking is a new form of free community, unified regulation is virtually impossible.

Works Cited

Loyd, Alex. "Facebook vs. the First Amendment: Student Free Speech in the Digital Age." The Legal Issue 6.1 (2012). 12 November 2018. <https://www.cu.edu/sites/default/files/Vol%206%2C%20Issue%201--Final.pdf/>

Office of General Counsel. "The Handbook of Free Speech Issues." California State University CSU (2009): 1-19.

Phillips, Rich. Facebook gripes protected by free speech. 16 February 2010. 12 November 2018 <http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/ptech/02/16/facebook.speech.ruling/index.html/>.

Shaw, L. (2011). Hate speech in cyberspace: Bitterness without boundaries. Notre Dame JL Ethics & Pub. Poly, 25:279-304. 12 November 2018.

<https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1049&context=ndjlepp/>