sample essays on freedom of speech

123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples

Looking for exciting freedom of speech topics to write about? This issue is definitely worth studying!

🔝 Top 10 Freedom of Speech Essay Topics

⁉️ freedom of speech essay: how to write, 🏆 best freedom of speech essay examples & topic ideas, 🔍 simple & easy freedom of speech essay titles, 💡 most interesting freedom of speech topics to write about, ❓ research questions about freedom of speech.

In your freedom of speech essay, you might want to focus on the historical perspective, elaborate on the negative effects of censorship, or even share your personal experience. Whether you will choose to write an argumentative, persuasive, or narrative essay, our article will help! We’ve gathered a list of excellent topics, ideas, and questions, together with A+ freedom of speech essay examples.

Freedom of speech as an individual and a collective right
Freedom of speech and its limitations
Negative effects of censorship
The origins of freedom of speech
Freedom of speech as a negative right
Democracy and freedom of speech
Freedom of information in the era of Internet
Freedom of speech and academic freedom
Liberalism and freedom of speech
Freedom of speech in the US

Freedom of speech is an important topic because every person has a fundamental right to express their opinions freely. Our ability to express our thoughts allows society to change and develop.

Essays on freedom of speech can raise awareness of the significance of this issue. That is why it is vital to create powerful and well-developed papers on this cause.

You can discuss various topics in your freedom of speech essay. You can search for them online or consult your professor. Here are our suggestions on freedom of speech essay analysis questions:

The advantages and disadvantages of free speech policies
The struggle schools face from the perspective of free speech
The appropriate use of free speech
The link between the freedom of speech and yellow journalism
Speech as a personality trait: What the freedom of speech can reveal about people
Freedom of speech: Pros and cons
Freedom of speech in the United States (or other countries)

Once you have selected one of the titles for your essay, it is time to start working on the paper. Here are some do’s of writing the essay:

Select topics that you are most interested in, as your dedication can help you to keep the reader engaged too. You can select one from the freedom of speech essay titles presented above.
Develop a well-organized freedom of speech essay outline. Think of the main points you want to discuss and decide how you can present them in the paper. For example, you can include one introductory paragraph, three body paragraphs, and one concluding paragraphs.
Define your freedom of speech essay thesis clearly. You should state it at the end of the introduction. The reader should understand the main point of your paper.
While working on a persuasive essay, do not forget to include a section with an alternative perspective on the problem you are discussing.
Remember that a concluding paragraph is vital because it includes a summary of all arguments presented in the paper. Rephrase the main points of the essay and add recommendations, if necessary.
Check out essay examples online to see how you can structure your paper and organize the information.

Remember that you should avoid certain things while writing your essay. Here are some important don’ts to consider:

Do not focus on your personal opinion solely while writing your paper. Support your claims with evidence from the literature or credible online sources.
Do not ignore your professor’s requirements. Stick within the word limit and make sure that your essay meets all the criteria from the grading rubric, if there is one.
Avoid using personal blogs or Wikipedia as the primary sources of information, unless your professor states it in the instructions. Ask your instructor about the literature you can use for the essay.
When checking other students’ essays online, avoid copying their ideas. Remember that your paper should be plagiarism-free.
Make sure that your paper is mistake-free. Grammatical mistakes may make the reader think that your opinion is not credible. It is better to check the essay several times before sending it to your professor.

Don’t hesitate to explore our free samples that can help you to write an outstanding essay!

Freedom of Speech in Social Media Essay Gelber tries to say that the history of the freedom of speech in Australia consists of the periods of the increasing public debates on the issue of human rights and their protection.
Freedom of Speech on Campus The primary issue identified by the case study is the extent to which free speech can be used and is protected regarding sensitive social aspects and discussions.
Balancing Freedom of Speech and Responsibility in Online Commenting The article made me perceive the position of absolute freedom of speech in the Internet media from a dual perspective. This desire for quick attention is the creation of information noise, distracting from the user […]
Freedom of Speech as a Basic Human Right Restricting or penalizing freedom of expression is thus a negative issue because it confines the population of truth, as well as rationality, questioning, and the ability of people to think independently and express their thoughts.
Freedom of Speech and Propaganda in School Setting One of the practical solutions to the problem is the development and implementation of a comprehensive policy for balanced free speech in the classroom.
Twitter and Violations of Freedom of Speech and Censorship The sort of organization that examines restrictions and the opportunities and challenges it encounters in doing so is the center of a widely acknowledged way of thinking about whether it is acceptable to restrict speech.
Freedom of Speech in Social Networks The recent case of blocking the accounts of former US President Donald Trump on Twitter and Facebook is explained by the violation of the rules and conditions of social platforms.
Teachers’ Freedom of Speech in Learning Institutions The judiciary system has not clearly defined the limits of the First Amendment in learning institutions, and it’s a public concern, especially from the teachers.
Privacy and Freedom of Speech of Companies and Consumers At the same time, in Europe, personal data may be collected following the law and only with the consent of the individuals.
Freedom of Speech in Shouting Fire: Stories From the Edge of Free Speech Even though the First Amendment explicitly prohibits any laws regarding the freedom of speech, Congress continues to make exceptions from it.
Freedom of Speech as the Most Appreciated Liberty In the present-day world, the progress of society largely depends on the possibility for people to exercise their fundamental rights. From this perspective, freedom of speech is the key to everyone’s well-being, and, in my […]
Why Defamation Laws Must Prioritize Freedom of Speech The body of the essay will involve providing information on the nature of defamation laws in the USA and the UK, the implementation of such laws in the two countries, and the reason why the […]
The Internet and Freedom of Speech: Ethics and Restrictions Because of a lack of security technology, across the board prohibition is justified under the law, a concept that is in itself considered unlawful by a strict definition of the First Amendment of the Constitution […]
Protesting as a Way of Exercising Freedoms of Speech and Expression However, this department will be very careful in monitoring the behavior of the protestors and engaging in dialogue to solve issues that may lead to conflicts.
Freedom of Speech Comes With Responsibility In Australia, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are highly valued accomplishments nowadays. According to Conroy, the present Press Council, and the current ACMA, the two existing establishments aimed to […]
Freedom of Speech: Is Censorship Necessary? One of the greatest achievements of the contemporary democratic society is the freedom of speech. However, it is necessary to realize in what cases the government has the right to abridge the freedom of self-expression.
Supreme Court Decision: Corporations and Freedom of Speech The Constitution is the framework for the Government of the United States that protects and guarantees the basic rights of the people.
Value of Copyright Protection in Relation to Freedom of Speech The phrase, freedom of expression is often used to mean the acts of seeking, getting, and transfer of information and ideas in addition to verbal speech regardless of the model used. It is therefore important […]
Freedom of Speech and the Internet On the one hand, the freedom of expression on the internet allowed the general public to be informed about the true nature of the certain events, regardless of geographical locations and restrictions.
Newt Gingrich Against Freedom of Speech According to the constitution, the First Amendment is part of the United States Bill of rights that was put in place due to the advocation of the anti-federalists who wanted the powers of the federal […]
The Freedom of Speech: Communication Law in US By focusing on the on goings in Guatemala, the NYT may have, no doubt earned the ire of the Bush administration, but it is also necessary that the American people are made aware of the […]
Freedom of Speech and Expression in Music Musicians are responsible and accountable for fans and their actions because in the modern world music and lyrics become a tool of propaganda that has a great impact on the circulation of ideas and social […]
Freedom of Speech and International Relations The freedom of speech or the freedom of expression is a civil right legally protected by many constitutions, including that of the United States, in the First Amendment.
The Importance of Freedom of Speech In a bid to nurture the freedom of speech, the United States provides safety to the ethical considerations of free conversations.
Canada’s Freedom of Speech and Its Ineffectiveness In the developed societies of the modern world, it is one of the major premises that freedom of expression is the pivotal character of liberal democracy.
American Student Rights and Freedom of Speech As the speech was rather vulgar for the educational setting, the court decided that the rights of adults in public places cannot be identic to those the students have in school.
Freedom of Speech in Modern Media At the same time, the bigoted approach to the principles of freedom of speech in the context of the real world, such as killing or silencing journalists, makes the process of promoting the same values […]
Freedom of Speech: Julian Assange and ‘WikiLeaks’ Case Another significant issue is that the precedent of WikiLeaks questions the power of traditional journalism to articulate the needs of the society and to monitor the governments.
Advertising and Freedom of Speech According to Liodice, the marketer should provide the best information to the targeted consumer. The duty of the marketer is to educate and inform the consumer about the unique features of his or her product.
Freedom of Speech and Expression This implies that autonomy is the epitome of the freedom of expression in many ways. Perhaps, this is the point of diversion between autonomy and restriction of the freedom of expression.
Freedom of speech in the Balkans Freedom of speech in Montenegro In Montenegro, the practice of the freedom of speech and press were restricted to some issues by the law.
“The Weight of the Word” by Chris Berg From this analysis therefore, we see that, state interference in the wiki leaks saga was unwarranted, and it amounted to a breach of the freedom of the press.
Freedom of Speech in China and Political Reform Although the constitution of China has the provision of the freedom of speech, association, press and even demonstration, the freedom is not there in reality since the constitution forbids the undertaking of anything that is […]
Controversies Over Freedom of Speech and Internet Postings It must be noted though that despite the Freedom of Speech being a first Amendment right, subsequent amendments to the constitution as well as various historical acts such as the Sedition Act of 1798 and […]
Government’s control versus Freedom of Speech and Thoughts One of the most effective measures that oppressive regimes use the world over is the limitation of the freedom of speech and thoughts.
Freedom of Speech: Exploring Proper Limits In this respect, Downs mentions the philosophy of educational establishments, where “the function of the University is to seek and to transmit knowledge and to train student in the process whereby truth is to be […]
Freedom of Speech, Religion and Religious Tolerance As stipulated in Article 19 of the Universal Human Rights Declaration, the pastor has the right to share ideas and information of all kinds regardless of the periphery involved and in this case, he should […]
Why Free Speech Is An Important Freedom Freedom of speech is an important aspect of social life in a civilized and democratic society. Although there has been debate on the justification of freedom of speech, it is important to realize that society […]
Human Nature and the Freedom of Speech in Different Countries The paper will look at the human nature that necessitates speech and expression, freedom of speech as applied in different countries and limitations that freedom of speech faces.
The Freedom Of Speech, Press, And Petition
How The First Amendment Protects Freedom Of Speech
The Freedom Of Speech, And Gun Ownership Rights
The Misconception of Hate Speech and Its Connection with the Freedom of Speech in Our First Amendment
Limitations On Constitutional Rights On Freedom Of Speech
Teachers’ and Students’ Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression
Internet Censorship Means No Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Speech Part of America’s Constitution
An Examination of the Disadvantage of Freedom of Speech in Slack Activism
A Description of Freedom of Speech as One of the Most Important Freedoms
How Censorship In The Media Is Taking AWay Our Freedom Of Speech
An Analysis of Freedom of Speech and Its Punishments
The Effects Of Technology On The Right Of Freedom Of Speech
Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City
Problems with Limiting Freedom of Speech
How The Freedom Of Speech And Its Interpretation Affects
Giving Up Freedom Of Speech – Censorship On Hate Sites
Freedom Of Speech, Religion, And The American Dream
The Freedom Of Speech Across The World Wide Web
Freedom of Speech: Should There be Restrictions on Speech in the U.S. Democracy
An Argument in Favor of the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press in Schools
Freedom Of Speech And Violent Video Games
The Importance of Freedom of Speech to the Progress of Society
The Amendment Is Not Protected Under The Freedom Of Speech
Should There Be Restrictions to Freedom of Speech
Why Should Myanmar Have Similar Freedom of Speech Protections to United States
An Analysis of the Freedom of Speech and the Internet in United States of America
Freedom of Speech and the First Amendment
Free Speech : The Benefits Of Freedom Of Speech
Comparison of Freedom of Speech: Malaysia vs China
The Fine Line between Freedom of Speech or Hate Speech
Freedom Of Speech : One Of The Core Principles Of A Democracy
Prevent Internet Censorship, Save Freedom of Speech
The Importance of the First Amendment in Providing Freedom of Speech in America
How the Freedom of Speech Is Possible Through the Internet in China
The Importance of Freedom of Speech in Higher Education
Hate Mail and the Misuse of the Freedom of Speech on the Internet
A Comparison of Freedom of Speech and Private Property
Importance Of Freedom Of Speech In Colleges
Freedom Of Speech and Its Legal Limits
Freedom Of Speech As An International And Regional Human Right
The Importance of Protecting and Preserving the Right to Freedom of Speech
An Overview of the Importance of the Freedom of Speech in the United States
The Communication Decency Act: The Fight for Freedom of Speech on the Internet
Freedom Of Speech On Students’s Rights In School
How Far Should the Right to Freedom of Speech Extend
Journalism and Freedom of Speech
The Constitution and Freedom of Speech on the Internet in U.S
‘Freedom of Speech Means the Freedom to Offend.’
Does the Law Relating to Obscenity Restict Freedom of Speech?
Does New Zealand Have Freedom of Speech?
How Far Should the Right to Freedom of Speech Extend?
Does South Korea Have Freedom of Speech?
How the First Amendment Protects Freedom of Speech?
Does Freedom of Speech Mean You Can Say Anything?
How Do You Violate Freedom of Speech?
What Are Mill’s Four Main Arguments in Defence of Freedom of Speech?
What Violates the Freedom of Speech?
What Are the Disadvantages of Freedom of Speech?
Does Freedom of Speech Have Limits?
Why Does Australia Not Have Freedom of Speech?
What Are the Three Restrictions to Freedom of Speech?
How Is Freedom of Speech Abused?
Who Benefits and Loses from Freedom of Speech?
Is There Freedom of Speech in Media?
What Are the Limits of Freedom of Speech in Social Media?
Does Social Media Allow Freedom of Speech?
How Is Freedom of Speech Negative?
Where Is Freedom of Speech Not Allowed?
Is USA the Only Country with Freedom of Speech?
Does India Have Freedom of Speech?
Who Made the Freedom of Speech?
Why Was Freedom of Speech Created?
Who Fought for Freedom of Speech?
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 24). 123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/freedom-of-speech-essay-examples/

"123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples." IvyPanda , 24 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/freedom-of-speech-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples'. 24 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/freedom-of-speech-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/freedom-of-speech-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/freedom-of-speech-essay-examples/.

First Amendment Research Topics
Communication Research Ideas
Freedom Of Expression Questions
Civil Rights Movement Questions
Free Will Paper Topics
Civil Disobedience Essay Topics
Human Rights Essay Ideas
Women’s Rights Titles
Censorship Essay Ideas
Humanism Research Ideas
Social Justice Essay Ideas
Cultural Competence Research Topics
Personal Values Ideas
Social Democracy Essay Titles
Constitution Research Ideas

27 Freedom of Speech Examples

freedom of speech examples and definition, explained below

Freedom of Speech refers to the right of any citizen to express their thoughts, ideas, and opinions without fear of government restraint or censorship (Legal Information Institute, 2020).

The notion of free speech extends beyond verbal communication. It can also defend our rights to use offensive sign language and body language, engage in symbolic and artistic expressions (e.g., flag burning), and even wear clothing that others may find offensive or revealing. Take, for example, the case of Cohen v. California, where the Supreme Court protected an individual’s right to wear a jacket with an expletive as a form of political protest.

Another practical example can be seen in newspapers or media outlets, who are often protected from government persecution by free speech laws. In liberal democracies like the USA and France, the free press are permitted to criticize the government openly.

Free speech helps defend our robust democracies, and makes our political systems more free, fair, and open than nations like Vietnam, China, Hungary, Turkey, and Cambodia whose governments largely control the media and therefore have a stronger monopoly over state power (Lidsky & Cotter, 2016).

Freedom of Speech Examples

Peaceful protest signs: Peaceful protest signs are protected under free speech laws in most liberal democracies. They represent the direct expression of an individual’s or group’s thoughts and concerns on a political matter (Chenoweth & Stephan, 2011). These signs serve as a non-violent way to demand action, raise awareness, or critique governmental or societal issues. Regardless of the message’s popularity, the freedom to publicly display such signs is protected under freedom of speech, as long, however, as they do not incite violence or unlawful actions.
Expressing religious beliefs: Freedom of speech in most liberal-democratic nations covers the public expression of religious beliefs (Roth, 2015). This includes wearing religious symbols, discussing religious topics, or participating in religious rituals in public. Importantly, this freedom is granted equally to all religions and even no-religion atheists and agnostics, who have the freedom to promote their non-beliefs. Such a law allows for a diverse array of religious expressions in public forums such as online and in universities.
Wearing symbolic clothing: The Supreme Court of the USA has upheld the right of individuals to wear expressive clothing as a form of symbolic speech (Cohen v. California, 1971). This can include everything from protest t-shirts to flag pins and allows individuals to wear their opinions literally on their sleeves.
Artistic expressions of dissent: Artistic expressions, including painting, music, and theater, are vehicles to express dissenting ideas or critique societal norms (Reitman, 2014). These expressions allow for creative commentary on the prevailing cultural, political, or social climates , contributing to the diversity of discourse within society. However, this would not be protected if the art were painted onto other people’s or public property, such as in the case of graffiti art.
Criticizing government actions: In most liberal democratic nations, freedom of speech also includes the right to voice dissent publicly and criticize government policies or actions (Stroud, 2011). This encourages transparency and accountability, empowering citizens to serve as a check on governmental power.
Satirical commentary on society: Protected under freedom of speech in many nations, satirical commentary allows for a critique of individuals, groups, and societal norms through humor and irony (Stankiewicz, 2017). Satire plays a vital role in maintaining a healthy society by promoting dialogue about difficult issues in a manner that engages audiences and provokes thought. For example, Charlie Hebdo’s incendiary satirical pictures of Islamic figures was offensive, but allowed, under France’s robust free speech laws.
Advocating for social change : One of the most potent uses of free speech is the ability to advocate for social change (Meyerson, 2010). This can occur in many ways, such as public speeches, organized protests, or social media campaigns, allowing individuals and groups to bring attention to societal issues and push for change.
Publicly debating controversial topics: Freedom of speech upholds the right to participate in public debate on controversial topics (Fish, 2016). Such debates often expose varying viewpoints and challenge assumptions , (even if you’re ill-informed!).
Sharing scientific theories: Academic freedom, a facet of freedom of speech, allows researchers to share scientific theories or findings even if they are controversial (Karran & Mallinson, 2017), without facing fear of being fired. This is a central concept in the tenure system in the USA. This openness promotes progress and innovation by enabling knowledge exchange and peer scrutiny.
Blogging personal political views: Blogging platforms provide a space for individuals to express their political opinions freely and discuss matters of public concern (Sunstein, 2017). This democratizes access to political discourse and helps cultivate a more informed public, but may also unfortunately spread misinformation – which is a key downside of free speech.
Writing a critical book review: Freedom of speech permits individuals to write and publish critical reviews of books (or other forms of media), helping to facilitate discourse and contribute to the literary or artistic community (D’Haen, 2012). Such reviews, positive or negative, aid in the critical reception and evaluation of the work, influencing its public reception, but, generally, if not slanderous, cannot be censored.
Political campaign speeches: When politicians deliver speeches during their campaign, they practice their freedom of speech (Kenski & Stroud, 2016). Their speeches allow voters to understand their stances on various issues, crucial for informed voting. They’re often critical of the government, but yet are allowed, in order to sustain a robust democratic society.
Publishing an investigative article: Investigative journalism, protected by freedom of speech, involves in-depth reporting to uncover hidden issues in society or government (Tumber & Waisbord, 2019). It serves as a watchdog, promoting transparency , and accountability. This allows papers like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal to release cutting-edge investigative journalistic pieces.
Whistleblowing on corporate wrongdoing: Freedom of speech protects whistleblowers who expose unethical practices within corporations, serving as a fundamental check on corruption and wrongdoing (Kohn, 2010). This form of expression is critical for maintaining trust and integrity within industries.
The right to offend: Freedom of speech includes the right to offend, meaning individuals are allowed to voice opinions or ideas, however, potentially offensive they may be to some (Strossen, 2018). This freedom allows for a wide range of expressions, fostering diverse and dynamic dialogue within society.
The right to silence: Often conceptualized as “the right to remain silent,” this right protects individuals from self-incrimination and stands as an integral aspect of free speech (Franks, 2014). This guarantees individuals’ liberty to choose when and how they express themselves. In the USA, this is protected under the 5th amendment.
Social media activism: Activism through social media platforms falls under the umbrella of freedom of speech (Loader & Mercea, 2011). This allows individuals to raise awareness, mobilize supporters, and campaign for change at unprecedented speeds and scales.
Public speaking at a rally: Individuals addressing a crowd at a public rally exercise their freedom of speech by expressing their beliefs and advocating for causes they support (Tufekci, 2017). Public speeches can rally support, influence opinions, and draw attention to essential issues.

Free Speech and the US Constitution (First Amendment)

While encased in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, freedom of speech was originally designed to maintain civil liberties an open, democratic society whereby all individuals could express their comments and opinions freely (Stroud, 2011).

The framers believed that unchecked and unrestricted discussion would lead to the truth, and bad ideas would be debunked by the good ideas. This idea is often described in the metaphor ‘sunshine is the best disinfectant’.

The USA has one of the most libertarian readings of free speech, and while other liberal democracies protect speech, none are quite as robust in their protections than the USA.

Interestingly, freedom of speech also covers the right to be silent. For instance, the Fifth Amendment of the United States constitution protects an individual’s right not to make self-incriminating statements under interrogation, often conceptualized as “the right to remain silent” (Franks, 2014).

The Constitutional Limits of Free Speech

Freedom of speech does not mean absolute freedom . Contrary to some misconceptions, this right is not without its boundaries (Smith & Kavanagh, 2015).

There are indeed restrictions that one must adhere to, such as libel, slander, obscenity, sedition, and incitement, to name a few.

For instance, hate speech that incites violence or harm towards a specific group is typically not protected by the right to free speech in the USA (Brimelow v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 2012).

Famous Freedom of Speech Cases in the United States

Tinker v. des moines (1969): student vietnam war protests.

This landmark case marked a significant decision protecting students’ rights to free speech (Abernathy, 2007). John Tinker and his fellow anti-war agitators were suspended from their Des Moines school for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. Upon appeal, the Supreme Court of the United States argued that their actions we free speech. Being non-disruptive of minimally disruptive, are protected. The court stated, “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate,” establishing a precedent for future freedom of speech cases in education settings, such as the freedom to wear political slogans on your clothing at public schools.

New York Times Co. v. United States (1971): Defending Press Freedom

In this case, better known as the “ Pentagon Papers Case ,” the government tried to prevent the New York Times from publishing classified documents containing information that the US government was trying to hide because it demonstrated unfavorable information about the USA’s role in the Vietnam War (Rudenstine, 2014). The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New York Times. It affirmed the principle of no prior restraint, which means that the government cannot stop the publication of a news story pro-actively, except in extremely rare circumstances. This case reaffirmed the robustness of press freedom in the USA.

Texas v. Johnson (1989): The Right to Flag Burning

This case involved Gregory Lee Johnson who burned an American flag as a form of political protest. This led to his arrest under a now-defunct Texas law banning “flag desecration” (Goldstein, 2016). The Supreme Court overturned his conviction stating that Johnson’s act was symbolic speech and, therefore, protected by the First Amendment. Here, we can see that ‘speech’ isn’t just about speaking but also symbolism . This decision significantly reinforced the idea of protection for symbolic speech under the freedom of speech.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): Money is Speech

This case addressed the issue of campaign financing, where the court found that giving money to a political candidate was seen as ‘political speech’ and therefore protected by the first amendment (Magarian, 2010). Citizens United, a non-profit organization, challenged a regulation barring corporations and unions from funding political campaign ads. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United . This, in turn, allowed unlimited corporate spending in elections, asserting that such “political speech” was protected under the First Amendment. Detractors – including myself – think this case essentially positioned corporations as people, which is ridiculous, and led to the devastating hyper-politicization of elections we see to this day.

Snyder v. Phelps (2011): The Right to Offend

This case involved the Westboro Baptist Church’s right to picket military funerals with fundamentalist anti-military sentiments, resulting in an emotional distress lawsuit from the father of a fallen marine (Carpenter, 2011). The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Westboro Baptist Church . The justices argued that the expression represented matters of public concern, thus protected under the First Amendment, no matter how offensive this behavior truly was.

Schenck v. United States (1919): The Limitations of Free Speech

Charles Schenck, Secretary of the Socialist Party, was arrested for distributing leaflets opposing the draft during World War I (Lewis, 2008). The Supreme Court upheld his conviction under the Espionage Act, ruling that Schenck’s actions posed a “clear and present danger” to national security. This case is important as it established the “clear and present danger” standard for limiting freedom of speech. Although, in my opinion, this ruling was counter to many other Supreme Court findings that held very absolutist perspectives toward free speech, and demonstrated the constant right-wing leanings of US supreme courts over the years.

While “freedom of speech” can often seem like an expansive term, understanding its roots in the democratic principles of open discussion and societal checks and balances can offer some enlightening contexts. However, as discussed above, there are indeed certain conditions and restrictions and, like any freedom, it necessitates responsible handling. Interestingly, strong free speech laws in the USA have led to many perverse outcomes which demonstrates that they may be too lenient; while in my home country of Australia, free speech is often protected, but the laws are much more strict. Finding the right balance is extremely difficult.

Abernathy, M. (2007). First Amendment Law Handbook . Thomson/West.

Brimelow v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic, 132 S. Ct. 2681 (2012).

Carpenter, D. H. (2011). Westboro Church’s Funeral Picketing is Free Speech . Supreme Court Debates.

Franks, D. D. (2014). The Fifth Amendment: Double Jeopardy, Due Process , and the Nature of the Interrogation Process. Routledge.

Goldstein, R. (2016). Flag Burning and Free Speech: The Case of Texas v. Johnson. University Press Of Kansas.

Legal Information Institute. (2020). Freedom of Speech. Cornell Law School. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/freedom_of_speech

Lewis, A. (2008). Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment. Basic Books.

Lidsky, L. B. & Cotter, R. T. (2016 ). Freedom of the Press: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution . Greenwood.

Magarian, G. P. (2010). The Democracy of Direct Speech. Wm. & Mary Law Review, 97.

Rudenstine, D. (2014). The Day the Presses Stopped: A History of the Pentagon Papers Case. University of California Press.

Smith, K. E., & Kavanagh, D. (2015). Freedom of Speech: The History of an Idea . Penn State University Press.

Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche News: The Politics of News Choice . Oxford University Press.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 50 Durable Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 100 Consumer Goods Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 30 Globalization Pros and Cons

2 thoughts on “27 Freedom of Speech Examples”

Hi Professor Drew: I am so-o-o-o enjoying your site. I am an ESL teacher, and I use it extensively to introduce the students to American culture. I really like the deep dives into specific topics, like The American Dream, and Freedom of Speech. A fantastic resource! Thank you!

Hi Jane, thanks so much for reaching out and I’m so glad my website is a useful resource for you. All the best with your teaching!

Regards, Chris.

107 Freedom of Speech Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right that is enshrined in many democratic societies around the world. It allows individuals to express their opinions, beliefs, and ideas without fear of censorship or retaliation. However, with this freedom comes great responsibility. In order to ensure that freedom of speech is protected and preserved, it is important to engage in thoughtful and respectful discourse.

To help spark ideas for essays on freedom of speech, here are 107 topic ideas and examples to consider:

The importance of freedom of speech in a democratic society
The role of social media in shaping contemporary debates on freedom of speech
The limits of freedom of speech in cases of hate speech
The impact of political correctness on freedom of speech
The role of universities in protecting freedom of speech on campus
The tension between freedom of speech and national security concerns
The relationship between freedom of speech and freedom of the press
The impact of cancel culture on freedom of speech
The role of technology in expanding the reach of freedom of speech
The history of freedom of speech in the United States
The role of the Supreme Court in defining the boundaries of freedom of speech
The impact of social movements on expanding freedom of speech rights
The relationship between freedom of speech and intellectual diversity
The role of satire in challenging societal norms and promoting freedom of speech
The impact of laws restricting freedom of speech in authoritarian regimes
The role of public opinion in shaping debates on freedom of speech
The impact of hate speech laws on freedom of speech
The relationship between freedom of speech and artistic expression
The role of whistleblowers in challenging government censorship and promoting freedom of speech
The impact of corporate censorship on freedom of speech
The relationship between freedom of speech and academic freedom
The impact of online harassment on freedom of speech
The role of the media in promoting freedom of speech
The impact of government surveillance on freedom of speech
The relationship between freedom of speech and privacy rights
The impact of social media algorithms on freedom of speech
The role of public protests in advocating for freedom of speech rights
The impact of defamation laws on freedom of speech
The relationship between freedom of speech and religious freedom
The role of international organizations in promoting freedom of speech rights
The impact of corporate influence on freedom of speech
The role of whistleblowers in challenging

Want to create a presentation now?

Instantly Create A Deck

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Hassle Free

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

Entertainment
Environment
Information Science and Technology
Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Social Issues

Essay Samples on Freedom of Speech

The issue of social media and freedom of speech.

Social media platforms have become a powerful tool for self-expression, information sharing, and public discourse. However, the relationship between social media and freedom of speech is complex. Therefore this essay raises important questions about the boundaries of online expression, censorship, and the responsibilities of platform...

Freedom of Speech
Social Media

The Importance of Freedom of Speech: Upholding Democracy and Fostering Progress

Why freedom of speech is important? In a world where ideas shape societies and opinions guide actions, the concept of freedom of speech holds immense significance. It serves as a cornerstone of democratic societies, fostering open discourse, promoting diverse viewpoints, and ultimately contributing to societal...

Freedom of Expression

Freedom of Speech: Balancing Liberties and Responsibilities

Freedom of speech is a fundamental pillar of democratic societies, ensuring that individuals have the right to express their thoughts, opinions, and beliefs without fear of censorship or persecution. However, as with any right, there is the potential for abuse. This essay explores the delicate...

Challenges to the Freedom of Speech on College Campuses

Background and History When the constitution of United States was laid in the year 1769, one of the rights that were cherished by the most Americans was the freedom of speech. This right was incorporated in the First Amendment to the Constitution, which gives all...

Academic Freedom

Importance of The First Amendment: Free Speech, Free Press, Free Society

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states the following: “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...

American Constitution

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

100% unique papers
3 hrs deadline option

How Freedom of Speech is Used Today

Freedom of speech is beneficial in many different ways because people around the United States are able to express what they feel about certain things that goes around America, but it can lead to extreme cases like talking about religious, race and many other groups...

Free Speech

Censorship and Freedom of Speech Online

One doesn’t have to spend much time at all on the internet to realize that censorship is present to some extent in nearly all online forums. Any platform which allows users to post original thoughts in the form of words, pictures, and videos, typically has...

Internet Censorship

David Horowitz and DHFC: A Threat to Students Social Rights

The major topic of this analysis refers to how the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC) is a hate group based on how its namesake founder advances arguments for academic freedom by framing them as calls to make free speech an absolute right in the United...

Hate Speech

Arguments for Ensuring the Freedom of Speech in US

Did you know that the happiest country on earth in 2017 was Norway? Did you also know that according to article 100 of The Constitution of Norway, Norwegians are given the right to having freedom in their speech? Denmark, also named to be the happiest...

Freedom of Speech Represented by David Irwin

Supreme Court has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. Not speaking, using offensive language to convey political messages, students wearing black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”), contributing money to campaigns,...

A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

One of our rights in the United States is freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, “...prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on...

First Amendment

Freedom of Speech and Journalism in Press of Vietnam

Introduction Freedom of speech and journalism play vital roles in promoting democracy, transparency, and accountability in any society. In the context of Vietnam, these fundamental rights face significant constraints and challenges. This essay examines the state of freedom of speech and journalism in Vietnam, exploring...

Holocaust Denial as a Form of Hate Speech

In April of 2018, at Spanish River Community High School, emails were exchanged between the principal and a parent regarding the curriculum on the Holocaust. A parent was offended by the fact that the Holocaust was taught in school as a historical fact. This parent...

Freedom of Speech and Media Ownership in Ireland

The freedom of speech is a contentious subject. Academically, it can be argued as both good and bad for society, with the right to freely express your opinion being marred by the court’s responsibility to protect the reputation of Irish citizens. The media provides the...

Building Democratic Canada With Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech Free speech is a critical component of a democratic and free society, therefore, it should not be regulated. Canadians are lucky enough to live in a free and democratic society where we have the right to make our views and opinions known....

Limitation of Freedom of Speech on Social Media

The Bill of Rights was written back in 1791 to fit the needs for the new world and the Americans that inhabited it. The rules and regulations may have worked in that time period but America has evolved so much since then. In the last...

Civil Rights

Restricted Speech In America

Restricted Speech America is the land of the free, and the home of the brave. The right of free speech is the most exercised when an individual is a citizen of the United States of America. This gives citizens the right to express their opinions...

Cyber Bullying

Best topics on Freedom of Speech

1. The Issue of Social Media and Freedom of Speech

2. The Importance of Freedom of Speech: Upholding Democracy and Fostering Progress

3. Freedom of Speech: Balancing Liberties and Responsibilities

4. Challenges to the Freedom of Speech on College Campuses

5. Importance of The First Amendment: Free Speech, Free Press, Free Society

6. How Freedom of Speech is Used Today

7. Censorship and Freedom of Speech Online

8. David Horowitz and DHFC: A Threat to Students Social Rights

9. Arguments for Ensuring the Freedom of Speech in US

10. Freedom of Speech Represented by David Irwin

11. A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

12. Freedom of Speech and Journalism in Press of Vietnam

13. Holocaust Denial as a Form of Hate Speech

14. Freedom of Speech and Media Ownership in Ireland

15. Building Democratic Canada With Freedom of Speech

Pornography
Gender Equality
Globalization
Women's Rights
Emmett Till

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

History Classics
Your Profile
Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
This Day In History
History Podcasts
History Vault

Freedom of Speech

By: History.com Editors

Updated: July 27, 2023 | Original: December 4, 2017

A demonstration against restrictions on the sale of alcohol in the united states of America.Illustration showing a demonstration against restrictions on the sale of alcohol in the united states of America 1875. (Photo by: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Freedom of speech—the right to express opinions without government restraint—is a democratic ideal that dates back to ancient Greece. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees free speech, though the United States, like all modern democracies, places limits on this freedom. In a series of landmark cases, the U.S. Supreme Court over the years has helped to define what types of speech are—and aren’t—protected under U.S. law.

The ancient Greeks pioneered free speech as a democratic principle. The ancient Greek word “parrhesia” means “free speech,” or “to speak candidly.” The term first appeared in Greek literature around the end of the fifth century B.C.

During the classical period, parrhesia became a fundamental part of the democracy of Athens. Leaders, philosophers, playwrights and everyday Athenians were free to openly discuss politics and religion and to criticize the government in some settings.

First Amendment

In the United States, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech.

The First Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution . The Bill of Rights provides constitutional protection for certain individual liberties, including freedoms of speech, assembly and worship.

The First Amendment doesn’t specify what exactly is meant by freedom of speech. Defining what types of speech should and shouldn’t be protected by law has fallen largely to the courts.

In general, the First Amendment guarantees the right to express ideas and information. On a basic level, it means that people can express an opinion (even an unpopular or unsavory one) without fear of government censorship.

It protects all forms of communication, from speeches to art and other media.

Flag Burning

While freedom of speech pertains mostly to the spoken or written word, it also protects some forms of symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is an action that expresses an idea.

Flag burning is an example of symbolic speech that is protected under the First Amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson, a youth communist, burned a flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas to protest the Reagan administration.

The U.S. Supreme Court , in 1990, reversed a Texas court’s conviction that Johnson broke the law by desecrating the flag. Texas v. Johnson invalidated statutes in Texas and 47 other states prohibiting flag burning.

When Isn’t Speech Protected?

Not all speech is protected under the First Amendment.

Forms of speech that aren’t protected include:

Obscene material such as child pornography
Plagiarism of copyrighted material
Defamation (libel and slander)
True threats

Speech inciting illegal actions or soliciting others to commit crimes aren’t protected under the First Amendment, either.

The Supreme Court decided a series of cases in 1919 that helped to define the limitations of free speech. Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917, shortly after the United States entered into World War I . The law prohibited interference in military operations or recruitment.

Socialist Party activist Charles Schenck was arrested under the Espionage Act after he distributed fliers urging young men to dodge the draft. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction by creating the “clear and present danger” standard, explaining when the government is allowed to limit free speech. In this case, they viewed draft resistant as dangerous to national security.

American labor leader and Socialist Party activist Eugene Debs also was arrested under the Espionage Act after giving a speech in 1918 encouraging others not to join the military. Debs argued that he was exercising his right to free speech and that the Espionage Act of 1917 was unconstitutional. In Debs v. United States the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Espionage Act.

Freedom of Expression

The Supreme Court has interpreted artistic freedom broadly as a form of free speech.

In most cases, freedom of expression may be restricted only if it will cause direct and imminent harm. Shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater and causing a stampede would be an example of direct and imminent harm.

In deciding cases involving artistic freedom of expression the Supreme Court leans on a principle called “content neutrality.” Content neutrality means the government can’t censor or restrict expression just because some segment of the population finds the content offensive.

Free Speech in Schools

In 1965, students at a public high school in Des Moines, Iowa , organized a silent protest against the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to protest the fighting. The students were suspended from school. The principal argued that the armbands were a distraction and could possibly lead to danger for the students.

The Supreme Court didn’t bite—they ruled in favor of the students’ right to wear the armbands as a form of free speech in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District . The case set the standard for free speech in schools. However, First Amendment rights typically don’t apply in private schools.

What does free speech mean?; United States Courts . Tinker v. Des Moines; United States Courts . Freedom of expression in the arts and entertainment; ACLU .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Freedom of Speech in the United States

How it works

Freedom of speech has been protected in The United States by the First Amendment since 1791. For over 100 years, this right, though symbolically important, has sat dormant. However today, freedom of speech has been in the headlines due to its involvement in controversial topics surrounding the media, political correctness, and “hate speech”. Hateful beliefs and intolerance towards those with different characteristics exist throughout society and results in an environment of hate. Americans now have a hard choice to make of what freedom of speech means and where to draw the line on what it protects.

Freedom of speech is an essential right that grants all Americans the liberty to criticize the government and speak their minds without the fear of being censored. However, it is time to realize that speech directing hatred and vitriol at marginalized people does not advance freedom or liberty.

Allowing hate speech to be protected by the constitution leads to a hostile environment for those it is directed at, as well as it rallies harm and violence against innocent individuals of our society. This topic is often brought before our judicial branch of government, highlighting the relevance to society today. Other countries have worked hard to build an inclusive environment for their citizens and denounce hate speech. Understanding the importance of the US constitution is crucial, however there is room for growth and evolution with current societal beliefs.

Exploring the union of ideas and events that led to the declaration of “freedom of speech and of the press” are important influences in the development of the principle and where it stands today. Freedom of speech in America began off the basis of the English Bill of Rights enacted in 1689 from the English Parliament. According to David Bogen, the colonies attempted to follow the Parliament and secure freedom of speech in legislative debate (1). This is emphasized by the Articles of Confederation directing that “Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Congress….” (2). Declaring these principles allowed politicians to gain independence and protection against punishment for criticizing a legislator and avoid censorship by the government. Moving this privilege forward began with the inclusion of common individuals. It is this cross over that has led to a more controversial discussion. When dealing with free speech in the legislature, it was confined to an environment where it was powerless to cause any other harm. However, with the expansion of freedom of speech to society generally, the potential of speech to cause harm increased greatly. The final form of the first amendment states, “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” (3). This brings up a contradictory element of freedom of speech. In the federal system, only Congress can set national limits on speech; for example, making laws regulating commercial speech and copyright laws. However, the language of the first amendment clearly restricts Congress from interfering with freedom of speech. Bogen sheds some light on this paradox stating, “Under the Constitution only the whole body of the people acting through Congress even arguably has the power to restrict speech” (1). In conclusion, the fight for freedom of speech dates back to the regulations imposed on speech in England and Americans need for protection against prior restraints.

The progressive era brought around a time of change for the political status of expression rights. During this time legislatures began to discuss proposals limiting the scope of expression rights, however measures like this were rarely passed. This era also showed a transition in how individuals were using the constitution as a defense for free speech. According to Mark Graber, “Leading progressive thinkers insisted the public policy should promote the social interests of the community and that these interests could best be determined by elected officials and social science experts” (4). This highlights the discontent for the judiciary system having control over the fundamental principles of American government. Instead the policies should be flexible for revision when noticing consequences, they entail when acted upon. Grab states, “This interpretation of the nature of truth has been called ‘instrumentalism’ because the validity of concepts is measured by their observable consequences, rather than logical structure” (4). This means that the new intellectuals believe the laws should be ever changing in relation to the effect and consequences seen by the civilian population.

The argument of censorship in America has been apart the first amendments history since its institution. This debate is relevant to all citizens of The United States, especially minorities or other parties facing discrimination. Regulating “hate speech” eliminates both the direct and indirect harm that comes to the recipients. For some individuals, verbal abuse can render the workplace and educational environments unbearable. This utilitarianism value rests on the fact that the positive feelings invoked by hate speech is greatly outweighed by the disgust and fear that minorities feel by falling victim. In addition, constitutionalists, extremist and internet users find themselves on the same side of the argument, protecting speech and their ability to preach content without repercussions. They believe that freedom of speech is operating as a democratic principle and a democracy cannot legitimately restrict speech within public discourse, solely on grounds of the undesirable worldviews expressed.

Allowing hate speech to fall under the guise of freedom of speech fosters a hostile environment for minorities, allowing their human dignity to be vandalized. In recent years, this controversy has been played out on college campuses. College campuses provide an environment where individuals can be fluid with their social markers, such as lifestyle preferences and cultural habits. According to Peter Scott, “The increased diversity on campuses has had important implications for debates about ‘free speech’ and ‘political correctness’. The exercise of free speech that appears to threaten their identity or culture and even their still precarious foothold in higher education can easily be interpreted as intolerable” (5). Scott recognizes that no speech is absolute and college campuses do not follow the “anything goes” model. There are sensitives and vulnerabilities that should be respected. This is seen by students campaigning for campus buildings to be renamed, protesting controversial speakers on campus, and mutual respect within the academic community. It is also important that these core components of the university experience not be invoked too often to protect the progressive science and enlightenment occurring within students. A strong balance must be reached to have the best environment to foster the learning experience, which is based on the ability to have free thoughts.

One way to ensure a respectable balance is to have improved responses from people in positions of power when the controversial topic arises. There has been a rise in frequency of hateful incidents on college campuses over the past two years. According to Cynthia Miller-Idriss, “There has been a 77% increase in White supremacist propaganda during the 2017-18 school year, including nooses hung on trees to swastikas painted on Jewish professor’s office walls” (6). These actions are terrorizing and detrimental to students and professors who are trying to increase the wealth of the country they live in. Even in wake of these unsetting action, campus leaders are still stumbling in their responses, not fully condemning the hateful content of the messages. This leaves room for these ideas to be seeding in other vulnerable people’s heads and grow in to a much bigger problem. Individuals involved are not seeing any consequences for their actions which encourages them to continue at even larger extremes. Such neutral statements may be a way to combat the concerns regarding navigating free speech. However, free speech should not be positioned against hate speech, as if protecting free speech means there are constraints on denouncing hate. Strong responses are becoming more apparent, such as the vice president at Cornell for student life Ryan Lombardi expressing his “revulsion” (6) at a swastika being marked in the snow, and how denouncing hate is a “shared responsibility” (6). This answer helps assert core community values that knit the campus closer together rather than increase the divide. In addition to campus leaders speaking out, there needs to be more training for residential assistants and resources available for students to report or seek counseling for such events. Every person, no matter their race, religion, or gender deserve a supportive, all-inclusive learning environment to better themselves and in turn the world around them.

Groups that are targeted for hateful expressions due to race, religion, or ethnicity usually develop into victims of hate-related incidents. Hate speech threatens unlawful harm and incites violence towards members of these targeted groups. According to the 2017 FBI report ove hate crimes, “There were 7,106 single-bias incidents involving 8,493 victims. A percent distribution of victims by bias type shows that 59.6 percent of victims were targeted because of the offenders’ race/ethnicity/ancestry bias; 20.6 percent were targeted because of the offenders’ religious bias; 15.8 percent were victimized because of the offenders’ sexual-orientation bias” (7). It would be naive to deny the relationship between hate speech and the hate crimes that follow. Governments functions are to protect individuals threatened with immediate violence and preserve social conditions that foster individual autonomy. Implementing stronger restrictions on these kinds of expression can save targeted individuals from immediate physical harm as well has serious psychological consequences. Eric Rosenberg highlights the detrimental effects hate speech and racism have on not only the individual but more importantly society. Egalitarianism is a doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities (8). It is a compelling ideal that emphasizes the rights that all people deserve and should not be sacrificed for the small gain of others. Rosenberg states, “The failure of the legal system to redress the harms of racism, and of racial insults, conveys to all the lesson that egalitarianism is not a fundamental principle; the law, through inaction, implicitly teaches that respect for individuals is of little importance” (8). This is confirmed in the increase of white supremist groups and religious bases being vandalized or destroyed. One of the most prominent cases of society being directed to ignore egalitarianism was made by President Trump concerning the Charlottesville rally in 2018. President Trump refused to outright condemn the white nationalists and even stated, “You also had people that were very fine people, on both sides” (9). This type of apathetic response only encourages extremists that there will be consequences for their actions and they can go about striping other people’s human dignities. The common saying, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”, minimizes the value that words have. However, one cannot protect free speech and demise hate speech by denying the power of speech.

One driving force behind the support for restricting hate speech is the success other countries have found and their avoidance to becoming an oppressive society. The fear Americans have is that they will be silenced, and the government will have complete censorship over all speech outlets.

Cite this page

Freedom of Speech in The United States. (2020, May 15). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/

"Freedom of Speech in The United States." PapersOwl.com , 15 May 2020, https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Freedom of Speech in The United States . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/ [Accessed: 21 Apr. 2024]

"Freedom of Speech in The United States." PapersOwl.com, May 15, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/

"Freedom of Speech in The United States," PapersOwl.com , 15-May-2020. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/. [Accessed: 21-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Freedom of Speech in The United States . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/freedom-of-speech-in-the-united-states/ [Accessed: 21-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Essay approach – freedom of speech (constitutional law)

Freedom of speech is a common essay topic (and often appears on the MBE). It really pays off to know it well. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to navigate a freedom of speech question.

STANDING. Discuss injury in fact, causation and redressability.
STATE ACTION. Discuss the regulation the state has put in place.
Discuss OVERBREADTH of regulation
Discuss VAGUENESS of regulation
Test: not allowed unless specific procedural safeguards in place: (1) narrowly drawn, reasonable and definite regulations, (2) prompt seeking of injunction and (3) prompt review of regulation
Normally strict scrutiny applies: “necessary to achieve a compelling government interest and narrowly tailored”
Public forum (historically open to speech): still strict scrutiny
Designated public forum (open to speech activities on a permanent or limited basis): still strict scrutiny
Limited and nonpublic forums (areas for specific speech activity or areas not open to speech): allowed if viewpoint neutral
Intermediate scrutiny applies – “substantially related to an important government interest”
Public forum/designated public forum (historically open to speech on a permanent/limited basis): must be (1) content neutral, (2) narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest and (3) leave open alternative channels of communication
Limited public/Nonpublic forum (areas for specific speech activity/not open to speech): must be (1) viewpoint neutral and (2) reasonable related to a legitimate government interest
COMMERCIAL SPEECH: protected unless false, misleading or unlawful. Regulations – valid if (1) substantial government interest, (2) the regulation must directly advance that interest, (3) regulation must be narrowly tailored.
OBSCENITY: not protected. Test (“POV”): (1) Appeals to the prurient interest in sex using a community standard, (2) Patently offensive based on community standards, (3) Lacks serious value (literary, artistic, political or scientific) using a national reasonable person standard.
INCITEMENT OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITY: not protected if the speech (1) creates a substantial likelihood of imminent illegal activity and (2) is directed to causing imminent illegality
FIGHTING WORDS: not protected if the speech involves (1) personally abusive words that are (2) likely to incite physical retaliation in an average person.
SYMBOLIC SPEECH: the government can regulate symbolic conduct if it has (1) an important interest in the regulation which is (2) independent of the speech aspects of the conduct and (3) the incidental burden on speech is no greater than necessary. E.g. prohibition on burning draft cards.
Official duty exception: government employer may punish a public employee’s speech whenever (1) the speech is made on the job and (2) pursuant to the employee’s official duties, even if the speech is on a matter of public concern
If the speech does not involve a matter of public concern, the courts give the government worker a (1) wide degree of deference and (2) allow punishment if the speech was disruptive of the work environment
If the speech involved a matter of public concern, courts must balance (1) the employee’s rights as a citizen to comment and (2) the government’s interest as an employer in the efficient performance of public service.

I hope this helps! Let me know what you think.

Milk Street Radio

Listen live.

Created by The Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, Reveal is public radio's first one-hour radio show and podcast dedicated to investigative reporting.

Courts & Law
Social Justice

The good, the bad, and the ugly of free speech

Pamela J. Forsythe

Daryl Tempesta is shown with tape over his mouth in protest in April, in Berkeley, Calif. Demonstrators gathered near the University of California, Berkeley campus amid a strong police presence and rallied to show support for free speech and condemn the views of Ann Coulter and her supporters. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez, file)

Citizens United rationale: Speech is speech

Campuses choose peace over expression, the right to be forgotten, trump and free speech.

WHYY is your source for fact-based, in-depth journalism and information. As a nonprofit organization, we rely on financial support from readers like you. Please give today.

Brought to you by Speak Easy

Thoughtful essays, commentaries, and opinions on current events, ideas, and life in the Philadelphia region.

About Pamela J. Forsythe

Want a digest of WHYY’s programs, events & stories? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Together we can reach 100% of WHYY’s fiscal year goal

Freedom of Speech Essays

Media ethics and freedom of speech, cultural sensitivity and language, history, public information, manipulation, propaganda, freedom of expression, freedom and authority, free speech on university campus, freedom of speech in the modern age, essays about freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is one of our fundamental rights and it has always been a relevant topic in academic writing, more so in recent years. After all, educational institutions are meant to be a place where everyone can exchange ideas and criticism, no matter how unpalatable they may be to other people.

Moreover, with the rise of “cancel culture” and the way people’s ideas, beliefs, and criticism are attacked, it’s important to remember the importance of freedom of speech and emphasize it, explore it, and reiterate that it allows us to challenge, oppose, and protest harmful views.

The best way to defeat bad ideas is not to censor them or ban them, but to champion good ideas based on ethics and reason. That’s why academic essays on freedom of speech continue to be and will always be important. If you’re unfamiliar with how to approach the topic, there are a few guidelines you should consider.

First, get a good grasp on the definition. Freedom of speech is not as straightforward as it may seem, which is why you must understand it well before you sit down to write your essay. It’s very difficult to squeeze ideas out of thin air, so the more information you have in your brain, the easier it will be to find an angle that’s worth exploring.

However, essays on freedom of speech are not about defining what it is. If anyone wants a definition, they can use a dictionary. That’s why you should consider making it personal. Your personal perspective is a lot more valuable and a lot more interesting, which is why you should leverage it and express your unique viewpoint.

Additionally, a focus on freedom can be helpful. We all have different ideas of freedom based on our life experiences, culture, values, and beliefs. That’s another thing you can leverage in your essay about freedom of speech. In society, our freedom has limits because it’s what allows us to live in harmony. Consider this when deciding on a focus for your essay.

This is your opportunity to add something important to the conversation; seize it.

And if you are working on your essay outline or searching for ideas to discuss, the samples on this page may help you with it.

Freedom of Speech Argumentative Essay

Does freedom of speech give people the right to use hate speech.

“What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist”

Salman Rushdie.

The quote perfectly sums up the never-ending debate about freedom of speech and hate speech. It is a well-known fact that freedom of speech and expression belongs to the group of fundamental human rights of every person on this planet. Lately, we are witnessing the rising concerns about hate speech, is it protected by this basic human right or freedom of speech should have some limitations? Given the fact that every individual is allowed to express thoughts and beliefs, banning the negative comments would, in fact, deny his or her basic rights i.e. freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech reinforces all other human rights, thus allowing society to develop and progress at a constant rate. The ability to state our opinion and speak freely is pivotal for any change in society. Throughout the history, society evolved thanks to the individuals, great thinkers, brave leaders, who were not scared to express their beliefs. Back in time, those beliefs that were contrary to the typical “mindset” would be considered as hate, a hatred towards their way of life, culture, and tradition. The most reputable professors, experts, and campaigners only confirm that free speech has always been used to fight for change, for better times.

Besides reinforcement of other human rights, free speech is also essential due to the ability to hear others and be heard at the same time. We need to hear other people’s views as well as offering them our own opinions. Unfortunately, one of the fastest-growing problems of our society is that people rarely listen to others and acknowledge their takes on certain topics if they don’t agree with them. We should feel comfortable exchanging ideas and thoughts with those who have opposing views. Experts agree that way there would be less “hate speech” circling around.

We hear or read the term “hate speech” a lot, especially now with the easy internet access and a multitude of social media websites to join. It comes as no wonder why insulting comments and expressing negative ideas are considered a threat to the humanity. A lot of people are anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-gay marriage, and so on. Those who assume hate speech is not a freedom of speech, primarily, focus on the expression of a negative attitude towards certain people and ideas. However, if we start banning people from expressing their beliefs, then what comes next? After one thing, there always comes another and, eventually, the mankind would live in fear of saying anything. The reality is that the society has become oversensitive; everything one does not agree with is considered insulting and branded as hate.

Finally, freedom of speech is the most important human right that every individual has the right to exercise. This freedom comes with the ability to express one’s opinion, regardless of its nature good or bad. What our society needs today are not limitations of free speech, but making efforts to establish dialogues between people with conflicting beliefs. Listening and being heard will go a long way; that way we could build bridges instead of burning them.

https://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2011/03/free-speech-central-democracy-rossi-says

https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2016/04/free-speech-important/

https://www.debate.org/opinions/does-freedom-of-speech-give-us-the-right-to-offend

Persuasive essay examples that work for college in 2022
Obesity in America: Cause and Effect Essay Sample
Essay Sample on Why i Want to Be a Veterinarian
Leadership and The Army Profession, Essay Sample

Improve your writing with our guides

Youth Culture Essay Prompt and Discussion

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid, Essay Sample

Reasons Why Minimum Wage Should Be Raised Essay: Benefits for Workers, Society, and The Economy

Get 15% off your first order with edusson.

Connect with a professional writer within minutes by placing your first order. No matter the subject, difficulty, academic level or document type, our writers have the skills to complete it.

100% privacy. No spam ever.

Knowledge Base
Popular Essay Topics

Freedom of Speech Essay

Author StudySaurus
Category Popular Essay Topics

Disclaimer: This paper has been submitted by a student. This is not a sample of the work written by professional academic writers.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of StudySaurus.

Topic: What freedom of speech means to me

Freedom of speech is one of the most fundamental rights we have in this great nation today. Our founding fathers came from a tyrannical rule and kept that in mind while framing the constitution we follow today. It was freedom of speech that allowed some of the greatest voices in history to get us to our free and prosperous country.

It is people like Bob Moses, Martin Luther King Jr., Lola Hendricks, Will Roscoe, Gloria Steinem and many other American activists that exercised this right to free speech to demand change in our now free and prosperous country. These names and many more have left their mark on this country, and for the better, I should add. You might not see it but everyday you, me, your friends, my friends, and people you don’t even know around the country are graciously enjoying this right. This leads me to my next subject on this matter. How do we have this right?

Many people exercise this right but not many people put much thought into how we are able to enjoy it in our homes, schools, and other environments in America. The answer to this is other people. We have a very large military that has stood strong for our rights for generations prior and many generations to come. These people, whether you recognize it or not, risk their lives, give everything up, leave their friends and families for long periods of time with the knowledge in their mind they might not come back, to fight for us. Not only for people they know but for everyone.

People don’t know even exist, but they do it anyway because they’re some of the bravest people on this planet. Freedom of speech to me is freedom itself. Without this right, I dare say we shouldn’t be considered free at all. It is the ability to make a change, the ability to love and to hate, to express anger or happiness. Freedom of speech is freedom itself.

Was this material helpful?

Related essays, about studysaurus, community. knowledge. success..

StudySaurus is run by two uni-students that still get a kick out of learning new things. We hope to share these experiences with you.

Ideas , concepts , tutorials, essay papers – everything we would’ve liked to have known, seen or heard during our high-school & UNI years, we want to bring to YOU.

Privacy & Cookies Policy Terms and Conditions DMCA Request

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

Essay Database >
Essay Examples >
Essays Topics >
Essay on Law

Freedom Of Speech and Its Legal Limits Essay

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: Law , United States , Business , Freedom , Democracy , Rhetoric , Flag , America

Words: 2000

Published: 11/25/2019

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Freedom of speech, also known as freedom of expression, can be defined as the freedom to express oneself without censorship. The freedom of expression is considered as the core or cornerstone of all the democratic rights and freedoms. This is because it formed the basis of all other human rights, since it was in existence before any other human rights were put into practice. As a human right, freedom of speech is now recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, under Article 19 of the declaration. The right to freedom of speech is also recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, under the international human rights law. The right to freedom of speech is considered an important aspect of democracy. If citizens of a nation have the freedom to express themselves, seek, receive and share information, then they are able to take an active role in the leadership of the country. This is so because the freedom allows them to make informed decisions and wise choices especially when they are electing their leaders. This ensures accountability and democracy on the part of citizens. Countries that practice democracy are usually peaceful and do well economically. For the above reasons, strategies and efforts have been put in place to ensure that all citizens know and understand their rights, and that they are also able to exercise them. Special strategies and mechanisms are being executed to give citizens more opportunities to fully express themselves without having to hold back anything in fear of possible consequences. Also, most constitutions have sections that protect the freedom of speech and expression, for example the American Constitution. According to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to their own opinion and also a right to express it without any form of interruption. The article further states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This means that one has the freedom to search, receive, and give information and ideas, via any form of media. According to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to freedom of speech and expression carries with it certain responsibilities. These are restrictions meant to prevent people from manipulating the freedom to offend others, by protecting their reputation and national order. The limitations vary depending on the laws of the individual country. In the United States, the freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This is reinforced by the many state constitutions, as well as state and federal laws. However, there are restrictions to the freedom to prevent defamation, incitements to riots, harassments, and any other vice in relation to the freedom of speech and expression. Despite the right to freedom of speech and expression, a number of incidences that go against what is stated under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have been reported. A good instance of this is when individuals or companies post false advertisements on products and services that they are selling. Advertisements fall under the commercial type of speech. This vice is referred to as deceptive advertising. The Federal Trade Commission defines deceptive advertising as being the use of false statements to persuade potential customers to buy the particular product or service. False advertisements are likely to have hidden information or charges. It would be very tragic if an advertisement only gave positive information on the product in highlight, especially medical products. Advertisements are supposed to give all the information that would be crucial or would determine a customer’s choice. The Federal Trade Commission is responsible for the regulation of advertisements. In the chance that an advertisement gives false information, the commission is supposed to take action to protect the consumer of the product in question. This is done to protect consumers from being persuaded to purchase products that may cause them harm. However, concrete evidence is needed to prove an advertisement as being false, but no evidence is needed to prove an advertisement as being deceptive. Again, advertisers have various strategies of persuading their clients to purchase their products. Most of these strategies may be deceptive but sadly, concrete information or facts would be needed to prove the advert as being deceptive, or the information from the advertisement as deceptive. This is in accordance to the advertising laws of the commission. False advertising is not only illegal in the United States of America, but in many other countries as well. Hence, false advertising is a form of breach of the right to freedom of speech and expression in that the advertisers use their right to freedom of speech to give false information or hold back certain facts that the customer needs to know before purchasing the said product or service. Another aspect that relates to the freedom of speech and expression is banning the citizens of the United States of America from burning the American flag. The American flag is among the most important symbols, and for this, it is associated with a lot of emotion as compared to any other symbol in the state. Many incidents have been reported where the American flag has been torn or burnt in a bid to protest something. The burning of the American flag is referred to as the desecration of the American flag. Whenever citizens do not agree with the way affairs in their country are being run, or are not in support of decisions made by the government, they may choose to show their disapproval by burning the American flag. Desecration of the American flag by burning is deemed as an insult to the national pride of the state .On the other hand, it illustrates that Americans have the free liberty to express what they feel. The American constitution does not view burning of the American flag as being an illegal act. Several attempts have been made to make the act of burning the flag illegal. In 1884, Gregory Lee Johnson was charged and convicted with the crime of desecrating the American flag by burning it. This case was overturned by the Texas Court of Appeal and was issued to the Supreme Court in 1989. The Supreme Court cleared off the charges and upheld that burning the flag was only a form of freedom speech. Further on, the Congress passed a Flag Protection Act in 1989, stating that anybody that mutilates or defiles the American flag in any way commits a criminal offense. The 1990 Flag Protection imposed bans on acts of desecration of venerated objects, especially the burning of flags. This was not taken well and several protests against the act ensued. Other attempts to stop the burning of the American flag include campaigns such as the Patriotic Act. This was a campaign initiated with the motive to limit the freedom of speech and expression of the citizens by making illegal the desecration of the American flag. All these efforts proved vain. Besides that, the Supreme Court dismissed the Flag Protection Act in 1990 and stated that burning of the American flag is a symbolic speech protected under the First Amendment of the American constitution. So trying to ban the people from burning flags as way of expressing what they felt would be limiting their right to freedom of speech and expression. The fact that the desecration of the American flag by burning is not considered illegal by the American constitution leaves it to the citizens to decide on how to express their opinions on political affairs in the community. It is also important to note that burning of the flag shows that the citizens have the freedom to express themselves without any fear. On the other hand, burning the flag is like an insult to the country and the patriotic American citizens would be offended by the act. It hence is up to an individual to decide on whether it is right to express their feelings or pass a message to the government by desecrating important national symbols such as the flag. Despite the fact that imposing bans on flag burning would be a breach of the right to the freedom of speech and expression, efforts are still in place to try and amend the American constitution, so as to make illegal desecration of the American flag by burning. It is unfortunate that this effort is being taken as a way of earning a stable position politically, as those who are in support of constitutional amendments want to be deemed as being patriotic citizens of the United States of America. It is also unfortunate that making illegal the act of burning the flag as way of expression would portray the United States of America as not being a democratic state. This would be contrary to the common knowledge that America is a country that safeguards all the rights of its citizens. Being an important symbol of democracy, freedom, and unity, the flag should be treated with a lot of respect. It should be protected since it stands for the heritage and history of the state. Flag burning should hence, not be used as a form of protest, or way of expression, as that is simply an insult to the object and the country. Standards should be set on how a flag should be handled to ensure that it is given its due respect. For instance, burning of the flag, using the flag as a piece of clothing, or anything else that reduces the flag to being just like any other fabric are not respectful ways of handling the flag. In conclusion, the right to freedom of speech should be held, since it is the most basic of all human and democratic rights. Constitutions should be amended in a way to protect the freedom, and not to impose bans on it. The political leaders should take it upon themselves to teach the citizens on the importance of symbols such as the flag, so as to protect it from incidents such as desecration by flag burning. Citizens should also take time to consider other options of expressing what they feel, other than resulting to shameful acts such as burning of flags. Flag burning should be discouraged in all ways, though not made illegal, as this would be like imposing limitations to the right of freedom of speech and expression. On the other hand, stringent measures should be taken against deceptive advertisers. If this is not done, a lot of lives would be put at stake. The Federal Trade Commission should therefore not take it easy on anybody proven to be violating the right to freedom of speech by giving false information in their advertisements, or making their advertisements deceptive. A good control measure would be setting up a system that would check all the advertisements before they are released for people to view them.

Works Cited

Amar, Vikram David. The First Amendment: Freedom of Speech: Its Constitutional History and the Contemporary Debate (Bill of Rights) . New York: Prometheus Books, 2009. Print. Goldstein, Robert Justin. Flag Burning and Free Speech: The Case of Texas v. Johnson. Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2000. Print. Magee, James J. Freedom of expression. Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002. Print. Moon, Richard. The constitutional protection of freedom of expression. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 2000. Print. Staff, Aspatore Books. Settlements and Negotiations for Advertising and Marketing Law: Leading Lawyers on Trademark and Copyright Issues, False Advertising Claims, and

Dispute Resolution. Boston: Aspatore Books, 2006. Print.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 1521

This paper is created by writer with

ID 261209290

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Free hiv on risks in public health and universal test critical thinking sample, good course work on media law, free salem witch hunts and the red scare essay sample, good example of critical thinking on economics de weese president of the american policy center, sample essay on religion paper, good example of course work on observational learning, communicate about risks critical thinking sample, good research proposal on crime rates in baltimore, example of central intelligence agency ethos report, free consolidated products essay sample, free critical thinking about biological weapons and high explosives, media violence influence on children argumentative essay examples, free personalities and communication essay sample, our only planet ethics to conserve and protect essay, free marketing plan business plan sample, good essay on name, answers essay sample, good example of essay on formed elements of the blood, the definition of racism essays examples, good research paper about leap motion, good essay on basic cell biology, good nursing management and leadership essay example, jonathan swifts a modest proposal essay sample, sample essay on our fantastic voyage begins in the gastrointestinal tract, words of affirmation positive guidance and encouragement essay examples, example of course work on police effectiveness and community policing, example of essay on decision making analysis, essay on snappy auctions, mcdonalds corporation essays, weapons proliferation essays, merkel cell carcinoma essays, hospitalizing essays, pathological gambler essays, cave article reviews, devil article reviews, journalist article reviews, cargo article reviews, accomplishment article reviews, mainland article reviews, tube article reviews, hardship article reviews, coal article reviews, taxpayer article reviews.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

Essay on Freedom of Speech in English Free PDF download

Download Important English Essay on the Topic - Freedom of Speech Free PDF from Vedantu

One of the fundamental rights of the citizens of India is ‘Freedom of Speech’. This is allowed to the citizens by a lot of countries to empower the citizens to share their own thoughts and views. This freedom of speech essay is for students of class 5 and above. The language used in this essay is plain and simple for a better understanding of the students. This freedom of speech essay example will help the students write a paragraph on freedom of speech in their own words easily.

Long Essay on Freedom of Speech

The phrase “Freedom of Speech” has been misinterpreted by some individuals who either do not actually understand the meaning of the phrase completely or have a totally different agenda in mind altogether. Every democratic country gives its citizens this freedom. The same is guaranteed by the Constitution of India too. Irrespective of your gender, religion, caste, or creed, you are guaranteed that freedom as an Indian. The values of democracy in a country are defined by this guaranteed fundamental freedom. The freedom to practice any religion, the freedom to express opinions and disagreeing viewpoints without hurting the sentiments or causing violence is what India is essentially made up of.

Indians stand out for their secularism and for spreading democratic values across the world. Thus, to save and celebrate democracy, enforcing freedom of speech in India becomes a necessity. Freedom of speech is not only about the fundamental rights, it’s also a fundamental duty to be done by every citizen rightfully so as to save the essence of democracy.

In developed democracies like the US, UK, Germany or France, we see a “freedom of speech” that is different from what we see in authoritarian countries like China, Malaysia or Syria and failed democratic countries like Pakistan or Rwanda. These governance systems failed because they lacked freedom of speech. Freedom of press gives us a yardstick to gauge the freedom of speech in a country. A healthy, liberal and strong democracy is reflected by a strong media presence in a country, since they are supposed to be the voice of the common people. A democracy that has a stomach for criticisms and disagreements is taken in a positive way.

Some governments get very hostile when faced with any form of criticism and so they try to oppress any voices that might stand against them. This becomes a dangerous model of governance for any country. For example, India has more than hundred and thirty crores of population now and we can be sure that every individual will not have the same thought process and same views and opinions about one thing. A true democracy is made by the difference of opinions and the respect people have for each other in the team that is responsible for making the policies.

Before making a choice, all aspects and angles of the topic should be taken into consideration. A good democracy will involve all the people - supporters and critics alike, before formulating a policy, but a bad one will sideline its critics, and force authoritarian and unilateral policies upon all of the citizens.

Sedition law, a British-era law, was a weapon that was used in India to stifle criticism and curb freedom of speech during the pre-independence era. Through section 124A of Indian Penal Code, the law states that if a person with his words, written or spoken, brings hatred, contempt or excites tension towards a government or an individual can be fined or jailed or fined and jailed both. This law was used by the Britishers to stifle the freedom fighters. Today it is being used by the political parties to silence criticism and as a result is harming the democratic values of the nation.

Many laws in India also protect the people in rightfully exercising their freedom of expression but the implementation of these laws is proving to be a challenge. Freedom of speech cannot be absolute. In the name of freedom of speech, hatred, tensions, bigotry and violence too cannot be caused in the society. It will then become ironically wrong to allow freedom of speech in the first place. Freedom of speech and expression should not become the reason for chaos and anarchy in a nation. Freedom of speech was stifled when article 370 got revoked in Kashmir. Not that the government was trying to go against the democratic values, but they had to prevent the spread of fake news, terrorism or any type of communal tensions in those areas.

Short Essay on Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech allows the people of our country to express themselves, and share their ideas, views and opinions openly. As a result, the public and the media can comment on any political activity and also express their dissent towards anything they think is not appropriate.

Various other countries too provide freedom of speech to their citizens but they have certain limitations. Different countries have different restrictions on their freedom of speech. Some countries also do not allow this fundamental right at all and the best example being North Korea. There, the media or the public are not allowed to speak against the government. It becomes a punishable offence to criticize the government or the ministers or the political parties.

Key Highlights of the Essay - Freedom of Speech

Every democratic country gives its citizens the Freedom of Speech so as to enable the citizens to freely express their individual views, ideas and concerns. The freedom to be able to practice any religion, to be able to express individual secularism and for spreading democratic values across the world. In order to be able to save and to celebrate democracy, enforcing freedom of speech in India Is essential. Freedom of speech about fundamental rights is also a fundamental duty of citizens in order to save the essence of democracy. In a country, a healthy, liberal and strong democracy is always reflected and can be seen through a strong media presence, as the media are the voice of the common people. When faced with any form of criticism, we see some governments get very hostile, and they try to oppress and stop any kind of voices that might go against them. This is not favorable for any country.

A good democracy involves all the people - all their various supporters and critics alike, before they begin formulating any policies. India had the Sedition law, a British-era law that is used to stifle criticism and curb freedom of speech during the pre-independence era. The section 124A of Indian Penal Code, this law of sedition stated that if a person with his words, written or spoken, brings hatred, contempt or excites tension towards a government or an individual, then he can be fined or jailed or both. Using freedom of speech, people spread hatred, unnecessary tensions, bigotry and some amount of violence too in the society. Ironically in such cases, it will be wrong to allow freedom of speech. The reasons for chaos and anarchy in a nation should not be due to Freedom of speech and expression. This law was stifled when article 370 got revoked in Kashmir, in order to prevent the spread of fake news, terrorism or any type of communal tensions in those areas.

Freedom of speech gives people of our country, the freedom to express themselves, to be able to share their ideas, views and opinions openly, where the public and the media can express and comment on any political activities and can also be able to express their dissent towards anything they think is not appropriate. Different countries have different restrictions on their freedom of speech. And it is not proper to comment on that .In Fact, there are some countries which does not allow this fundamental right , for example, North Korea where neither the media nor the public have any right to speak against or even for the government and it is a punishable offense to openly criticize the government or the or anyone in particular.

While freedom of speech lets the society grow it could have certain negative outcomes. It should not be used to disrespect or instigate others. The media too should not misuse it. We, the people of this nation, should act responsibly towards utilizing its freedom of speech and expression. Lucky we are to be citizens of India. It’s a nation that respects all its citizens and gives them the rights needed for their development and growth.

A fundamental right of every citizen of India, the ‘Freedom of Speech’ allows citizens to share their individual thoughts and views.

FAQs on Essay on Freedom of Speech in English Free PDF download

1. Mention five lines for Freedom of Speech Essay?

i) A fundamental right that is guaranteed to citizens of a country to be able to express their opinions and points of view without any kind of censorship.

ii) A democracy’s health depends on the extent of freedom of expression of all its citizens.

iii) Freedom of speech is never absolute in nature.

iv) New Zealand, USA or UK rank high in terms of freedom of speech by its citizens.

v) A fundamental right in the Indian constitution is the Freedom of Speech and Expression.

2. Explain Freedom of Speech?

A fundamental right of every citizen of India, Freedom Of Speech allows every citizen the freedom and the right to express all their views, concerns, ideas and issues relating to anything about their country. Freedom of Speech is never actual in nature and has its limits too. It cannot be used for any kind of illegal purposes.The health of a democracy depends on the extent of freedom of expression of its citizens.

3. What happens when there is no Freedom of Speech?

A country will become a police and military state with no democratic and humanitarian values in it if there is no freedom of speech. Freedom of Speech is a fundamental right for all citizens, and a failure to not being able to express one’s ideas, beliefs, and thoughts will result in a non authoritarian and non democratic country. Failure to have freedom of speech in a country would mean that the rulers or the governments of those countries have no respect for its citizens.

4. Where can we get study material related to essay writing ?

It is important to practice some of the important questions in order to do well. Vedantu.com offers these important questions along with answers that have been formulated in a well structured, well researched, and easy to understand manner. Various essay writing topics, letter writing samples, comprehension passages are all available at the online portals today. Practicing and studying with the help of these enable the students to measure their level of proficiency, and also allows them to understand the difficult questions with ease.

You can avail all the well-researched and good quality chapters, sample papers, syllabus on various topics from the website of Vedantu and its mobile application available on the play store.

5. Why should students choose Vedantu for an essay on the topic 'Freedom of Speech’?

Essay writing is important for students as it helps them increase their brain and vocabulary power. Today it is important to be able to practice some important topics, samples and questions to be able to score well in the exams. Vedantu.com offers these important questions along with answers that have been formulated in a well structured, well researched, and easy to understand manner. The NCERT and other study material along with their explanations are very easily accessible from Vedantu.com and can be downloaded too. Practicing with the help of these questions along with the solutions enables the students to measure their level of proficiency, and also allows them to understand the difficult questions with ease.

6. What is Freedom of Speech?

Freedom of speech is the ability to express our opinions without any fear.

7. Which country allows the highest level of Freedom of Speech to its citizens?

The USA is at the highest with a score of 5.73.

8. Is Freedom of Speech absolute?

No, freedom of speech cannot be absolute. It has limitations.

Presidential Search
Editor's Pick

Jeremy Weinstein Was Offered the Harvard Kennedy School Deanship. Who Is He?

Interim Harvard President Alan Garber’s 100 Days of Trial By Fire

‘Mourning into a Movement’: Family Members of George Floyd, Eric Garner Discuss Grief and Activism at IOP Forum

Expert Witness Says Northrop’s Lack of Summer Contact Was ‘Typical’ for University Case Workers

Harvard Residential Advisers Allege University Administrators Engaged in Union-Busting Tactics

Academic Freedom and Free Speech Are Distinct. Both Matter.

All year we’ve bandied about phrases like “civil discourse,” “open inquiry,” “academic freedom,” and “free speech.” It’s time to clarify them, and what living by them requires.

“Civil discourse” and “open inquiry” name an aspiration to discourse where disagreements — even fierce ones — can spark mutual learning because we engage with each other earnestly and respectfully. They promise a world where good-faith arguments, directed toward truth-seeking, bound by standards of evidence and logic, and inclusive of all perspectives, are welcome — even when they run counter to a majority point of view.

If “civil discourse” and “open inquiry” are the “what” of good discourse on campus, “academic freedom” and “free speech” are the “how.” Often used interchangeably, both phrases name specific policy regimes governing types of speech, but there is a critical difference between them.

Academic freedom is a creature of colleges and universities and specifically protects the right to make arguments in academic contexts, subject to review of one’s work according to scholarly standards.

Free speech rights, in contrast, name a protection against governmental interference restricting speech in the public sphere. In the U.S., they are broadly defined by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The first set of protocols is organizational — The policies of universities; the second set is legal — governmental policy.

Academic spaces — including classrooms, labs, seminars, and public events sponsored by academic units — should resemble a courtroom. To achieve a verdict — Latin for “speaking the truth” — trials require witnesses for both sides.

So too in the academy. We should always want to hear the other side’s best arguments. This requires intellectual diversity — of methods, data sources, and normative frameworks, as well as viewpoints.

The need for multiple viewpoints is why academic freedom goes hand in hand with inclusion and belonging: Protecting and supporting the participation of people with diverse identities or divergent ideologies is necessary for robust academic inquiry.

But diversity of perspective doesn’t mean “anything goes.”

When a journal article is submitted without appropriate pursuit of the truth, the submission may be rejected or receive a “revise and resubmit” notice, an invitation to the author to try again. Speaker panels, too, can be judged to be ill-constructed and receive notice that further work is needed before they see the light of day.

These are not cases of cancellation or sanctioning — they reflect a legitimate evaluation of the contribution’s caliber with regard to truth-seeking.

Similarly, policies against classroom disruption, which protect the academic freedom required to sustain inquiry, do not violate free speech rights, because the classroom is not where free speech rights apply. Instead, policies against disruption protect the right of people to make the best argument they can, from whatever their point of view may be, in pursuit of the truth.

Yet free speech, including the right to protest, also matters on campus. How, why, and where should protests receive protection here?

At a public university, free speech rights follow directly from First Amendment rights. The state sponsorship of universities like U.C. Berkeley or UMass-Boston makes university leaders state representatives with formal legal obligations to respect free speech.

But at a private university, free speech rights are a privilege granted by the university in a public-spirited effort to contribute additional public spaces to those otherwise available for political debate — street corners, parks, some coffee shops, the Internet, and so on.

Though Harvard was founded by officials of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and technically continues to be legally accountable to the state legislature, Harvard is nonetheless considered a private university. As such, it is out of a public-spirited orientation that our University treats parts of the campus as the public sphere, where expression is broadly more protected than under the more constrained norms of academic freedom.

Speaking loosely, free speech rights apply in spaces and to events that are both extracurricular and public. These are, of course, fuzzy categories on a campus, hence our confusion.

For example: At the Harvard Kennedy School, the Institute of Politics clearly functions as a public forum, so protests against its speakers that adhere to the “time, place, and manner” restrictions on free speech on our campus can be expected and must be respected there.

Other public speaker events also fall into this category, as does speech that takes place in our outdoor public space. But what about key campus rituals — from Commencement, or Match Day in the medical school, or weekly Community Teas at the Divinity School?

To address these edge cases, we rely on the following principle: Wherever spaces and events are integral to academic work and experience, they should be off-limits to disruption.

But perhaps this rules out too much? With our harsh winters, for instance, perhaps we need indoor spaces that can serve as public forums, with sensible restrictions?

Such questions deserve our more direct attention. Maybe we need a campus map that identifies places and hours where free speech rights, rather than the protocols of academic freedom, apply.

Still, even under free speech norms, it’s not the case that anything goes. The fifth value in the University’s values statement assigns us “responsibility for the bonds and bridges that enable all to grow with and learn from one another.” As an ethical matter, this value should govern how we choose to express our political views.

Even when we passionately pursue a political cause, using public spaces at Harvard to do so, including Harvard-linked online fora, we do that as a member of this campus community, in compact and covenant with everyone else here.

We cannot forget: Our use of these spaces is a privilege. We should pay for that privilege by taking responsibility for using them in ways that sustain healthy relationships with one another.

Danielle Allen is the James Bryant Conant University Professor at Harvard University and director of the Allen Lab for Democracy Renovation.

This piece is the second installment in a series that will identify and assess the difficult ethical questions surfaced by Harvard’s recent leadership crisis.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

More From Forbes

Navigating the murky waters of antisemitism, free speech, and academic freedom.

Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to Linkedin

Minouche Shafik, president of Columbia University.

Unlike the presidents of Penn, Harvard, and MIT , Columbia University president Minouche Shafik’s testimony unequivocally condemned antisemitism on the New York City-based campus. Shafik also issued an essay in The Wall Street Journal the day before her April 17 hearing, proclaiming: “ Antisemitism and calls for genocide have no place at a university .”

Representative Aaron Bean (R-Fla.) noted that Shafik was able to condemn antisemitism without the phrase “it depends on the context” — a term often used by the presidents who testified in December. However, Bean and other Republican representatives were not entirely satisfied. They claimed that the words stated in the hearing did not match the lack of action on Columbia’s campus.

Much of the concern pertained to Joseph Massad , a tenured professor in the department of Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies at Columbia. Massad published an article titled “Just another battle or the Palestinian war of liberation?” in The Electronic Intifada on October 8, 2023. In the article, he referred to the Hamas attack on Israel one day earlier as a “resistance offensive” and stated, “regardless of who comes to power in Israel, nothing will change the nature of Israeli settler-colonialism and racism toward the Palestinians.” The Republican lawmakers objected to these statements.

Reps. Tim Walberg (R-Mich) and Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) both challenged Shafik, asking what the university had done to condemn Massad’s statements and how he had been reprimanded. Shafik was quick to say that she condemned Massad’s statement but when asked what the repercussions were, she replied, “He was spoken to by his Head of Department and Dean.” She also noted that he has not repeated the behavior. The Republican lawmakers were not happy with the answer, with Stefanik firing back: “Does he need to repeat stating that the massacre of Israeli civilians was ‘awesome’?” Massad used the word “awesome” in his article mentioned above. Of note, Massad told the Associated Press that he was not reprimanded and claimed that his comments were taken out of context.

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Camera Upgrade Includes Latest Cutting-Edge Technology

Netflix renews and also cancels the witcher as first glimpse of season 4 drops, bitcoin suddenly braced for a 35 trillion halving price earthquake.

After considerable grilling, Shafik stated, “On my watch, faculty who make remarks that cross the line in terms of antisemitism, there will be consequences for them. I have five cases at the moment who have either been taken out of the classroom or dismissed.”

University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education professor Jonathan Zimmerman , an expert on free speech and academic freedom, stated: “Yesterday was a sad day for academic freedom in the United States. A major university president told a Congressional committee that she intends to censor "antisemitic" speech. But reasonable people disagree about what that term means. And if we impose a singular definition of it, we will not be able to converse across our differences.”

Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich) also questioned Shafik, inquiring if a statement like “from the river to the sea. Palestine will be free” is antisemitic. Here Shafik was nuanced in her response, stating “I hear [it] as such, some people don’t.” David Schizer , former dean of Columbia Law School and leader of the school’s antisemitism task force, disagreed and labeled the phrase antisemitic.

Despite the many arrows coming at her, Shafik was skilled in her approach, learning from the experiences of the presidents who testified last year. She spent hours preparing, was accompanied by two members of the Columbia board of trustees, and Schizer. One strategic move used by Shafik was focusing more on fighting antisemitism and less on free speech. She tried to make it clear that free speech is valued but that the presence of antisemitism and calls for terrorism and genocide are not.

Larry Moneta , an adjunct professor in higher education at the University of Pennsylvania, “It seems that the Columbia president avoided the pitfalls of her presidential colleagues (some former now) but may have created controversy for her[self] back on campus. I see nothing of value in these hearings related to the diminishment of antisemitism. All I see is blatant sexism, culture wars, and flailing presidents.”

Shafik’s testimony was consistent with her words from the night before, when she stated, “Most of the people protesting do so from a place of genuine political disagreement, not from personal hatred or bias or support for terrorism. Their passion, as long as it doesn’t cross the line into threats, discrimination or harassment, should be protected speech on our campus.”

When thinking about protests on college campuses around these types of volatile issues, Walter Kimbrough , the former president of historically Black Dillard University in New Orleans, LA, shared “My overriding thought is that members of Congress seem to expect even more than in loco parentis [universities acting in place of the parent].” Referring to the lawmakers questioning of Shafik about antisemitic flyers on Columbia’s campus, Kimbrough stated, “They expect schools to be able to limit what kinds of flyers students pass out on campus. It just seems like there are unreasonable expectations, which if fully executed, would lead to much greater costs. Schools would really be locked down.”

As the debate continues, it is crucial for all those involved to engage in constructive dialogue that respects diverse perspectives while actively working toward eradicating antisemitic beliefs and fostering inclusive environments within academic communities. As Moneta shared, “The hearings only focus attention to expressions of antisemitism not on antisemitism itself. Actually diminishing antisemitic beliefs requires far more work…work that seems unlikely as DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion] is further demonized by conservatives.”

Editorial Standards
Reprints & Permissions

Share full article

Supported by

Guest Essay

Is This the End of Academic Freedom?

By Paula Chakravartty and Vasuki Nesiah

Dr. Chakravartty is a professor of media, communication and culture at New York University, where Dr. Nesiah is a professor of practice in human rights and international law.

At New York University, the spring semester began with a poetry reading. Students and faculty gathered in the atrium of Bobst Library. At that time, about 26,000 Palestinians had already been killed in Israel’s horrific war on Gaza; the reading was a collective act of bearing witness.

The last poem read aloud was titled “If I Must Die.” It was written, hauntingly, by a Palestinian poet and academic named Refaat Alareer who was killed weeks earlier by an Israeli airstrike. The poem ends: “If I must die, let it bring hope — let it be a tale.”

Soon after those lines were recited, the university administration shut the reading down . Afterward, we learned that students and faculty members were called into disciplinary meetings for participating in this apparently “disruptive” act; written warnings were issued.

We have both taught at N.Y.U. for over a decade and believe we are in a moment of unparalleled repression. Over the past six months, since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza, we have seen the university administration fail to adequately protect dissent on campus, actively squelching it instead. We believe what we are witnessing in response to student, staff and faculty opposition to the war violates the very foundations of academic freedom.

While N.Y.U. says that it remains committed to free expression on campus and that its rules about and approach to protest activity haven’t changed, students and faculty members in solidarity with the Palestinian people have found the campus environment alarmingly constrained.

About a week after Hamas’s attacks in October, the Grand Staircase in the Kimmel student center, a storied site of student protests , closed indefinitely; it has yet to reopen fully. A graduate student employee was reprimanded for putting up fliers in support of Palestinians on the student’s office door and ultimately took them down; that person is not the only N.Y.U. student to face some form of disciplinary consequence for pro-Palestinian speech or action. A resolution calling for the university to reaffirm protection of pro-Palestinian speech and civic activity on campus, passed by the elected Student Government Assembly in December, has apparently been stuck in a procedural black hole since.

The New York Police Department has become a pervasive presence on campus, with over 6,000 hours of officer presence added after the war broke out. Hundreds of faculty members have signed onto an open letter condemning the university’s “culture of fear about campus speech and activism.”

Such draconian interventions are direct threats to academic freedom.

At universities across the country, any criticism of Israel’s policies, expressions of solidarity with Palestinians, organized calls for a cease-fire or even pedagogy on the recent history of the land have all emerged as perilous speech. In a letter to university presidents in November, the A.C.L.U. expressed concern about “impermissible chilling of free speech and association on campus” in relation to pro-Palestinian student groups and views; since then, the atmosphere at colleges has become downright McCarthyite .

The donors, trustees, administrators and third parties who oppose pro-Palestinian speech seem to equate any criticism of the State of Israel — an occupying power under international law and one accused of committing war crimes — with antisemitism. To them, the norms of free speech are inherently problematic, and a broad definition of antisemitism is a tool for censorship . Outside funding has poured into horrifying doxxing and harassment campaigns. Pro-Israel surveillance groups like Canary Mission and CAMERA relentlessly target individuals and groups deemed antisemitic or critical of Israel. Ominous threats follow faculty and students for just expressing their opinions or living out their values.

To be clear, we abhor all expressions of antisemitism and wholeheartedly reject any role for antisemitism on our campuses. Equally, we believe that conflating criticism of Israel or Zionism with antisemitism is dangerous. Equating the criticism of any nation with inherent racism endangers basic democratic freedoms on and off campus. As the A.C.L.U. wrote in its November statement, a university “cannot fulfill its mission as a forum for vigorous debate” if it polices the views of faculty members and students, however much any of us may disagree with them or find them offensive.

In a wave of crackdowns on pro-Palestinian speech nationwide, students have had scholarships revoked, job offers pulled and student groups suspended. At Columbia, protesters have reported being sprayed by what they said was skunk, a chemical weapon used by the Israeli military; at Northwestern, two Black students faced criminal charges , later dropped, for publishing a pro-Palestinian newspaper parody; at Cornell, students were arrested during a peaceful protest . In a shocking episode of violence last fall, three Palestinian students , two of them wearing kaffiyehs, were shot while walking near the University of Vermont.

Many more cases of student repression on campuses are unfolding.

Academic freedom, as defined by the American Association of University Professors in the mid-20th century , provides protection for the pursuit of knowledge by faculty members, whose job is to educate, learn and research both inside and outside the academy. Not only does this resonate with the Constitution’s free speech protections ; international human rights law also affirms the centrality of academic freedom to the right to education and the institutional autonomy of educational institutions.

Across the United States, attacks on free speech are on the rise . In recent years, right-wing groups opposed to the teaching of critical race theory have tried to undermine these principles through measures including restrictions on the discussion of history and structural racism in curriculums, heightened scrutiny of lectures and courses that are seen to promote dissent and disciplinary procedures against academics who work on these topics.

What people may not realize is that speech critical of Israel’s occupation and apartheid policies has long been censored, posing persistent challenges to those of us who uphold academic freedom. Well before Oct. 7, speech and action at N.Y.U. in support of Palestinians faced intense and undue scrutiny.

Our students are heeding Refaat Alareer’s call to bear witness. They are speaking out — writing statements, organizing protests and responding to a plausible threat of genocide with idealism and conviction. As faculty members, we believe that college should be a time when students are encouraged to ask big questions about justice and the future of humanity and to pursue answers however disquieting to the powerful.

Universities must be places where students have access to specialized knowledge that shapes contemporary debates, where faculty members are encouraged to be public intellectuals, even when, or perhaps especially when, they are expressing dissenting opinions speaking truth to power. Classrooms must allow for contextual learning, where rapidly mutating current events are put into a longer historical timeline.

This is a high-stakes moment. A century ago, attacks on open discussion of European antisemitism, the criminalization of dissent and the denial of Jewish histories of oppression and dispossession helped create the conditions for the Holocaust. One crucial “never again” lesson from that period is that the thought police can be dangerous. They can render vulnerable communities targets of oppression. They can convince the world that some lives are not as valuable as others, justifying mass slaughter.

It is no wonder that students across the country are protesting an unpopular and brutal war that, besides Israel, only the United States is capable of stopping. It is extraordinary that the very institutions that ought to safeguard their exercise of free speech are instead escalating surveillance and policing, working on ever more restrictive student conduct rules and essentially risking the death of academic freedom.

From the Vietnam War to apartheid South Africa, universities have been important places for open discussion and disagreement about government policies, the historical record, structural racism and settler colonialism. They have also long served as sites of protest. If the university cannot serve as an arena for such freedoms, the possibilities of democratic life inside and outside the university gates are not only impoverished but under threat of extinction.

Paula Chakravartty is a professor of media, communication and culture at New York University, where Vasuki Nesiah is a professor of practice in human rights and international law. Both are members of the executive committee of the N.Y.U. chapter of the American Association of University Professors and members of N.Y.U.’s Faculty for Justice in Palestine.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Skip to main content
Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

NPR defends its journalism after senior editor says it has lost the public's trust

David Folkenflik

NPR is defending its journalism and integrity after a senior editor wrote an essay accusing it of losing the public's trust. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

NPR is defending its journalism and integrity after a senior editor wrote an essay accusing it of losing the public's trust.

NPR's top news executive defended its journalism and its commitment to reflecting a diverse array of views on Tuesday after a senior NPR editor wrote a broad critique of how the network has covered some of the most important stories of the age.

"An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don't have an audience that reflects America," writes Uri Berliner.

A strategic emphasis on diversity and inclusion on the basis of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation, promoted by NPR's former CEO, John Lansing, has fed "the absence of viewpoint diversity," Berliner writes.

NPR's chief news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote in a memo to staff Tuesday afternoon that she and the news leadership team strongly reject Berliner's assessment.

"We're proud to stand behind the exceptional work that our desks and shows do to cover a wide range of challenging stories," she wrote. "We believe that inclusion — among our staff, with our sourcing, and in our overall coverage — is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world."

NPR names tech executive Katherine Maher to lead in turbulent era

She added, "None of our work is above scrutiny or critique. We must have vigorous discussions in the newsroom about how we serve the public as a whole."

A spokesperson for NPR said Chapin, who also serves as the network's chief content officer, would have no further comment.

Praised by NPR's critics

Berliner is a senior editor on NPR's Business Desk. (Disclosure: I, too, am part of the Business Desk, and Berliner has edited many of my past stories. He did not see any version of this article or participate in its preparation before it was posted publicly.)

Berliner's essay , titled "I've Been at NPR for 25 years. Here's How We Lost America's Trust," was published by The Free Press, a website that has welcomed journalists who have concluded that mainstream news outlets have become reflexively liberal.

Berliner writes that as a Subaru-driving, Sarah Lawrence College graduate who "was raised by a lesbian peace activist mother ," he fits the mold of a loyal NPR fan.

Yet Berliner says NPR's news coverage has fallen short on some of the most controversial stories of recent years, from the question of whether former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 election, to the origins of the virus that causes COVID-19, to the significance and provenance of emails leaked from a laptop owned by Hunter Biden weeks before the 2020 election. In addition, he blasted NPR's coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict.

On each of these stories, Berliner asserts, NPR has suffered from groupthink due to too little diversity of viewpoints in the newsroom.

The essay ricocheted Tuesday around conservative media , with some labeling Berliner a whistleblower . Others picked it up on social media, including Elon Musk, who has lambasted NPR for leaving his social media site, X. (Musk emailed another NPR reporter a link to Berliner's article with a gibe that the reporter was a "quisling" — a World War II reference to someone who collaborates with the enemy.)

When asked for further comment late Tuesday, Berliner declined, saying the essay spoke for itself.

The arguments he raises — and counters — have percolated across U.S. newsrooms in recent years. The #MeToo sexual harassment scandals of 2016 and 2017 forced newsrooms to listen to and heed more junior colleagues. The social justice movement prompted by the killing of George Floyd in 2020 inspired a reckoning in many places. Newsroom leaders often appeared to stand on shaky ground.

Leaders at many newsrooms, including top editors at The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times , lost their jobs. Legendary Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron wrote in his memoir that he feared his bonds with the staff were "frayed beyond repair," especially over the degree of self-expression his journalists expected to exert on social media, before he decided to step down in early 2021.

Since then, Baron and others — including leaders of some of these newsrooms — have suggested that the pendulum has swung too far.

Author Interviews

Legendary editor marty baron describes his 'collision of power' with trump and bezos.

New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger warned last year against journalists embracing a stance of what he calls "one-side-ism": "where journalists are demonstrating that they're on the side of the righteous."

"I really think that that can create blind spots and echo chambers," he said.

Internal arguments at The Times over the strength of its reporting on accusations that Hamas engaged in sexual assaults as part of a strategy for its Oct. 7 attack on Israel erupted publicly . The paper conducted an investigation to determine the source of a leak over a planned episode of the paper's podcast The Daily on the subject, which months later has not been released. The newsroom guild accused the paper of "targeted interrogation" of journalists of Middle Eastern descent.

Heated pushback in NPR's newsroom

Given Berliner's account of private conversations, several NPR journalists question whether they can now trust him with unguarded assessments about stories in real time. Others express frustration that he had not sought out comment in advance of publication. Berliner acknowledged to me that for this story, he did not seek NPR's approval to publish the piece, nor did he give the network advance notice.

Some of Berliner's NPR colleagues are responding heatedly. Fernando Alfonso, a senior supervising editor for digital news, wrote that he wholeheartedly rejected Berliner's critique of the coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict, for which NPR's journalists, like their peers, periodically put themselves at risk.

Alfonso also took issue with Berliner's concern over the focus on diversity at NPR.

"As a person of color who has often worked in newsrooms with little to no people who look like me, the efforts NPR has made to diversify its workforce and its sources are unique and appropriate given the news industry's long-standing lack of diversity," Alfonso says. "These efforts should be celebrated and not denigrated as Uri has done."

After this story was first published, Berliner contested Alfonso's characterization, saying his criticism of NPR is about the lack of diversity of viewpoints, not its diversity itself.

"I never criticized NPR's priority of achieving a more diverse workforce in terms of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation. I have not 'denigrated' NPR's newsroom diversity goals," Berliner said. "That's wrong."

Questions of diversity

Under former CEO John Lansing, NPR made increasing diversity, both of its staff and its audience, its "North Star" mission. Berliner says in the essay that NPR failed to consider broader diversity of viewpoint, noting, "In D.C., where NPR is headquartered and many of us live, I found 87 registered Democrats working in editorial positions and zero Republicans."

Berliner cited audience estimates that suggested a concurrent falloff in listening by Republicans. (The number of people listening to NPR broadcasts and terrestrial radio broadly has declined since the start of the pandemic.)

Former NPR vice president for news and ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin tweeted , "I know Uri. He's not wrong."

Others questioned Berliner's logic. "This probably gets causality somewhat backward," tweeted Semafor Washington editor Jordan Weissmann . "I'd guess that a lot of NPR listeners who voted for [Mitt] Romney have changed how they identify politically."

Similarly, Nieman Lab founder Joshua Benton suggested the rise of Trump alienated many NPR-appreciating Republicans from the GOP.

In recent years, NPR has greatly enhanced the percentage of people of color in its workforce and its executive ranks. Four out of 10 staffers are people of color; nearly half of NPR's leadership team identifies as Black, Asian or Latino.

"The philosophy is: Do you want to serve all of America and make sure it sounds like all of America, or not?" Lansing, who stepped down last month, says in response to Berliner's piece. "I'd welcome the argument against that."

"On radio, we were really lagging in our representation of an audience that makes us look like what America looks like today," Lansing says. The U.S. looks and sounds a lot different than it did in 1971, when NPR's first show was broadcast, Lansing says.

A network spokesperson says new NPR CEO Katherine Maher supports Chapin and her response to Berliner's critique.

The spokesperson says that Maher "believes that it's a healthy thing for a public service newsroom to engage in rigorous consideration of the needs of our audiences, including where we serve our mission well and where we can serve it better."

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp and Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no NPR corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

IMAGES

Essay on Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech pre written essay
Write an essay on Importance of Freedom
010 Essay About Freedom Example Persuasive Outline Format Mersn
7+ Sample Freedom of Speech Templates in PDF
Freedom of speech

VIDEO

Freedom fighters essay 5 lines || Short essay on Freedom fighters || About Freedom fighters
Essays of Freedom brought to you by the Constitution Party MO
Speech /Essay on Indian Freedom Struggle // Indian Freedom Struggle Essay in English//Paragraph
Col. Karen Kwiatkowski: How the Israeli/Hamas war could expand
The Power of Free Speech: Protecting Our First Amendment Rights
Help us defend freedom of speech in Europe!

COMMENTS

Freedom of Speech Essay • Examples for Students • GradesFixer
Freedom of Speech Essay Topic Examples Argumentative Essays. Argumentative essays on freedom of speech require you to take a stance on a specific aspect of this topic and provide evidence to support your viewpoint. Consider these topic examples: 1. Argue for the importance of protecting hate speech as a form of free expression, emphasizing the ...
123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples
Develop a well-organized freedom of speech essay outline. Think of the main points you want to discuss and decide how you can present them in the paper. For example, you can include one introductory paragraph, three body paragraphs, and one concluding paragraphs. Define your freedom of speech essay thesis clearly.
27 Freedom of Speech Examples (2024)
Freedom of Speech Examples. ... Writing a critical book review: Freedom of speech permits individuals to write and publish critical reviews of books (or other forms of media), helping to facilitate discourse and contribute to the literary or artistic community (D'Haen, 2012). Such reviews, positive or negative, aid in the critical reception ...
Why Freedom of Speech is Important: [Essay Example], 702 words
Introduction. Freedom of speech is a foundational pillar of democratic societies and a fundamental human right. It serves as the bedrock of open and inclusive societies, allowing individuals to express their thoughts, opinions, and ideas freely, without fear of censorship or reprisal. In this essay, we will delve into the multifaceted reasons why freedom of speech is crucial for the protection ...
The Significance of Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right that has been the subject of much debate and controversy in recent years. From historical origins to modern-day implications, the concept of freedom of speech has far-reaching significance in promoting democracy, preserving individual rights, and shaping societal discourse.This essay will explore the definition, importance, limitations, controversial ...
107 Freedom of Speech Essay Topic Ideas & Examples
In order to ensure that freedom of speech is protected and preserved, it is important to engage in thoughtful and respectful discourse. To help spark ideas for essays on freedom of speech, here are 107 topic ideas and examples to consider: The importance of freedom of speech in a democratic society
Freedom Of Speech
38 essay samples found. Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community to articulate their opinions without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. Essays could explore the various interpretations of freedom of speech, its limitations, and its impact on democracy and societal harmony.
Freedom of Speech Essay Topics and Sample Essay
Freedom of Speech Essay Topic Ideas. Essay Example: Social Distancing Is Important During the Coronavirus Pandemic. Essay Analysis. Many of the 1689 Bill of Rights provisions were ultimately included in the First Amendment Right. The Declaration of Independence is a part of it.
Essay Samples on Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is a fundamental pillar of democratic societies, ensuring that individuals have the right to express their thoughts, opinions, and beliefs without fear of censorship or persecution. However, as with any right, there is the potential for abuse. This essay explores the delicate... Freedom of Expression. Freedom of Speech.
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech—the right to express opinions without government restraint—is a democratic ideal that dates back to ancient Greece. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees free ...
Freedom of Speech in the United States
Freedom of speech has been protected in The United States by the First Amendment since 1791. For over 100 years, this right, though symbolically important, has sat dormant. However today, freedom of speech has been in the headlines due to its involvement in controversial topics surrounding the media, political correctness, and "hate speech".
Essay approach
Here's a step-by-step guide on how to navigate a freedom of speech question. STANDING. Discuss injury in fact, causation and redressability. STATE ACTION. Discuss the regulation the state has put in place. FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Explain the freedom and state how it is applicable (including symbolic acts). 1st Amendment applies to federal ...
The good, the bad, and the ugly of free speech
At the NCC, he used his recent book, "The Soul of the First Amendment," as a starting point to survey the current state of free speech. Citizens United rationale: Speech is speech. I wasn't the only one in the capacity crowd who recoiled at learning Abrams had assisted in successfully arguing Citizens United. He seems used to the reaction ...
Freedom of Speech Essay Examples
Freedom of Speech: a Pillar of Democracy and Expression. Freedom of speech, a cornerstone of democratic societies, is a fundamental human right that empowers individuals to express their thoughts, opinions, and ideas without fear of censorship or punishment. Rooted in the principles of autonomy and individualism, this right plays a crucial role ...
Freedom of Speech Essay Examples
Freedom of Speech in the Modern Age. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the United States and many other countries around the world. It is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and protects citizens from censorship by the government. In recent years, however, there has been a growing concern about freedom of speech and its role in society.
Essay on Freedom of Speech
Essay on Freedom of Speech. This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples. This essay includes a discussion of the analysis of freedom of speech and community safety. Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right so is community safety.
Freedom of Speech Essay Examples
Freedom of speech Definition Essay. The 1st amendmentThe First Amendment in the United States is used in protecting the freedom of speech from any restrictions by the government. However, when it…. Constitution First Amendment Freedom of Speech Hate Speech Terrorism. View full sample.
Freedom Of Speech, Free Argumentative Essay Example
The reality is that the society has become oversensitive; everything one does not agree with is considered insulting and branded as hate. Finally, freedom of speech is the most important human right that every individual has the right to exercise. This freedom comes with the ability to express one's opinion, regardless of its nature good or bad.
Freedom Of Speech
Paper Type: 2500 Word Essay Examples. Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression.
Freedom of Speech Essay Sample [A+ 300 Words Paper]
Freedom of speech is one of the most fundamental rights we have in this great nation today. Our founding fathers came from a tyrannical rule and kept that in mind while framing the constitution we follow today. It was freedom of speech that allowed some of the greatest voices in history to get us to our free and prosperous country.
Freedom Of Speech and Its Legal Limits Essay
Published: 11/25/2019. Freedom of speech, also known as freedom of expression, can be defined as the freedom to express oneself without censorship. The freedom of expression is considered as the core or cornerstone of all the democratic rights and freedoms. This is because it formed the basis of all other human rights, since it was in existence ...
Freedom of Speech Essay for Students in English
Download Important English Essay on the Topic - Freedom of Speech Free PDF from Vedantu. One of the fundamental rights of the citizens of India is 'Freedom of Speech'. This is allowed to the citizens by a lot of countries to empower the citizens to share their own thoughts and views. This freedom of speech essay is for students of class 5 ...
Academic Freedom and Free Speech Are Distinct. Both Matter
If "civil discourse" and "open inquiry" are the "what" of good discourse on campus, "academic freedom" and "free speech" are the "how.". Often used interchangeably, both ...
Social Media and Freedom of Speech: Combating ...
Conclusion. In conclusion, freedom of speech is a crucial component of democracy and individual rights. However, its challenges on social media platforms have amplified the dangers of hate speech and misinformation. Social media platforms have a responsibility to balance freedom of speech with responsibility and take measures to combat hate speech and misinformation.
Navigating The Murky Waters Of Antisemitism, Free Speech, And ...
University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education professor Jonathan Zimmerman, an expert on free speech and academic freedom, stated: "Yesterday was a sad day for academic freedom in the ...
Opinion
It was written, hauntingly, by a Palestinian poet and academic named Refaat Alareer who was killed weeks earlier by an Israeli airstrike. The poem ends: "If I must die, let it bring hope — let ...
NPR responds after editor says it has 'lost America's trust' : NPR
Berliner says in the essay that NPR failed to consider broader diversity of viewpoint, noting, "In D.C., where NPR is headquartered and many of us live, I found 87 registered Democrats working in ...

123 Freedom of Speech Topics & Essay Examples

🔝 Top 10 Freedom of Speech Essay Topics

27 Freedom of Speech Examples

Freedom of Speech Examples

Free Speech and the US Constitution (First Amendment)

The Constitutional Limits of Free Speech

Famous Freedom of Speech Cases in the United States

New York Times Co. v. United States (1971): Defending Press Freedom

Texas v. Johnson (1989): The Right to Flag Burning

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): Money is Speech

Snyder v. Phelps (2011): The Right to Offend

Schenck v. United States (1919): The Limitations of Free Speech

2 thoughts on “27 Freedom of Speech Examples”

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

107 Freedom of Speech Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Essay Samples on Freedom of Speech

The Importance of Freedom of Speech: Upholding Democracy and Fostering Progress

Freedom of Speech: Balancing Liberties and Responsibilities

Challenges to the Freedom of Speech on College Campuses

Importance of The First Amendment: Free Speech, Free Press, Free Society

How Freedom of Speech is Used Today

Censorship and Freedom of Speech Online

David Horowitz and DHFC: A Threat to Students Social Rights

Arguments for Ensuring the Freedom of Speech in US

Freedom of Speech Represented by David Irwin

A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech and Journalism in Press of Vietnam

Holocaust Denial as a Form of Hate Speech

Freedom of Speech and Media Ownership in Ireland

Building Democratic Canada With Freedom of Speech

Limitation of Freedom of Speech on Social Media

Restricted Speech In America

Freedom of Speech

First Amendment

Flag Burning

When Isn’t Speech Protected?

Freedom of Expression

Free Speech in Schools

Sign up for Inside History

Freedom of Speech in the United States

Cite this page

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Essay approach – freedom of speech (constitutional law)

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Milk Street Radio

The good, the bad, and the ugly of free speech

Citizens United rationale: Speech is speech

Brought to you by Speak Easy

You may also like

About Pamela J. Forsythe

Freedom of Speech Essays

Popular Essay Topics

Freedom of Speech Argumentative Essay

Related posts:

Improve your writing with our guides

Youth Culture Essay Prompt and Discussion

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid, Essay Sample

Reasons Why Minimum Wage Should Be Raised Essay: Benefits for Workers, Society, and The Economy

Freedom of Speech Essay

Was this material helpful?

Freedom Of Speech and Its Legal Limits Essay

Works Cited

Cite this page

Other Pages

Download Important English Essay on the Topic - Freedom of Speech Free PDF from Vedantu

Long Essay on Freedom of Speech

Short Essay on Freedom of Speech

Key Highlights of the Essay - Freedom of Speech

FAQs on Essay on Freedom of Speech in English Free PDF download

Academic Freedom and Free Speech Are Distinct. Both Matter.

More From Forbes

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Camera Upgrade Includes Latest Cutting-Edge Technology

Is This the End of Academic Freedom?

NPR defends its journalism after senior editor says it has lost the public's trust

NPR names tech executive Katherine Maher to lead in turbulent era

Praised by NPR's critics

Author Interviews

Heated pushback in NPR's newsroom

Questions of diversity