scholarly journals Role of Media of Pakistan in "Freedom of Speech": A Survey of Lahore District

2020 ◽  
Vol III (I) ◽  
pp. 39-51
Author(s):  
Rida Saeed

A researcher wants to study the role of media of Pakistan in freedom of speech of Lahore district. Each individual has some inborn basic rights, which he and she enjoys no matter, where, he and she lives or what his and her material or social status is, the ability to freedom speech and expression is one of those rights. As said by Newseum, in 1997 that "Freedom of speech is guaranteed, and protected by the first amendment, of the United-States constitution". Connotations, of the freedom of speech have a varied, in different eras of history. There are parts of bills of rights in 1st amendment forbids national, government from restricting freedom of expression, in this article the author looks into the phenomenon of 'Freedom of Speech' within Lahore.

2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-214
Author(s):  
David E. Bernstein

The right to join with other people to promote a particular outlook, known as the right of expressive association, is a necessary adjunct to the right of freedom of speech, which is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Freedom of speech would be of little practical consequence if the government could suppress ideas by bluntly prohibiting individuals from gathering with others who share their perspective. Freedom of expression must consist of more than the right to talk to oneself.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 82-103
Author(s):  
Juhani Rudanko

This article focuses on face-threatening attacks on the Madison Administration during the War of 1812. The discussion is framed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, with the language of the Amendment protecting freedom of speech, and also by the Sedition Act of 1798, which, if it had been made permanent, would have seriously curtailed freedom of speech. The War of 1812 was intensely unpopular among members of the Federalist Party, and their newspapers did not shy away from criticising it. This article investigates writings published in the Boston Gazette and the Connecticut Mirror during the war. It is shown that the criticism took different forms, ranging from accusing President Madison of “untruths” to painting a picture of what was claimed to be the unmitigated hopelessness of his position, both nationally and internationally, and that the criticism also included harsh personal attacks on his character and motives. It is suggested that some of the attacks may be characterised as exhibiting aggravated impoliteness. The article also considers President Madison’s attitude in the face of the attacks.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdul Alim

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is an essential part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, obstructing the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering peoples assembling rights in a peaceful manner or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental remedy of grievances. The guarantees of this Bill of Rights were subject to the limitation imposed by the free speech and press provisions of the First Amendment to the US Constitution as interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court and other courts. The United States and India are the largest democratic country and almost have similar free speech provisions in their Constitutions. This Article is intended to present the free speech provisions of the American and Indian Constitution as a basic fundamental right of human being. It is also to be examined that what is the role of Supreme Court in interpreting the freedom of speech and expression provisions. The study also tries to incorporate the comparison between the looms of both countries as far as freedom of speech is disturbed.


Author(s):  
Maryam Ahranjani

The very first amendment to the United States Constitution protects the freedom of speech. While the Supreme Court held in 1969 that students “do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate,” since then the Court has limited students' freedom of speech, stopping short of considering the boundaries of off-campus, online speech. Lower court holdings vary, meaning that a student engaging in certain online speech may not be punished at all in one state but would face harsh criminal punishments in another. The lack of a uniform standard leads to dangerously inconsistent punishments and poses the ultimate threat to constitutional knowledge and citizenship exercise: chilling of speech. Recent interest in technology-related cases and the presence of a new justice may reverse the Court's prior unwillingness to address this issue. In the meantime, this chapter argues that school districts should erect a virtual schoolhouse gate by implementing a uniform standard.


Communication ◽  
2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dwight Teeter

Freedom of the press refers to the freedom to criticize government without suffering official interference or punishment, before or after publication. “Freedom of the press,” “freedom of speech,” and “freedom of expression” are terms often used together in the United States, with “the press” primarily connoting print and electronic media. This bibliography concentrates on freedom of the press as defined by some major American and English writers and in decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Because of the advent of electronic media and of the internet and of other “new media” or “social media” during the 20th and early 21st centuries, the term “freedom of the press” is used to cover mediated communication in general. The clearest indicator of press freedom is that opponents of government or of government leaders, laws, or policies can publish effective criticisms without suffering government retaliation in the form of fines, imprisonment, or even death. That definition does not include communications that may break laws of general applicability, such as the law of fraud, nor violation of a contract. It also does not cover extralegal controls such a communicator’s sense of the community’s range of permissible expression, or public pressures (including mob action) against the press in times of crisis. The legal definition of “freedom of the press” in the United States begins with the forty-five words of the First Amendment to the Constitution, adopted 15 December 1791: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The absolute words of prohibition against congressional statutes tampering with speech or press freedom were, however, overridden early in the nation’s history by Congress in 1798, just seven years after the adoption of the First Amendment. Congress then passed the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which, among other things, made it a crime to criticize the federal government or government leaders. These short-lived enactments, which fueled bitter partisan controversy in the new nation, are discussed in the Historical Context section. Freedom of the press is not static: it rises in times of peace and diminishes in times of war or national crisis, when most needed by society.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-93
Author(s):  
Ksenia A. Ivanova ◽  
Madi Zh. Myltykbaev

The subject. The article is devoted to the analysis of the freedom of speech and access to information in the context of the emerging system of international information security. The purpose of the article is to try to predict the positive and negative consequences of changing international relations in the digital age, to determine the role of freedom of speech and access to information in the context of confrontation between Russia and the United States. The research presented in this article was carried out by combining different disciplinary approaches, including comparative law, comparative politics and international relations, political theory and sociology. Moreover, study includes methods of dialectical logic, analysis and synthesis, as well as formal legal analysis of international legal acts of the UN. The main results and scope of their application. The rights of freedom of speech and access to information is undoubtedly one of the main in the global digital communication context. Degree of implementation of human and citizen rights to freedom of expression and access to information are indicators of political processes, the pace of building a civil society and legal state in current country. These rights are the foundation of modern democracy. The authors carry out a systematic analysis of the categories “freedom of speech” and “the right to access information”, identify the features of implementation of these rights in cyberspace, analyze international practice of legal regulation of these rights and assess the place and role of these rights in the emerging system of international information security. A legal analysis of international legal acts shows that the positions of the United States and the Russian Federation in the field of international information security are gradually converging, and the convergence is going in the direction of the Russian position Conclusions. The limits on the exercise of freedom of speech and access to information do not correspond to the level of development of public relations, because there are no effective legal tools to prevent defamation in the mass media, which in turn can lead to conflict between countries. It is concluded that there is a need for active international cooperation and consistent unification of the legislation of various countries, taking into account that freedom of speech and access to information in cyberspace should have the same level of protection as in the physical world.


Author(s):  
Laura Pontzer

From the inception of American jurisprudence, an individual’s right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution 1 has been given some of the strongest protection available.2 The most celebrated legal minds in American history have consistently advocated the necessity of an open and honest exchange of ideas as fundamental to democratic society,3 even when the ideas expressed may be unpopular or of little value.4 Nonetheless, it is equally well-established that not all speech is protected, particularly where the speech in question poses a threat to public order.5 Although First Amendment law continues to evolve, the media available to Americans wishing to express their ideas seem to be evolving exponentially faster, particularly in the forum provided by the Internet.6 Indeed, the vast expansion and availability of Internet media seem to continually outstrip the much more gradual evolution of the law, not only in the United States but worldwide.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document