In the modern world, the internet has changed the pattern of communication. It has drastically changed the way of our thinking, talking pattern with our friends and generally our lives too. Social media provides platforms to people for expressing their thoughts, opinions and voices “freely”. In this paper, we are going to discuss the statement in favour of “should social media comments be protected by free speech”.
Reasons and Pieces of Evidence :
The meaning of free speech is allowed to express you freely without interfering or limitation by the government. The possible consequence of the speech on social media comments is protected by “free speech” may not be limited. For individuals who think it is hard to communicate with others directly; the internet gives them an incredible way for imparting, and not feeling hesitant or apprehensive. Everybody has a right to state what they think, feel and believe, thus this is a decent way to those who are less assertive to express themselves (Zuckerberg, 2018). It gives a playing ground to the people that you like. When somebody feels glad and pleasant, they can convey what needs be all the more articulately and conceivably. Although the freedom of speech is a human right, however, the question arises how much this right can be practised or a person can be allowed to express at what extent on social media sites (Ian Faria, 2016).
Apparently it is said that the right to free speech can undoubtedly transform into hate discourse without specific limitations as well as, it can risk national security and people’s protection and honor and dignity (Ian Faria, 2016). Free speeches that can inflame brutality and hatred should not be simply dropped in the category of “right to speak freely” and should be reported by law on social networking sites according to the law. A set of limitation and censorship should be used as a restriction method of subjugation and oppression by authorities.
According to the article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Everybody possesses has the right to freedom of expression and opinion, this article also includes the right without any interfering and to pursue, get and communicate information, ideas and knowledge through any channel of media irrespective of border restriction” (Nicholas, 2016). While universal human rights law expects states to prevent the most serious types of “hate discourse”, restriction and control methods is seldom a powerful procedure for handling it’s underlying drivers. Comprehensively encircled hate discourse laws are additionally abused to target contradicting political perspectives, stories and disagreeing articulation (Nicholas, 2016).
Governments ought to take part in a scope of law and approach measures to counter the level of freedom of expressing the opinions and thoughts with more discourse, trying to boost inclusively, decent variety and diversity in open talk. That implies obviously characterizing the conditions where specific kinds of hate discourse can or should have constrained, and guaranteeing those measures are just used uncommonly, as a last option (Nicholas, 2016).
On an individual viewpoint, the life of social media is consumed for online harassing and defrauding. It offers people the chance to get pleasure and talk every minute of every day. The intimidation, bullying, harassment and threatening by speech are difficult issues and ought not to be overlooked or expelled. With everything taken into account, one should dependably remember that everybody can perceive what others post via social networking; there is no such thing as security on the World Wide Web. It is ideal to ensure that one’s posts do not hurt others or impact them adversely in any way.
Social networking is one of the most appealing inventions amongst all the best discoveries of the present century. The social networking sites empower us to stay connected with our friends, families and other individuals. In addition, it also supports us to save our memories of good times. It can also represent the memories of the respondents. Honestly, the issue is not a right to speak freely, but instead one of the ethical quality of the speech (Zuckerberg, 2018).
To conclude, there is no doubt that social media is a source of making communication easier to distance areas. It can also represent business activities, share positive opinions and thoughts. In reality, the ethical issues about opportunity and articulation would now be able to be applied to the social media globe. Regardless, people like it or not or even agree with, it is more important to respect our speeches, comments and communications as well as others. In addition, we need to be useful for individuals to communicate. On social media expression and speeches are extremely intermingled in a context that can involve other extents of law preventing rights of being silence detractors. Finally, restriction and censorship on speeches on social media must be alive and well organized.