9 of 103

Write now Article Tools

The freedom of speech granted to all citizens of the United States, including the press, is one of the most critically important rights that we enjoy under the Constitution. In the current political environment, the Fourth Estate is often criticized for publishing or airing pieces that many believe are an abuse of the right to free speech. It is said that they go too far, in some cases displaying insensitivity, in others revealing too much information. But regardless of how much controversy or anger is sparked by any given piece of journalism, the public, and members of the government, must never be tempted to call for a reigning in on the right to speak openly and freely. The alternative is far too dangerous.

Sometimes, it is easy to become sympathetic towards opponents of free speech. When a member of the media prints a story that cannot be fully authenticated, one that makes exaggerated claims and may even have a reasonably serious impact on society, it is our natural impulse to make sure that sophomoric, inflammatory or immature articles and stories never make it to print or on the air. We want to make sure that the media is held up to rigorous standards and checks so that the content that reaches us is of the highest value possible.

But when these desires to set boundaries on the media arise, we must be tread carefully. The authors of the Constitution were careful to leave potential limitations on speech off the document. They understood that as soon as the government begins to stifle the powers of the media and the public to express whatever ideas or views they like, however seemingly minimal those restrictions seem, it opens up the legal and socially acceptable tendency to continually decrease these freedoms. The natural end result is the loss of our First Amendment rights. Many of those who now indict members of the media for not censoring themselves should be reminded of the USSR and similar governments who have tried to control the content of media, and the tragic consequences of those actions.

There are restrictions on the media's power of free speech, like the general public, concerning defamation of character, etc. But beyond these special cases, there should be no attempt to suppress the media's ability to report anything they want, no matter how offensive or tactless it appears. There seems to be an even more insidious problem plaguing the mainstream media: even with the broad freedoms they are allowed, they often choose to take the safe road. Much of the information that ends up in our newspapers or on our television screens is an example of the media's laziness. Rather than vigorously investigating facts, holding our leaders and officials accountable, and refusing to take anything at face value, they often opt to simply repeat the talking points of government officials. Self-censorship is no better than state-sanctioned censorship; and both are threats to the vitality of our republic.

Learn more about this author, Alex Kuzio.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should the media have freedom of speech??
We want to hear your view. Write now!