Most of the people think that when we put limits on the freedom of speech, it won’t be a freedom anymore, but in fact, when this freedom interferes with other’s freedom; it is not a freedom anymore! Limiting the freedom of speech is a controversial topic, it has two perspectives; one of them is with applying censorship because they think it is protecting their rights while the other is against it because they think it is a threat and they want to know what is happening all around the world. The media should be more aware of sensitive topics and they shouldn’t go over the limits when it comes to compromising the national interest or security to influence decision-making authorities. I think freedom of speech should be limited under three cases,
…show more content…
Not that only, but also around 68% agree that they should get punished and 28% answered with probably yes for punishing those who unsettle national and local interest secure or offend anybody. No wonder of this huge percentage! Because it is really had happen in our real life. For instance, the Charlie Hebdo shooting incident that took place early January last year due to a blasphemous and satirical portrayal of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by the French magazine. When the magazine was published it provoked Muslims all over the world and the people were demanding for the magazine to stop using the cartoons as a way to express their hatred. As a result of no communication and understanding of the sensitive topic by the French magazine, a violent reaction was always being anticipated. Many people get killed and injured during this incident. Later, Pope Francis deprecates what Charlie Hebdo’s did, although that he is not a Muslim and he commented, “You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit” (qtd. In If you limit freedom of expression, is it still a freedom?). However, in my survey when I asked if it is possible that freedom of speech limits could be changed when the political status get changed. Only 10% answered that the limits won’t change during …show more content…
“In 2000, the World Health Organization warned that repeated coverage of suicides tends to encourage suicidal preoccupations, particularly among young people” (Bond). Teenagers generally are influenced by the media and as what Rk Sharma said, “The impressionable young minds can’t differentiate between real and make believe … What they see, they learn” this plays an important role when it comes to shaping their behavior. On April 16, 2007, the Virginia Tech massacre took place on the campus of the State University which led to 32 people killed and many more left wounded. “The president of the American Psychiatric Association, Pedro Ruiz, said that it would not be a smart idea to air any photos, video clips or writings of the shooter since it would only inspire more suicide copycats” (Bond). An individual that is exposed to violent media content on a regular basis is more likely to turn out to be someone that will behave in an aggressive or violent manner. The media can influence unhealthy or risky activities, including excessive alcohol consumption, smoking, and taking other harmful drugs. Equally important to mention is that the media also could make a mind wash process to
Not that only, but also around 68% agree that they should get punished and 28% answered with probably yes for punishing those who unsettle national and local interest secure or offend anybody. No wonder of this huge percentage! Because it is really had happen in our real life. For instance, the Charlie Hebdo shooting incident that took place early January last year due to a blasphemous and satirical portrayal of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by the French magazine. When the magazine was published it provoked Muslims all over the world and the people were demanding for the magazine to stop using the cartoons as a way to express their hatred. As a result of no communication and understanding of the sensitive topic by the French magazine, a violent reaction was always being anticipated. Many people get killed and injured during this incident. Later, Pope Francis deprecates what Charlie Hebdo’s did, although that he is not a Muslim and he commented, “You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit” (qtd. In If you limit freedom of expression, is it still a freedom?). However, in my survey when I asked if it is possible that freedom of speech limits could be changed when the political status get changed. Only 10% answered that the limits won’t change during …show more content…
“In 2000, the World Health Organization warned that repeated coverage of suicides tends to encourage suicidal preoccupations, particularly among young people” (Bond). Teenagers generally are influenced by the media and as what Rk Sharma said, “The impressionable young minds can’t differentiate between real and make believe … What they see, they learn” this plays an important role when it comes to shaping their behavior. On April 16, 2007, the Virginia Tech massacre took place on the campus of the State University which led to 32 people killed and many more left wounded. “The president of the American Psychiatric Association, Pedro Ruiz, said that it would not be a smart idea to air any photos, video clips or writings of the shooter since it would only inspire more suicide copycats” (Bond). An individual that is exposed to violent media content on a regular basis is more likely to turn out to be someone that will behave in an aggressive or violent manner. The media can influence unhealthy or risky activities, including excessive alcohol consumption, smoking, and taking other harmful drugs. Equally important to mention is that the media also could make a mind wash process to