FYS Research paper

1. Joshua Kovach
Professor Blanco
FYS 100-206
24 January 2015
Should We Regulate Free Speech
A big topic all over the world right now is whether or not the press and media outlets
should be regulated. This raises three questions to the people of the world and governments all
over. The first one is what are the benefits of regulating free speech? Next what are the effects of
unregulated free speech? Lastly what are the implications this debate has over democratic
societies?
The issues being debated in the article Free Speech at Risk are whether or not
governments should be weakening free speech rights due to concerns of national security and
offending other religions. All over the world people are asking this after incidents like the terror
attack in Paris this month and reporters being killed in the Middle East. According to a graph,
found in the article Free Speech at Risk, 232 journalists were imprisoned in 2012 and about 43
journalists were murdered. These numbers have been on the rise every year. One of the questions
being raised is whether or not religious sensibilities should be allowed to limit free expression. A
British journalist wrote, “There is no free speech without the ability to offend religious and
cultural sensibilities.” Pakistan has recently blocked YouTube because an anti-Muslim video was
uploaded to the site. Would regulating free speech be a good thing?

2. Kovach2
In some countries, people are concerned that freedoms of speech and of the press have
been badly abused in recent years. The United Kingdom and Australia are two countries that are
considering tighter regulations on the press. In the United Kingdom a voluntary incentive-based
system is being talked about and that would give companies who choose to join a censored group
financial incentives. This would protect ordinary people from being caught up in terror attacks.
Murders of journalists have risen forty-three percent in the past year, with tighter restrictions on
the media this number would go down. Through regulating free speech we can make it so
offensive materials do not make it to the public. Regulating free speech could potentially save
hundreds of lives across the globe. Now this raises the question what are the effects of
unregulated free speech?
Not regulating free speech would go along with our Constitutional rights some would
say. With that being said a few of the consequences could be terror attacks. The media is
offending religions and that is causing some to lash out. Earlier this month a journalist company
in Paris was attacked by Al Qaida supporters leaving seventeen dead after the Journalist
Company insulted them. If we regulated the press, this attack could have been prevented.
Continuing to not regulate free speech could lead to hundreds of more deaths across the globe.
In democratic societies it’s in their Constitutional right to have free speech, regulating
free speech some could say violates this Constitutional right. Many people differ on their beliefs
on this topic and that leads to great controversy when it comes down to what implications if any
should be put on free speech. Ultimately if the government does decide to put implications on
free speech in the future, this would probably end being challenged in the courts and it will have
to become a controversial subject again. There is no easy answer to this matter and we will
continue to debate this subject for years to come.

3. Kovach3
In today’s world whether or not we should regulate free speech is a topic being asked all
over. With issues such as terrorist attacks, journalists being arrested, and in some cases
journalists even being murdered we wonder if regulating free speech would be a good thing.
There are both positives and negatives to regulating free speech and not. Regulating free speech
could lead to not only saving journalists’ lives but also lives of those caught in the crossfire. Not
regulating free speech will make this a free country but at the cost of innocent lives.