AP Project.pdf - Taft 1 The Drastic Need for Regulating...

This preview shows page 1 - 4 out of 15 pages.

Taft 1 The Drastic Need for Regulating Hate Speech Online
Taft 2 Abstract: In this day in age, using technology to communicate or to put your opinions on the Internet is the new normal. There has been rapid technological advancements in the past few decades, which has resulted in the ability to hold social media in the palm of your hand. However, some people take advantage of social media platforms to put down others through online hate. There has been a long debate over the ambiguity of the First Amendment regarding the freedom of speech. Key court cases such as Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, which helped define “fighting” words, or Elonis v. The United States case, which was the most recent case and one of the first cases of online hate speech to reach the highest level of judicial court, have contributed to how people view their First Amendment rights today. In this essay, I will be discussing the pros and cons of regulating online speech. I will address how social media platforms try to regulate hate speech online today and provide other alternatives to help control it. Although a few social media platforms have already tried to create regulations on their sites, there are many other possibilities to lessen the amount of hate seen today. Media outlets such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter provide incentives to their uses which include giving people the access to interact and connect with others on a global scale. If a user is caught spreading hate online, they can lose their privileges to the site or even be fined/imprisoned. More regulations need to be implemented to protect race, ethnic, and sexual minorities from online hate speech.
Taft 3 Sydni Taft 22 May 2020 English 39 C The Drastic Need for Regulating Hate Speech Online The First Amendment was adopted in 1791 and grants many freedoms, such as the freedom of speech, the right to peacefully assemble, freedom of the press, and the right to petition the government of grievances. There is much ambiguity when it comes to what “free speech” actually entails, everyone has a different meaning and debates the details of the amendment. Hate speech is a form of communication that is biased towards a certain person or group of people for their race, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability. This can happen online, in person, over the phone, or through action. Today, there have been drastic increases in social media platforms and the expansiveness of the Internet has added to ways in which hate speech can be expressed. There is also a lot of uncertainty and loopholes around hate speech, sometimes it is protected, sometimes it is not. Hate speech is legal under the First Amendment as long as there was no physical threat to the well being of another person.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture