The First Amendment (1791) protects the freedom of speech, stating that: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”, and, if the words are taken literally, we would probably grant every man the right to say whatever they want. However, in reality, censorship exists – distributing obscene materials can be unconstitutional (Miller v. California, 1973). Questions should then be raised: to what extent do we actually have freedom of speech and under what circumstances? The fact that people are not granted with equal political influence and, therefore, bear different social responsibilities adds another layer of complication to this question. As the work-from-home state crystalizes into a new norm, cyber space has become the arena of contesting arguments, expressed by individuals behind masks of social accounts. How much accountability should we place on the shear amount of fragmented and sometimes unverified messages that can be viewed by virtually anyone in the cyber space instantaneously? How should the old constitution written in the age of prints change accordingly? |
