Regulation In Free Speech Principle

1.5 Regulation in Free Speech Principle The commitment to the principle of freedom of expression is of great significance to the society and so it has become necessary to spell out as clearly as possible the nitty-gritty of this commitment. From this angle, free speech as a matter of fact, does not mean that a person is free to say whatever that person wants to say. However, as has been observed over a period of time, plenty of speeches have been regulated, be it legally or illegally. Furthermore, Mary Kate McGowan buttresses the argument of regulation since she believes that regulation of a speech is perfectly compatible with the commitment to free speech. Paradoxically, too, this same commitment to the principle of free speech is making

But this raises the question about the exact meaning of this technical word. Unfortunately, a handful of scholars have arduously worked at giving an elaborative answer to the question of what should count as speech. Among these scholars are Frederick Schauer, McGowan, Maitra and Braddon-Mitchell. Observably, it seems that many ignore the question of what should count as speech. Nevertheless, what ought to count as speech is related to the inquiry about what makes speech valuable. Foremost, then, whatever is rendered as speech has at its basis the notion of values. With this concept of value in mind, each country, institution and community has what is specific to it. In line with this, therefore, the legitimate limitations to freedom of expression are particular to nations, political societies and/ or institutions. Nonetheless, the regulation or limitation of free speech is mostly grounded on the balancing of harm. However, some contend that certain kinds of speech be not regulated. The United States of America currently is of the opinion that regulating racist speech would cause more harm. By this, it is interesting to note that, the US courts generally digresses from the consensus of the international community which has criminalized racial propaganda. It is necessary to bear in mind that, one may have the legal rights to utter hateful words to another person or to display

Evidently, it has driven the human experience towards fascinating ends on a positive side. On the contrary however, due to the human person’s misconstruction of the concept of freedom and its limitation, there have been devastating outcomes. By the various justifications presented, it could be observed that the free speech principle has brought an improvement in society, especially in democratic and liberal systems. However, by its abuse it has been observed how some human beings have unjustly suffered. In summary, it is expedient for us to revisit the fundamental sense of freedom which would aid in the redefinition of responsibility towards others as this right is been