Freedom of Speech: Challenges & Consequences

  • News
  • Thread starter azzkika
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the limitations and challenges of free speech on moderated internet sites. The participants argue that due to the diversity of views and potential for offense, it is difficult to have true freedom of speech. They also mention how certain political issues are often avoided and how this can impact society negatively. The concept of private property and its influence on freedom of speech is also brought up. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of allowing open and honest discussions without censorship for a better understanding of different perspectives.
  • #1
azzkika
60
0
Most internet sites which allows me and you to post our opinions are moderated to one degree or another. It is apparent that free speech is impossible as there are so many topics on which different people hold different views and it's impossible not to offend. From Julian assange to Islam to abortion and population control - it does not take long for topics on these matters to quickly become locked as many things are deemed offensive. this is a major stumbling block we have in society in general which ensures it's demise rather than improvement as things negatively impacting on society are not allowed to be freely debated therefore preventing corrective action.

Politically there are certain issues that are being avoided by all main parties. From EU faschist state to the problems of American bullying to the impending Islamic rule of England. All these issues have impacted badly upon the lives of many I know and will only get worse in time, and one of the contributing factors is that we are not free to speak our minds - indeed in this country you can be sacked depending upon political affiliation. Democracy has long been dead and censorship of thought and opinion seeks to keep it that way.

The world has gone mad. For example, it is not OK to smack your own child as a form of discipline yet it is OK to rip the genitalia off a female baby in a muslim family for the purpose of preventing sexual pleasure in adulthood. I wonder how long until this thread becomes locked. Many issues are inevitably going to offend someone and it would be so much better if freedom of speech was maintained irrespective of what people have to say. Only then can a true reflection of opinion be allowed and positive action with all things considered be accurate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
As far as freedom of speech, you have complete freedom to put up your own website forum and let people post away without any moderation whatsoever.

Other peoples sites are like their property. And they have the right to allow you on it and limit what you say on it.

It is not speech infringement. You are naive and incorrect in your belief that just because you have an internet connection you should be able to post anything you want anywhere you want and that if you can't there is some sort of injustice or infringement on your freedom of speech.
 
  • #3
A website is a privately-owned object, and can be controlled as seen fit by the owner. You have the freedom to create your own website and say whatever you want.

Topics on this forum aren't locked because the moderators are trying to censor, the site is predominantly a science-based forum first. The off-topic sections are provided for user convenience, but have specific guidelines. Follow them, and you won't have a problem. If you want to talk in detail about some of the other topics you mentioned, feel free to find a site which specifically deals with them.
 
  • #4
I don't get it... what's wrong with establishing standards for a private enterprise, and enforcing those standards? PF wants to educate people about physics, and be a community for its users of all ages. If you want to talk about your personal neurosis, there are doctors for that, friends, or other websites... livejournal for instance if it still exists. :smile:
 
  • #5
drankin said:
As far as freedom of speech, you have complete freedom to put up your own website forum and let people post away without any moderation whatsoever.

Other peoples sites are like their property. And they have the right to allow you on it and limit what you say on it.

It is not speech infringement. You are naive and incorrect in your belief that just because you have an internet connection you should be able to post anything you want anywhere you want and that if you can't there is some sort of injustice or infringement on your freedom of speech.


Fair comment. But having forums moderated means forums then become honed to what is acceptable in the view of the moderators. I wish I knew how to make my own website with forums. Sadly I don't. And I think having limits on what one can or cannot say just contributes to the big brother society with thought police around every corner that is being slowly established in most parts of society.
 
  • #6
drankin said:
As far as freedom of speech, you have complete freedom to put up your own website forum and let people post away without any moderation whatsoever.

Other peoples sites are like their property. And they have the right to allow you on it and limit what you say on it.

It is not speech infringement. You are naive and incorrect in your belief that just because you have an internet connection you should be able to post anything you want anywhere you want and that if you can't there is some sort of injustice or infringement on your freedom of speech.

Yes, it is speech infringement. Call a cow a cow, for all the justifiable reasons you've cited above.
 
  • #7
In private your freedom of speech isn't the same as in public.

In my house, I have a right to dictate what you may or may not discuss. If I don't want you swearing I have a right to tell you not to, and if you do I can throw you out - there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Here is a very old report citing a case: http://www.slate.com/id/2079885/
Because malls are private property, and our constitutional rights are triggered only when the government (and not a private citizen) tries to limit our freedoms.
 
  • #8
azzkika said:
Most internet sites which allows me and you to post our opinions are moderated to one degree or another. It is apparent that free speech is impossible as there are so many topics on which different people hold different views and it's impossible not to offend. From Julian assange to Islam to abortion and population control - it does not take long for topics on these matters to quickly become locked as many things are deemed offensive. this is a major stumbling block we have in society in general which ensures it's demise rather than improvement as things negatively impacting on society are not allowed to be freely debated therefore preventing corrective action.


Maybe you’re missing the main point – PF is mainly about physics. It would be complete impossible to implement and maintain "Freedom of Physics", and get something useful out of that. There’s no 'scientific value' in a crackpot stating; "I can prove that the Earth is flat and 3,000 years old – my paper is soon ready for peer review" ...

Get it?

When it comes to GD and P&WA it’s somewhat different, but personally I think that https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113181" are much in line with The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), Article 11:
"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."​

And the reason threads gets locked will will be found in "the law".

One should also remember that PF has an international membership, and what would be 'normal' and harmless to you, could be very offending to a person on the other side of the globe (I know that I have missed that several times when it comes to religion).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill" (1859) is worth reading for those interested.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
jarednjames said:
In private your freedom of speech isn't the same as in public.

I think many Egyptians are experiencing this sensation in this very moment.
 
  • #10
DevilsAvocado said:
I think many Egyptians are experiencing this sensation in this very moment.

I know not of what is happening in Egypt at the moment.
 
  • #11
jarednjames said:
I know not of what is happening in Egypt at the moment.

As of yesterday, massive rioting against the current government, but AFAIK (sorry DA) the main issue are economic, and rightly so! I want to speak, but only after I'm fed and clothed thanks.
 
  • #12
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
DevilsAvocado said:
:bugeye: You’re not watching the news (CNN)...?

Not even sure if I can get CNN in the UK. Perhaps I'll have to dig around the Sky news channels.
 
  • #15
nismaratwork said:
but AFAIK (sorry DA) the main issue are economic

I don’t think the 'subject' matter that much... not for freedom of speech anyway... If you get your head bloody because you open your mouth, you got your head bloody because you opened your mouth... :rolleyes:

nismaratwork said:
*sniffle* such a good Avocado! Thanks for the good press. :biggrin:

:biggrin:
 
  • #16
jarednjames said:
Not even sure if I can get CNN in the UK. Perhaps I'll have to dig around the Sky news channels.

Ha! And BBC has gone on vacation??

(:smile:)

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/01/26/egypt.protests/index.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
DevilsAvocado said:
I don’t think the 'subject' matter that much... not for freedom of speech anyway... If you get your head bloody because you open your mouth, you got your head bloody because you opened your mouth... :rolleyes:



:biggrin:

You're right about the bloody head... I've been in the USA for too long... too soft. I guess I'm just very dismayed to see such a strong US and EU ally would suddenly come under such intense pressure.

I'm not surprised, but I AM also dismayed by the response of the Mubarak govt. Honestly, I'm very torn here... of course the people of Egypt want freedom, but history tells us if they win this fight it's chaos they'll get.

It seems also, in response to the post you've made as I'm typing this (I'm sloooow), that the Mubarak regime is really roughing up reporters and cracking down on twitter. Today, there are no protests, but they are planned for tomorrow it seems. I guess it's not news unless someone is bleeding from the head, live on video. *jab at the BBC, not you DA*.

It would be excellent if this led to a change in government, without chaos however...
 
  • #18
nismaratwork said:
I'm not surprised, but I AM also dismayed by the response of the Mubarak govt. Honestly, I'm very torn here... of course the people of Egypt want freedom, but history tells us if they win this fight it's chaos they'll get.

Agree, I’m totally ignorant on the "political situation" and what might come... I do know that the "founding fathers" of what you see happening in Afghanistan today, was in jail a couple of years ago, don’t know if they are still alive... If chaos breaks out, and these "founding fathers" get out... well, the Middle East will not be on my list for 'possible vacations'...

Let’s hope it ends well and democracy survive... Friday will be crucial...
 
  • #19
DevilsAvocado said:
Agree, I’m totally ignorant on the "political situation" and what might come... I do know that the "founding fathers" of what you see happening in Afghanistan today, was in jail a couple of years ago, don’t know if they are still alive... If chaos breaks out, and these "founding fathers" get out... well, the Middle East will not be on my list for 'possible vacations'...

Let’s hope it ends well and democracy survive... Friday will be crucial...

Yes, we just have to wait and see.
 
  • #20
Phrak said:
Yes, it is speech infringement. Call a cow a cow, for all the justifiable reasons you've cited above.
How is PF refusing to post what you want them to "speech infringement"? PF isn't stopping you from doing anything, they are simply choosing what they will or won't put on their web site. Calling that speech infringement is like me calling your failure to buy me a rifle an infringement on my right to bear arms. It's just illogical nonsense.

Your right to free speech doesn't constitute an obligation on the part of others to use their resources to publish it.
 
  • #21
Al68 said:
How is PF refusing to post what you want them to "speech infringement"? PF isn't stopping you from doing anything, they are simply choosing what they will or won't put on their web site. Calling that speech infringement is like me calling your failure to buy me a rifle an infringement on my right to bear arms. It's just illogical nonsense.

Your right to free speech doesn't constitute an obligation on the part of others to use their resources to publish it.

That's what he's saying man; he's saying it IS infringing on your expression, but that isn't some magically terrible thing: it's normal and even OK.

That, or Phrak has gone off the deep end... and I doubt it.
 
  • #22
nismaratwork said:
That's what he's saying man; he's saying it IS infringing on your expression, but that isn't some magically terrible thing: it's normal and even OK.
Could be, but "infringing on" has a different meaning from "declining to assist". PF moderators have deleted several of my posts, but have never infringed on my free speech rights one iota. They simply lack any power whatsoever to do so. They may have duct tape, but they would have to catch me first. :biggrin:
 
  • #23
Al68 said:
Could be, but "infringing on" has a different meaning from "declining to assist". PF moderators have deleted several of my posts, but have never infringed on my free speech rights one iota. They simply lack any power whatsoever to do so. They may have duct tape, but they would have to catch me first. :biggrin:

I read, "speech infringement", not "infringement of rights". You have no right to free speech here, nor do I, nor does Phrak... our speech is now infringed upon or we cease to be absolute speak entirely. That doesn't mean that PF in any way is wrong, and as no rights are there to infringed... non-issue!

Beyond that, Phrak can speak for himself... I was just surprised by your take on things. For the record, the deleting mention... I didn't report you, and I'm not going to. I disagree because I think you misunderstood... it happens. If I'm wrong, then go wild... but maybe waiting for confirmation would be good?
 
  • #24
nismaratwork said:
I read, "speech infringement", not "infringement of rights". You have no right to free speech here, nor do I, nor does Phrak... our speech is now infringed upon or we cease to be absolute speak entirely. That doesn't mean that PF in any way is wrong, and as no rights are there to infringed... non-issue!

Beyond that, Phrak can speak for himself... I was just surprised by your take on things. For the record, the deleting mention... I didn't report you, and I'm not going to. I disagree because I think you misunderstood... it happens. If I'm wrong, then go wild... but maybe waiting for confirmation would be good?
I didn't mean to imply you reported any of my posts, I only mentioned it as an example. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

As far as "speech infringement" goes, I think my take is the same as your take, except for semantics. The word "infringement" means to prevent or restrict, it doesn't mean to decline to publish or decline to assist someone's speech.
 
  • #25
PF is not infringing on anyone's speech, in about the same way that a library or grocery store or car wash does not infringe on anyone's right/need/fancy to sing a song or buy a gun or leave the windows down on their car. PF provides you with an avenue to produce more speech, not less. You do not have greater freedom of speech in the absence of PF.
 
  • #26
DevilsAvocado said:
Maybe you’re missing the main point – PF is mainly about physics. It would be complete impossible to implement and maintain "Freedom of Physics", and get something useful out of that. There’s no 'scientific value' in a crackpot stating; "I can prove that the Earth is flat and 3,000 years old – my paper is soon ready for peer review" ...

Get it?

When it comes to GD and P&WA it’s somewhat different, but personally I think that https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113181" are much in line with The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), Article 11:
"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."​

And the reason threads gets locked will will be found in "the law".

One should also remember that PF has an international membership, and what would be 'normal' and harmless to you, could be very offending to a person on the other side of the globe (I know that I have missed that several times when it comes to religion).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill" (1859) is worth reading for those interested.

I know this is a site mainly devoted to science, and I am very grateful for it. Your last paragraph supports part of my original assertion, that something can be very damaging to our society but cannot be discussed in case offense is caused. I did post this in politics and world affairs btw which is there for discussions of this type.

I perhaps used moderation of a website as bad example of my point to this. In all areas of western culture one can be prosecuted or sacked for simply speaking the truth. Even journalists who publish footage of murder have western politicians calling for them to be executed! Freedom of speech has long been dead and the internet has reversed the oppression of free speech by the authorities to quite a degree so my questioning of moderation is fair one I think. Of course physics forums has the right to allow or disallow any content they wish, I just think moderation of any form is a subtle reflection of the Orwellian nightmare we live in today. The inability to speak about certain topics because of possible offense has already had disastrous consequences in some parts of the UK and will continue to allow social cancers to carry on untreated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #27
azzkika said:
Even journalists who publish footage of murder have western politicians calling for them to be executed!

I would love to see the source for this claim.
Freedom of speech has long been dead and the internet has reversed the oppression of free speech by the authorities to quite a degree so my questioning of moderation is fair one I think. Of course physics forums has the right to allow or disallow any content they wish, I just think moderation of any form is a subtle reflection of the Orwellian nightmare we live in today. The inability to speak about certain topics because of possible offense has already had disastrous consequences in some parts of the UK and will continue to allow social cancers to carry on untreated.

Possible offence?

I would have you note that in the UK, you can speak freely about whatever you want so long as you aren't preaching hate or something that is considered illegal. That is not what freedom of speech is about. There are people outside Westminster preaching what are considered dreadful topics everyday, but because they aren't screaming about something illegal or inciting hatred/violence there's nothing that can be done to stop them.

Political correctness only really affects government issues - naming conventions for groups of people for example. So far as the general public are concerned, you can't be prosecuted for calling someone something the government doesn't consider PC (unless it comes under an area such as Racism). Generally, the worst thing that would happen is you annoy someone by not being PC - in most cases I simply say "tuff".
 
  • #28
Al68 said:
I didn't mean to imply you reported any of my posts, I only mentioned it as an example. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

As far as "speech infringement" goes, I think my take is the same as your take, except for semantics. The word "infringement" means to prevent or restrict, it doesn't mean to decline to publish or decline to assist someone's speech.

Yeah, that works too.
 
  • #29
Gokul43201 said:
PF is not infringing on anyone's speech, in about the same way that a library or grocery store or car wash does not infringe on anyone's right/need/fancy to sing a song or buy a gun or leave the windows down on their car. PF provides you with an avenue to produce more speech, not less. You do not have greater freedom of speech in the absence of PF.

I'm sorry, you must not be aware of Christine O'Donnel's position on these matters, and what of poor poor Doctor Laura?! Remember...

Dr Laura on CNN said:
Embattled radio talk show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger announced Tuesday she will not renew her contract that is up at the end of the year, telling CNN's "Larry King Live" she wants to "regain my First Amendment rights."
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-17/entertainment/doctor.laura.ends.show_1_n-word-schlessinger-radio-show?_s=PM:SHOWBIZ

:smile:

Yeah, the FCC and interest groups have an effect, but you still have RADIO show. On the other hand, now she can express her outrage to her cats... she strikes me as someone who will be eaten by her cats.

story.laura.lkl.cnn.jpg


I think this stems from the endless rhetoric that depends, not on an actual logical argument, just volume and stridency.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #30
jarednjames said:
I would love to see the source for this claim.
<SNIP>

Me too! I'm sure given the number of people who could be called, "western politicians" you can probably find an example of all slices of humanity. I'd like to see this as some kind of public call however... we don't do Fatwas, and I think we're getting more heat than light from azzkika
 
  • #31
nismaratwork said:
Me too! I'm sure given the number of people who could be called, "western politicians" you can probably find an example of all slices of humanity. I'd like to see this as some kind of public call however... we don't do Fatwas, and I think we're getting more heat than light from azzkika

I have absolutely no doubt that some politician somewhere has gone "I wish someone would 'deal' with that guy", but I'd be extremely surprised to find they've made it public - "called for it" if you will.
 
  • #32
jarednjames said:
I have absolutely no doubt that some politician somewhere has gone "I wish someone would 'deal' with that guy", but I'd be extremely surprised to find they've made it public - "called for it" if you will.

Now THAT I believe, but by the nature of the claim, it's not something you or I could prove, and public rhetoric can be apologized for and called "heated". It's those slips on a live microphone that really give you insight, speaking of W... and Cheney. Oh man... that was classic.
 
  • #33
nismaratwork said:
<SNIP>

Me too! I'm sure given the number of people who could be called, "western politicians" you can probably find an example of all slices of humanity. I'd like to see this as some kind of public call however... we don't do Fatwas, and I think we're getting more heat than light from azzkika

Are you not familiar with the journalist Julian Assange? It is a fact he published footage of atrocities committed by US servicemen and certain US politicians have called for him to be hunted down like Al Queda and executed. Even media freedom is under threat in the west.
 
  • #34
azzkika said:
Are you not familiar with the journalist Julian Assange? It is a fact he published footage of atrocities committed by US servicemen and certain US politicians have called for him to be hunted down like Al Queda and executed. Even media freedom is under threat in the west.

I knew you would go for him.

I want a source showing a politician publicly calling for him to be "hunted down and executed".

Also note, he's not a journalist.
 
  • #35
azzkika said:
Are you not familiar with the journalist Julian Assange? It is a fact he published footage of atrocities committed by US servicemen and certain US politicians have called for him to be hunted down like Al Queda and executed. Even media freedom is under threat in the west.

Julian Assange is a journalist?... Huh... he doesn't follow journalistic practices, and he uses criminal means to get his information.

So, please cite which POLITICIANS (you just added "servicemen") which is already a broad enough term called for Assange to be, "hunted down like Al [Qaeda] and executed."

When you refer to media freedom in the west being under threat, do you just mean wikileaks, and if so, what part of the "west"?
 

Similar threads

News Freedom of speech and pseudoscience
Replies
10
Views
2K
News Political correctness Vs Freedom of speech
2
Replies
47
Views
12K
News US Supreme Court rules on violent video games
Replies
28
Views
6K
News Explore the Impact of Grover Norquist's Taxpayer Protection Pledge
Replies
17
Views
3K
News Freedom of Information Act - taken too far? (Palin Emails)
Replies
20
Views
4K
News Ahmadinejad's speech at Durban II
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
News Terrel Owens: Corp Restriction to Free Speech
Replies
13
Views
2K
News Does 'pack journalism' shape the science news we read?
Replies
15
Views
2K
News The Israel Media Watch: A Threat to Freedom of Speech in Israel?
Replies
3
Views
3K
News Criticize your choice for president
Replies
4
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top