ESSAY OUTLINE

Topic
Give suggestions on how to approve or disapprove freedom speech through social media
To what extent do you agree with the scenario above? Discuss this issue comprehensively

I. Introduction

Freedom speech are promoted allegedly by several Malaysians. Is this issue of freedom speech
gives us a peaceful environment or leads to negative approaches and actions by a group of people
whom could turn on to be destroyers to our nation?

Essay Statement

Advantages and disadvantages of freedom speech that had become trends . People from all kind of
stages are free to give talks through social medias about another group of people and specific issues
that occurs. The freedom speech through social media by anybody mostly brings uncomfortable
environment to the worldwide nation.

II. Body

1. Freedom speech by anybody through social media.

a. when an issue occurs
b. variety of thoughts opinions and actions by people

2. Advantages of freedom speech

a. benefits and Supporting facts of certain issues
b. ideas to take necessary steps to overcome raised
issues

3. Disadvantages of freedom speech.

a. negative ideas or actions come from people
b. unhealthy and uncomfortable situations occur.

III. Conclusion

Summarize of the essay and how freedom speech through social media supports and unsupport the
raising issues.
Topic
Give suggestions on how to approve or disapprove freedom speech through social media
To what extent do you agree with the scenario above? Discuss this issue comprehensively

Introduction

Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to

articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The term
"freedom of /expression" is sometimes used synonymously but includes any act of seeking, receiving,
and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.

the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental

interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.
Social media are interactive computer-mediated technologies that facilitate the creation or sharing of information,
ideas, career interests and other forms of expression via virtual communities and networks.[1][2] The variety of stand-
alone and built-in social media services currently available introduces challenges of definition; however, there are
some common features:[2]

1. Social media are interactive Web 2.0 Internet-based applications.[2][3]

2. User-generated content such as text posts or comments, digital photos or videos, and data generated
through all online interactions, is the lifeblood of social media. [2][3]
3. Users create service-specific profiles and identities for the website or app that are designed and maintained
by the social media organization.[2][4]
4. Social media facilitate the development of online social networks by connecting a user's profile with those of
other individuals or groups.[2][4]

The freedom of speech is one of the crucial features of the democratic society. The personal liberty
cannot be achieved without the ability to express your thoughts freely. It also means the opportunity
to participate in the discussions and debates. George Orwell said, “If liberty means anything at all, it
means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”.
The media is a powerful mean of social progress nowadays. It is said that social media’s worldwide
audience gives individuals new rights, responsibilities, and risks. Joshua Rozenberg claimed, “A
tweet is not an email, it’s a broadcast”. The aim of this essay is to present my own opinion on the
expressions by Orwell and Rozenberg and to discuss the influence of media on the human rights,
responsibilities, and risks.

The Main Body

The social media represents the source and the mean of the information dissemination. It is difficult to
imagine what the world would look like if we did not have the media. The dissemination of the true
information is one of the pillars of the free society.
Nowadays, the breakthrough in this process has been achieved due to the development and
implementation of the new media and information and communications technologies (ICTs) (IMS
Conference on ICTs, 2008). I agree with the statement of George Orwell, who said that the liberty
“means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”.
It goes without saying that all people are different and, thus, their views on the changes occurring in
the surrounding world differ. However, the social progress cannot be achieved without the conflict
solving and decision making. The availability of the different opinions contributes to the arriving at the
best solution. The freedom of speech implies the opportunity of the unhampered expression of the
opposite views.
How can we say about the liberty and personal freedom if we are afraid of protesting and arguing?
The truly democratic society is the one, which encourages the independent thinking and the
expression of the opposite views.
Katharine Gelber in her article ‘Freedom of Speech and Australian Political Culture’ considers the
opinions of the Australian politicians, representing both the Coalition and Opposition in the beginning
of the 1990s. Gelber tries to say that the history of the freedom of speech in Australia consists of the
periods of the increasing public debates on the issue of human rights and their protection.
kl
In 1992, the wide discussions contributed to the recognition of the freedom of speech in Australia
(Gelber, 2011). Although the representatives of the various political parties have different views on
the concept of freedom of speech, all of them indicate to its importance for the society.
Gelber says that the majority of Australians believe that the freedom of speech exists in the Australian
society (Gelber, 2011). Undoubtedly, it shows that people feel their liberty in saying what the others
do not want to hear.
There is a famous expression by Joshua Rozenberg, “A tweet is not an email, it’s a broadcast”. I think
that he means that if the conversation includes more than two persons, it is public and it disseminates
the information rapidly. In the context of the human rights, it can be said that the ‘tweet’ or wide
discussions are vital for the dissemination of the information and contribute to the freedom of speech.
I agree with the statement that the social media’s worldwide audience gives individuals new rights,
responsibilities, and risks. In this respect, censorship remains one of the most significant hazards.
However paradoxical it looks at the first glance, the United States of America represents the bright
example of the country with the freedom of speech, on the one hand, and the cases of censorship, on
the other hand.
Patrick Garry in his book An American Paradox: Censorship in a Nation of Free Speech analyses the
reasons for the existence of censorship in the country proclaiming the freedom of speech as one of
the highest values. Garry finds the roots for this problem in the rapid dynamism of the American
society.
The author also states that “as multiculturalism replaces the older, more traditional social model of
Americanized homogeneity, speech and censorship will increasingly form the ethnic and cultural
battleground of this change” (Garry, 1993, p. 14).
Undoubtedly, the freedom of speech is one of the most discrepant social and political issues.
People’s words depend on their minds and their emotions. However, they are not always the positive
ones and sometimes people are driven by hate. The history of mankind already has a lot of examples
when the speech provoked the violence. The Nazi Germany is one of such examples.

The emotional speech of Adolph Hitler inspired millions of people to commit the crime against
humanity. That is why it should be emphasized that the freedom of speech assumes the
responsibility. It is said that “our most successful approach to defending our human rights and human
dignity is to begin with the principle: Choose Love, Not Hate” (Freedom of expression, no date).
Besides, it should be mentioned that the freedom of speech should not contradict the other human
rights, including the intellectual property rights, the right to reputation, and others. The government
intervention in the dissemination of the information should not go beyond the boundaries of the
protection of the confidential information, reputation, public safety and order (Freedom of
expression, no date).
The debates provoked by the promulgation of the secret information by WikiLeaks shook the public.
Although there were different views on the activity of the website, it is obvious that it made the
confidential information public, thus, violating the right to privacy and supporting the freedom of
speech.
According to Little, “there is a difference between disclosure of information relating to private lives of
individuals and that relating to governments” (2013, par. 6). The European authorities support the
freedom of speech but indicate to the importance of licensing of broadcasting and the verification of
the information disseminated by the media (Freedom of expression, 2007).
Connie Bennett and Rob Everett emphasize the importance of tolerance and understanding in the
protection of the freedom of speech. At the same time, the authors state, “Free and open access to
the universe of ideas not only enriches the lives of a country’s citizens; it protects them from the harm
caused when ignorance and misinformation go unchallenged by facts” (Bennett and Everett, 2011,
n.pag.).
The rapid development of the information technologies and the digital communication systems create
the risks of inconsistent and false data dissemination as the role of the journalists and editors
becomes vanished by the work of computers and Internet. At the same time, the modern technologies
may help to overcome the bias in the information disseminated by the media.
There are a number of the social organizations aimed at protecting the freedom of speech and the
activity of the journalists all over the world. In particular, Freedom House provides the support to the
advocates of the human rights to defend the free media and the right to independent expression
(Freedom of expression, no date).

Conclusion
In order to sum up all above mentioned, it should be said that the freedom of speech is one of the
main human rights. However, it remains one of the controversial social issues as well. The freedom of
expression implies certain responsibilities including the respect to the privacy of other people as well
as to the results of their intellectual activity.