Spe
ech and Censorship
Student name
University
XXXXXXXXXXXX
The XXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXX XX ensure XXX XXXXXXX to XXXXXX has resulted XX a dilemma. XXX XXXXX XX regulating speech is XX XXXX attention XXXXXXX XXXXX are certain XXXXXX XXXX XXX considered XX XXXXX threats to a XXXXXXX group XX XXXXXX or an individual. XX the same time, protected speech should not be censored XXX XX XXX freedom XX XXXXXX. XXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX and criminalization XX such harmful speech in songs XXX in XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX.
Speech Censorship
XXXXXX should not allowed to XXX XXXXXXXX, to XXXXXX at any place. XXXX XXXXXX XXX XX offensive XXX XXX introduce the XXXXXX XX XXXXXXX injury to XXXXXXX. XXXXX are certain XXXXX XXXXX are protected XXX XXXXXXXXXX to be XXXX opinion but there are other XXXXXXX XXXXX or phrases XXXXX when subjected to a XXXXXXX group XX XXXXXX or an XXXXXXXXXX, XXX XX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX.
Jokes such XX XXXXXX ‘I will crush you!’ XXX XXXXXXX identified XXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX. XXXXXXX, there are XXXXXXX XXXXXXX that XXX be detected XXXXX on the context. For XXXXXXXX, directing XXXXXXX statements like ‘I will XXXXX you!’ XX a XXXXXX XXXXX XXX XX considered a XXXX XXXXXX. XX signifies an XXXXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXX a police XXXXXXX. Considering XXXXXXX situation, suppose one XXXXX state that ‘this man XXX killed XXX police XXX a hero, XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX be killed’, there can XX XXX parts which may XX distinguished XX XX offensive XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX (Vedantam, 2018). The XXXXX XXXXXX ‘XXXX man XXX killed the XXXXXX XXX a XXXX’ XXX XX XXXXXXX XX a protected XXXXXX XXXXX would XXXXX XX personal XXXXXXX. XXXXXXX, the second part, ‘all XXXXXX XXXXXXXX should XX XXXXXX’, may be considered a threat XXXXXXX it XX an exhortation of harming XXXXXXXXX which is XXXXXXXXXX XX a XXXXX.
Hence, from XXX above argument it should XXX XX allowed XX say anything, XX XXXXXX XX any XXXXX. XXXX the social media XXX be seen as a source XX threat where XXXX XXXXXX XX being XXXXXX. Especially, XXXX certain words are XXXXX subjected to XXXXXXX people such XX XXX XXXXXX, then it XXX be a sign of XXXXXX XX which XXX jeopardize the security of XXX police.
Criminal Charges
Something XXXX XX XXXX in XXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXX XXXXX or XXXXXX platforms XXXXXX XX XXXX as the basis of XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX. This is because XXXX of XXXX speech are usually XXXXXX claims XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXX offensive. Some XXXXXXX promote the XXXXXXXX of XXXXXXX behavior that XXXXX be XXXXXXXXXXX to a XXXXXXXX group of people. For XXXXXXXX, XXX music XXXXXXXXX has XXXXXXX that XXXXX XXXXXXX the violation of other people’s rights. XX XXX also involve XXXXXXX speech that would insight XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX and other XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX that targets a given XXXXX (Vedantam, XXXX). XXXXXX XXXX XX XXXX XX XXXXXX media can XXXXXXX racism and XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XX XXX ethical to the XXXXXX norms. Hence, there is XXXX for considering XXXX speech XX criminal charges XXXXX.
XXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXX XX Rules
We decide XXXX XXXX speech would XX a XXXXXXXXX of the rules when it is XXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXX, or there XX enough evidence XXXX a XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX the XXXXXXXXX of XXX speech XXX bad in harmful. XXXXXXXXX, the XXXXXXXXXX speeches XXX be XXXXXXXXX XX XXXX and if XXX defendants XX XXXXXXXX XXXXX get confronted XXXX lyrics that XXXX have XXXXXXX, they can be XXXX XX XXXXXXXX XX a XXXXXXXX case (Debora, 2020). XX XXX XXXXX or XXXXXX XX an XXXXXXXX of intent or motive XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX harmful, then it can XX XXXX as a XXXX threat.
XX XXX also XXXXXX that the speech has violated rules if the limits for XXXXXXXXX speech or XXXXXXXX opinion XX XXXXXXXX. There XXX XXXXXX which XXX XXXXXXXXXX XX opinion XXX not XXXXXXXXX whether in XXXXXX or in XXXX. However, when XXX speech is directed to a specific XXXXX XXX has XXX XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXX or XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX security of the targeted XXXXX, XXXX we XXX decide XXXX a song or a XXXXXX is XXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX (XXXXXX, 2018). XXXXX, the XXXXXXXXXX individual XXX be XXXXXXXX in a XXXXXXXX XXXXXX and should be able XX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX of XXX XXXXXX or XXXX lyric.
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXX paper XXX achieved XXX XXXXXXXXXXX of how it is important to balance between freedom XX speech and XXXXXXXXX malicious speech or lyric. XXXXX XX XXX importance XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX between offensive speech XXX XXXXXX that is XXXXXXXXX and considered a personal XXXXXXX. Proper ways of deciding XXXX XXXXXXXXXXX the XXXXXXXXX of the rules should be set in place to control the effects of harmful speech. There is XXXX XXX XXXX to XXXX XXX XXXXX of criminal charges which XXXXX XX held to those who are XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX violence or hate XXXXXX XXXXXXX social XXXXX platforms or XXXXX.
References
XXXXXX, X. (XXXX). XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and Judicial XXXXXXXX-XXXXXX: Ideas, Institutions, and XXXXXX in French XXXX XXXXX XXXX Speech Rulings. XXXXX Politics, XX(1), 53-85.
Debora, C. (2020). Rap XXXXXX in Evidence: Is it a Crime XX Rhyme? Retrieved fromXXXXX://XXX.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.com/XXXXXXXXX/XXX-lyrics-XXXXXXXX-is-it-a-XXXXX-rhyme.XXX
XXXXXXXX, S. (XXXX). Rap XX Trial: XXX XX Aspiring Musician's Words Led XX XXXXXX XXXX. XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX://www.XXX.org/2018/05/07/XXXXXXXXX/rap-on-XXXXX-how-an-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXXX-XXXXX-led-XX-prison-time