Free Expression and Popular Opinion: Cases and Principles

In Freedom for the Thought We Hate, Anthony Lewis makes the point that free speech is not always popular. In fact, Lewis writes, "Some of the greatest judicial opinions have run against popular opinion—as did those of [Justice] Holmes and Brandeis when they dissented from the punishment of radical speech" (p. 180). For this final blog post, briefly describe and explain one Supreme Court case that has been at odds with popular opinion. Note: To assist you in this task, refer to the "Table of Cases" in the Lewis book, pp. 193-195.

Write about 200-250 words (about 13-15 sentences). As noted above, your task is to (1) describe the most important facts of the case you select and (2) explain how and why the decision in this case was unpopular.

This assignment is due by midnight on Tuesday, November 27. We will discuss these cases in our class on Wednesday at 2 p.m. See you then.

The First Amendment: An Unfinished Tale

In his book Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, Anthony Lewis traces the back-and-forth nature of First Amendment freedoms. "Ours is the most outspoken society on earth," he writes on the first page of the Introduction. Yet Lewis also notes that U.S. history is littered with restrictions on free speech, actions that have not lived up to the high ideals and liberties of the First Amendment.

For this blog assignment, read Lewis' Introduction as well as Chapters 1-5. From these chapters, identify one significant example of a failure of the First Amendment to protect the free expression rights of the citizens. Briefly explain the facts and First Amendment issues of your case and answer these questions: (1) Why did this breech of the First Amendment occur at the time it occurred? and (2) What is the significance of this case for us today?

Write about 250 words (about 14 sentences) for this post. Cite specifics from the reading to support your examples and strengthen your arguments. See you Monday.

Practicing Journalism vs. Staying in Business: Who Do Journalists Work For?

In Chapter 3 of The Elements of Journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel make this statement:

By the end of the twentieth century, in deed if not in name, America's journalistic leaders had been transformed into businesspeople. Half of them report that they spend at least a third of their time on business matters rather than on journalism.

As citizens, we should be alarmed.

Based on your reading of Chapter 3, write a response to this assertion. In other words, should we be alarmed that journalism is a business? Why is this a problem? What difference does it make? Or is it a problem at all? If not, why not?

Refer to the examples in the chapter (or other recent examples you discover) and write a short essay of about 150 words (about 10 sentences) in response to the Kovach and Rosenstiel statement. Post your response by midnight Sunday. We will discuss these responses in class on Monday. See you then.

Free Expression in Early America: The Role of the Printed Word

The final two chapters of David Copeland's book, The Idea of a Free Press, review the development and growth of printing and newspapers in colonial America. In chapter seven Copeland writes about the many uses of the printed word in the colonies, one of which was public debate. Based on your reading of this chapter, identify and discuss a significant, specific role that the press played in the development of free expression. In other words, what role did the printed word play in establishing the American system of free expression?

For this assignment, write about 200 words (about 13 or 14 sentences). Remember, specifics are better than generalities, so cite specific details from chapters seven and eight as you make your argument.

This assignment is due by midnight Sunday, October 7. Also, remember to sign your name to the post. 

Banned Books Week: A Reading from Lolita

In recognition of this year's Banned Books Week, I am posting this short reading from Vladimir's Nabokov's 1955 novel, Lolita.

Defending Free Expression: A Short Video

Free Speech v. Censorship: Applying Principles to Real-World Cases

It's easy to argue for free speech when the speech you are advocating is popular and agreeable. It's much harder to support free speech when the speech is unpopular, disagreeable and even hateful.

This situation, which I call "the paradox of free expression," has been in the news lately because of the anti-Muslim film that was posted on YouTube and which inspired anti-American demonstrations and violence in the Middle East and elsewhere.

In fact, the nature of the film and the violent response to it have renewed calls for government action against the filmmaker and calls for YouTube to remove the film from its site. Commenting on all of this, civil liberties writer Glenn Greenwald points out that neither the American left or right has taken a principled stand for free speech. Both sides have been quick to abandon a consistent free speech position and criticize YouTube. Both sides have pushed for government action to remove the film from the Internet.

Greenwald notes, however, that government attempts to censor political speech runs counter to the free speech philosophy of the First Amendment. Free expression is supposed to protect controversial and offensive ideas, he notes. Moreover, he continues, "the White House has no business sticking its nose into which videos YouTube decides to publish or suppress." (A link to Greenwald's column is here.) 

For this blog assignment, read the entire Greenwald column and think about his arguments in light of our recent class readings. What would Milton say about the current controversy? What position would Locke or Cato take on these matters? In other words, what ideas or principles would these thinkers apply to this situation?

For this blog assignment, identify one or more free speech principles from Milton, Locke or Cato and apply them to the current controversy. Explain how your principle(s) applies to the controversy and how it attempts to resolve the debate over offensive speech.

Write about 250 words, which is about 15 sentences. Note: This is a longer post than previous blog assignments.

Enlightenment England and the Move Toward a Free Press

In Chapter 3 of The Idea of a Free Press, Copeland traces some of the historical developments that led to a free press in England. Based on your reading of the chapter, identify and explain the significance of one important historical event or incident that moved the English press closer to a system of free expression. Because this chapter is concerned with the growth of news, select an event or incident that involves news.

Write your post in the comments section below. For this post, write about 100 words (about seven or eight sentences). To do this well, cite specific details from Copeland and explain why your development is important in the growth of a free press in England. Originality is important too. It is bad form to repeat or rewrite what another student has already posted.

Also: Be prepared to discuss and defend your historical development in class. See you Monday.

Free Reading, Or Not: Book Censorship in China

Free expression is an old but on-going idea, a concept that shifts with the times. That's one lesson of a story I noticed a couple of days ago about writing, reading and publishing in China.

As the story notes, publishing fiction can be a tricky business in China, a nation that has not embraced the Western idea of free expression. Due to official censorship, self-censorship and other factors, Western readers get a narrow slice of Chinese literature and much of that comes from Chinese writers based outside of China.

Technology is also a factor, the story notes, as more and more Chinese fiction is "published" online.

There's more about writing and censorship in China here.

God, Religion and Liberty of Conscience

The first two chapters of David Copeland's book, The Idea of a Free Press, have a lot to say about religion and its role in the development of free expression. Copeland writes especially about the religion and an idea he calls "liberty of conscience" in Enlightenment England. But what was the connection between religion and liberty of conscience? How did a belief in God translate into notions of free expression?

Your assignment for this blog post is answer those questions. Do this by writing about 100 words (about 7 or 8 sentences) in which you identify in the reading at least one significant "real world" link between religion and the development of liberty. Beyond identifying that link, explain the significance of that connection on the development of free expression. That is, explain why this link was important.

Read these chapters carefully so that you will have a thoughtful and original short essay. We will be discussing these posts on Monday. See you then. 

Free Expression on the Web: Questions, Answers and Discussion

Watergate reporter Bob Woodward signing my copy of "All the President's Men" on campus last semester.

This is the first posting for the 2012 edition of the TU communication class History and Philosophy of Free Expression. As your instructor, I will be posting prompts and discussion questions about class readings on this site.

Following the schedule in the syllabus, you are to write succinct answers to these questions. The idea behind these blog posts is to push you to read and think carefully about the topics of the readings.

Your comments are due no later midnight on the day before the class. Be prepared to discuss your answers in class.

See you soon in Oliphant 141!

Elements of Journalism: Additional Ideas and Comments on Kovach & Rosenstiel

As the fall semester winds down, I want to give you a chance to make some final comments on the nature and purpose of journalism and free expression. In other words, I want you to spend some quality time with the last few chapters of the Kovach and Rosenstiel book so that you can make some thoughtful comments on the ideas you find there. More precisely, take a look at chapters 7-11 in The Elements of Journalism and select an important idea or two from the text to discuss on this blog.

Questions: What key idea or ideas do Kovach and Rosenstiel advance in the last half of their book? Why is this idea significant? What does this idea contribute to the history and philosophy of free expression or the advancement of American journalism? How does this idea make the individual, the society or our democracy better?

As always, the quality of your comment is more important than the length of your post. Also, specific ideas based on short quotations from the text are better than vague ideas based on generalities. 

Journalism and the Problem of Objectivity

In The Elements of Journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel write about objectivity and its role in contemporary journalism. More specifically, the authors note that objectivity has lost its meaning in journalism and needs to be replaced by other ways of thinking about reporting.

Questions: Based on your reading of Elements of Journalism, write a commentary that addresses the following questions. What is the problem with objectivity? Why and how did objectivity lose its meaning in journalism? What do the authors propose as a replacement for objectivity? Will this replacement work? If so, how well?

As always, write a paragraph or two that addresses these questions in a thoughtful and specific way. Remember to sign your posting.

Turning Points for Free Expression

In Chapter 6 of The Idea of a Free Press, Copeland writes about "turning points" in the American search for free expression. One of those turning points was the now-famous trial of John Peter Zenger, a case I introduced to you a couple of weeks ago. But the Zenger case was not the only "turning point" in the rise of American free expression, as Copeland makes clear. 

Questions: Based on your reading of Chapter 6, identify and discuss at least one significant event or development (not including the Zenger case) that represents a turning point in America's struggle for free expression. Why was this event or development important? What significance did it have? Who was involved? 

Write a substantive paragraph in the comments section below that addresses these questions. Happy reading. 

American Origins: Print Culture and Its Obstacles in the Colonies

In Chapter Five of his book The Idea of a Free Press, David Copeland writes about the rise of printing and print culture in the American colonies. The first printing press arrived in North America in 1638, he notes, and over time, the printed word became vital to the lives of the colonists. But the rise of print culture in America was not quick nor easy. As Copeland points out, there were many obstacles to the spread of printing in the colonies and it took some years before books, pamphlets, broadsides, newsletters, and newspapers became widespread in the colonies.

Questions: Why did printing and print culture take so long to become established in the colonies? What general and specific obstacles hindered the rise of printing? For this posting, identify and discuss at least two obstacles to print culture in America, including one obstacle that is different from the English experience. 

As always, be specific. Cite particular passages (with page numbers) from the text. Also, don't forget to sign your name in your post. 

Up Next: Thinking about Banned Books

Every year since 1982, the American Library Association (ALA) has sponsored Banned Books Week, an event that highlights the freedom to read. According to the ALA, Banned Books Week is the only national celebration of the freedom to read, a freedom that is easily overlooked and often taken for granted.

For the TU Free Expression class this year, I want students to consider the freedom to read and the notion of banned books. It turns out than most books aren't "banned" at all. Instead, they are "challenged" for a variety of reasons. Not surprisingly, a lot of books are challenged because of sex, violence and language. Other books are challenged because they are offensive to various religious, racial or ethnic groups. 

Whatever the case, there is a growing list of challenged books. The ALA reports that more than a thousand books have been challenged since 1982, including more than 400 in 2007 alone. The books challenged over the years include a number of literary classics such as Leaves of Grass, Madame Bovary, The Great Gatsby, 1984, Brave New World, The Diary of Ann Frank, The Color Purple and many, many more. More recently, many children's books have been challenged by parents who object to the ideas, themes or language in some children's literature. Many of these books are challenged because of their positive messages about homosexuality. 

Questions: All of this raises a number of thorny questions. What does the freedom to read really mean in the U.S.? How does it apply to public libraries? How does it apply to public schools? If it doesn't apply to minors, at what age should minors be able to exercise their freedom to read? When does the freedom to read interfere with the parents' right to control what their children read? Should religious, racial or ethnic groups be highly offended by negative depictions in books?

In celebration of Banned Books Week, I am asking each student to find and read some portion of a banned book. Once they have studied the book, I want each student to respond to it in the "Comments" section of this blog. Address the following questions: What was so objectionable about the book?  How did the author treat this material? Is there a justification for challenging the book for adults? For older children? For younger children? Why or why not? 

Head to the library and find a banned book. Happy reading. 

Free Expression Polemicists: Who Speaks to You?

The philosophy of free expression has been developed over many centuries by many thinkers and writers. Plato, Milton, Lilburne, Locke, Hobbes, and Cato have all contributed to the idea of free expression by raising important issues about the truth and reality, democracy, the nature of civil society, and free speech and press. 

Based on your reading thus far, which of these writers is the most important in the modern understanding of free expression? In other words, which of these writers is the most important to you? Why? Write a paragraph or so that explains and justifies your choice for the most significant free expression advocate. Be specific in your reasoning. 

What is Truth and How Can Journalists Pursue It?

In The Elements of Journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel contemplate the meaning of truth in journalism. Truth, they write, is the first principle of journalism, but it is also the most confusing. Based on their discussion (see Chapter 2), consider the nature of truth and the issues journalists face in seeking it. Then write a short post addressing major parts of the following questions: 

Questions: In journalism, what does "the truth" mean? Is it the same as "the facts"? More generally, is it possible to achieve truth in journalism? Why or why not? How can journalists pursue the truth more conscientiously? 

First Blog Post: The Enlightenment Legacy

In The Idea of a Free Press, Copeland writes about the legacy of the Enlightenment, a legacy that emphasizes human reason. Enlightenment thinkers, Copeland says, "combined their religious beliefs with a new way of looking at the world." That is, God gave humankind the ability to reason and thus people could understand the world around them, even man himself. As Copeland writes, summarizing Enlightenment thinking, "God could not, would not, reveal, create, or act in any manner contrary to humankind's ability to reason." 

Questions: What do you think of this Enlightenment idea? Did it make sense in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries? Does it make sense today? Why or why not? 

Using the web to think about free expression

This blog has been created to encourage student engagement and interaction on topics related to the Fall 2008 edition of History and Philosophy of Free Expression, a communication class taught by me, Prof. John Coward.

The idea is simple: I will be posting comments, quotations, and other statements on this site and students will be strongly encouraged (that is, required) to add their own comments and ideas about these posts. If we all work at it, we will create an on-going dialogue of ideas, facts, proposals, criticisms, counter-proposals, and other arguments about the history of free expression and the ideas that link free expression to the democratic experience in the United States.

So watch this space. More ideas coming soon.