Introduction
Freedom of mass information is considered the central principle in any democratic state. It is necessary for political pluralism and cultural diversity for individuals and their associations. Despite this, permissiveness can have negative consequences since the unrestricted freedom always drives to the repression. Therefore, the issue of media freedom is always on the agenda in all democratic societies, and it is crucial to examine it’s pros and cons to assess the possible risks and prospects.
Pros
Complete independence in statements could be the reason of further legitimate propaganda. For example, people would have the right to incite hatred towards social groups or other states, which could result in wars and internecine strife. Moreover, perpetrators can use media for disseminating radical ideas and sharing harmful materials, including videos of terrorist attacks and hostage killings (Yar, 2018). They try to sow fear and chaos through the Internet and manipulate their actual and potential followers. Therefore, restrictions on freedom on the social media will make it possible to suppress the activities of extremists more effectively. Limitations may help to recognize that when expressing thoughts and opinions, one should stick to other legitimate rights. Restrictions promote law and order in the digital realm, which in turn will reduce the incidence of cyberbullying, and abusive behavior on the Internet.
Cons
Self-expression is an integral part of one’s social life as it is based on the presence of one’s point of view and precise personal positions. Its absence limits the opportunities for vertical and horizontal interaction between people (Balkin, 2019). Freedom of speech allows one to exchange information that is valuable for the development of society. Citizens cannot regard the opinion of the government, which uses censorship, as a reliable data source. The absence of restrictions provides numerous opportunities for the development of important aspects of people’s lives. Complete freedom of speech guarantees a variety of standpoints and a large number of independent publications that contribute to a comprehensive view of events.
Conclusion
In conclusion, freedom of speech is an indispensable part of modern life and that it would be a straightforward solution to place restrictions on it. However, it is essential to comprehend that permissiveness has negative consequences and opens vast opportunities, especially for abusers. Therefore, it should be designated that one should be responsible for the words on the Internet in case they cross personal boundaries.
References
Barner, C. (2012). Social media and communication. New York, NY: Sage.
Brownlie, D. (2012). Andragogy. Web.
Cummings, J. N., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2014). The quality of online social relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103–108.