Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

148094-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Americans today face an age of information overload. With the evolution of Media 3.0, the internet, and the rise of Media 3.5—i.e., social media—relatively new communication technologies present pressing challenges for the First Amendment in American society. Twentieth century law defined freedom of expression, but in an information-limited world. By

Americans today face an age of information overload. With the evolution of Media 3.0, the internet, and the rise of Media 3.5—i.e., social media—relatively new communication technologies present pressing challenges for the First Amendment in American society. Twentieth century law defined freedom of expression, but in an information-limited world. By contrast, the twenty-first century is seeing the emergence of a world that is overloaded with information, largely shaped by an “unintentional press”—social media. Americans today rely on just a small concentration of private technology powerhouses exercising both economic and social influence over American society. This raises questions about censorship, access, and misinformation. While the First Amendment protects speech from government censorship only, First Amendment ideology is largely ingrained across American culture, including on social media. Technological advances arguably have made entry into the marketplace of ideas—a fundamental First Amendment doctrine—more accessible, but also more problematic for the average American, increasing his/her potential exposure to misinformation. <br/><br/>This thesis uses political and judicial frameworks to evaluate modern misinformation trends, social media platforms and current misinformation efforts, against the background of two misinformation accelerants in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and U.S. presidential election. Throughout history, times of hardship and intense fear have contributed to the shaping of First Amendment jurisprudence. Thus, this thesis looks at how fear can intensify the spread of misinformation and influence free speech values. Extensive research was conducted to provide the historical context behind relevant modern literature. This thesis then concludes with three solutions to misinformation that are supported by critical American free speech theory.

ContributorsCochrane, Kylie Marie (Author) / Russomanno, Joseph (Thesis director) / Roschke, Kristy (Committee member) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Comm (Contributor, Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
132242-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
America has been widely considered a great democratic experiment, which is a characterization attributed to Thomas Jefferson. An experiment can be designed to use trial-and-error methods to find a certain outcome. While not a conscious effort, the United States has experienced a trial-and-error experimental process in developing legislation that will

America has been widely considered a great democratic experiment, which is a characterization attributed to Thomas Jefferson. An experiment can be designed to use trial-and-error methods to find a certain outcome. While not a conscious effort, the United States has experienced a trial-and-error experimental process in developing legislation that will restrict dangerous misinformation without violating the speech and press clauses of the First Amendment. In several of his personal writings and official speeches, Jefferson advised against additional government intervention with regard to filtering true and false information published by the press or distributed by citizens. His argument is a guiding theme throughout this thesis, which explores that experimental process and its relation to contemporary efforts to address and prevent future phenomena like the fake news outbreak of 2016.
This thesis utilizes an examination of examples of laws designed to control misinformation, past and present, then using those examples to provide context to both arguments in favor of and opposing new misinformation laws. Extensive archival research was conducted to ensure that accurate historical reflection could be included in offering information about historical examples, as well as through application of relevant literature. The possible effects on the electorate and the practices of the press by those laws of the past and potential proposals for new legislation are also discussed in an effort to provide further context to, and support for, the conclusions reached. Those conclusions include that additional regulation is necessary to discourage the creation and distribution of fake news and misinformation in order to protect the public from the violence or imminent unlawful action they may cause.
Created2019-05
132277-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
There are certain clear-cut instances where speech is used only to harm, where the context of the situation does not affect or alter the meaning. These instances, however, are rare. The issue presented in Matal v. Tam (2017) highlights the government’s inability to, and difficulty in, attempting to prohibit assumed

There are certain clear-cut instances where speech is used only to harm, where the context of the situation does not affect or alter the meaning. These instances, however, are rare. The issue presented in Matal v. Tam (2017) highlights the government’s inability to, and difficulty in, attempting to prohibit assumed offensive content. This thesis argues that even in the rare and overt instances, the government is required to abstain from regulating hate speech, and that the government will not be able to successfully adopt advocate proposed hate-speech regulations. This thesis embraces the concept of precedent as the most binding force in First Amendment questions. It also begins argumentation at the most important era of First Amendment issues, and then analyzes numerous cases spanning nearly one hundred years. Utilizing case rulings, this thesis examines the American social context, as well as academic and historical writings, throughout the past century. Ultimately, this thesis finds that the decision in Matal was not surprising, and that it supports a contemporary First Amendment jurisprudence that believes in a strong divide between the government and private speech. The implications of Matal have been almost immediate, with several lawsuits being decided or brought to court based on the precedent. The decision implies that hate-speech regulations, already given little credence, will share a similar outcome to the law in Matal.
ContributorsSmith, Case Hilliard (Author) / Russomanno, Joseph (Thesis director) / Russell, Dennis (Committee member) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism & Mass Comm (Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05