The author is arguing that the Supreme Court should put a stop on all regulation regarding broadcast television. The main argument is that new media sources, such as the Internet, are not limited by the First Amendment, whereas broadcast television still suffers from it. The Internet, in general, provides access to countless media where speech is not regulated. According to the author, censorship in broadcast television is highly inconsistent; some words can be said, while some words cannot be said; some programs have the ability to have their characters speak freely, while some don't, because of artistic value. Personally, I do not have a clear stance on this topic. As a college student, I could argue for the end of free speech regulation in broadcast television, as it would not affect me personally. However, as a probable parent in the future, I surely do not want my children to hear certain expletives on television. I do agree that it is unfair for the Internet to be mostly uncensored, while broadcast television must follow certain regulations. Television censorship, I believe, is for the benefit of our children. In today’s world, the Internet is becoming more and more an essential component in American lives. I would assume today’s children to be much more involved with the Internet than I was at that age. Therefore, I do believe that there should be censorship on the Internet as well. Overall, I believe free speech should still be regulated in broadcast television, as I believe it protects our children.
No comments:
Post a Comment