For this discussion, we learn that not all speech is created equal.
There are four proprietary ways in which speech can harm a person: offensive speech, fighting words, hate speech, and intimidation or threats. According to our law, “the words and images they use alienate, cause fear and increase conflict.” They are performed the speech that are meant to hurt and caused negative emotion.
This form of speech can be unprotected in the First Amendment in some cases. In the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire Supreme court case in 1942, Chaplinsky was arrested for disturbing the peace. When police came up to him, he started saying profanity and slurs toward the police officer. Though America has speech protected under the First Amendment, the court ruled that “the First Amendment did not protect narrow categories of speech that make no contribution to the discussion of ideas or the search for truth.” Chaplinsky’s remarks were considered fighting words “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite immediate breach of peace”
(link for more info: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/315/568/ )
We also learned more about the stigma of violent influence on forms of media. The Federal Trade Commission considers children exposed to entertainment media does not cause them directly to commit violent acts. However, there are some arguments that such exposure could lessen the severity of these acts for entertainment purposes. For example, Video games like Call of Duty kid give kids expose children to physical harm. Shows that illustrate riskier content such as rape could find the TV company for negligence if someone reasonably was influenced by that show. Game shows and other forms of media could also give consumers harmful images that could potentially horrify and traumatize someone.
I personally believe that the forms in which media can incite harm is as effective of an argument that the Bible does as well. As humans we consume knowledge in the things we see, hear, say, and feel. in my opinion it is unreasonable two sensor anyone and everyone from these so-called negative actions. Rather I think it's important to be aware of such atrocities to prepare yourself in the future. The difference between doing something and not doing something boils down to choose. And it is our job to manage ourselves.
My peers felt the same toward this sentiment. Kim states “I do agree that in most cases the media are not liable for harm because it is not their job to direct the viewers moral compass. However, I do think that they should be more vigilant of the content they publish and distribute.”
Reference:
Susan Dente Ross, Reynolds, A., & Trager, R. (2020). The law of journalism and mass communication (17th ed., pp. 257–263, 273–282, 271-272). Cq Press, An Imprint Of Sage Publications, Inc.