lstephenson21ahsgov

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Civic Action Assessment of Issue

1. I have not volunteered or publicly spoken out about this issue. I fear that my issue is a tough one to help solve because really is comes down to state legislators and lawmakers. However I have personally learned a lot about this issue and find that information very valuable. The freedom of speech online is only going to grow more important as Internet voices become more relevant. When that happens in the near future I will have confidence about my civil rights and this issue. 

2. In the future I am willing to openly write about this topic. If I ever get int blogging or have a platform to write to lots of people, the importance of the freedom of speech online is definitely something worth writing about. Also if there ever is an issue with the freedom of speech online, where a corporation is suppressing user voices, I will speak out about it. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Legaslative and Executive Action

1. The most recent and applicable bill to the freedom of speech online is S.J.Res. 58: A joint resolution expressing support for freedom of conscience.

2. Congress ordered it in October of 2019 and it has yet to pass the House or Senate. 

3. This bill doesn’t entirely relate to the freedom of speech online but does relate to the first amendment in the sense that it helps protect the freedom of belief and religion. 

4. The Bill itself was sponsored by a Republican from Nebraska, Benjamin Sasse. 

5. It was assigned to the 116th Congress. 

6. I would encourage them to vote no on this bill. It seems the first amendment already protects all beliefs and religions and there seems to be no issues with that amendment, so there doesn’t really seem to be a good reason for this bill in my opinion. 

7. The Department of Justice. 

8. The Department of Justice’s job is to ensure the safety and well-being of the citizens of the United States. The first amendment ensures a lot of freedoms that the citizens have and the department of justice ensures that nothing can alter or eliminate those freedoms. 

9. William Barr is the current attorney general of the Department of Justice. Barr seems pretty official in becoming the attorney general though his political background is rather short. He was appointed by Trump in 2019 and has served as a Republican. 

10. This department has a privacy program that protects the freedom of speech online and user privacy online. This program seems to protect these freedoms pretty well. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

California Proposition Assignment

Proposition 24: amends consumer privacy laws

This proposition helps ensure consumer privacy online with social media websites. 

25 million dollars tp execute. 

This proposition was approved. I was surprised by this since it would cost so much tax money. 

The proposition’s initiative creator, Alastair Mactaggart, donated 3 millions dollars to this proposition. He did this with the intentions of getting it on the California ballot in 2020. 

The arguments for this proposition are that consumer privacy online is a first amendment right and needs to be protected under state legislation. An argument against this proposition is that it requires a fair share of tax money that could be spent in more productive areas. 

I would have voted for this proposition. It seems right that the consumers online should have their privacy protected from these big corporations. 

one thing I found interesting is that Senator Bob Hertzberg agreed with Mactaggart’s stance on the proposition, saying "[t]here is no reason to negotiate". 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Political Interest Groups and PACs Assessment

The interest group I found that most benefits the protection of free speech online is the Progressive Patriot’s Fund. This organization’s goal is to protect and spread the founding principles of the constitution, including the first amendment right to free speech, in today’s political climate. Not a lot of information about their cause is listed, but a chart of the politicians they support is on the site. Generally the PPF supports those who are more democratic.  One person, which they support with an 88 percent rating, is Barbara Lee; a democratic senator on the House of Representatives. Unfortunately this interest group is located in Wisconsin but they are active online. Email would be the best form of reaching out and learning more about this group. 

The PAC I found is the Protected Freedom PAC. This PAC is dedicated to protecting the American freedoms designated in the constitution. They have spent a total of 6 million dollars with most of it in favor of the republican party (roughly 3 million). This was not a surprise to me since I expected most people in favor of gun rights to support this cause and most gun rights supporters happen to be republican. Most of the donors are from predominately red states. (one guy from Pensilvania donated 6 million dollars alone. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Election 2020 Presidential Candidates Assessment

For my presidential candidate I wanted to see what Roque de la Fuente Guerra and Kanye West’s stances were on the freedom of speech online. The American Independent Party has caught my attention because of Kanye’s unusual election campaign and I would love to learn more. 

Unfortunately I couldn’t find their standpoints on the freedom of speech online. I sent the following email:

Dear Rocky Fuente and Kanye West, The issue I am concerned about is the freedom of speech online.  I am concerned about this issue because The freedom of speech online is becoming more and more important with the internet growing rapidly.  I am currently a senior at Acalanes High School and I am researching this issue for my senior Government class.  Please clarify your stance on this issue.  Thank you so much for your time and good luck.

Sincerely, Liam Stephenson liam.stephenson21@auhsdschools.org

My stance on the issue of free speech on the internet is simple. Everybody should have a voice on the internet the same they do in real life. However I think it is best some monitoring be done online for user safety but the silencing of free speech is too far. Let the public say what they want without interfering by banning or silencing voices. 

Despite not finding anything about the freedom of speech online from the party, I looked at some of their opinions on matters like healthcare and immigration. And I actually agreed with some of their standpoints. I plan to keep my eye on this party in particular because of this. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Political Party Action

Each political party’s view on the freedom of speech in the internet. 

Republican: The republican party is in support of protecting the freedom of speech online but have concerns with fake news. 47% of republicans reported that they would be alright within limiting the freedom of speech online to prevent fake news from spreading. This would violate a constitutional right but at the same time, fake news is an issue. Republicans are also afraid that Joe Biden will threaten the freedom of speech online. 

Democrat: The democratic party is all for defending the freedom of speech but they rarely mentioned the online aspects of this right. However the democratic party is in favor of many freedoms such as religion, press, and others within the first amendment, so I think it’s safe to assume that they are in favor of free speech on the internet. 

Libertarian: The libertarian party is heavily in favor of free speech both online and in real life. They are strong advocates for criticizing the government and the freedom of speech is something that allows them to do that. They are even critical of the right to free speech but at the same time the libertarians acknowledge how helpful it is to them. 

Green: The green party all together is against the freedom of speech so it’s safe to say they are against it online as well. This isn’t a surprise as the green party is against other first amendment rights as well. They seem to be the only stand out party that is against free-speech. 

Peace and Freedom: This party is all for free speech. As it says in their party name, they advocate for freedom, so the freedom of speech is under their umbrella of encouraged freedoms. They serve as opposites to the green party in this regard. 

The party I most agree with is probably the republican. I am in favor of all first amendment rights on the internet and the republican party believes that as well. I also agree with their opinions about fake news. It is an issue that needs to be stopped and like 47% of republicans, I believe that sacrificing some of our free speech to stop fake news is a good idea. This view on the subject seems the most practical to mine. 

My point was not discussed in the presidential debate however it definitely has had a large impact on the debates and this election. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

Media Assessment of Issue

The first site I looked at regarding the freedom of speech on the internet was from a conservative perspective at https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/conservatives-flock-free-speech-social-media-app-which-has-started-n1232844

subject: the main subject of the article was how conservative voiced their concerns for the moderation of Twitter content. 

author: the author was James Wellemeyer who has worked with NBC for some time now. He never mentioned his personal views on the subject but rather reported on some statements from large conservative figures like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. 

context: the article was produced July 2, 2020 from the west coast. 

audience: NBC is relatively unbiased with their regular audience being around ten million people. This article wasn’t trying to be persuasive but rather factual. 

perspective: NBC is slightly conservative but more unbiased than most sites. In this article they were reporting on a conservative topic without presenting it in a conservative manner. 

significance: mostly quotes were used from conservative representatives. Most quotes were from Twitter. 

The second site I looked at was about the liberal side of freedom of speech from https://www.city-journal.org/html/liberals-versus-political-speech-14330.html

subject: the article goes over how liberals throughout history have tried to limit the freedom of speech for citizens and how they are trying to do so with the internet. 

author: John McGinnis who is a professor of constitutional law at Northwestern University and a journalist for the City Journal. 

context: written in the Spring of 2016 from Northwestern University in Illinois. 

audience: the City Journal is mostly conservative. One professor at Vanderbilt stated “City Journal’s print magazine offers a stimulating mix of hard-headed practicality and cutting-edge theory, with articles on everything from school financing and policing strategy to urban architecture and public health policy—right at your fingertips.” about it. 

perspective: City Journal is mostly conservative which makes sense why they are using an aggressive tone towards the liberal side of freedom of speech. 

significance: the city journal references supreme court cases and other news sources to back their claims. 

The third source I looked at was unbiased when discussing the freedom of speech online at https://www.ifs.org/research/regulating-the-internet-a-dangerous-trend-for-free-speech/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwqfz6BRD8ARIsAIXQCf0xJyRDGlJ2aTbCmgZx4gDNBqFl0UAasFDXH21MMUJenBaW9XpoTjQaAqlMEALw_wcB

subject: the article talks about how freedom of speech is in danger with the internet growing larger. 

author: Luke Wachob who is the communications director from this site. 

context: August 9,2018. The Institute of Free Speech is based out of Alexandria, Virginia. 

audience: The IFS usually travels to colleges around the country to inform students about their cause. They also receive steady viewership online. 

perspective: the IFS make it a point to be unbiased. Rather than trying to sway the reader one way or another, they try to inform the audience about the threat on free speech because of the internet. 

significance: the IFS provides mostly facts and then pieces together their argument. They reference the constitution as well, primarily the first amendment right of free speech. 

After looking at these three sites I learned a lot about the topic of free speech on the internet, as well as where to find different sources with different biases. 

[lstephenson21ahsgov]

I chose the civic action issue of freedom of speech because with the internet I believe some of the first amendment rights are being breached. With all types of social media and the internet, and with how popular it all is, it is very easy for the government to suppress what one says and control what one sees. This is a total breach of the first amendment right to freedom of speech. Originally it seemed good to limit what people see for their protection but now it has gotten out of hand. A good way of potentially fixing this issue would be to go back to how things originally were and only limit what is bad for people, and not what people want to see and say. I understand there is a fine line between the two and it may be hard to come up with an immediate solution, but as of now things need to change.