Tiffany G-S.
While many proud American patriots find themselves joining the Armed Forces to defend the very rights all American citizens are guaranteed those rights are not always protected. College campuses and universities, for example, have a history of being safe spaces to learn and express a diversity of opinions. Since the era of the Vietnam war, college students have often felt inclined to express their free speech and other freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment, and they have often done so under the name of their university. Currently, in the United States, colleges and universities (public especially) claim to endorse and encourage their students’ guarantees under the First Amendment, however this is not always the case as sad as that is. This does not necessarily mean that the First Amendment is under attack at colleges and universities in the United States, but it is still threatened to an extent.
There have been examples in the recent past of censorship and limiting of free speech in colleges such as certain speakers being turned away from universities based on their ideologies of political affiliation. Commonly dubbed “disinviting,” the act of turning away speakers after they have been invited (either by students or by the university itself) is often done to maintain the reputation or save the face of the university particularly when the invited speaker is controversial or has a controversial background. Take, for example, California State University disinviting Ben Shapiro in 2016 after his proposed lecture. Shapiro threatened legal action against the university, eventually reclaiming his right to speak. This comes to show that some colleges and universities, while still claiming to promote free speech, deny it at times that it stands to soil their reputation.
Further suppression of the First Amendment can be seen in universities through the students themselves. Across the nation, there has been a string of professor firings based on the nature of the materials being taught. Just recently, a professor was dismissed from Hamline University (in St. Paul, Minnesota) for showing her art history class paintings of the Prophet Muhammad. Such dismissal merely to appeal to the opinions and whims of the students is a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
Although the same opinions are not shared or wholly understood by each individual in this nation, everyone still deserves the right to speak their mind and have their voice heard. This is one of the primary pillars upon which these United states of America were founded, and it is what many brave men and women serve for every day. Being able to think critically about a variety of opinions is part of the reason students attend post-secondary education in the United States. As it is now, several college institutions and universities do not promote the growth of opinion and free speaking to their best capabilities, yet they still do so to the extent that the United States is recognizable as a nation that promotes free speech and diversity.
While many proud American patriots find themselves joining the Armed Forces to defend the very rights all American citizens are guaranteed those rights are not always protected. College campuses and universities, for example, have a history of being safe spaces to learn and express a diversity of opinions. Since the era of the Vietnam war, college students have often felt inclined to express their free speech and other freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment, and they have often done so under the name of their university. Currently, in the United States, colleges and universities (public especially) claim to endorse and encourage their students’ guarantees under the First Amendment, however this is not always the case as sad as that is. This does not necessarily mean that the First Amendment is under attack at colleges and universities in the United States, but it is still threatened to an extent.
There have been examples in the recent past of censorship and limiting of free speech in colleges such as certain speakers being turned away from universities based on their ideologies of political affiliation. Commonly dubbed “disinviting,” the act of turning away speakers after they have been invited (either by students or by the university itself) is often done to maintain the reputation or save the face of the university particularly when the invited speaker is controversial or has a controversial background. Take, for example, California State University disinviting Ben Shapiro in 2016 after his proposed lecture. Shapiro threatened legal action against the university, eventually reclaiming his right to speak. This comes to show that some colleges and universities, while still claiming to promote free speech, deny it at times that it stands to soil their reputation.
Further suppression of the First Amendment can be seen in universities through the students themselves. Across the nation, there has been a string of professor firings based on the nature of the materials being taught. Just recently, a professor was dismissed from Hamline University (in St. Paul, Minnesota) for showing her art history class paintings of the Prophet Muhammad. Such dismissal merely to appeal to the opinions and whims of the students is a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
Although the same opinions are not shared or wholly understood by each individual in this nation, everyone still deserves the right to speak their mind and have their voice heard. This is one of the primary pillars upon which these United states of America were founded, and it is what many brave men and women serve for every day. Being able to think critically about a variety of opinions is part of the reason students attend post-secondary education in the United States. As it is now, several college institutions and universities do not promote the growth of opinion and free speaking to their best capabilities, yet they still do so to the extent that the United States is recognizable as a nation that promotes free speech and diversity.
Katelyn F
One change I would like to see in our government is better regulation of the media during election times. Let me preface this by saying I do not want to censor anything. I believe that everything that is said by the media needs to be verifiably true. This includes social media, news media, newspapers, and anything in between. If something was to be said that is untrue, which has happened several times recently, the media company needs to take responsibility for it. The way to take responsibility for it would be to dedicate an entire segment of their broadcast to share and speak on the incident. This segment must be aired at the time that has on average their highest viewer rating. There would be several things that would take place during this time. First, they would need to apologize for spreading misinformation. They would then need to say why it was false and what the truth is. Finally, and most importantly they need to say why they decided to say what they said even though it was not verified to be true. Adding in this last part would force them to come up with a reason why they thought it would be ok to lie. I do not think they would tell the truth when saying this but even so what reason could they give to make it sound okay? This would be an extreme way of handling the issue of misinformation during elections and a way that, frankly, I do not think would ever happen.
One other option would be to get rid on any form of voting except in person voting. This includes mail in votes or any electronic voting that does not take place at a certified voting location. It is too easy to exploit the system when not voting at physical location. I would also like to add some sort of verification for in person voting. This could be something as simple as when you get your voter registration done you get a barcode that must be scanned once you are about to vote. When you scan it a picture of you is brought up and the person behind the counter must verify it is you. Then when you vote your barcode can no longer be used for a certain amount of time. This would help limit voters’ fraud. By doing things like this I believe it would also increase voter turnout. One thing I hear more than anything on college campuses is “my vote doesn’t matter.” If people had faith their vote mattered and that their voice would be heard, they would be more likely to get out and vote! A right that is very important and is not encouraged in other places around the world. One we as a country need to take more seriously and cherish.
One change I would like to see in our government is better regulation of the media during election times. Let me preface this by saying I do not want to censor anything. I believe that everything that is said by the media needs to be verifiably true. This includes social media, news media, newspapers, and anything in between. If something was to be said that is untrue, which has happened several times recently, the media company needs to take responsibility for it. The way to take responsibility for it would be to dedicate an entire segment of their broadcast to share and speak on the incident. This segment must be aired at the time that has on average their highest viewer rating. There would be several things that would take place during this time. First, they would need to apologize for spreading misinformation. They would then need to say why it was false and what the truth is. Finally, and most importantly they need to say why they decided to say what they said even though it was not verified to be true. Adding in this last part would force them to come up with a reason why they thought it would be ok to lie. I do not think they would tell the truth when saying this but even so what reason could they give to make it sound okay? This would be an extreme way of handling the issue of misinformation during elections and a way that, frankly, I do not think would ever happen.
One other option would be to get rid on any form of voting except in person voting. This includes mail in votes or any electronic voting that does not take place at a certified voting location. It is too easy to exploit the system when not voting at physical location. I would also like to add some sort of verification for in person voting. This could be something as simple as when you get your voter registration done you get a barcode that must be scanned once you are about to vote. When you scan it a picture of you is brought up and the person behind the counter must verify it is you. Then when you vote your barcode can no longer be used for a certain amount of time. This would help limit voters’ fraud. By doing things like this I believe it would also increase voter turnout. One thing I hear more than anything on college campuses is “my vote doesn’t matter.” If people had faith their vote mattered and that their voice would be heard, they would be more likely to get out and vote! A right that is very important and is not encouraged in other places around the world. One we as a country need to take more seriously and cherish.
