The First Amendment and Free Speech

During this past week and the Dorian fiasco, we were assigned to read and learn about topics such as the First Amendment, Free speech, hate speech, and microaggression. The first article I read illuminated the way in class discussions should be approached. The excerpt from, “I take your point” talks about the way to have a successful in class conversation. I believe London would define effective in-class discussion as when the skills of listening closely to each other, of engaging in meaningful exchanges, and of finding shared sources of meaning are put into practice. London explains that if you acknowledge what the other person says before moving on to address your own point then classroom conversations are enhanced. London states that, “Genuine understanding seems to be the exception rather than the norm in everyday communication.” I think that better communication is essential because as a culture we need to be able to overcome differences, find common ground, build meaning and purpose, and set directions together. I found it very interesting that the Greeks had such a strong connection with the power of dialogue. The article explains that the Greeks , “introduced the idea that individuals are not intelligent on their own, that it's only by reasoning together that they are able to uncover the truth for themselves.” The next article we read addressed the topic of micro aggression. The article is called “What exactly is a Microagression?” To my understanding, a microaggression ia s comment or insult made without the direct intent of hurting someone’s feelings but yet it still creates a discord between two individuals. These comments are often made based on stereotypes or assumptions. Personally I think that when addressing a microagression teachers and students should not tolerate these comments. However, if someone makes an unrepeated mistake they should be offered grace and an education on the mistake that they made. The next topic that we covered was communication skills. I read the article titled “12 Essential Communication Skills That Aren’t Taught in Schools at All” I believe that the most effective skill when communicating with members of the university community is proactive listening. Personally, I try to be a proactive listener all the time. I currently practice this by listening and writing down events in my planner so that I do not miss any mandatory things. I think these skills are very important skills for first-year students to master. These skills are important because you have to be able to communicate in college and especially in your field of work. I think the only thing that wasn’t mentioned in this article was that you must also do your research before you speak to someone. If you understand a persons background and know about your topic before you approach them then you will have more successful conversations. Students could use skills mentioned in the article to help them be successful as a first-year student. For example students could use empathy when interacting with peers. Students should ask great questions when interacting with advisors for good results. Finally, students should employ proactive listening with their professors to stay ahead. I think as a general rule though, students should build authenticity and trust with everyone they encounter. The next set of articles focused on the legality and the humanitarian aspect of free speech. The first article, "Hate Speech is Protected Free Speech: Even at College Campuses" was written by Chemerinksy. Chemerinksy is a lawyer and he says that students and faculty are trying to prevent certain people from coming to campus now this comes from the bullying is wrong mentality that our generation has been taught. Universities can not constitutionally control whether or not a speaker speaks based on what they’re going to say. If campuses allow hate speech to occur that doesn’t mean that they have to support it or that aligns with their principles. Chemerinksy commented that students tend to connect the idea of free speech with hate speech. Chemerinksy further explain, “these students who are wary of free speech must remember the good that has come from free speech such as the end of segregation.” Chemerinksy believes controversial speech should be allowed to occur as long as it is conducted in a way that is non threatening to campus activities. The next Article on this subject offers a different view-point. Powell’s “On Speech and Belonging” focuses on the dividing results of free speech. Powell states that, “They are exploiting democratic principles meant to protect and expand our communities. In doing so, they are attempting to co-opt and pervert the concept of free speech itself.” This means that individuals are hiding under the cover of free speech to torment certain groups through their words. Powell’s message is that we should focus on what unifies us instead of what singles out parties. We have all heard the phrase sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. However, Powell points out that hateful speech acts can cause real harm. Although Powell believes we should obey the law, it can be inferred that the rights of individuals and “our most vulnerable communities” should be protected. In Jelani Cobb’s article, “Race and The Free Speech Diversion” the author offers the perspective of free speech’s impact on people of color as well as well educated individuals. I personally found Chemerinksy’s article on free speech to be the most compelling evidence. The last information we were exposed to this week were two videos. When watching these two videos I was both intrigued and alarmed. The video on the school system’s analysis of social media analysis made me feel uneasy. I feel like this is necessary for the schools liability and students safety however, I do have to wonder where is the line? What counts as public and private life? I feel that if posts are brought to administrations attention then they should be dealt with but that schools should not spend their time trying to view their students social media. Instead schools should engage with their students in the classroom to get to know them personally. The next video, “Hate vs free speech” basically explained that speakers do have the right to say horrible things under the protection of the First Amendment. However, once they invoke violence they have then committed a crime. The video, also explains that although they may cause controversy, universities have to allow speakers to speak on campus even if they are saying racist, homophobic things. The video showed a very passionate young woman who I believe many people can identify with. We have been taught from a young age to respect others and treat people with kindness which is why it can be very upsetting when we feel like an individual is attacking people. Despite this feeling, I am glad that we have the First Amendment. This form of protecting free speech does allow for unkind things to be broadcasted. However, if the government were able to control what everyone could or couldn’t say the outcome may be very grim.