Marketplace of Ideas

                                         

    There are 8 total values of free expression. These values are what define freedom of speech. However, when something goes wrong and drama starts, freedom of speech must be debated. Thankfully, freedom of speech is a powerful right not seen in other countries. Speech theories define what is and isn't speech. I believe the most important one on the list is the Marketplace of Ideas, or discovery of truth. Here's why I think it's the most important.

    The Marketplace of Ideas theory states when lies are pitted against the truth, the truth would win, stronger than it was before. Information can be more valuable than gold, and at the same time, more destructive than a bomb. The wise Mark Twain once said "A lie can travel half way around the world before the truth laces up its boots." This could not be more accurate when you look at the world today. Thanks to platforms like twitter, people are more free than ever to spread around all sorts of information, both true and false. Here's an example of what happens when the truth comes too late.

    It's no secret that the coronavirus changed the world in a matter of months, and it's also a fact that it originated in China. The Chinese government tried to hide the actual numbers. It wasn't until long after the lockdown when the actual numbers were revealed. Had China acted responsibly and told the truth about the numbers, went on lockdown immediately, and not silenced anybody who spoke out against them, the world would've been much better prepared. It's also important to note that this lie would've never succeeded in America, where our 1st amendment and free speech rights prevent the government from silencing people.

    This of course was not the only lie out there. There were also lies about the cause like 5g towers. This is easily proven false when you do the research. For example, 5g towers existed long before the pandemic started, and the virus spread to thousands in places like Israel, where no towers were known to have been constructed. This is why the Marketplace of Ideas theory is so important. The lies about the virus drew more attention to the issue in an effort to find the truth. That is why I think it's so important to keep information truthful in this world where one influential person can cause a widespread conspiracy.

    In conclusion, information is both precious and dangerous. It can make or break peoples lives. The world is full of lies and deceit. If we loose our ability to communicate valid information, we could end up with something much worse than this pandemic. All we can hope for is to keep the facts straight so that we know what to do in the future. We need to make sure the truth always wins.

                                                                      Work Cited

Wong, Edward, Barnes, Julian, Youngs Zolan, (Aug 19, 2020)  Local Officails in China Hid Coronavirus Dangers From Beijing, U.S. Agencies Find. cited from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/19/world/asia/china-coronavirus-beijing-trump.html

Tucker, Nati (Aug 18, 20) A Little Late, Israel is Finally Poised to Enter the 5G Mobile Era. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/business/.premium-a-little-late-israel-is-finally-poised-to-enter-the-5g-mobile-era-1.9083813

(statistics for cases) https://news.google.com/covid19/map?hl=en-US&mid=%2Fm%2F03spz&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

Antiwar and The American Conservative

     

    

                                                                                 &

    The News sites Antiwar and The American Conservative are similar news outlets. They are both news sites dedicated to promoting anti-war views, and are much smaller than mainstream news outlets like Fox or CNN. Plus, when you take a look at their content, you'll notice a stark contrast between the two. TAC and Antiwar contain stories that are more focused on antiwar while Fox and CNN are for more general news. Here's why they are different.

    The first thing to notice about the topics on Antiwar and TAC are that they are more focused. They care less about current political debates and stick to anti-war views. Plus, while Fox and CNN try to be objective and non-biased (even though they aren't), Antiwar and TAC openly state their message on their site in the about us section. In the article "Trump Challenges Pro-War Foreign Policy Elite", it has commentary that both criticizes AND approves of his actions. Other news outlets would make the story solely about what Trump did and why it's bad. Also, Antiwar has articles like "With No Enemies, Many See Swiss Plan to Buy $6.6 Billion in Planes as a Waste of Money" on their homepage. One look at CNN and Fox's homepage shows that they are mainly concerned with American news. Antiwar seems to cover stories all around the world. Both Fox and CNN cover world stories too, but they aren't promoted nearly as much as U.S politics.

    The biggest difference between mainstream news and these two sites are their anti-war focus. This is a very strong theme for these sites. Then comes the question, why are these sites more focused on a good message than mainstream sites, and why are they so obscure? The answer is simple, money and attention. Both Antiwar and TAC are much smaller companies than Fox and CNN, and Antiwar is a nonprofit business. News sites collect money with ad revenue when people click on their site or watch them on TV. Logically, millions of people need to watch them in order to turn up a profit. Nothing draws more attention than drama and conflict, especially in politics. As a result, CNN and Fox will jump on stories that can stir up that drama, or they will present an unrelated story in a way that does. The American Conservative may be for profit, but they focus more on their anti-war message. They don't want conflict. Meanwhile, Fox and CNN thrive on conflict. By focusing more on a message than on profit, these two sites have a far more focused message but are less promoted than mainstream news.

                                                                                    Work Cited

Bandow, Doug (Sep 17, 20) "Trump Challenges Pro-War Foreign Policy Elite" cited from https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trump-challenges-pro-war-foreign-policy-elite/

Ditz, Jason (Sep 22, 20) "With No Enemies, Many See Swiss Plan to Buy $6.6 Billion in Planes as a Waste of Money" cited from https://news.antiwar.com/2020/09/22/with-no-enemies-many-see-swiss-plan-to-buy-6-6-billion-in-planes-as-a-waste-of-money/ 

The 6 Freedoms vs current BLM Protests

 

    There are 6 freedoms granted by the First Amendment. The Six Freedoms are press, speech, from state religion, of religion, assembly, and petition. These freedoms are meant to grant individuals rights and prevent the government from infringing on those rights. They are necessary to America's core values. However, current Black Lives Matter protests have proven to be destructive in recent times, yet these protesters tend to use the first amendment to back them up. Does it really back them up? Specifically, the freedoms that apply here are speech, assembly, and petition. Let's take a look.

    First, we'll start with freedom of speech. Typically, this is used to protect individuals from being silenced by the government or public property when the speaker is sharing opinions or complaints. After all, we don't want it to be a crime to criticize the government again. However, all opinions go out the window when destruction of property or threats become involved. Speech is just speech, but actions can have many consequences. The next freedoms are assembly and petition. Protests typically have large gatherings to show support. Plus, these large groups typically have a petition, or right to redress of grievance. Basically, it's the right of the public to attempt to fix a problem in the country. The first amendment condones peaceful protest, as in calm yet firm oppositions to rules and norms that may or may not be just. All of these are protected, again, as long as it all stays nonviolent speech. With that covered, let's take a look at the protests.

    This first one is a clear example of violence. In Chicago, there was a riot that resulted in about 60 million dollars in property damage. This already prevents the first amendment from protecting it, because all protections go out the window when violence is involved. Plus, no constitutional claim can be made about this. The buildings destroyed were privately owned shops, like Macy's, Gucci, etc. State-Action Doctrine makes it so that the first amendment only protects individuals when it's the government, or public property that's involved(Aero). 

"You ... have said that violence is sometimes necessary in these situations... What exactly is it that you hope to achieve through violence?" 

                    Martha MacCallum interviewing president of BLM.

    Let's look at another example. A president of Black Lives Matter, Hawk Newsome, speaks his opinion of violence in his protests. Newsome believes that it's hypocritical to say BLM are violent when America's history is full of violence. He goes on to say while he's indifferent on riots, if America doesn't give them what they want, they will "burn down this system and replace it" (Garcia). While Newsome may not be actively destroying anything, he is threatening the government by saying they are going to burn it down. This is not an example of free speech because what he said is a blatant threat.

    All of these incidents show that the First Amendment is not absolute nor is it a shield against general applicability. It won't protect you if you commit any crimes in the process. By all means, if you want to protest, the F.A will protect you as long as it's about the government and its genuinely peaceful. No one is above the law. Breaking the laws to fix a broken system doesn't solve anything. All it does is discredit the cause you support. 

 

                                                                     Work Cited

Garcia, Victor (6/24/20) "Black Live Matter Leader States if the U.S 'Doesn't give him what we want, then we will burn this system down'" Fox,  https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-lives-matter-leader-burn-down-system 

Aero, Dario, (8/11/2020) "Black Lives Matter holds rally in Chicago to support those arrested after looting, unrest" Fox, https://www.foxnews.com/us/black-lives-matter-holds-rally-chicago-support-arrested-looting-unrest

History's Supreme Court

    

 

    Established in 1789, the U.S. Supreme Court is the highest federal court in America. It has the most power over all the Laws in the country and evaluates the laws constitutionality. Run by nine Justices, the Supreme Court has the power to check the actions of the executive and legislative branches of Government. It serves as a balance between these two powers. Here's how it functions.

    In 1789, Article Three of the constitution gave life to the Supreme Court. In addition, Article three also allowed Congress to create inferior federal courts. Congress was allowed to organize the court, so with the Judiciary Act of 1789, it was originally established that the court would be run by six judges until they died or retired. The first meeting took place on February 2, 1790, though there weren't any cases at this time. These early meetings were simply meant to work out its procedures. The first case that the court decided was West v. Barnes on August 3, 1791. 

    The President is who nominates potential Justices. The one's who make the final decision on the nominees are the U.S. Senate. The first Justices were John Rutledge, William Cushing, John Blair, Robert Harrison, and James Wilson, led by Chief Justice John Jay. The Chief Justice has complete authority over the Supreme Court, and sets the agenda for the weekly meetings. The chief also has power over impeachment trials, such as with Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. 

    Eventually, Congress altered the number of seats in the court. Today, it remains nine. A total of 113 Justices have served on the Supreme Court. Some notable Justices include John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, Earl Warren, Thurgood Marshall, and many others. Many important cases take place in the Supreme Court, but not all outcomes are truly just. For example, The Supreme Court denied citizenship, upheld segregation laws, and upheld Japanese-American internment camps during World War II. However, the Supreme Court also prevented illegally obtained evidence from being used, prevented the president from withholding evidence in trial, and has allowed defendants who cannot afford legal representation to be provided public attorneys.

    In conclusion, the Supreme Court is one of America's greatest powers. It keeps our laws in check and gives the final word on interpreting the law. In 200 years, the Supreme Court stands as a vital asset in America's legal system. While both good and bad happened with it, we would be worse off without it. 

Source

History.com Editors (May 11, 2010), Supreme Court, https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/supreme-court-facts

My Top 5 News Sources

1. BBC (https://www.bbc.com): The BBC is one of my favorite places to find interesting information. I mainly enjoy them for their documentaries. They have many topics ranging from typical politics and current events. One of my favorite things they did was a documentary on a scam center in India. Someone found a way to hack the CCTV in the scam call center to spy on them. This was turned into a whole documentary that managed to get the two brains behind the operations arrested. The content is interesting, diverse, and can lead to great things happening.

2. The Verge (https://www.theverge.com/): This is a tech based website filled with news about modern technology. It's filled with information about computers, phones, games, apps, and even artificial intelligence. It's perfect for people who want info on new game consoles, video games, and other gadgets on the market. They have many categories including electronics like headphones and tablets, and also the companies producing the devices like Amazon and Microsoft. If you are looking for news about the next computer, Alexa, or whatever new device is invented, the Verge is for you.

3. New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com): The New York Times offers a wide variety of news. There's a story somewhere on there about every topic. They run through politics, technology, science, health, and even food. They are a great source for general as well as in-depth news stories. If you want a story, New York Times will have something for you.

4. The Economist (https://www.economist.com): While similar in topics like the New York Times, the Economist stands out with some of its features. For example, There are categories on the site called "The world if", and "The World in", a neat compare and contrast section that asks what would've happened if this happened, and what might happen in the near future. For example, "What if aviation doesn't recover from Covid-19", or "Don't bet on a recession in 2020". They're interesting topics that make you think about the future.

5. Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com): The Wall Street Journal gets straight to the point. They don't use sensational titles, but rather straightforward, direct titles for their news stories. some sample titles include, "U.S Debt Is Set to Exceed Size of the Economy for Year, a First Since World War II", as well as "Macy's Post $432 Million Loss as Stores Continue Recovery." These titles are very simple and down to earth compared to what you would find on CNN like, "There is a Legitimate way to end coronavirus vaccine trials early, Fauci says". This title already makes a promise before you read it, and that's not what news is supposed to do. I like Wall Street for it's direct titles.