Political Correctness And Freedom Of Speech

Who determines if political correctness or freedom of speech is harmful or helpful? Does the average civilian believe that political correctness deters freedom of speech? Political correctness is a language that avoids hurting people of different genders, sexual preference, or cultures. Political correctness deters freedom of speech, which is written as a constitutional right, but if you ask me which one is helpful? I’d have to say freedom of speech. It promotes the free exchange of ideas, advances knowledge for a society, and gives us an opportunity to challenge hate.

First off, freedom of speech helps promotes free exchange of ideas to help create a more knowledgeable commonality. In the article, “The War Photo No One Would Publish” by Torie Rose DeGhett, a freelance writer and blogger, writes about a combat photographer, Kenneth Jarecke, who photographed an Iraqi solider who was burnt alive in a vehicle which frames his face and chest. Every news media refused to air such gruesome war photos because they believed that withholding an image means protecting the community from such messy, imprecise ramification of a war, making the broadcasting sketchy, and even deceptive (cite). The media needs to start coming more forward with more information instead of trying to “protect” us. By holding back information and pictures from our society we don’t get the chance to learn from hearing experiences and perspectives from one another. The First Amendment allows citizens to communicate and to be uncovered to a wide field of opinions and outlooks. This was designed to ensure a free exchange of ideas even if the ideas are unpopular (First Amendment: Freedom of Expression and Religion). These war photos tell a story, the story has a point and if the point is pure annihilation of people who were there and all the charred bodies, then that’s the heart-breaking truth. Everyone knows that war is ugly and hideous, but photographs like Jarecke’s disclose significant stories about the aftermath of American and affiliated airpower. (cite) Some may disagree about showing bloodshed and trauma frequently and sensationally can weaken emotional understanding. But if we never show these pictures ever then it guarantees that such an understanding will never advance. Can you envision how your mental, political, and moral world would be if you were never exposed to a photograph? Jarecke’s photos show us the real action how bombs drop on actual people, but they also make the public feel accountable. (cite) Do the following commentary sounds familiar? “Don’t you dare challenge the boss”; “People are scared to express themselves at meetings.”; “No one cares to hear my perception anyways.” These comments share a fundamental feeling in the absence of freedom to communicate completely (Haskins). Without freedom of speech advocating the free exchange of ideas we would not be able to openly share our ideas to one another to help grow each other’s imagination.

Although, freedom of speech promotes free exchange of ideas to create a wiser populace, it also advances knowledge for a society. My college writing II class had a discussion over the article “The Coddling of the American Mind” by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathon Haidt. We were able to come together as a collective and discuss our point of view on the reading. Hearing my classmates share their perception helped open my eyes to seeing different viewpoints. The more popular comedians, such as Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock and Bill Maher, all have stopped performing at college campuses because of college students being overly sensitive. Jerry and Bill said “..too many of them can’t take a joke.” (cite, p263) Every comedian is different and have their own style for entertaining their audience. College students are missing out on the information these comedians are expressing into their work, it is not always jokes, they speak on controversial topics that have happened in our society. College campus in America where you expect freedom to be the most free, where our future leaders are educated at, have to deal with their highly restricting speech codes. (video cite) Shielding our young adults college campuses into “safe spaces” from words and topics that make them feel uncomfortable would prohibit their learning experiences and they won’t be exposed to create their own opinions. Higher education who promotes biased and unconstitutional speech codes deserves thorough critiquing for punishing college students and faculty for expressing their views. The greater mistake of higher education is ignoring to advise the intellectual routine that advocate “debate and discussion, tolerance for views we hate, epistemic humility, and genuine pluralism.” (Lukianoff p.13). This is what would happen if we continue to shield our college campuses from advancing in society.