The Decline Of The First Amendment: Freedom Of Speech

In the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, every American citizen is guaranteed the basic freedoms of religion, assembly, petition, press, and speech, but are we really? Over the years, our freedom of speech has slowly begun to disappear.

In “The Decline of American Press Freedom,” Anne Applebaum, a journalist for the Washington Post and Slate magazine, discusses how the American press has less freedom today than they had in past decades. Applebaum argues that the American press is not abiding by the First Amendment and is censoring their citizens. Because of globalization and the development of international influences, freedom of speech is more censored today than it was in past decades.

Applebaum begins her article by describing George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984. Applebaum explains that governments in the world today censor their citizens from viewing what might be viewed as touchy subjects, such as religious or political topics. In the summer of 2009, the Yale University Press announced there would be a change of content in one of their up and coming books, The Cartoons that Shook the World. This book was an academic account on the controversy over the Danish Newspaper, Politiken, after the 2005 publication of twelve cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammed. This book contained a large sum of new material that had never been discussed before. Before publishing their new book, the Danish author, Jytte Klausen, argued the controversy had been tampered with by Danish imams, Islamic religious leaders. The Yale University Press made the executive decision to not publish their book because “the risk of terrorism was too great to allow the publication of the twelve cartoons” (Applebaum 639). Never the less, controversy soon ensued as Yale alumni signed a letter of protest against Yale’s decision to cancel the publication of the twelve cartoons. Yale’s refusal to print the cartoons attracted a sum of attention, “but in fact the university was merely cowardly” (Applebaum 640). The university was acting in the well-being of its students, though; the suppression of information on account of foreign counterparts is often unclear and frowned upon in the United States. Applebaum discusses that this action taken by The Yale University Press contradicts the First Amendment written in the United States Constitution.

Similarly, in the summer of 2009, GQ magazine was considering whether or not to publish the article “Vladimir Putin’s Dark Rise to Power,” by Scott Andersson. This article discussed and argued that security services in Russia had helped to plan and carry out a series of bomb attacks in Moscow in 2000. These attacks, which killed dozens of innocent people, were blamed on a Chechen terrorist group. At this time, the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, used these terrorist attacks as reasoning to launch the second Chechen war. To this day, discussion of this topic remains unmentionable in Russia. Sooner than later, Andersson’s article was published in the September 2009 American edition of the magazine but was censored from being published in the foreign editions of the magazine by the United States media company, Condé Nast, who owns GQ magazine.

Within days of being published, Andersson’s article was uploaded to the internet and available for the entire world to see. “Condé Nast’s humiliating act of self-censorship sets a precedent” (Applebaum 641). Applebaum explains if American journalists are too sheepish to publish an article about a foreign country in the United States, they are refuting their freedom of speech. Applebaum continues her article by explaining “the lengths to which American companies have been persuaded to go in aiding and abetting censorship in China” (Applebaum 641). Companies such as Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo! “have been voluntarily controlling its own search engine” (Applebaum 642) in Communist China. For example, if a Chinese blogger were to try and post about “Falun Gong”, a spiritual movement banned in 1999 by Communist China, a warning statement would appear letting the user know there was a forbidden statement in their text.

Applebaum explains, aiding a foreign country in censoring its own citizens and shielding from the development of international influences, American software companies are contesting the First Amendment. As international influences have become more prominent in today’s modern society, “the reach of international terrorism stretches further than it once did, and globalization has some unexpected consequence[s]” (Applebaum 645). Some of these consequences include the censoring of the press and restricting their freedom of speech.

Many journalists and authors find themselves asking if the work they are publishing will cause controversy or harm in any way, shape, or form. Decades ago, the American press had a reputation for discussing political topics that were viewed as distasteful or taboo. The press was unafraid of what the rest of the world would think of them. Due to advances in technology, anything written by authors and journalists can be uploaded to the internet within moments of being published. This allows foreign nations to view the publication and can potentially cause political hostilities or riots. Due to this reason, the American press’ freedom of speech has become more limited than ever before in American history. As the development of international influences, such as globalization becomes more prominent in today’s modern society, the freedom of speech listed in the First Amendment has been on the decline ever since.

A good portion of the American press is afraid to speak their mind in fear that it will offend and cause disruptions to their counterparts, viewers, as well as foreign countries. Because of this recent trend, the American press has less freedom today than those in past years. The First Amendment gives the basic freedom of speech to every American citizen, therefore; the press should not worry about having to censor their content and speak the full truth when publishing an article.