Freedom of Expression in the Digital Age

The invention of the internet has given people a new way to connect with each other, organize, and access information more freely. However, access to the internet has its downsides when it comes to spreading misinformation and hate speech to others anonymously, which leads to an interesting discussion on our right to free speech in the digital age. 

Historically, freedom of expression has been somewhat regulated by the government through broadcasting and publishing laws. Allowing those in the entertainment industry to speak their minds according to what the government deems fit. 

This makes the invention of social media platforms like Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok so much more vital when it comes to freedom of expression. According to Reno v. ACLU, the internet is “a unique and wholly new medium of worldwide human communication,” and it is one that deserves protection under the First Amendment. This also aligns with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms everyone’s right to “seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” 

Again, the same open-concept design that makes the internet such a powerhouse when it comes to freedom of expression, is the same design that has enabled harmful content including hate speech. As the Alberto Cerda Silva said in a Ford Foundation article, the internet has become a “double-edged sword.” While so many great conversations can be had on the internet, hate speech, disinformation, and harassment are also invited into the conversation. The same mechanisms that enable protest and storytelling also fuel digital abuse and censorship. 

While there has been a debate on censorship and regulation of the internet since its creation, it has been difficult to navigate since the internet is constantly changing and evolving. In FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, the Supreme Court upheld the FCC’s right to regulate indecent content on public airwaves. This was due to a radio broadcast titled, “filthy words” where the broadcaster decided to say as many swear words as possible, which caused a controversy in the public eye. While the case was far before the internet, it illustrates a recurring legal principle: that freedom of expression can be regulated in certain circumstances for the better of the people. 

In addition, in the United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., the Court struck down content-based restrictions on adult programming, which helped create “parental controls.” Growing up during the beginning of the internet, I don’t think my parents necessarily thought I would find anything that I shouldn’t be seeing, but I did. Nowadays there are some parental controls placed on apps like YouTube and Netflix, and age restrictions on apps like Twitter and Instagram. While there are ways to get past these restrictions, I think this was a step in the right direction for the internet when it comes to protecting what children can see and have access to. 

So, should there be a ranking of rights in the digital age? 

Well, rights often collide, such as our right to privacy, which is easily taken away the second you post a video publicly. This turns your life into interpretation for an audience you may or may not want. So, in a contextual hierarchy, where values are based on circumstance, I would rank my rights like this. 

Access to the Internet as a Foundational Right 

Without access, nothing else would be put into place and there would be no argument. As the Brookings article notes, access to the internet is essential in today’s society when it comes to education, employment, and democratic participation, making it a right in the 21st century. 

Then, freedom of expression because an override of censorship would cause an uproar considering the public is allowed to freely express themselves online to a certain extent. This is again outlined in the Pacifica and Playboy cases, regulation is possible when it comes to harm or infringing on our rights, but should not be regulated or restricted further than that. 

Protection from harm and harassment should be another right to focus on but not necessarily the highest rank on my list. While cyberbullying, doxxing, and hate speech are all things I wish would not occur, they do. So, it’s best to stay aware and know what information to share with the public and always double check what you’re posting, before you post, to save yourself from all three of these things. 

Closely tied to expression is the right of privacy. Surveillance silences speech, and misuse of personal data can have life-altering consequences, like we saw with Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook. Again, this is something I would like to see regulated when it comes to social media platforms selling our personal information, but again, it is also something we need to be aware of when it comes to posting. 

 While the internet has become a place to amplify voices globally, it has its downsides and vulnerabilities. A careful look at our rights and what we can do to regulate privacy policies, parental controls and harassment are possible, but I believe we need people in the government that are more familiar with these platforms and the internet as a whole. The goal should not be to choose which rights matter most at the end of the day, but to understand how they interact and to ensure that in protecting one right we do not silence others.