Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The government speech doctrine establishes that the government may advance its speech without requiring viewpoint neutrality when the government itself is the speaker. Thus, when the state is the speaker, it may make content based choices. The simple principle has broad implications, and has led to contentious disputes within the Supreme Court. [1]
Civil discourse is the practice of deliberating about matters of public concern in a way that seeks to expand knowledge and promote understanding. The word "civil" relates directly to civic in the sense of being oriented toward public life, [1] [2] and less directly to civility, in the sense of mere politeness.
The government encouraging them to remove false speech only violates the 1st Amendment if it can be proved that the government caused, and will cause in the future, speech to be blocked.
Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky comment in their book Manufacturing Consent: the Political Economy of the Mass Media that Orwellian doublespeak is an important component of the manipulation of the English language in American media, through a process called dichotomization, a component of media propaganda involving "deeply embedded double standards in the reporting of news."
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Both cases pose the question of when speech by government officials violates the First Amendment. The leading Supreme Court precedent, Bantam Books v. Sullivan, was decided in 1963.
Symbolic speech is a legal term in United States law used to describe actions that purposefully and discernibly convey a particular message or statement to those viewing it. [1] Symbolic speech is recognized as being protected under the First Amendment as a form of speech, but this is not expressly written as such in the document.
In May 1991, at a commencement ceremony for a graduating class of the University of Michigan, then U.S. President George H. W. Bush used the term in his speech: "The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land. And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and ...