OUTLINE
Title of Essay
Freedom of Speech and Social Structure
Introduction
- Introduction to the topic
Speech takes place online much more so than it does in traditional public forums, such as
public parks and streets. People communicate on social networking sites, such as
Facebook and Twitter, more than in any offline venues.
People staying at home during pandemic spending more than in social media than usual.
Older generation learned how to use social media sharing and expressing more on social
media – new to them.
Free speech is a constitutional right guaranteed to Malaysian citizens under Article 10 of
the Federal Constitution. There is room for it to be restricted, but that is in regard to
extreme exploiting of the right, such as hate speech that demonstrates incitement and is
believed to be a security concern.
-One Thesis Statement
The Major Problem Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is the right to express one’s opinions without being penalized. It is
under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Even though
there is freedom of speech in many western countries, other countries in the world still do
not have the luxury of this basic human right. A major problem that freedom of speech
faces is when it conflicts with other human rights, such as cases when hate speech is seen
as freedom of speech. Writing Freedom of Speech essay is challenging because students
need to put a lot of effort into making sure that the introduction and conclusion match the
outline of the essay. It is important to make sure that there is a link between all parts of
the essay. Sample papers can help students to discover how to write high-quality freedom
of speech essay.
Topic 1
Agree / disagree affect the audience in social media (Benefit / Drawbacks)
1
A. Supporting Detail
I. Agree / Disagree
Agree with freedom of speech; our constitution does not define what it means by these
rights. Perhaps one could rely on the definitions formulated in other jurisdictions.
Art.10(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (which was drawn up in 1951)
for example has this to say;
“Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to
hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by
public authority and regardless of frontiers”.
This right has been given prominence by the European Court of Human Right when it
ruled that.
Topic 2
Set up a team to monitor speech on social media
A. Supporting Detail
Facebook’s Supreme Court, this past week, with some fanfare, Facebook announced its
own version of the Supreme Court: a 40-member board that will make final decisions
about user posts that Facebook has taken down. The announcement came after extended
deliberations that have been described as Facebook’s “constitutional convention.”
a) Sub-example (if any)
Facebook’s Supreme Court
We don’t usually use sweeping terms such as Supreme Court and constitution to describe
the operation of private companies, but here they seem appropriate. Internet platforms
such as YouTube and Facebook have been called the modern public square. That
description understates the platforms’ importance for the many people who use them in
place of newspapers, TV stations, the postal service, and even money. People whose
posts are removed from major platforms say they are being excluded from the most
important communication channels of our age. We should care deeply about the rules
these companies apply to our speech and behavior—whether PayPal should process
2
donations to WikiLeaks, for example, or whether the security provider Cloud flare should
protect neo-Nazi sites or 8chan, or whether Facebook should have taken down the famous
Vietnam War photo of a naked girl fleeing her village.
III. Suggestion on how to disapprove
Policing that disapprove freedom of speech
Lawyers for Liberty views with extreme concern the recent surge in online policing of
social media posts that touch on sensitive issues such as race, religion and royalty.
On Sept 11, four individuals were arrested for making allegedly offensive posts regarding
racial and religious issues on social media. The police have also initiated investigations
under the Sedition Act 1948 into a case where the King and Queen were allegedly
insulted on Twitter by several individuals, including Party Socialism Malaysia activist
Khalid Is math who was arrested on Friday night.
a) Sub-example (if any)
Social media posts real harm
These arrests are a serious assault on our freedom of speech which is guaranteed under
Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. This fundamental right has a high threshold which
also covers the freedom to speak about sensitive issues in Malaysia. While some social
media posts may be distasteful or considered offensive, the law should not be misused to
prohibit such acts of expression as they do not cause any real harm that is normally
prohibited by criminal law.
III. Conclusion
-The conclusion of the essay
Freedom of speech is stepping back and our feed on social media platforms, our threads
and our blogs may soon stop being a platform for open discussions.
Now let me get one thing straight - when I think of celebrating this month of Malaysian
independence, the last thing that comes to mind is censorship laws, which is exactly what
3
this new "hotline" is – a censorship tool aimed to cease critics, dressed up as a device of
respect and harmony.
Free speech is a constitutional right guaranteed to Malaysian citizens under Article 10 of
the Federal Constitution. There is room for it to be restricted, but that is in regard to
extreme exploiting of the right, such as hate speech that demonstrates incitement and is
believed to be a security concern.
Essay
4
H’ng Zu Jia
Muralitharan A/L Ammasi
OUMH1203: English for Written Communication
2 August 2020
Freedom of Speech and Social Structure
The Right to Freedom of Speech and expression under Article 19 (1) (a) is an
inalienable right of every citizen of the country however, the right is not absolute and
subject to certain limitation. This right is enjoyed exclusively by the citizens i.e., natural
persons of the country. Through this Article the framers of the Constitution have intended
to provide some basic imperative value of a democratic secular polity, equal freedom for
individual filament, attainment of truth, participation in political and ideological debate,
decision making and providing opportunities of free discussions and exchange of
opinions.
This freedom is paramount for smooth functioning of a democratic process.
Speech and expression because every person is entitling to know the activities of the
State, the instrumentalities and the agency of the State. In modern world, the government
does not have the privilege of secrecy which has existed in ancient times. Now the
government and its agencies are bound to disclose facts to the citizens of the country
and in almost every country right to information have been made a basic fundamental
right.
I believe the most important freedom in the rest amendment is the freedom of
speech. It allows us to express our opinion and speak freely is much needed to bring
about change in the world. I believe free speech has always been important because we
used this freedom for a get for change. This ability to speak but also to hear other voices
to. Josie Timms states that “Freedom of speech is one of the most precious and important
human rights”. A free society depends on the free exchange of ideas. Nearly all ideas are
capable of giving offence to someone. To me this quote is important because it shows us
5
about the freedoms in some countries where you don’t get the opportunity like us to
speak freely about the government or any freedom that is given to us that they can’t have
is important to understand. Freedom of speech gives us the ability to write, to research.
Facebook announced its own version of the Supreme Court: a 40-member board
that will make final decisions about user posts that Facebook has taken down. The
announcement came after extended deliberations that have been described as Facebook’s
“constitutional convention.”
We don’t usually use sweeping terms such as Supreme Court and constitution to
describe the operation of private companies, but here they seem appropriate. Internet
platforms such as YouTube and Facebook have been called the modern public square.
The prevailing framework for free expression is getting a do-over. The existence
of private Supreme Courts and constitutional conventions makes it possible, even easy, to
imagine that this do-over will be governed by the same constraints as real-world
governments: constitutional rules to protect individual rights, and democratic processes to
set the laws we live under. Other rules that are being retrofitted for private internet
platforms also sound like the mechanisms that keep real-world governments accountable
to the public.
Those are all good developments up to a point. But we should not fool ourselves
that mimicking a few government systems familiar from grade-school civics class will
make internet platforms adequate substitutes for real governments, subject to real laws
and real rights-based constraints on their power. Compared with democratic
governments, platforms are far more capable of restricting our speech. And they are far
less accountable than elected officials for their choices. We should pay close attention to
those differences before urging platforms to take on greater roles as arbiters of speech
and information.
6
Freedom of speech allows everyone the ability, and the motivation to challenge
all beliefs. It presents the building block of every other human right we have. If we lose
this important freedom, we will lose much more than just freedom of speech. We will
lose our humanity.
While it is clear that freedom of speech is not absolute, it is only in limited
circumstances, when it is absolutely necessary, that the authorities may act, in a
proportionate manner, against social media posts that carry a real issue of incitement,
public disorder or security.
It is not easy to assess the state of freedom of speech and expression in the
country for the past four decades. For one thing it requires a complete and comprehensive
review which presupposes a considerable amount of time and expertise. As law cannot
be understood outside its context one needs more than just the knowledge on
technicalities of the law: such an assessment needs to be done against the background of
social, economic and political realities of the country. What follows is just a sketch of
ideas and points on the position, an attempt at presenting an objective assessment of the
state of freedom of speech in the country since the country achieved its independence in
1957. It is hoped that it will become a starting point for further discussions on the issue.
Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a society, one of the
basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man it is applicable not
only to information or ideas that are favorably received, but also to those that offend,
shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that
pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no democratic society.
There is arguably no objective or reliable way of knowing just how successful
such a law will be. More specifically, the alarm over coronavirus misinformation has
provided the French government with the perfect impetus for pushing through unproven
measures which will most likely reduce freedom of speech and increase censorship.
7
While one may disagree with the court’s attitude towards offensive, shocking and
disturbing ideas no one doubt that freedom of expression stands as one of the foundations
of a democratic society. To a certain extent the judgement underlines the fact that
different societies, within the democratic framework, have different standards of
freedom, particularly when it comes to the details of such rights, although there may be
common characteristics between those democracies.
Arrest for mere social media posts was a shameful and common practice of the
previous government that should not continue today. We therefore urge the authorities to
cease all unnecessary investigations and arrests relating to social media posts.
Freedom of speech is stepping back and our feed on social media platforms, our
threads and our blogs may soon stop being a platform for open discussions. Free speech
is a constitutional right guaranteed to Malaysian citizens under Article 10 of the Federal
Constitution. There is room for it to be restricted, but that is in regard to extreme
exploiting of the right, such as hate speech that demonstrates incitement and is believed
to be a security concern. Real harmony and peace are achieved not by pushing problems
and complaints under the rug, but by providing a safe space for people to air out their
feelings, by encouraging respectful free speech, and by promoting discourse.
It is understandable that some people may feel uncomfortable about this new
generation of open discussions and criticism regarding race and religion, after all, many
Malaysians are proud and defensive about racial or religious identity. But the answer is
not to enact restrictive laws that go against democratic ideals like free speech, the answer
is to positively encourage respect and tolerance.
The law should not be invoked merely to protect people’s feelings and
sensitivities, as it is not only an abuse of power but there also would be no end to the
number of such cases. Instead, non-legal solutions, such as educating society on proper
social media boundaries and raising awareness about cyberbullying, would be more
appropriate.
8
This is the justification for the restrictions on the right to freedom of speech and
expression. Even though one may disagree with this, one certainly accepts the fact that
words, even if they are true, can do damage.
Set up a team to monitor speech on social media, there are valid reasons that
support both sides of the coin: why we should monitor social media, as well as why we
should not monitor social media. Those who would prefer to avoid it fear that social, by
monitoring people activity on social media, are encroaching on civil rights to free speech
and privacy. Meanwhile, advocates are concerned that dangerous situations which could
be prevented – by monitoring social media in this era – will continue to pose a threat to
people body safety.
We should monitor to correctly identify potentially dangerous situations that need
to be handled immediately. We should also provide team training to effectively deal with
problems discovered by monitoring social media.
9
ATTACHMENT
REFERENCES
Mohd Azizuddin Mohd Sani (2008, Mar, 26). “Freedom of Speech and Democracy in
Malaysia” Retrieved July 1, From
[Link]
scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=rasi20
GradesFixer. (2019, Junuary, 28) The Role of the Freedom of Speech. Retrieved July 2,
2020, From
[Link]
Article19org. (2018, June, 22) Malaysia: A new era for free speech? Retrieved July 8,
2020, From
[Link]
Vincent Thian. (2020, March, 11) Malaysia: New Government Backslides on Free
Speech. Retrieved July 10, 2020, From
[Link]
Melissa Sasidaran (2019, September, 16) Freedom of speech must be protected.
Retrieved July 10, 2020, From
[Link]
protected
Daphne Keller (2019, September, 22) Facebook Restricts Speech by Popular Demand.
Retrieved July 13, 2020, From
[Link]
popular-demand/598462/
10
Simon Chandler (2020, May, 14) French Social Media Law is Another Coronavirus Blow
to Freedom of Speech. Retrieved July 15, 2020, From
[Link]
another-coronavirus-blow-to-freedom-of-speech/#56839710703c
Ismail Hafiz (2019, August, 20) Screenshot all you want, I won’t stop writing. Retrieved
July 20, 2020, From
[Link]
11
