Freedom of speech and the press are values vital to American democracy. But the First Amendment doesn't really define free speech, and plenty of expressions are restricted. Learn all about the ins and outs of this cherished right in this classic episode. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In this podcast episode, the host explores the relationship between our brains and our experiences, asking unusual questions like whether we can create new senses for humans.
Free speech is one of the fundamental pillars of American democracy. While some people look to Europe as a model for free speech protection, it's essential to recognize that the United States has a unique approach to this right.
The definition of freedom of speech has been expanded by the Supreme Court to include freedom of expression, which also protects the freedom to not speak.
The Clear and Present Danger Test, created by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, was used to determine whether free speech presented a clear and present danger of bringing about substantive evils Congress has a right to prevent. However, this test has been used in the past to squash dissent rather than protect wartime dissenter's rights.
The US has a long history of grappling with defining and regulating pornography and obscenity. Court cases have molded and shaped what is considered acceptable, with the exception of child pornography.
The definition of obscenity and pornography is based on community standards which vary from state to state; therefore what may be considered obscene in one community may not have the same outcome in another.
Discussion on the notion that freedom of speech means freedom from consequence and how it is a misguided idea.
Hate speech has been protected for decades and has been lumped together with protecting freedom of speech, except when it is used to incite violence.
The internet has presented a variety of issues related to freedom of speech, including the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). While some advocate for regulation of certain types of speech, others argue that regulating the internet threatens freedom of speech.
This podcast segment discusses the difficulties of proving libel, as well as the distinctions between libel and slander, which is typically spoken defamation.
The controversy sparked by Bacely Nakula's 14-minute video, The Innocence of Muslims, raises the question of whether or not the US should have freedom of speech that can cause harm in another country. However, the protection of satire in the US, with a rich tradition of political cartoons and powerful satire, is crucial.
The speaker argues that suppressing speech is equivalent to suppressing thoughts and that without allowing hate speech, harmful positions cannot be addressed and proven wrong. He emphasizes that although the US has laws that allow progress in civil rights, feminism, and gay rights, these same laws also protect those who commit harmful acts.
A college student sent a letter expressing his interest in interning at the podcast and the hosts plan to make it happen.
Andrew Yang discusses the three basic human needs of eating, sleeping and breathing, and shares his opinion on which one he would give up in order to live, as well as his reasoning.
Join us weekly to explore how our brain influences our behavior, perception, and reality, answering thought-provoking questions like whether we can create new senses.