Compare and Contrast essay about Lincoln Caplan’s “Stress Test for Free Speech” and David L Hudson, Jr’s “In the Age of Social Media, Expand the Reach of the First Amendment” Both essays offer perspectives on the First Amendment Write a unified essay that compares and contrasts what each writer is saying about the first amendment, free speech, and social media You should focus mainly on the two texts What conclusions do the authors draw about the first amendment and free speech in today’s climate? Why are the similarities or differences between the two articles important? Be specific in your answer, drawing on the texts to support your assertions You should use relevant quotes from the texts to strengthen your arguments and include citations and references

Compare and Contrast

Name of the student

Affiliation

Course

Instructor’s name

Submission date

Compare and Contrast

The First Amendment protects three elements, including freedom of speech, press, and freedom of association or right to assemble. However, in the wake of the second gilded era of digitalized capitalism, as Caplan calls it, media, especially social media, have played a part in necessitating the amendment of the First Amendment (Caplan, 2018). This is in the quest to protect the users and government from unreasonable restrictions and conduct among private social media entities. In both articles, the authors are in consensus and conclude that social media is highly destroying a ‘democratic culture’ created that the First Amendment ought to protect (Caplan, 2018). They show the need to modify the First Amendment, which, this time, targets social media private entities, as their over protection, is destroying the developed democratic culture. Caplan and Hudson Jr. demonstrate similarities in their consensus of the expanded reach of First Amendment in a digital era and show minimal contrast in their arguments only that Caplan utilizes a socio-cultural lens. At the same time, Hudson uses a political lens in explaining their reasoning.

Primarily, both authors agree that social media entities, which are privately owned, can censor the main elements of the First Amendment of free speech, expression, and press as the government. Conventionally, according to Hudson, the First Amendment was developed to limit excessive interference of governmental entities in the freedom of speech, association, and press (Hudson Jr., 2018). This was extended by the development of Section 230 of Communication Decency of 1996. Caplan contends that it protects providers of interactive computer services by not being held responsible for information re-laid by its users. Through these two laws, the government’s interference is limited by the constitution and social media entities overly protected, as Section 230 is the reason for lack of accountability even amidst censoring and restricting the application and viability of the First Amendment (Caplan, 2018). For this reason, both authors agree on the need for an amendment that addresses private social media entities.

A primary contrast in the two works is the lens used to describe the issue. Hudson Jr. uses a legal or political lens of description to identify two main points concerning the First Amendment and the age of social media. First, he argues that the powerful private entities have infringed on two critical aspects that the First Amendment seeks to protect, including “freedom of expression at the marketplace of ideas and individual self-fulfillment.” (Hudson Jr., 2018). Censorships presented by entities such as Facebook limit people’s right to participate in the marketplace of ideas. The liberty of self-fulfillment is denied, which is similar to interference the First Amendment limits the government to conduct. Secondly, an amendment of the First Amendment, especially on state action doctrine, is necessary to re-evaluate the limitations of applying the First Amendment on private actors, as seen through Section 230 (Caplan, 2018). Caplan uses a socio-cultural lens, focusing on the application of social media platforms and entities to show how they violate people’s freedoms (Caplan, 2018). He focuses on social media’s involvement in destabilizing the public sphere and its participation in the presidency.

The differences and similarities established are vital as they enable a comparative and thematic analysis of essential arguments that can be used to instigate public policy. They help identify possible strengths and limitations present in the two articles, providing an opportunity for further research and writing. Moreover, the main arguments and abstract ideas can be highlighted and easily understood, thus minimizing confusion among concepts.

References

Caplan, L. (2018, September 4). Stress Test for Free Speech. Retrieved from American Scholar: https://theamericanscholar.org/stress-test-for-free-speech/#.XsYHsmgzbIV

Hudson Jr., D. L. (2018). In the Age of Social Media, Expand the Reach of the First Amendment. Retrieved from ABA Groups: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-ongoing-challenge-to-define-free-speech/in-the-age-of-socia-media-first-amendment/