Wednesday, August 24, 2011

The Right to Free Media (21st c. Revision)

Instead of a "free press,"
as stated in the United States Constitution's First Amendment
and other countrys' constitutions,
let's modernize --- call it a "free media."

Soon there will be less "press" of inked letters on to paper,
as journalism and knowledge move into the digital realm.

grab a last look:  antique printing press machine

I declare the Right to Free Media,
whereby all media has the freedom to provide information,
while supporting the Right to Reputation and Right to Respect
of all beings.

This right is also necessarily modified and supported by:
The Right to Factual Media,
The Right to Freedom of Speech.

Thus, the Right to Free Media
should be a revision, from the word "press" to "media,
 and it should be separated from a Right to Free Speech (U.S. Constitution),
becoming a right unto itself, for clarity,
 in spite of the relationship between the two rights.

60 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yes I think there should be a right to free media yet that can have some cons. This is because we all should be able to publish anything we would like, but what you publish should not disrespect and may not ruin someone’s social status. Like sometimes I think paparazzi gets way into too much detail about the artists lives and sometimes do not let them have a personal and social life. I do agree we all should have the right to know and publish what we know that others don’t, but we should have rules and regulations towards it. Cd884

Anonymous said...

The constitution is outdated for certain things like Free Press,in this day and age the majority of times the media is used to inform us about whats happening and not the press,the days where a pamphlet was the only form of mass communication have left us and the constitution needs to be changed to show it.
CP

Anonymous said...

I agree with this article. I believe we should all have the right to free media, as long as we respect the Right to Reputation and the Right to Respect of all beings. Now a days the press is slowly but surely going away. Most of our information is all through Media. I still like the old ways of getting your news. I think Media is definitely over taking and the constitution should be updated.
Robert M. Pino

Anonymous said...

The right to free media is wonderful but when it gets to the wrong hands, it can destroy people. Just by naming cyber bullying, discrimination, and racism; one can see the consequences of free media. At the end of the day, all great things come with consequences. The world is not perfect.
G.I.M

Anonymous said...

I completely agree with this article. In these days, instead of sitting down and reading a newspaper to get information, people log onto their computer, or better yet, their iphone. There definitely should be a revision to the constitution to include the media. However, I agree with all of the comments that say that there should be regulations to refrain from cyber bullying and delving too deep into other's personal business. hanalv

Anonymous said...

The Right to Free Press is a sign of the times. Obviously, the constitution is very outdated when it comes to those terms. In this day in age, we have can communicate around the world or can acquire information from the palm of our hands. There is and should be The Right to Free Press. However, with more knowledge, there is more responsibility. As someone mentioned in the post, situations such as cyber bullying and abuse should be regulated. These situations were non-existent during the old times but they are very real in our present time.

Anonymous said...

~TP~ (I forgot to sign the above post sorry)

Anonymous said...

The Right to Free Media is inevitable. A recently published article stated how entering College Freshmen don't remember a time when they didn't have computer access. Free Media is a evolution of communication. Of course, like all important changes in society, it comes with both negatives and positives. It is in the duty of our government to create regulations and constitutional revisions in order to properly evolve with the media times.

Chuck F.

Anonymous said...

In my opinion I think there most be room for both print and digital media because I know positively that there are still people that enjoy reading a print book or newspaper on a regular basis. J.V

Anonymous said...

I do agree, Although it is called “free media” we need to be aware of peoples rights and make sure we don’t forget that people do have feelings, not saying that’s they wont be hurt by what someone might express in an article but those limitations definitely need to stay in place. VA

Anonymous said...

I kind of agree with this article. On one hand, "Everyone has the right to freedom of oppinion and expression".If we do not have free media, we will be denied the right of being informed. We all want to be informed and we as well deserve to know what is going on around us. On the other hand, it would be fair enough to allow the censorship of certian information that could be offensive to others.
Cy.U

Anonymous said...

We have the privilege of living in a democratic country that respects basic human rights like the freedom of speech and press. The term Press, as defined in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, refers to the dissemination of information. This information can be on printed paper or through electronic media, as the internet. The freedom to disseminate information is what makes United States a great democracy. By using this constitutional right, in 1974 two journalists uncovered the wrong doing of President Richard Nixon. Nixon later resigned. In my opinion the freedom of press and the freedom of media are one in the same. There is no need to make a new amendment, because the new way of press is through technological media.

Torpedo179

Anonymous said...

As always, the judiciary folks on capitol hill determine the meaning of our Constitution. Thankfully, they do it in constant regard of our modern society. It will take revolutionaries such as Julian Assange (of Wiki-Leaks infamy) to help push the boundaries of accepted media. Knowledge has always been power, and in this day and age, that power is information. Giant news corporations currently control that information and the way it is disseminated to the public. Most of us won't absorb more than a few headlines from CNN before going back to our busier lives. As we become more and more overwhelmed by the plethora of information on the network, I'm afraid we will become more and more distant from it. JS

Anonymous said...

I feel there should be a right to free media in the constitution since it is a separate issue from the right to free press. I feel we need to amend many things to adapt them to present and the future. We cannot be living in the past and the way things were done then. This is the time of social media and technology. So to go along with the changing times that we should have a right to free media since barley any news is read from paper now a days it is all online.
C.Munoz

Anonymous said...

I like waking up in the morning and reading my newspaper. I love the smell, the sound, and the feeling of having it in my hands. Yes, it is convinient to view news in your computer or phone; but the quality of a newspaper in your hands does not compare.
KP

Anonymous said...

Free Media is a subject with a lot of controversy. Do not take me wrong, I believe in freedom of speech, but also think that most times the press does not analyses the words or news given to the public.
In United States we all know the laws are there to be fulfilled, but what happens with these laws when they hurt you or your family?, by what is called “Freedom of Speech”
How many people were hurt by a simple word, a photo, or a gossip by the press?
Again, I am not in disagreement of free media, but I believe, that not only the media, put people in general, need to be a little bit more careful in how we use our “freedom of Speech”
*NG*

TrustMeImADoctor said...

Free Press is not really free I believe a paper costs about 35 cents for a copy. Will there be a price on "Free media"? Even if the press or media will be free to share information with the general public they are not always factual and can be detrimental to someones creditably. If we do allow a transition to digital media or even if we do keep the press I believe that only factual information should be allowed to circulate. For instance, now a days we have security threats and they happen often then not. Weather it be a bomb threat or an actual bombing I do not like reading that everything is suspected to link to Al-Qaeda.

Anonymous said...

The more we as society know, the better off we are. At the end of the day the Founding Fathers expect us to keep real to our ideals and that as we change as a nation we have to be able to adapt the definition of our freedoms.
I support the declaration of “The Right to Free Media should be a separate right unto itself” and say it be one of many changes we, as a people, can make to reflect the ever changing GLOBAL nation we live in. Let everyone feel comfortable that no matter what they say, or with what media they choose (yes even the printed word) that they can communicate (respecting the rights of others of course… no lies, or crap) the thoughts with no fear of reprisal or censorship. The beauty of the media age is we can click to another page or turn off the tube if we don’t like or agree with it.
It used to be we just burned the books if it didn’t sit well with us…
CTK

Anonymous said...

As I looked up both words definitions they mean the exact same thing, "press" and "media" is defined as, "all the media and agencies that print, broadcast, or gather and transmit news, including newspapers, newsmagazines, radio and television news bureaus, and wire services." We've had the right to Free Press and if they are simply modernizing the word from "press" to "media" this is just a face lift for the verbiage to our Constitution. As far as validity to the media or press its always been in question as citizens we have the right to believe, research, see and read what we want. NOBRA

LXC said...

The right to free media can bring up some hesitations and questions as many of the previous comments have noted. Yes, I believe the right to free media is as crucial as the right to freedom of speech and expression. However, this makes me wonder if an additional clause should be added to the right to free media such as the right to unbiased and uncensored information. Although unbiased media is somewhat idealistic, it would be important to ensure that we receive truthful information through the media. This also makes me wonder if free media would increase the tendency to be biased or if it would decrease it.

Anonymous said...

I feel that the "press" has taken the constitution out of context. I feel that the press often stretch the truth and tend to be unfair, untruthful and bias at times. I believe in the Right to Factual Media and Press. RhW

Anonymous said...

I do not think it is necessary to stipulate a separate right because the right to free media is included in the right to free speech and press. The majority of regulations that can control the abuse of media can be derived from common sense and the basic human rights. In past years, new and revolutionary technologies have replaced other technologies in past; such as the radio and television. The word “press” has been accepted by our society over the years to represent all forms of communications. May be in the future when newspapers become obsolete, it will be necessary to change the word. But for now, there is no need. Gaby LT

Anonymous said...

It’s the year 2011, now a days people are receiving there information more there the web and cell phones then actually picking up a newspaper and getting there finger tips dirty with ink, lets face it, the generations are changing, this world is becoming more and more with technology, I agree with this article, but I also agree that there should be regulations. Sometimes the media takes things a little to far and too deep into others personal life. I still like the old fashion newspaper!AFF

Anonymous said...

I believe in the right to free media. When we have a free media, people will convey news from all different viewpoints and thus we will be able to figure out what is true and what is false. This will now create the media having to supply more reliable news, now that you are comparing them with their competitors. RR

Anonymous said...

They should just add the right to free media separate from all the other rights because it is a whole new and completely different platform with different views and beliefs. Yes we have been falling quickly into a new and modern age but we should never forget the basics that make it all possible to push forward. If we tear down the foundation then we will fall flat on our face but I’m all for remodeling when it is necessary.
-LZ

Anonymous said...

Media; Press, Tomatoes; Tamatos. The law is never black and white, the court will always determine what is considered "press" the constitution should not be altered for this.
SG

Anonymous said...

I know we are living modern times so let me agree with the right to free "media" instead of free "press" but I would like to think that in the future, the newspaper will continue coming to my door because my husband still enjoy reading the paper every other Sunday, while I enjoy reading a book. J.V

Anonymous said...

I think the US Constitution is a very well written document. The right to free press should maintain as is and encompass the freedom of speech. We all have the right to choose how and in what form information is delivered to us individually. Thus we choose the form of media whether it be the old newspaper or the android news application. The option to choose is the key, press, media, to me is one in the same. Voicing the freedom of speech can also be done via press, media, or android application. Why fix what isn’t broken? YYD

Anonymous said...

Anyone who has access to the internet and cell phone plans that allow connectivity already experiences unrestricted free media. Unlike the printed word, this mode of expression is generally spontaneous and its delivery immediate - a double-edged sword. No time to edit the content or weigh the consequences. Via the digital realm it is possible to receive real time, uncensored coverage of events in the most remote corner of the earth with digital wizards ready to circumvent any attempt to block the flow of information. VMR

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between Right for Free Speech and a Right for Free Media. Technology has played a significant part in the way we communicate today and ought to be updated. Therefore I agree that the U. S. Constitution should fine-tune the Right for Free Press and create a separate Right to Free Media. DS

Anonymous said...

I like the idea of free media. I think it doesn't matter how people get informed about what is going on around the world, as long as they educate themselves. I also think that the freedom of press and media are the same thing, and as we move forward, we take more advantage of this right. ME

Anonymous said...

I think there is a bit of a difference between free media and free press. We are moving forward and bringing technology into our lives more and more. People are reading newspaper articles and magazines online and educating themselves through articles they find through there computer. I think free media and free press mean the same thing, but saying "free media" seems like it covers more and allows that right to catch up with the times it's living in.

BS

Anonymous said...

I very much agree with this article. The right to free media is already in play but unspoken. However, with this new right, I believe the right to uphold one’s reputation should be taken much more seriously. Factual media is just as important as free media.

R.A.T. Jr

Anonymous said...

The right to free media is a good idea, not only because of the technology advancement but also the paper that goes to waist in the press. The country is trying to protect our ecosystem and by killing trees and other plants the way they do to keep up with paper its just impossible in the U.S. today. The right to free media should also have its own laws because we know that sometimes publishers get out of hand with certain details about people (famous people for example) that should be out in public. The press is so old school, and the media is so much faster and easier to get to. When I think of the news paper, I think of boring, waste of paper, ink and gas, not to mention a waist of an enormous amount of time spent to publish it. Using media is so much faster and cheaper in cost, all you need is a computer, internet and a people to writing the articles. CMP

Anonymous said...

Sounds good to update a bit our Constitution. times are changing and more and more things are being published online. I hope that soon the right of "Free Media" shall be an addition to free press before someone takes this little glitch and abuses it. LC

Anonymous said...

With technology at a fast pace, it is very important to look into this possible amendment. Recently, more and more information is being published via online or through the air. Pretty soon printing will be absolute, giving chance to loop holes in the constitution. All this technology and high ended learning with ebooks and android phone applications, libraries and newspaper will be a thing of the past leaving it only for the grandparents to enjoy. The world is changing, let's hope we are ready... mlv.

Anonymous said...

Media - 1The main means of mass communication regarded collectively, 2. An intermediate layer, esp. in the wall of a blood vessel. Free media, I've always been told that there is no such thing as free. However, as a citizen of this country I do feel that I am entitled to know what is going on. I think that a lot of people are not informed of all the different ways that they can get information about what's going on in our own country and the world. For instance, there are an abundance of .gov web pages that when you enter them they have news headlines with up and current news. Newspapers, magazines, radio, tv, and the Internet are all forms of Internet, we have the luxury to choose how informed we want to be and through what source we wish to acquire that information. We are as informed as we choose to be. AAA

Anonymous said...

The right to free media is a great idea but where do we draw the line. Paparazzi (Who were blamed for Princess Diana’s death) are already very vicious when it comes to prying into celebrity lives. You have shows like TMZ producing unauthorized videos of people ruining reputations. Every human deserves privacy.-J.D.

Anonymous said...

There will be some information in print for many years to come. Until the press is completely eliminated, we as a country should incorporate media or revise this Amendment to say, “The Right to Free Media and Free Press.” I agree with the passage above that states, the right to free speech being separated and a right unto itself for clarity. DH63

Anonymous said...

The right to free media is a wonderful idea, as long as it includes the right to reputation and respect.Media is mostly where we get our information.The U.S constitution should be revised to evolve with the media times.cjj

Anonymous said...

The Right to Free Media is great in theory. But unfortunately, now a days, the media is reporting things that are disrespectful or hurtful on someone. They have no regard to peoples privacy, thoughts or concerns. There has to be a clear line where no paparazzi, in particular, can cross. I guess it would be difficult to draw that line but with everyone’s efforts, I am sure it can be done. JENS

Anonymous said...

The Right to Free Media goes hand in hand with the Right to Free Press. The term "media" is a modernized version of the term "press". Press is a broad term that can represent all forms of communication, including the media. Although I am for the Right to Free Media, I do not think that our constitution needs to be changed to further differentiate media from press. Media seems to be the modern press as our generations become more technologically advanced. I do believe in the Right to Reputation and Respect more than ever with the growing access we have with technology. I also respect the Right to Factual Media and feel that we as a people should strive to make slander less acceptable. -KKP

Anonymous said...

I wish I had the time to read through everyone's comments, but unfortunately that's not the case, so please forgive me if I say something that has already been said: I just truly hope that The Right to Free Media stays present in this digital age where it is so easy for governments to "black-out" all forms of communication (i.e., cell phone service, social networking, etc.)! Don't they still have that "internet flip-switch" debate going on somewhere in the political world? Cbereng

Anonymous said...

I personally have not read a newspaper since high school when I use to do current events. Yes, I agree with the Right to Free Media. However, people tend to blow things out of proportion, jus in order to sell their stories. This can be misleading to the public because sometimes the media presents erroneous information. It is alright as long as there is respect.
-LizR

Anonymous said...

The right to free media with the right to reputation and the right to respect sounds great. But the problem with the media is that it is always looking for "sensation". Sometimes this consists of negative subjects, and most of the time defaming people.
People today abuse the free media to manipulate and distort information to make it sensational, caring very little about respecting anyone's reputation.

-AQ-

Anonymous said...

With all the advance techology most people get all there media online or through television,So i believe the Right to free Media would be a fantastic idea.I personally still read the newspaper and watch the news for media.JP

Anonymous said...

I believe that the most used source for entertainment, news and gossip, nowadays, is in fact the internet. I do believe the word press should be replaced by media now that "press" refers to newspaper, magazines and hard copies. "Media" on the other hand refers to "The main means of mass communication regarded collectively." which could refer to newspapers, magazines or online articles. I too believe this right should go hand in hand with the Right to Reputation and Right to Respect.

-DBM

Anonymous said...

Personally I cant believe what is said in the media there is so much manipulation of the truth that it makes it hard to know the truth, but as far as free media instead of free press, I think its convinient because of all the advanced technology now.

Anonymous said...

Personally I cant believe what is said in the media there is so much manipulation of the truth that it makes it hard to know the truth, but as far as free media instead of free press, I think its convinient because of all the advanced technology now. -RBM

Anonymous said...

I believe in the right for free media because everyone should be able to know what is going on around them. I personally don’t read or watch the news, but when I do I honestly can’t believe all the things I’m missing out on. However, I also believe that there should be a right to privacy, and as long as that hold true, then I’m completely for free media.
M.D.L

Anonymous said...

In my opinion I believe it's important to have "Free Media" in order to know whats going on in the world and not taking for granted our country and our basic human rights due that many people in other countries don't have such a privilege, but I do agree it need certain regulation. Many time they put things out there that are not entirely true destroying artists reputation and people life.
Y.A

Anonymous said...

It is because of this free media world we live in that we are able to know what's going on in every corner of the globle regardless of the content. Even though I strongly believe that everyone should be conscious of the right to reputation and the right to respect, we are the responsible ones who decide and choose the information we want to read and the sources we want to utilize. I think putting restrictions on what we can publicize on the internet weakens the credibility of the information at hand to a certain extend. We would not know who and under what purpose was a given article altered, limiting us to the truth behind it. Perhaps, leaving the digital media as is, will give more credibility to the printed media forcing the industry to not completely disappear.

-GT

Anonymous said...

I agree with the right to free media. I feel like we have the right to say what we want and post what we want. The only thing is that if we say or post anything, just make sure its true because many people tend to post false information which can later lead on to trouble. If you want to post something that's fine just don't have bad intentions. H.I.V

Anonymous said...

The right to free media is great when it is showing the face of someone that needs the truth of them brought out.Speak the truth and you will have the right to free media. Speak your mind all day only if your saying what is deserved. JE

Anonymous said...

The right to free media can lead to several things. Like for example the submarine used to be thought of as a fiction until someone got inspired from the idea and made it real. Without the right to express your creations and imagination our future can’t progress and the right to media is one of those things that express fiction or what will come to be.
AG

Anonymous said...

The right to free media i think would be more correct in our days.Everything is so modern and developed now in days that newspaper seems so antique to us. Unfortunately not all countries are as developed or high in income as us so newspaper has to stick around for the sake of the world.

BJO

muaath alheji said...

As stated by my fellow classmates, the Constitution is outdated and needs to be updated. Doing so would include adding an amendment which states, "The Right to Free Media." This means that instead of just being able to express people's opinions in newspapers, they can do so on the Internet and news channels, as well. In my country, Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive. I personally disagree with that, and if I wanted to write my opinion in a newspaper or on the Internet and I am in Saudi Arabia, I can face consequences for the things that I say. After coming to the US I have realized how much I wish I was able to express my opinion back home. Free media is privilege that we all take advantage of, and I personally think should be allowed everywhere. I vote change the Constitution, and give people the rights they deserve.
M.A. (Muaath Alheji)

Anonymous said...

With time comes change, and with change comes adaptation. The constitution should have a board of revisers who make yearly revisions over the rights and laws of its people. We're and ever growing and changing nation. The right to free media should be the first revision as we are in constant use and communication with it. [Ang.]

Anonymous said...

"What's a newspaper?" A question that will definitely be asked in the future. Truth is there is no longer a real need for the newspaper or magazines, the Internet has taken care of that, but that doesn't mean that there will not be a want for them.

-AJG

VH said...

I do not agree with this "right to free media" fully. Yes I do think that people should be able to have freedom in whatever media way they want to display it, but at the same time it does need boundaries. For me I would not want someone to put my personal life, or my kids up on a website that all types of strangers look into it can be of harm to us. If people did know how to use this right I would not mind but a lot abuse the media to hurt people.