Saturday, June 23, 2007

Freedom of Expression

Singer believes that freedom of expression is essential to any democracy and therefore should not be limited. On the other hand, Szilagyi believes that more focus should be placed on social responsibility.
In the context of Singapore’s multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, which author’s view do you think should be adopted?

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/singer9

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/03/opinion/edsofia.php



Freedom of expression is the right of a person to communicate and express opinions, in public, private, either written or spoken, without fear of punishment. Free expression is vital to democratic government. However, even in the United States, free speech does not permit one to make statements that threaten the safety of others.

Freedom of speech is important to both the society and government. A government must know what the people feel or think. When criticisms of a government are freely voiced, the government is able to respond and answer unfair comments and criticisms about its actions. On the other hand, when freedom of speech is restricted, rumours, unfair criticism, comments and downright falsehoods are circulated by word of mouth.

Singer believes that freedom of expression - freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers - is essential to democratic regimes and therefore should not be limited. "Without that freedom, human progress will always run up against a basic roadblock." This is true to a certain extent. The principles of democracy emphasize the importance of the individual in the context of government. If there is freedom of expression is severely restricted, we are only having a communist system of government. Furthermore, history has shown that the communist system is a failure and as human progress will always run up against a basic roadblock. On the other hand, if people abuse the freedom that they are given, it will actually impede human progress, as seen from the many racial and religious riots in the past.

It is also one of the most dangerous rights, because freedom of expression means the freedom to express one's discontent with the status quo and the desire to change it. As such, it is one of the most threatened rights, with governments all over the world constantly trying to curtail it. One of the more recent examples would be the cartoons of Prophet Muhammad that was published in the Danish newspapers. When the Danish authorities refused to take action, the Muslims decided to protest and boycott Danish goods in Muslim countries.

On the other hand, Szilagyi believes that more focus should be placed on social responsibility. Whether we like it or not, now we all effectively live next door to one another. What is more important for the democratic advancement of a society - to ensure the freedom of expression of all its citizens (within the limits marked by law) or to protect the collective interests of society?

In the context of Singapore’s multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, sensitivity is very important. Therefore, i believe that Szilagyi's view should be adopted. Freedom of expression and speech comes with responsibility. Therefore, it should be subjected to restrictions in the name of safeguarding the rights of others. An example of how sensitive and the importance of social responsibility in our society can be seen from the race riots in 1964.
On 21 July, 1964, about 25,000 Malays gathered at Padang, Singapore to celebrate the Prophet Muhammad's birthday. After the speeches, the procession went on to Geylang. Along the way, a group that was dispersed was asked to rejoin the procession by a policeman. Instead of obeying the orders, the group attacked the policeman. This incident led to a race riot after the group of Malays attacked Chinese passers-by and spectators.
As prevention is better than cure, racial harmony between people will prevent any disagreements and people of different races can live together peacefully. Thus, more focus should be placed on social responsibility which comes with freedom of expression.

"Freedom of speech has never been a static value, and the responsibilities of the press evolve with every new social and political development around the world - requiring the limits of media output to be subjected to constant review.

The press needs to serve the ever-evolving public interest, and it needs to do so by focusing on responsibility, and not solely on freedom."