Too many willing to forgo First Amendment rights

Here is proof positive that ignorance is hazardous to freedom.

The Freedom Forum’s 2018 First Amendment survey, conducted in May and June, asked 1,009 Americans to name the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. Only one person could name all five. One out of more than 1,000.

But perhaps the most telling aspect of the survey was when knowledge of the First Amendment was compared to a willingness to have the government censor social media online. Fully 63 percent of those who could name not a single First Amendment right agreed the government should censor speech, while 87 percent of those who could name four freedoms disagreed.

The more rights one could name, the more those people balked at government censorship. The curve of ignorance runs counter to the curve of freedom.

Knowledge is power and ignorance is hazardous.

Even more scary is the fact that ignorance is rampant. Fully 76 percent of those surveyed could name none or only one First Amendment right — meaning that if such a censorship scheme were put to a vote it just might win.

As for political party affiliation, 54 percent of Democrats agreed with government censorship compared with 47 percent of Republicans.

For the record, the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

We’ve been writing about this annual survey with considerable angst for two decades and things have gone downhill since. In 1997, the first year of the survey, 2 percent of those questioned could name all five rights.

Somewhat ironically, considering the considerable willingness to renege on it, the one First Amendment right a simple majority, 56 percent, could name was freedom of speech. Only 15 percent could recall freedom of religion. A mere 13 percent could think of freedom of the press, while right of assembly garnered only 12 percent and right of petition a paltry 2 percent. Fully 9 percent thought the Second Amendment right to bear arms was in the First.

Another disturbing finding in the survey is the willingness of Americans to silence someone merely because someone might be offended. When asked whether public universities should be able to retract invitations to controversial speakers if their remarks would offend some groups or even individuals, 42 percent agreed. If the appearance might provoke protests, 51 percent would withdraw the invitation. And if it might incite violence, 70 would cancel — the hooligan’s veto.

“It’s a little disquieting that 4 in 10 believe that public universities should be able to cancel a speaker if he or she might offend ‘individuals.’ In these polarized times, it’s difficult to conceive of anyone speaking on any topic without offending someone,” commented Ken Paulson, president of the Freedom Forum Institute’s First Amendment Center and dean of the College of Media and Entertainment at Middle Tennessee State University.

“That finding — along with majority support for cancelling speakers if a protest is likely — suggests there is significant public support for keeping controversial ideas off college campuses,” Paulson continues. “This begs the question: If a public institution dedicated to the sharing of knowledge and ideas is the wrong place for controversial thoughts, what is the appropriate venue?”

On a more positive note, 74 percent of survey respondents agreed that it is important that the news media act as a watchdog on the government, up from only 68 percent in 2017.

David L. Hudson, Jr. — author, co-author or co-editor of more than 40 books, including “First Amendment: Freedom of Speech” — noted that politicians have long extolled and excoriated the role of the press.

Though President Obama praised “a tough and vibrant media,” President Trump has called some members of the press “enemies of the people” and purveyors of “fake news.”

“The most encouraging part of the 2018 State of the First Amendment survey is the public’s embrace of the ideal of the media serving as the watchdog of a free society,” Hudson writes. “The American public recognizes the essential importance of a vibrant and free press to serve the interests of the public as a check against government.”

But for how long?

Thomas Mitchell is a longtime Nevada newspaper columnist. You may email him at thomasmnv@yahoo.com. He also blogs at http://4thst8.wordpress.com/.

Disclaimer: 

All editorials, Letters to the Editor, columns and comments are the sole opinions of the authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of Mesquite Local News.

 

Comments

  1. This is what Federal Government Education has gotten us. The Fox watching the Hen house, to put it mildly. Long story short, when my son graduated High School he wanted to go to collage, I asked what do you want to be? Collage educated was the answer and I told him I would not support him in that.Told him pick a Vocation and I will support you but I will NOT pay for another (like we pay for now) Arts Major, Socials Major, Environments Major or Social Justice Warriors Major and on and on.
    Five years out he has Mechanical Skills and is learning more everyday how to be a productive person instead of a slave to the overrated, overreaching education indoctrination system and student loan scam, but more importantly and to your point, if you stopped him on the street and asked him about any of the Amendments … well I think you would have met a match.

    Very Proud Father
    Al

  2. “Though President Obama praised “a tough and vibrant media,” President Trump has called some members of the press “enemies of the people” and purveyors of “fake news.””

    Speaking of fake news. First, Obama willfully and deliberately had his Justice Dept.do surveillance and even arrests of journalists. He constantly criticized Fox News as not a real news network.

    Second, Trump has always been careful to distinguish “enemies of the people” as those who are willing to provide fake and made up news to the people. He has never used the phrase in any other context towards to the media. ONLY to those who are willing to perjure themselves and their stories in what they write or broadcast.

  3. Terry Donnelly says:

    Mr. Mitchell and I agree on little when it comes to how government should run, but there is a lot of common ground between us on the topics in this column. The vigorous defense of the First Amendment, including the defense of a free press (the only private industry cited in the Constitution) is part of that common ground. The press is not an enemy of the state and the press has always been a thorn in the sides of politicians, especially presidents, but most have defended the Fourth Estate’s right to criticize them. As for college campuses censoring speech, I’m ashamed of them. Especially Berkeley, the home of the Free Speech Movement. It is imperative, in every stage of life, to hear ideas that are contrary to our own. And, at no stage of life is it more important to do so than during the years spent attending a college or university. I’m liberal and I really don’t much need to hear what liberals are saying–I already know that. I need to read and hear what conservatives are saying so we can find areas for compromise leading to progress.

Speak Your Mind

*