This concept has been a major topic of discussion as the country continues to grapple with what it means to be able to freely express yourself. People struggle to agree on what people should(n't) be able to say, the role of government in censorship and media, how to protect minority voices, and the interpretation of the First Amendment.
The eight values of free expression are often used to explain why free speech and expression are important in a democracy, drawing legal and political concepts. The eight values of free expression are as follows:
1. Marketplace of ideas
2. Participating in Self-government3. Stable Change4. Individual Self-Fulfillment
5. Check on Governmental Power
6. Promote Tolerance
7. Promote Innovation
8. Protect Dissent
Protect Dissent
In my opinion, one of the most important values of free expression is protecting dissent. Protecting dissent means safeguarding the expression of those who hold values and/or opinions and beliefs that are contrary to those of the majority. I believe that this is especially important in a country like the United States, where so much of our legal and societal decision-making is led by the "majority." Although we typically regard this system as a good thing, we cannot always trust that the majority will always make the best choices or that they will consider the needs of the minority. This is why people need to be able to speak out against poor decisions because otherwise, they go unchecked. Additionally, dissent means that people in power are held accountable. If people cannot speak out against the government, we risk losing democracy and slipping into authoritarianism. Lastly, protecting dissent builds a more resilient and tolerant society that is not afraid of or opposed to disagreements and debates.
Marketplace of Ideas
The concept of a Marketplace of Ideas was started by English philosopher John Milton. It argues that we should allow all ideas and opinions, good or bad, to be freely expressed because only the best will prevail in society. Although this concept seems logical and fair, what happens when the people who are supposed to be the most educated and influential are the ones making false statements? During a debate amid the 2024 presidential election, then-former President Trump said that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating the pets of the people who lived there. Although many dismissed the statement as false, some believed his assertions fueled feelings of fear and anger toward immigrants. Does the Marketplace of Ideas reach officials like Trump, or should they be held to a higher standard of truthfulness and professionalism? Should we be concerned?
The Marketplace of Ideas also plays a pivotal role in the ongoing conversation about censorship, both online and in print media. Take the extensive (and growing) list of banned books, for example. Is it acceptable for the government to choose which voices and opinions are the "right" ones for us to read about? This is also the source of debates surrounding social media. Meta recently removed fact-checking from Facebook and Instagram. Many disagree on whether this is the best step to protect free speech and the pooling of ideas and opinions or if this is just opening up a path for more dangerous misinformation to be spread online.
As we continue to navigate this evolving world of free speech in a digital age, we must continue to protect dissent, demand the truth, and make sure that every voice, regardless of how unpopular or small it may be, has a place in our society.