Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Many countries have constitutional law that protects free speech. Terms like free speech, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression are used interchangeably in political discourse. However, in a legal sense, the freedom of expression includes any activity of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.
Half a glass of water, illustration of two different mental attitudes, optimism (half full) and pessimism (half empty). Optimism is an attitude reflecting a belief or hope that the outcome of some specific endeavor, or outcomes in general, will be positive, favorable, and desirable.
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law by ...
Parrhesia appears in Midrashic literature as a condition for the transmission of Torah.Connoting open and public communication, parrhesia appears in combination with the term δῆμος (dimus, short for dimosia), translated coram publica, in the public eye, i.e. open to the public. [13]
The marketplace of ideas is a rationale for freedom of expression based on an analogy to the economic concept of a free market.The marketplace of ideas holds that the truth will emerge from the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse and concludes that ideas and ideologies will be culled according to their superiority or inferiority and widespread acceptance among the ...
Angelina Jolie laughed when a reporter asked her what a biopic of her life might look like and said in part, "Let’s hope there isn’t one about my life"
AOL Mail welcomes Verizon customers to our safe and delightful email experience!
During colonial times, English speech regulations were rather restrictive.The English criminal common law of seditious libel made criticizing the government a crime. Lord Chief Justice John Holt, writing in 1704–1705, explained the rationale for the prohibition: "For it is very necessary for all governments that the people should have a good opinion of it."