Key Blogpost #1 - Eight Values of Free Expression

Speech theory number three, “Stable Change,” suggests that angry/alienated citizens will be less physically violent if they are legally allowed to be more audibly and digitally aggressive. Allowing the masses to “vent” their personal, cultural, and/or political frustrations through assemblies and social media supports/encourages honest self-expression and the positive evolution of cultural norms. Additionally, granting more “dangerous groups” to speak their mind allows the government the ability to better monitor them and gage any threats against national security or a group of people.

Dr. Charity Kurz, a professor at SAGU posted an article discussing “The Psychology of Venting'' and the positive and negative effects it has on not only the communicator, but also the listener. Within the study, Dr. Kurz highlights how venting is a stress-relieving coping mechanism which if done in a safe environment could succeed in reducing stress, however if done incorrectly, could result in “heightened stress and physical health concerns.” Kurz notes that in order for the venting to remain healthy, both the communicator and the listener have to play their equally important roles through the practice of active listening and empathy.

Building off these points, a year ago I took a sociology class, Mass Media and Society. Within that class we discussed psychologist Paul Eckman’s study which identified the six universal emotions which all humans feel, those being: happiness, sadness, fear, disgust, anger, and surprise. Throughout class we discussed how different social media platforms use these humanistic emotions to their advantage to promote the platform. Some examples being how Twitter users often use the site to express meanness and frustrations, while Snapchat users often promote more positive and comedic content. What if for whatever reason, Twitter began banning anyone from using the platform who had posted a negative comment against a political party? Would the masses continue to trust the “safe space” they once trusted to express their viewpoints? Under such a hypothetical, both the active listening and empathetic process involved with the act of venting, would most certainly result in the negative social and physical outcomes Kurz discussed in her article.









Another speech theory which could be applied in tandem with “Stable Change” is number six: “Promote Tolerance.” The theory suggests that protecting hateful speech can actually be used in a positive manner to educate the masses as to how to live a more tolerant life. Emphasizing how society learns and adapts from the use of inappropriate language to better educate the masses as to what are acceptable norms and behaviors. My problem with this theory is that nowadays, it seems like more politicians are acting more openly aggressive through social media and advertisements against their competitors. It seems like powerful figures are becoming more openly intolerant of their foes through false advertising through exaggerated or misinterpreted messages of their beliefs or actions. I do believe in the theory, however I don’t want the cowardice of some who intentionally spread misinformation for their own gain, to persuade an audience of potentially invested viewers who give them their attention.




https://www.sagu.edu/thoughthub/the-psychology-of-venting




https://www.paulekman.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Are-There-Basic-Emotions1.pdf