Almost a century later, we face an even more chaotic battlefield as free speech is not under siege by a single monolithic oppressor—but rather a hydra of rapidly shifting political agendas, corporate interests, and societal and technological forces, all nibbling away at our ability to express ideas freely.
Free speech is being dismantled—but not with a sledgehammer in a single dramatic action. It’s death by a thousand cuts, whether intentional or technology-driven, at the whims of a distracted society.
All this signals a profound shift in how information, power, and influence are being reshaped—and reshaping the 21st century.
From news to noise
In a stunning move, WCBS-AM—New York’s legendary all-news radio station—abandoned objective journalism for a sports format in late August.
This isn’t just a rebrand. It’s a strategic move augmented by instant technology, eroding trust, shifting generational habits, intense competition, and economic pressures all redefining culture and consumer behavior.
Talk radio, with fiery opinions and punditry, is flourishing with 63 million tuning in weekly, paradoxically, often under the same corporate umbrellas that once championed news formats.
Meanwhile, Nielsen data from July 2023 shows traditional TV news, including broadcast and cable, fell below 50% of total TV usage for the first time.
Simultaneously, streaming services continue to surge, now capturing almost 39% of total TV viewership; and YouTube and social media are luring away network news audiences, further eroding the influence of legacy news.
Additionally, in the past three years, podcasts advanced 20% annually and lured audiences away from traditional TV, as younger demographics favor on-demand content.
While these shifts enable a broader spectrum of voices to be heard, they also create ambiguity between open dialogue and misinformation. As a result, distinguishing between genuine discussion and misleading content becomes increasingly difficult.
Legal drama
Multiple legal maneuvers might seem like courtroom drama on the surface, but when you dig deeper, they uncover cunning cartels and government schemes designed to silence criticism and suppress free expression.
In August, X, formerly Twitter, filed a lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) a WFA arm, and GARM members CVS Health, Mars, Orsted, and Unilever. The suit alleges collusion to illegally boycott certain companies and platforms, including Rumble, by misusing brand safety standards to exclude them from advertising. Brands argue that they are free to advertise with whomever they want to.
In a dramatic twist, GARM shut down just 48 hours after the lawsuit was announced, although the legal battle continues.
Later that month, European Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk about X’s compliance with the European Union’s (EU) Digital Services Act, citing concerns over harmful content in an interview with former U.S. President Donald Trump.
This political overreach displays EU bureaucratic attempts to control speech on digital platforms. Breton’s move failed miserably—and the interview was viewed by close to 1 billion.
In a severe attack on free speech, Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered X, owned by Musk, to pay fines for not removing posts conflicting with government statements and banned Brazilians from posting on the platform, imposing heavy penalties for non-compliance.
Moraes’s actions are extreme and unnecessary censorship masked as fighting misinformation. The backlash sparked mass protests in Sao Paolo, where thousands rallied to defend their rights on social media platforms last weekend.
In May 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled that government officials cannot coerce private entities to suppress disfavored viewpoints. This decision reaffirms critical protections against governmental interference in free expression.
Separately, SCOTUS set new boundaries in its unanimous decision in National Rifle Association v. Vullo, underscoring that government officials cannot coerce private entities into censoring viewpoints they disfavor and reaffirming the fundamental principle that free speech must be protected from undue influence.
Under pressure from U.S. government officials during the COVID-19 pandemic, Meta censored content, which later led to regret from CEO Mark Zuckerberg, further revealing the dubious dynamics between tech companies and government influence on speech.
Meanwhile, Google is under EU antitrust investigations and facing scrutiny over misinformation, privacy breaches, and data security, which brings to the fore broader concerns about Big Tech’s impact on public discourse.
And the list goes on.
Censorship won’t unite us
“We must remember that any oppression, any injustice, any hatred, is a wedge designed to attack our free society,” former U.S. President Dwight D Eisenhower wisely said.
In the U.S., free speech is more than a constitutional right. It is powerful and impacts everyday lives. It lets people share reviews, pushing companies to be better. It allows employees to speak up about working conditions, leading to safer and fairer workplaces. Entrepreneurs can openly promote their ideas, sparking competition and driving economic growth.
When we lose open dialogue, we lose more than just words—we lose the ability to challenge unfair practices and push for change.
Media sensationalism traps us in echo chambers, drowning out differing opinions and stifling debate. Government and corporate control over information warps our choices, influencing everything from our purchases to our votes.
Protecting free speech isn’t just about grand ideals—it’s about ensuring that each person has the power to question the status quo, demand improvements, and shape their own future.
Without free speech, people lose the ability to influence their lives, communities, and the nation’s future. By upholding free speech and defending freedom, we empower everyone to make meaningful changes in the world.
The battle for free speech is a daily fight for each of us. If we don’t connect the dots quickly, then we could soon lose the diversity of voices that drives progress, innovation, and accountability.
Simply put, among many other things, freedom of speech allows me to author this article.
More must-read commentary published by Fortune:
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
Credit: Source link
