The following is the prompt for the discussion:
In his dissent from the majority opinion in Abrams v. United States (which upheld the Espionage Act convictions of a group of antiwar activists), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote about the “marketplace of ideas” to explain the value of freedom of speech. He wrote that “the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas … the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.”
Do you think, in the age of social media, the “marketplace of ideas” is still viable? Websites such as Twitter and Facebook, and some news organizations, are often accused of knowingly proffering false information which many view as “true.” It is argued that individuals have no way of distinguishing the false from the true. Should these media sources be regulated; if so, in what ways? Or should all arguments and claims be allowed to compete in the marketplace of ideas?
How the post will be graded:
A substantive forum post will:
1) analyze question or scenario provided, not just summary or personal experience analyze the question or scenario provided, not just a summary or personal experience
2) use correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and complete sentences
3) be posted by the stated deadline (late posts are not accepted)
4) be approximately 200-250 words