As far as my opinion is concerned; communicating with neutral tone and thoughts is a difficult task but no impossible. There have been instances when people believe that freedom of speech is important and sometimes people believe that it does not mean anything. There has always been a conflict between this 2 people.
Freedom of speech on online forums:
Free speech certainly enables uncomfortable ideas to exist online, often forever because “the Internet records everything and forgets nothing”. The right to be forgotten is a modern answer to removing unwanted, outdated, or irrelevant personal information from the Internet. The regulation of hate speech also demonstrates the shifting social context of intellectual freedom towards a right not to be offended. A brand-new European Commission agreement allows four major U.S. companies – Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Microsoft – to block “illegal hate speech” and their users to report offensive images or speech.
Freedom of speech and privacy:
Both freedom of speech and privacy are fundamental rights, which are equally recognized by everyone and all kinds of institutions all around the globe. It is generally thought that these two rights must be in conflict with each other, and sometimes that is the case. But quite often privacy is necessary for freedom of speech (or expression).
Preserving Intellectual Freedom:
So what do we do? How do we balance the old with the new, the traditional with the progressive? How do we unite the future of intellectual freedom with its foundation?
There is no simple answer to these complex legal and social questions. As advocates of equity, diversity, and inclusion, we must remember that free speech is an essential component of social change. To paraphrase Charles Brownstein, the Executive Director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, free speech and social justice are allies, not enemies.
Progress depends on the free exchange of ideas, access to information, and the opportunity to decide for ourselves. Progress stops when we remove certain materials because they are offensive, unorthodox, or otherwise upsetting. Thus, we must not use social justice as a weapon against free speech. Rather, we must preserve First Amendment values in libraries, publishing, advocacy, and scholarship. Censorship is never the appropriate reaction to controversy.