Freedom of speech is important to many people nowadays. It concerns both individuals and communities and regulates their communicational processes, including the freedom of exchanging ideas without perceptible control and censorship. Freedom of speech can contribute in producing a more advanced society and is an important right for both people and animals. This right is important in workplaces, everyday life and even in prisons. Sometimes it happens that freedom of speech is ignored in various spheres of life and this provokes the challenges which become substantial in social relations.
Companies that employ people and give them workplaces have extraordinary attention to the freedom of speech that can be mistakenly violated. According to Bruce Haller, practice shows that the freedom to speak everything you want is often not respected in the companies as they implement their own rules how to behave, what to express and how to act in the public space for their workers (Haller 566). In many cases, it can be named discrimination if the owner of the company gives a fee to his employee. However, in the law field, every enterprise can choose the legal terms and restrictions for people who work under their management because this belongs to corporate ethics. A good example of limitations is the restriction of immoral discussions and abusive words at the workplaces. All the other areas of speaking should be guaranteed with freedom of phrases and words.
The evidence shows that freedom of speech is often declined as the deviation from the norms even in prisons. Evan Bianchi and David Shapiro mention that prison censorship harms the marketplace of ideas as it results in a general lowering of the speech amount and disproportions of the speech restrictions because of different racial identities of the detainees (Bianchi & Shapiro 15). The supporting idea comes from Martha Nussbaum who states that people should give the freedom to speak even to animals and reject radicalism in treating them (Nussbaum 845). The logical clarification is that prisoners should not be related worse than animals in their rights. Restraining speech topics is not a part of their punishment for breaking the law.
The freedom of speech researches has gone far in depth of the theme and now also include analysis related to the right of domestic and wild animals to have a voice. Martha Nussbaum states that animals should be given more freedom and that they should not be kept in zoos (Nussbaum 854). The problem with this issue consists of the cruelty of keeping wild animals in cages. Animals can also feel emotions and become sad from being misunderstood. They need someone to talk to and that is the display of their requirement for normal existing. Animals need human approach in the organization of relations with them and not less kindness as people. That is why modern community tries to make the life of animals filled with the most humane attributes, such as the freedom of speech, the right of choice and others.
All in all, freedom of speech is the basis of living and should be provided to the broad sectors of the population. Even animals need special treatment and the extension of their abilities to express themselves in natural communication with the creatures similar to them. All three cases are laced with the common idea of freedom and show how people require additional powers to challenge the existing restrictions in these areas. Freedom of speech should be honored as one of the most serious factors that identify people’s personalities and help them to succeed in finding harmony with the outside world.