Political Correctness Is Just A Strategy To Limit Freedom Of Expression Essay Sample

The United States Constitution recognizes the fundamental rights of every citizen to express their ideas. Apart from this there is also the law that requires the media to be given the freedom to express ideas and highlight issues in the society without any favor. But this seems not to be the case anymore. One case that sparked controversy and debates on media freedom was the case when Juan William a Washington journalist was unceremoniously dismissed by NPR for speaking his mind on what he felt and what many Americans also felt. He spoke his mind concerning the feelings that Americans had especially when boarding airplane together with passengers that are dressed in Muslim garb. The dismissal by NPR basing on the act of political correctness sparked debates and calls for the Congress to stop public funding of media organization. In this excerpt, “defying the PC police” William explores the public firing to discuss the various ways in which the Media’s freedom is curtailed. This review seeks to demonstrate how William highlights the genesis of the PC and how it has scuttled the freedom of the media to engage in honest and informative enlighten of the society. It is a clear that the authorities are in a concerted effort to make sure that the media does not exercise its responsibility freely.

Issues that William highlighted

First William makes it clear that the concept of political correctness ideally limits the media and the society at large to exchange and express ideas freely. In this way, this policy undermines the fundamentals of democracy. This is a creative ways that the authority uses to make sure that the issues that they feel should not reach the public remain within closed circles. Ideally anything that one says can erupt negative feeling on the other party and William clearly shows this. For instance, when bartenders are limited to speaking about religion or politics, it means that their rights of expression are curtailed. The case of bartenders reflects the idea that this policy seeks to impose on the media. It seeks to make sure that the media only speaks things that favor them and tend to support their views. Anything that is deemed to undermine or highlight the rot in the society is quickly deemed as politically incorrect.
The partisan world of today that has the media ruling the airwaves, it is impractical to have political incorrectness dictating what should be said and what should not be said. It would only mean that impunity takes the center stage and anything that is said should be scrutinized by those that claim to protect the feeling of others. In such a society, then there is the deliberate muzzling of honest exchange of ideas and the search for solutions. It is only those people that tow that party line that dominate the airwaves and any political discussion. In such a society, what dominates is the lack of honest debate and truth-telling of the facts. Some of the issues that do not get an open minded discussion include why abortion is supported, racial profiling, reliance on religion to debate American values and many other issues. These issues seem to be put in the sidebars as they are thought to go against the PC. Without the lack of honest on such issues then it is hard for the society to progress in honesty.
Williams seeks to make sure that society gets a chance to get truthful and factual information. It is important that the journalist should carry out their responsibility with the professionalism that is expected of them, and not from the whims of those who seek to hide the truth from reaching the public. He mentions that those that are not ready to highlight the truth to the society are faced with the challenge of having weak bones in their knees. Despite the threats and the effort by the NPR to silence him, his commitment is to the pursuance of the truth, and he vows to let the society know the truth. He argues that it is an utter show of hypocrisy and fabrication of the truth from those that purport to support the PC. They only want to use it to support their hidden agenda and not to help the public and the society at large.
William also seeks to show that the definition of the term political correctness has only been skewed and crafted to fit the needs of those in authority. The initial definition of political incorrectness is quite different from the current definition. The history of this concerted effort to tame the media began in the campuses. Authorities sort to muzzle any efforts by groups of activist that sort to have marginalized groups champion for their rights. By the 1960s and 1970s, there were battles between the right wings and the left wings. The term was ideally used by people on the left wing. The major contest on this issue was on the issues of the Vietnam War and the women right activist and even leading feminist. The main idea then was to give women the chance to break from male domination and set their pace towards their freedom. At the time, it was successful since the ideas that were addressed are issues that undermined the freedom of some groups of the society.
The idea that only started in the campuses soon spread to other quarters and became a tool to silence some of the people that had divergent ideas in the society. William highlights some of the people such as David Horowitz. During this period of history, people like Horowitz were deemed to be politically incorrect when they expressed ideas that were controversial and against the left-wingers. Over the years, the backlash extends beyond the campuses and the idea of political incorrectness extended to the news reports and national politics. Any group that seemed to talk about anything that was controversial to the liberal point of view was quickly shut. Ideally William gave many examples in the 1960s that demonstrate how the idea of political correctness developed.

Analysis of Williams’s ideas

First Williams’s expression of these issues brings a clear picture of the exact problems in the society. He highlights how the authority uses sinister policies to make sure that the media does not have the chance to say the truth. From the fact that he provides, it is clear that the effort by the authority is not even to protect the society, but rather to protect selfish interest. He takes us to the history of the whole process only to make us understand the controversy. The idea that William uses other people experience makes his argument clear and well understood. From the way he presents the issues in this writing; it brings out the exact problems and the effect of this policy.
William is quite successful in addressing the issues and making it clear that there is hypocrisy amongst those that support this policy. Ideally, he shows that there is no honest among those who are pro-political correctness. The media should have the freedom to highlight the issues that take place in the society and not to protect the feelings and the thoughts of a few. Ideally the media’s role is not to make people comfortable about what they highlight and whatever they think, but it is to give the fact about what is happening in the society. It is up-to-the people that are getting the information to decide the kind of interpretation they take from the information. It is thus incorrect for the pro political correctness to argue that the media should be careful and limit what they present to the public. In this case, the question will be of what use will it be for the media to have the responsibility of informing and enlightening the society. I think that William brings out enough facts that qualify his perspective and understating of media freedom (Williams, 89).
The strength of William arguments is that that he gives an idea and also provides enough evidence to back it. For instance, when he says that those that are not ready to carry out their responsibility with the professionalism have weak bones in their knees, he clearly demonstrates this with examples from the society. As well, he delves deep to discuss the background and the genesis of the idea of political correctness. With a historical analysis of the concept of political correctness William provides background fact for analyzing and understanding the problem and making his argument stronger. It is from this perspective that I believe that Williams work is at its best. As well, the use of figurative language makes his work even stronger and effective.
William’s work is a good source of inspiration not only for students, but for just any person that seek to understand the issues that happen in the society. There are a lot of things that he brings out in this book that influences the fight for the freedom of expression and issues that revolve around the fight for media freedom. Any person that seeks to get information about the history of some of the great people in the society can find this book quite effective and informative. For students, this book can be an inspiration and a source of information. The author takes time to build his case and uses a lot of background information that makes this work just a good piece of art. Not mention the use of easy to understand language also makes the book a good reference material for students.
In a nutshell, it is clear that political correctness is just a scheme by the authority to muzzle the freedom of the media. The basic responsibility of the media is to inform and enlighten the society. If the media has to care about whatever they provide the society with then, they will not be playing its most vital role of information. As well, the authority regulating whatever is given to the media is simply curtailing the fundamental freedom of expression and access to the information. The society has the right to all kind information and trying to curtail such freedom is simply a fault to the constitution.

Work Cited

Williams, Juan. Muzzled. New York: Crown Publishers, 2011. Print.