Free speech video assignment Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Free speech video assignment - Research Paper Example the the promotion of the film and the film, under the First Amendment, are protected speech, and so is the filmmaker, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, aka Sam Bacile. This paper examines the video and explains whether the filmmaker had a First Amendment right to make the film; it offers a vivid legal explanation as to why the filmmaker First Amendment right cannot be violated. Additionally, the paper looks at how the mainstream American media covered the story, how the United States government treated the issues, the filmmaker’s interpretation and explains how, assuming that I made the film, I would have handled the alleged uproar. The paper also answers the question of whether the U.S government should arrest and criminally prosecute the maker of the anti-muslim film, â€Å"The Innocence of Muslims†. FREE SPEECH VIDEO ASSIGNMENT After the distribution of the â€Å"The Innocence of Muslims†, the anti-muslim video via YouTube, protests ensued in the Middle East, in Cairo , outside the American Consulate, in Libya, which led to the killing of four Americans, among them, the American Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens. ... Additionally, a debate with regards to whether the filmmaker, who joined the ranks of Delph and Jones, had the First Amendment right to make the film. The First Amendment of the U.S constitution establishes protection of individual rights belief, conduct and speech, in other words, rights to freedom of expression and religion. According to Nowak & Rotunda (2004), freedom of expression constitutes the freedom of assembly, freedom of press, to petition and freedom of speech. Therefore, by default, the U.S constitution is set to by all means protect the freedom of speech, even violent and hat filled speech (Cohen, 2012). The filmmaker or producer and the film distributor have the First Amendment right, since the promotion of the film and the film are protected speech and neither the promotion of the film nor the film create something like the infamous â€Å"shouting fire in a crowded theater† (Chertoff, 2012). In determining whether the filmmaker and the film distributor had Firs t Amendment right, it is important to consider whether the film, considered as speech, was intended to incite violence or was an incitement to riots – the film or speech should have not only led to violence, but the filmmaker must have intended the film to incite riots/violence. The â€Å"The Innocence of Muslims†, or the anti-muslim video did produced violence, but it is clear that it was not the filmmaker’s intention for the film to produce violence; the film did not also produce violence immediately. For this reason, the filmmaker has First Amendment rights since the film/speech is protected by the First Amendment. There is no way that the film produced by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, aka Sam Bacile qualify as an incitement