- action | issues
- Academic Freedom
- Books
- Classrooms
- Copyright
- Film
- Government Secrecy
- Hate Speech
- Internet
- LGBT
- Libraries
- Music
- Nudity & Pornography
- Political Correctness
- Political Dissent
- Public Spaces
- Race Ethnicity Gender
- Radio & Television
- Religion
- Science
- Sex Education
- Theater & Performance
- Video Games
- Violence
- Visual Art
- Youth
- advocacy | projects
- education | resources
in support of free expression
The information presented here by the National
Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety,
provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from
NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source
of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information
obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering
unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here
may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without
the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.
©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design
free speech first amendment censorship
Resources
Testimony of Joan E. Bertin, Executive Director, National Coalition Against Censorship before the Task Force on Youth Violence and the Entertainment Industry
Summary:
This testimony will discuss the implications of the First Amendment for proposals to rate video games and other entertainment for violent content, and to restrict the sale of such materials to minors.
Unlike obscenity, the Supreme Court has never carved out an exception in First Amendment analysis for violent speech and images. This is true even where minors are concerned. The Court has instead affirmed that violent content is protected by the First Amendment, regardless of its social worth, because “the line between the transmission of ideas and mere entertainment is much too elusive for this Court to draw.”
An exception in First Amendment jurisprudence for violence would threaten a wide range of artistic and political expression. Graphic depictions of violence can be found in the Bible and much classic literature, film, art and theater. It is impossible to distinguish rationally between “acceptable” and “unacceptable” forms of violent speech, imagery or entertainment, as the judgment is inherently subjective. The Constitution accordingly allows each of us to make our own decisions about such content, and parents to set their own guidelines for their minor children, and restricts the role of government in controlling these choices.
[The opinions expressed in this testimony do not necessarily represent the views of each of the NCAC participating organizations.]
» Read the full testimony
Action Alerts
