One of our rights in the United States is free speech, guaranteed by the First Amendment. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, “…prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there shall be no prohibition on the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing upon the freedom of the press , interfere with the right peaceably to assemble, or prohibit petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances” (U.S. Constitution Amendment I). ​​Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The case I identified where the principles of free speech and censorship were called into question, was on the social media platform Twitter. There is a video that was posted via Twitter, brutally broadcasting the beating of a mentally disabled girl in Chicago in July 2019. The video of this 15-year-old is horrifying to watch, and within minutes of the incident, the video was released and appeared went viral. In this case, discussions about the rights of the speaker versus those of the listener were called into question. There are conflicting views on both sides. Bystanders posted about the beating of the 15-year-old and before Twitter could respond, millions of users saw the video sparking a controversy. Research by Duggan and Smith (2013) found that over half of Twitter subscribers use this platform to get news, and Twitter currently has 271 million active users who tweet in more than 35 languages. Comparing this to the print version of a newspaper, Hadley Malcom (2014) reports that USA Today prints, on average, approximately 1.8 million copies and 1.4 million digital copies. Because Twitter has millions of users, they must constantly navigate the social norms of completely different cultures from around the world, and what may be considered hostile or offensive by one government may not be invasive in another. This makes it difficult for Twitter to attempt to censor what a speaker wants to post. Free speech applies, even in the most difficult and unpleasant circumstances. Many believe that the journalists who covered this video provided the facts and attempted to help the listener gain accurate knowledge of what was happening without breaking any rules. It could be argued that, among the millions of tweets published every day, there are a rather small number that can create great anxiety. Keith Loria (2014), interviewed an attorney named Eric Chad stating, “social media sites are not required to remove anything and have no responsibility to protect users from potentially troubling or offensive material.” Private entities like Twitter ultimately have the final say when it comes to what users can and cannot post under their Terms of Service (TOS). With this case of the mentally disabled 15-year-old, many sources supported the release of the video, defending the rights of the speaker. On the other hand, many listeners might argue that Twitter removing the cover was the right thing to do because people want and deserve respect and privacy. Many listeners sign up for free use of Twitter; however, they believe that privacy should be respected in the event of the death of a loved one to the best of Twitter's ability. However, the difficulty of completely banning coverage is simply impossible, and we have given Twitter a certain degree of trust and control over what information we can see or share. According to Lauren Williams (2014), in ThinkProgress reported that the First, 121(8), 2012-2094.