David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Israel Democracy Institute (2001)
The subject of this study is the justification for limiting negative expression directed at the government: its institutions and public officials, in order to preserve public faith in government. This paper is an abstract of a book that considers this question. The conclusion is that since the value of speech concerned with the performance of government is very high and the interest in protecting the status of government is limited and typically not substantial, there is generally no justification for legal restrictions of this kind.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Steven K. Berenson, Government Lawyer as Cause Lawyer: A Study of Three High Profile Government Lawsuits.
Piyabutr Bunaramrueang, Procedural Standards for Governmental Actions: Case Studies on Privatizations of State-Owned Enterprises in Thailand (มาตรฐานการดำเนินการของรัฐ – กรณีศึกษาการแปรรูปรัฐวิสาหกิจของไทย).
Bruce Barry (2007). The Cringing and The Craven. Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (2):263-296.
Anine Kierulf & Helge Rønning (eds.) (2009). Freedom of Speech Abridged?: Cultural, Legal and Philosophical Challenges. Nordicom.
Jonathan Gilmore (2011). Expression as Realization: Speakers' Interests in Freedom of Speech. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 30 (5):517-539.
Re'em Segev (2008). Freedom of Expression: Justifications & Restrictions. Israel Democracy Institute.
Kenton F. Machina (1984). Freedom of Expression in Commerce. Law and Philosophy 3 (3):375 - 406.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #61,004 of 1,088,905 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,905 )
How can I increase my downloads?