The Castan Centre for Human Rights Law presents The 2011 Writing for Human Rights Secondary Schools Essay Competition

Download 42.48 Kb.
Date conversion19.05.2016
Size42.48 Kb.
The Castan Centre for Human Rights Law presents

The 2011 Writing for Human Rights
Secondary Schools Essay Competition

Social media is free speech gone mad“

Schools Information Kit


The annual Castan Centre Writing for Human Rights essay competition gives year 10, 11 and 12 students the chance to learn about human rights by highlighting controversial current issues. This kit will give you some hints for writing an essay for this year’s competition.

What is the Essay Topic?

Social media is free speech gone mad

What do you mean by social media?

Social media is internet-based media that is used for social interaction. Examples of social media include social networking sites such as Facebook, Myspace and Twitter, virtual worlds such as Second Life and Sims, and blogs such as LiveJournal and Blogger.

There have been suggestions that social media platforms, in particular Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, were instrumental in the recent Arab uprisings in Egypt and Libya, by enabling protesters to communicate with one another and the world.

Social media has also been criticised, however, because it enables individuals to make inappropriate and damaging comments without limitation. Cyber bullying is a problem that is often cited as a negative consequence of social media platforms.

What is free speech?

Free speech, sometimes called freedom of expression, is the right to express oneself without censorship or punishment. However, not all speech is protected. For example, defaming another person’s reputation is against the law in Australia.

How is free speech protected in Australia?

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression under Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Australia ratified the ICCPR in 1972 and it came into force in 1980. Nevertheless, Article 19 has not been enshrined in Australian law and is therefore not enforceable here. However, the High Court has found an implied freedom of political speech in the Constitution due to its necessity for the proper operation of democracy. This right, however, is limited because it only applies to speech made for the purpose of political communication. Section 15 of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the “Charter”) also provides protection of freedom of expression, though this right has its limitations under the Charter.

What are Human Rights?

All people have human rights, regardless of where they are or what they have done in their past. Many human rights are protected in Victoria by the Victorian Charter. The Charter protects the rights to life, privacy and freedom of expression among others. A more detailed explanation of the Charter and human rights is included in Part 2 of this kit.

Part 1 – Recent examples of free speech through social media

As you might expect, not everything can be said freely and without consequence in Australia. For example, defamation, threats of violence, blackmail and sexual harassment are illegal. Although most people would agree that free speech is important, there is much debate about whether and how free speech should be limited.

Social media platforms have added a new dimension to this debate by making it easier for individuals to express their opinions while remaining anonymous. Some people would suggest that social media is too unrestricted and that free speech on the internet should be limited.

Below are some recent examples of how free speech has been exercised through social media platforms, with both positive and negative consequences.

Bullying and violence

A young boy named Casey became an instant Facebook hero after a video of him body slamming a bully in a Sydney school was uploaded onto the internet. In the video a boy hits Casey repeatedly, with other school children watching and filming the fight, until Casey slams the boy into the ground. After the video was uploaded onto YouTube, a page in support of Casey was created on Facebook that now has 223,000 likes.

Some supporters of Casey’s actions claim that he has inspired other young people to take a stand against bullies and suggest that Casey should be commended for his bravery. Others argue that the spread of the video online only legitimises physical violence and does not combat the problem of bullying.

Should this sort of free speech be limited? Is it sending the wrong message?

Can you think of another example of violence you have seen via social media?

Cyber Bullying

In 2006,a 13 year old girl named Megan committed suicide after receiving mean messages from a boy she had become friends with through MySpace. The boy’s account, however, had actually been set up by the mother of one of the girl’s friends. While their exchanges started off friendly, their tone changed with the boy accusing Megan of being mean to her friends with the last message sent saying “You are a bad person and everybody hates you. Have a bad rest of your life. The world would be a better place without you.” Megan committed suicide and was found 20 minutes after she received the message. Recently, Blake Rice, the brother of the Queensland flood hero Jordan Rice, was bullied and bashed by other youths who later set up a Facebook page entitled ‘We bashed Blake Rice’.

Does social media just magnify the playground and make it easier for kids to be humiliated in public? Does social media make it easier to anonymously post offensive things about others?

Can you think of another example of cyber bullying via social media?

Facebook Parties

A New South Wales teen had to contact the police after her Facebook birthday party invitation went viral with almost 200,000 people replying that they would attend. She was bombarded with phone calls and text messages from strangers after the information was made public through the invite.

Is social media too public? Does it make it easy for “bad elements” to cause trouble by finding out about events?

Have you ever seen private information become public via social media?

A lawless environment

A 16 year old schoolgirl posted naked and semi-naked photos of two St Kilda footballers on the internet. The situation received great publicity over the internet and in the mainstream media. A court stopped the media from publishing the girl’s identify to protect her, but anyone could go online and find her name through Facebook, YouTube or Twitter in a matter of minutes. The media was also prevented from publishing photographs of St Kilda players that she had uploaded via Twitter, which could also be found using a standard google search.

Is it too difficult to police social media?

Offensive comments and vilification

The St Kilda Schoolgirl generated enormous interest in her story but she was not able to control the fallout, and she was vilified by many people. Every day, people are subjected to extreme vilification on social media. For example, a search of any offensive term on Twitter will reveal a tweet every few seconds using that word. Indeed, in 2010, Facebook removed the group ‘Kevin Rudd = EPIC FAIL’ yet a quick search on Facebook in 2011 comes up with the group ‘Tony Abbott is a F*%#wit’.

Do you think that offensive speech needs to be policed and banned where appropriate on social media?

Can you think of another public figure subjected to widespread abuse via social media?

Employers firing staff over Facebook comments

There have been a number of cases where employees are fired over comments or photos they have posted on their Facebook pages. In the USA, a woman was fired for criticising her boss on Facebook, while a teacher was forced to resign after she posted a picture of herself holding a glass of wine while on a trip in Europe. Increasingly employers will research your Facebook page and other comments you have made though Twitter before deciding whether to hire you or not.

Should you be able to post comments and photos on Facebook without having to worry about losing your job? Is it really appropriate for employers to monitor what their employees say and do on Facebook?

Do you know of anyone who got into trouble at work because of their social media activities?

Arab revolutions

The recent revolutions in Egypt and Libya relied on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to mobilise individuals and share information with the outside world. In Tunisia, the government attempted unsuccessfully to block internet sites to prevent protesters from communicating with each other and organising the revolt.

Advocates of social media suggest that its use during the Arab revolutions demonstrates the ability of social media platforms to enable oppressed societies to challenge authoritarian governments and create social change. Others argue that the role of social media in the revolutions has been exaggerated.

Can social media advance free speech in countries with oppressive governments?

What do you know about the use of social media in the Middle East protest movements?

Awareness raising campaigns

Social Media websites are increasingly being used in awareness raising campaigns. These causes range from issues such as HIV/AIDS and poverty reduction to workplace safety and anti-discrimination campaigns. From the creation of videos on YouTube, to Twitter-based fundraising efforts, NGOs and other community organisations are starting to expand their use of social media to help campaign for various causes. In the US, people can even make cash donations to their favourite charity through Facebook as well as via text message. Just hours after the earthquake struck Haiti, a tweet told followers how to donate to the earthquake relief by sending a text message. Within 24 hours, over $800,000 had been raised though text message donations.

Is social media a good avenue though which to fundraise and raise awareness of important issues? Or are other alternative mechanisms more appropriate? Will people become desensitized by these campaigns?

Have you ever been involved in an awareness raising or fundraising campaign via social media?

Alternative news sources

Social media can also be an alternative source of news information. When mainstream media outlets go down, or appear to be biased, readers can turn to social media to get a different account of what is happening. Likewise it has enabled amateur journalists to gain exposure that they would not otherwise have been able to gain though the mainstream media. Now, due to social media outlets, anyone can be an amateur journalist, posting news items and commentary on events. During the Arab revolutions the mainstream media received much of its information from amateur journalists on the ground. You no longer need work for one of the big media outlets to have an impact.

Does this lead to a lower standard of reporting given that the amateur journalists may not be required to fact check his or her story in the same way a mainstream journalist would? Has it created a broader range of news and views?

Do you get news and opinions from non-traditional news sources?

Government services

In the aftermath of the bush fires in Victoria, the government started utilising text message updates to inform people of potential bush fire hazards. The ubiquitous nature of mobile phones meant this information could be sent to the public quickly. You did not need to be sitting by a TV in order to be made aware of danger spots.

Is the government’s use of text message and other social media technology a benefit for the public? Or will the government use this new technology to bombard us with advertising and marketing information?

Have you ever received a public information message via social media?

Part 2 – Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities

Australia is the only western democracy without a national bill of rights, however Victoria has the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the “Charter”). The Australian Capital Territory has the Human Rights Act 2004, and several states are considering introducing similar legislation.

Where Do the Rights in the Charter Come from?

The first major international human rights document was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was made by the United Nations after World War II. It was then divided into two binding treaties, which have been ratified by most of the world’s nations, including Australia. They are:

  • The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects rights such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to life.

  • The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which protects rights such as the rights to education, health and work.

The Charter is modelled on the ICCPR, however it has modified or excluded some controversial rights. For example, the Charter does not apply to abortion laws, and the right of self-determination is not included. The Charter does not include ICESCR rights.

How Does the Charter Work?

Public authorities: the Charter prohibits government authorities (known as “public authorities”, for example government departments, local councils, police officers) from violating human rights. This requirement will help to instil a “culture” of respect for human rights into public bodies.

Individual rights: the Charter is not designed to encourage law suits, so people cannot sue someone for a breach of their rights. However, if they are suing a public authority for breaching some other law, they can also argue that the authority has breached their rights.

New legislation: the government must state whether each new law complies with the Charter when it introduces the law to Parliament. The government can still pass legislation if it is not compatible with the Charter, and it only needs to explain why it is doing so. The intention is that the law will encourage the government to respect human rights because it will be reluctant to admit that it is passing a law which violates human rights.

Human rights in the courts: the Supreme Court can declare that a law does not comply with the Charter, but this does not make the law invalid. After the court makes such a declaration, the government must respond in Parliament, but it does not have to change the law if it does not want to. Courts must also interpret laws so that they are compatible with human rights, where possible.

Free Speech in the Charter

Section 15 of the Charter is entitled ‘Freedom of Expression’ and espouses the right to freedom of expression, limited by reasonable restrictions to respect the rights and reputation of other persons and the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality.Part 3 – Writing Your Essay

What Should I Focus on in My Essay?

The point of your essay should be to explore whether restrictions should be placed on free speech expressed in social media platforms and if so, which restrictions. Some people believe that people should be able to say and write anything they like, whilst others are of the opinion that it is better for society at large if the right to free speech is limited to ensure other human rights are upheld. By considering what is best for society, you will be able to decide if free speech in social media should be restricted and to what extent.

Do I Need to Mention Specific Human Rights?

This topic is mainly about the right to freedom of speech, sometimes called the right to freedom of expression. Be sure to discuss this right in your essay. You may also want to discuss any competing human rights, such as the right to privacy.

Do I Need to Mention the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act?

No. You may wish to discuss laws introduced by the federal government, other state governments or local governments outside of Victoria. None of these governments are covered by the Charter which only operates in Victoria.

It is enough to know that human rights are recognised in many different ways: for example, by international treaties and by domestic laws such as the Charter. At the federal level in Australia there is no human rights charter, although many rights are protected in other laws and a committee appointed by the Federal Government recently recommended that one be adopted.

What Resources Should I Use?

This guide gives you a brief introduction to the arguments surrounding free speech in social media. You’ll have to do some of your own research on the issue, and there are lots of interesting and informative websites out there that can help you.

Some Resources for This Topic

  • is a Research Note on Free Speech and the Constitution on the Parliament of Australia website

  • is a blog entry by Sarah Joseph entitled, ‘Defamation, Twitter and Free Speech’

Useful General Internet Resources

  • is a simple, easy to understand site for young people.

  • is a fact sheet on the Charter.

  • has general information on human rights.

  • is the Victorian government’s human rights website.

  • is the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission site.

  • is the United Nations human rights page.

  • is the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights.

  • is the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights.

  • is The Charter.

When preparing your essay, you should only use credible resources such as books, magazines, newspapers and similar online resources. Although open source sites such as Wikipedia are good for background information, you should not rely on them. You should also avoid sites such as weblogs.

We do not expect you to have lots of footnotes, however if you make a statement of fact, then you should insert a footnote containing the source from which you found the information, following this example: “police seized photographs from the Roslyn Oxley Gallery.”1

Part 4 – Competition Guidelines

Essay Guidelines

Students must meet the following guidelines:

  • Essays must be written by a single year 10, 11 or 12 Victorian school student

  • Essays must be between 750 and 1000 words

  • Essays must be typed with a font no less than 10 point

  • Essays must be double spaced

  • Essays must be the original work of the submitting student

  • Only one essay may be submitted per student

  • If using or citing sources such as books, journals, newspapers and websites, essays should be correctly referenced

  • Applications must include the name of a nominating teacher from your school

Prizes and judging

Short-listed essays will be assessed by a panel of judges from the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law.


  • 1st prize: The new iPad 2 (64gb with wifi/3G)

  • Two runner’s up will each receive a the new iPad 2 (32gb with wifi/3G)

The winning essay will also be published in the Castan Centre’s semi-annual newsletter.

Award Ceremony and the Great Law Week Debate

The Essay competition will be officially launched during the Great Law Week Debate, on 18 May 2011 from 6-7:30pm. The debate will be held at the BMW Edge, in Federation Square, Melbourne.

We encourage students to attend the debate where they will see esteemed members of the legal community, in this often humorous debate, address the same topic as the essay competition. Please rsvp for the debate by Friday 13 May to or 03 9905 2630.

Winners, their families and nominated teachers will be invited to attend the awards ceremony to be held during the Monash University Education Matters week, tentatively scheduled for the third week of September. More details about the awards ceremony will be available on the competition website.

Submission process and deadline

  • Essays must be submitted by 5pm on 27 June 2011.

  • Essays must be accompanied by an official application form available on the website at and sent to:

Human Rights Essay Competition
Castan Centre for Human Rights Law
Building 12
Monash University, Vic 3800

Or emailed to

Contacts and Other Information

The Competition Website

The Website contains downloadable copies of this kit and the entry form, and other information.

Competition Inquiries

Erica Contini

Project Officer
Phone: (03) 9905 3318

The Castan Centre

Castan Centre for Human Rights Law

Building 12
Monash University Vic 3800
Phone: (03) 9905 3327

1 Michael Pelly “Artist Bill Henson Escapes Obscenity Charge” The Australian, 6 June 2008.

new picture

The database is protected by copyright © 2016
send message

    Main page