Commercial and Corporate Speech

The 1st amendment of the Constitution and what counts as “free speech” has been an issue that has appeared in multiple supreme court cases throughout the history of the United States. Some of these cases include Roth v United States (1957), Miller v California (1973), and Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), in which the freedom of speech was either restricted or was left standing. Different displays of “speech” came under fire specifically in the Roth v United States (1957) and Miller v California (1973) casesin which obscene language became restricted by the US Supreme Court on the grounds that dominant theme taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest" or “to which lacks serious literary artistic, political, or scientific value”. Even in the Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) case, freedom of speech is restricted again when it comes to speech that is “directed to incite or producing imminent lawless action”.

These decisions indicate that not all forms of speech are protected under the 1st amendment and there are some restrictions as to what can be “advertised”. However, when it come to what companies can sell, it depends on who the target audience would be in relation to the product and whether that speech is corporate or commercial speech. Adults cannot be viewed as kids so therefore advertising content such as cigarettes, alcohol, guns, or other items that may not be the best for their health is still permissible. The courts and government cannot treat adults as children as that would violate the “free speech” of voting citizens in American society.

Personally, I believe that the issue of “Free Speech” and “Rights” overall are aspects that all depends on what people in a particular society value in their day to day lives. If a population of people state what they value in their day-to-day life, it is easier for people to predict what legislation will be written and what restrictions, if any, are place on said legislation. This prediction can even be applied to whether people respect the federal government’s opinion more than their own state level legislature’s opinion on issues and is very apparent in many of decisions made by the US Supreme Court throughout US history.

Even company values are reflected in what they will tolerate within the company and what they will not through their hiring processes, through what they are advertising, wages, and their overall treatment at their company. A company that values money and profit over the lives of their citizens will most likely want to put as little restriction on their products that could prevent them from making that money. This tends to be the fuel for private vs. federal debates and a fight over the ideals of an overall capitalist society vs. a more democratic socialist society. Private company values and rules tend to often conflict with government regulation at the local, state, and federal levels as all are examining “what is right” and who will have the power to enact “what is right”.