In some ways, "freedom of speech" is a double-edged sword. Why do people promote freedom of speech when they have something to say, yet when they find something supposedly “offensive," they completely change their mind, and go against it? How is it that people want freedom to say whatever their heart pleases, but they’re always on the lookout to hear something they can feel offended by. I find it disturbing, to not say disgusting, this newly found need of self-entitlement people have now. Because people find something offensive, inappropriate, stupid, demeaning or whatever it is they think of, they start rallying against whomever or whatever it is that “fulfill” these characteristics.
Media outlets have fallen prey to this, but media outlets are the main cause for this uprise of self-entitled naysayers. The internet is the worst culprit of all. The internet has become the home for these naysayers, those who sit in front of a screen to simply criticize, insult, and put down whatever they see just because. YouTube’s videos are majorly filled with comments that try to spark a controversy. Of course, you might think “but aren’t they using their right for freedom of speech?”, and you are correct. This is why I say freedom of speech can be described as a double edged sword. It can impale the one who wields it and the one at the other receiving end, all at the same time. There is a side who uses freedom of speech for a good cause, to raise awareness, to express the need for change within our world. Then there is a side who uses freedom of speech to do the complete opposite.
Comedy has been another medium where this self-entitlement of the public has changed what can and what can’t be said. This new trend of censorship based on offensive remarks or what can seem offensive has struck the wrong note in comedy. There aren’t any bold innovative comedians like there used to be. They didn’t care for the general public’s op...