Negative Case: September/October 1999

In today's society, almost no one can agree on anything, especially when it comes to cultures. For example, in today's politically correct world, we use the word Native American instead of Indian. This may sound fine, but it terribly offends some Native Americans such as the Millie Lac and Objibwa tribes who are offended by this word and simply prefer to be called Indians. No matter what you do, you cannot please everyone which is why I negate today's resolution which states: Resolved: When they conflict, respect for cultural sensitivity ought to be valued above commercial use of free speech. When we value cultural sensitivity highest, we value an impossible goal that we can never achieve and risk losing our rights. When we value commercial use of free speech we protect our rights and benefit both society as a whole and cultures.

[ I would like to challenge the affirmative on the following definitions taken from Webster's American College Dictionary and the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
conflict- to be in opposition, clash.
respect- to relate or have reference to.
culture-the totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, and all other products of human work and thought characteristic of a community or population.
sensitivity- the state or quality of being sensitive.
ought- moral obligation or duty.
valued- relative worth or importance.
commercial- produced or marketed, with emphasis on salability.
free speech- the right of people to express their opinions publicly without government interference.]

The highest value in today's round is that of progress. Progress is defined by Webster's Dictionary as to move forward, to improve, to advance. When we negate the resolution we allow for progress because we insure everyone's' right to free speech and help dispel the negative stereotypes and allow for progress within cultures.

I will support my value through the criterion of Mill's theory of Utility. Mill's theory of utility states that something is morally justified if it produces the greatest amount of good for the greatest many. In this resolution, some people may be offended, but we will have the greatest good for the greatest number by insuring social and cultural progress.

I will negate today's resolution with two contentions: Social Progress is achieved through Commercial Free Speech and Cultural Progress is gained through Commercial Free Speech.

Lets first direct our attention to CONTENTION ONE: Social Progress is achieved through Commercial Free Speech.
It does this by giving equality to businesses, securing free speech for everyone, and better allowing for utility. First, businesses are contributing members of society. Without an economy, no one could provide themselves with basic necessities to live. So why should we value their speech any less? Businesses are simply a collection of individuals, so why should we not hold their speech as high in the business world as in everyday life. Second, if we don't value commercial free speech highest, we risk losing our political speech. If we start saying businesses cant use cultural slang, then eventually it would cross over to television, movies, books, and maybe even everyday speech. Basically, our economical and political rights are intertwined. As Michael Gartner, author of Advertising and the First Amendment, "Commercial speech is expression, and freedom of expression is necessary for a democracy. Any intelligent, self-governing people must shop freely in the marketplace of ideas, and that marketplace contains commercial as well as political stalls." When you limit one you limit the other and this leads to suppression of ideas. Third, valuing commercial free speech highest best serves utility. It is impossible to keep everyone happy when it comes to different cultures simply because people , even within the same cultures, have different views on what is acceptable and what is not. It serves for the better of society if we protect our rights and allow businesses free speech since it is impossible to be culturally sensitive to everybody. However, advertising not only helps society as a whole and businesses, it also helps the cultures themselves which leads me to

CONTENTION TWO: Cultural Progress is gained through Commercial Free Speech.
Progress is gained in cultures by having their rights protected and helping cultures to mix through commercial free speech. To begin with, you gain progress through commercial free speech by having cultures' rights protected. After all, the members of different cultures will want to express their beliefs. It is still lowering cultural respect if you do not value commercial free speech highest. When you do not value commercial speech, the people in these cultures will not be able to advertise the way that they want to and in that way will be limited. Commercial free speech also helps cultures to mix. Every time that an advertisement that a culture finds offensive, what happens? The cultures complains that that is not how they really are and then proceeds to show the rest of society why that stereotype or portrayal is not true. Often, advertisers rely on the attitudes of society to sell their products. As Anthony J. Cortese, author of Provocateur, once said, "Advertising is more a reflection of society than vice versa." "It should not be demonized nor offered as the convenient scapegoat for contemporary urban problems." Basically, advertising tends to reflect the views of society, and often when they do this, some people are going to be offended, but when they bring it public, they teach us what they really are about and dispel our wrongful views of that culture. The only way we are going to take down cultural barriers and help everyone in society is to value commercial free speech.

I WILL NOW MOVE ON TO MY OPPONENT'S CASE.

In conclusion, I have gone over my case and my opponents case to show you why commercial speech ought to be valued highest in today's round. My two contentions were: Social Progress is achieved through Commercial Free Speech and Cultural Progress is gained through Commercial Free Speech. (review as time allows.) For all these reasons I believe that society will be better off if we hold commercial free speech higher because it allows for progress in many areas. As Michael Gartner once said, "The economic marketplace and the idea marketplace are intertwined. A constraint on one is a constraint on the other."

I AM NOW OPEN FOR CROSS EXAMINATION.