Freedom Of Expression In The American Military

Features

Description

Much of the freedom of expression enjoyed by civilians in the United States, and guaranteed to them by the constitution, is illegal for American military personnel. Freedom of Expression in the American Military addresses the issues at the root of this First Amendment dichotomy. The author examines free expression for service members as a communications issue rather than simply an issue of military traditions and necessities.

The book examines court decisions involving First Amendment rights, the literature on military communication, and models that illustrate how communication works. Then the author presents and critiques the communication model used by the military to curtail the First Amendment rights of soldiers. Among the subjects covered in this volume is an interesting comparison of the First Amendment rights of civilians and soldiers who protested U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Using such examples and analysis of both communication and First Amendment literature, the author concludes that the view of military as a separate society and the validity of the rationales used to curb military speech are only weakly supported. Thus, she concludes, no compelling proof of need exists for the degree of curtailment of expression existing in the military.

The final chapter offers a revised model of military communication that allows greater freedom of expression without jeopardizing the military mission. Review: Packer identifies and examines five basic justifications for special restrictions on freedom of expression in the US military. She demonstrates through both analysis and the words of its advocates the bankruptcy of this reasoning.

Like William E. Bailey in his widely reprinted seminal 1980 essay, The Supreme Court and Communication Theory, she demonstrates that the government and court-approved restrictions on communication show a lack of understanding of how communication works and are intellectually indefensible. Packer also notes an ideological basis for restrictions in which a pervading anti-union sentiment prohibits all communication designed to promote unionization, while great concern is expressed for protection of the 'First Amendment rights' of Klansmen and Nazis.

Thoroughly documented, it presents extensive research. - Choice