ABSTRACT
This chapter explores what difference does it make whether the focus is on the interest in individual freedom of speech—the interest of the speaker—or the social necessity to be informed—the interest of a democratic people. Adoption of the latter value as the primary value underlying the first amendment speech provision has extremely important consequences for the conceptual contours of that provision and its relation to other basic values of our society, including privacy. The first amendment, for Meiklejohn, is not concerned with the individual's right to find self-fulfillment in free expression. By contrast, the social interest in free expression, in "hearing" or being informed, which inheres in the body politic, not the individual, is protected by the first amendment. The Justice seems to be missing Meiklejohn's distinctiveness, if not misunderstanding him. For many years the Supreme Court has decided first amendment free expression cases without the benefit of a consistent and systematic theory.
