We are normally affected or influenced by the media at any given time and place. When we are at home, we watch news on television and get information from the internet. In our cars we like turning up speakers while driving to hear the billboards music or hot breaking news. The American time use survey 2009, showed that “watching TV was a leisure activity that occupied most time (2.8 hours per day) accounting for about half of the leisure time on average, for those aged 15 years and over”(Bureau of labor statistics). It is true that, TV and radio are the main sources of our daily information. As the mass media have huge invisible powers that build, affects and changes people’s sense of worth. Therefore this paper agrees to the fact that there should be a commission to regulate the media so that the information provided is true and accurate. Many countries have different commissions to regulate the information that is given out by the media. These commissions work towards the prevention of faulty information broadcast provided by the media. In the United States, the Federal Communications Commission has the authority over what the media can say on air and it has the right to control who can use the airwaves. In this way, the media has restrictions about what they can say. In the article “Why We Need to Abolish the FCC”, Robert Garmong thought the FCC hurts Americans’ right of free speech and it should be abolished. Because the First Amendment declares that “Congress shall pass no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or that of the press”. I can’t go along with him because instead of hurting our rights on the whole, the FCC protects us. We have two main questions in this context. The first one is that, does the existence of FCC hurt people’s freedom of speech and secondly what actions done by FCC are right or which ones are wrong. Before discussing the first question, we need to define what “free speech” is. The definition of free speech is quite critical. There are many argumentations on the topic. One of them is, “is hate speech free speech?” In my opinion, free speech means we can say anything we want to say, but what we say should not bring negative impacts to others and the society as a whole. For example, “Racial insults are particularly undeserving of First Amendment Protection because the perpetuator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialogue but to injure the victim” (Lawrence 375). Thus hate speech can’t be a part of free speech. The US does have certain laws limiting people’s rights of free speech. The Supreme Court for instance, has the right of final say on free speech; it is clear that “obscenity, fighting words, defamation, child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats and solicitations to commit crimes,” are some of the types of hate speeches. These nine kinds of speeches are not protected by the first amendment. Therefore it is reasonable for the FCC to ban these kinds of information relay, and this action doesn’t go against the first amendment. Again we can’t say that this hurts our rights to free speech. The author Robert Garmong once argued that FCC will restrict the content of information provided by the media. He said “the very existence of FCC is a flagrant violation of the right to free speech.”(587) I strongly disagree with him on this one. The FCC is supposed to safeguard the