In the 2015 case elonis v. united states, the supreme court decided that people should not be prosecuted for threats made on social media unless it can be proved that the threats are real. what does this case indicate about first amendment rights in the 21st century? a. the first amendment allows internet companies to publish users' content regardless of what it says. b. these rights have had to be reinterpreted to consider how people use new types of communication. c. people's freedom to express their opinions is restricted to the forms of communication in place when the bill of rights was written. d. first amendment rights are more likely to be restricted today than 50 years ago.

The correct answer is B) These rights have had to be reinterpreted to consider how people use new types of communication.

What this case indicates about First Amendment rights in the 21st century is that these rights have had to be reinterpreted to consider how people use new types of communication.

Social media has no regulation at all. Through social media, anyone in anonymity could cause severe damage posting a lie that can become a “truth”, just by resending it hundreds or thousands of times. First Amendment rights must be reinterpreted to consider how people use new types of communication. People need to be responsible in what they post through social media because the thin line that separates the public life and the personal life some times is not distinguished at all.

where's the