3 ms·

Upvoted because I make this argument too, but I think it’s better applied to the kind of person who says “words are just words, man” than free speech absolutist

Upvoted because I make this argument too, but I think it’s better applied to the kind of person who says “words are just words, man” than free speech absolutists. Though, to one who believes that swear words have power but shouldn’t be censored: is that just in a legal sense or in a societal sense?

simonh 4y ago
It very much depends on the context. As an advocate of free speech rights I believe the only justification for legally penalising speech is when it is incitement to violence or criminality. Speech being offensive is no good reason to penalise it legally, otherwise it's no freedom at all. However social groups and independent forums or publishers should be free to set their own editorial standards. Nobody (acting in their private capacity, that is not as a government employee) should have any obligation to repeat, distribute or publish the speech of others that they disagree with.
- int_19h 4y ago
  Yet at the same time, there must be enough independent forums for a true diversity of opinions. If they all end up being owned by a couple of monopolists, any semblance of free speech is just that.
  - simonh 4y ago
    In theory maybe, but in practice we're nowhere even remotely near that. E.g. Twitter is full of very vocal politicians complaining loudly that their political beliefs are being, er, silenced on Twitter. It's all part of the show. The western media landscape is incredibly diverse, pretty much every conceivable opinion and niche community is available and discoverable. In fact there seems to have been a huge boom in fringe attitudes and beliefs, as barriers to communication have fallen away, exactly the opposite of what you'd expect if communications was being meaningfully restricted and moderated at the societal level.
    - int_19h 4y ago
      There's a difference between availability and prominence. What we have right now is a media market (both on and off the Internet) that's dominated by a few large players that represent very few political ideologies. And then, yes, you have "every conceivable opinion" on the Net - but, more often than not, you have to already know that opinion to find more about it, because it ends up shoved off the main platforms into dark corners.

simonh 4y ago

It very much depends on the context. As an advocate of free speech rights I believe the only justification for legally penalising speech is when it is incitement to violence or criminality. Speech being offensive is no good reason to penalise it legally, otherwise it's no freedom at all. However social groups and independent forums or publishers should be free to set their own editorial standards. Nobody (acting in their private capacity, that is not as a government employee) should have any obligation to repeat, distribute or publish the speech of others that they disagree with.

int_19h 4y ago
Yet at the same time, there must be enough independent forums for a true diversity of opinions. If they all end up being owned by a couple of monopolists, any semblance of free speech is just that.
- simonh 4y ago
  In theory maybe, but in practice we're nowhere even remotely near that. E.g. Twitter is full of very vocal politicians complaining loudly that their political beliefs are being, er, silenced on Twitter. It's all part of the show. The western media landscape is incredibly diverse, pretty much every conceivable opinion and niche community is available and discoverable. In fact there seems to have been a huge boom in fringe attitudes and beliefs, as barriers to communication have fallen away, exactly the opposite of what you'd expect if communications was being meaningfully restricted and moderated at the societal level.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    There's a difference between availability and prominence. What we have right now is a media market (both on and off the Internet) that's dominated by a few large players that represent very few political ideologies. And then, yes, you have "every conceivable opinion" on the Net - but, more often than not, you have to already know that opinion to find more about it, because it ends up shoved off the main platforms into dark corners.