CSULB ENGLISH 100 essay #3 supplemental readings
"40% of Millennials OK with limiting speech offensive to minorities" by Jacob Poushter
An interesting shift has occurred. The "free speech movement" began more or less on college campuses like UC Berkely in the 1960s, championed by students who were upset about the censorship imposed by things like the McCarthy trials, for example. Today's college students, however, are the most likely to advocate regulation of certain types of speech.
Many of the organized protests on college campuses across the country have published lists of demands for changes they want to see implemented on their campuses and in their communities. Several of the groups explicitly call for regulation of hate speech. For example, the Amherst College's group demand #6: "President Martin must issue a statement of support for the revision of the Honor Code to reflect a zero-tolerance policy for racial insensitivity and hate speech." Most of the others implicitly advocate regulation. For example, most demand some sort of mandatory cultural/racial training, wherein it is reasonable to infer that hate speech would be discouraged in one way or another.
"House Masters 'Unanimously' Agree To Change Title" by Meg. P. Bernhard
Social regulation can be very complex. In addition to pressuring others (boycotts, for example), think of all the ways we choose to regulate ourselves as a means of navigating our social lives.
"How political correctness rules in America's student 'safe spaces'" by Ruth Sherlock
"Students at NY School Demand Censorship, Gender-Neutral Pronouns" by Peter Hasson.
"Students question STEM profs' awareness of campus issues" by Brendan Hellweg
"Court: School can ban US flag shirts for safety" by Paul Elias
Note: these are high school students. The courts have generally ruled that minors do not enjoy full constitutional rights, as they are not legally adults, for example see the case of Bong Rips for Jesus.
"Free Speech or Hate Speech? Britain Bans US Anti-Muslim Bloggers" by Harvey Morris
Ground zero of this debate these days seems to be college campuses, but the conflict is throughout many layers of our society.
"Should There Be Limits on Freedom of Speech?" by PBS.
A video and accompanying write-up produced by PBS.
"Too Free?" by Ken Paulson
"In a First Amendment Center/AJR survey, nearly half of those responding said they think the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees."
"The Two Leading Presidential Candidates -- Clinton and Trump -- Are Both Mocking Free Speech On The Internet" by Mike Masnick
As Larry Flynt suggests, we all want free speech for ourselves, but we tend to be much less concerned for the free speech of others... And it's not really a Republican or Democrat thing; it's a human thing.
Interestingly, the free speech movement was really started by liberals in the 1960s, opposing conservative censorship. Today, conservatives tend to be the most vocal in support of free speech, opposing liberal censorship. Same fight, different teams. Generally, the group that is NOT in power is most in favor of free speech. In the 1960s, conservatism was culturally dominant, hence liberal support of free speech. Today, liberalism is culturally dominant, hence conservative support of free speech.
"Chancellor's message on campus appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos" by UC Berkeley
This is an official statement from the Berkeley administration published a couple days before the first big free speech / hate speech riot in January 2017. The statement outlines the Constitutional legality of hateful speech, but admonishes that "student groups enjoy the right to invite whomever they wish to speak on campus, but we urge them to consider whether exercising that right in a manner that might unleash harmful attacks on fellow students and other members of the community is consistent with their own and with our community’s values."
"FREE SPEECH IS NOT VIOLATED AT WELLESLEY" Staff Editorial, The Wellesley News
In this article, student staff for the Wellesley student newspaper advocate and defend their efforts to restrict hateful speech: "The spirit of free speech is to protect the suppressed, not to protect a free-for-all where anything is acceptable, no matter how hateful and damaging." [The original article seems to have been scrubbed from the internet - link is to an archived version of the article]
FREE SPEECH discussion on the Charlie Rose show [VIDEO]
A very good and thoughtful roundtable discussion of the issue between guest host Dan Senor, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni, and Jonathan Haidt, the NYU professor who co-wrote "The Coddling of the American Mind."