Hate Speech
The social media behemoths are under a lot of pressure to censor material on their sites, because it is supposedly stoking partisan rancor, allowing the Russians to elect Republicans, and enabling violence. I’m not so sure that is a good idea. I’ll start with a short anecdotal ramble to try to illustrate the point.
When I was a starving student, I sent what little civic engagement money I could afford to the young people going South to protest segregation and to the ACLU. In those days the ACLU defended free speech across the political spectrum, from Nazis to Communists and Anarchists. I was a strong believer in free speech, even obnoxious free speech. Sadly, the ACLU is now interested solely in the free speech of the left side of the political spectrum.
For a few decades, I spent a lot of time at planning commission and city council meetings, mostly waiting for my agenda item to be heard. Almost all of those bodies devoted significant time to something usually labeled “public comment”. Every such body had one, or maybe a few, folks who got up to rant about something totally unrelated to anything on the agenda. I used to resent the time I spent listening to their comments. A few were public policy wonks with a valid point to make; most were wing nuts. After many hours of unhappy listening, I had an epiphany. Wing nuts are also American citizens, who have an inalienable right of free speech. Today’s wing nut view might be tomorrow's consensus. I was grateful that the politicians had the patience to sit and listen, with at least the pretense of attention.
Some years ago, I threw a fundraiser for a political candidate. Afterward, one of his minions asked to have lunch with me. He was a gay activist and was pushing gay marriage long before it became the law of the land. I suggested that his movement was making a mistake. A majority of the public was in favor of civil union, which was marriage in all but name. Why alienate those who regarded marriage as a sacramental union between a male and female? Eventually, the consensus would work its way to his position, if allowed to do so. He explained to me that I knew nothing about social change. Activists had to get out on the edge of the issue and drag public opinion in behind them. At least in the case of gay marriage, his assessment was correct. Subsequently, I thought of other examples that validated his assertion.
My point is that we should be very careful about censorship of any kind. This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. A free market of ideas should be free. Which geek on the Facebook payroll should be in charge of editing free expression?
What about all the evil consequences? Advocating violent action should be beyond the pale. But it should be allowed, so that the police are on notice. The result should be a warrant for a search of the house for weapons, and placement on the “do not sell to” list at gun shops and gun shows. The social media companies could easily flag such postings and pass the information along to law enforcement. Better for the sickos to plan in public than in secret.
What about the silo consumption of news and resulting polarization? I have a solution for that problem that I will illustrate with another anecdote.
Dan Rather destroyed his career by using a forged letter to discredit George W. Bush. The effort blew up when a lawyer in Minneapolis posted a request for typeface experts. Within hours, he had an avalanche of data, which proved that the typeface in Dan’s damning letter did not exist until decades after it was supposed to have been written.
The social media companies should hire skilled and non-partisan fact checkers instead of censors. Controversial and conspiratorial postings can be fact checked on the spot, with an open invitation for the public to weigh in. Those with moderate opinions and useful information should be encouraged to contribute. Anyone entering the silo would then be presented with some facts and thoughts that might open the mind a bit.
Suppressing wing nut speech is not the American way. The free market of ideas, however obnoxious they may be, will work, if we take the time to work it.
