Successor and companion volume to "Words that Wound," the first book to argue for recognition of hate speech as a serious social problem. The current volume greatly expands the coverage of hate speech, including chapters on children, the Internet, recent cases, campus hate speech codes, and international responses. Deals expressly with arguments against hate-speech regulation, as well as the case for it.Written by leading critical race theorists Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, this volume succinctly explores a host of issues presented by hate speech, including legal theories for regulating it, the harms it causes, and policy arguments pro and con suppressing it. Chapters analyze hate speech on campus, the history of hate speech in America, the careers of particular words as "nigger," "spick," "wop," and "kike," hate speech against whites, and the special case of children. Particular attention is devoted to hate on the Internet, talk radio, and to the role of white supremacist groups in disseminating it. Designed to be accessible to the general public and students, this book features reading lists, exercises, and questions for discussion. This book accompanies and expands on the prize-winning volume "Words that Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment," also published by Westview Press.

Now updated with new material from the author and other leading scholars in the field, Literacies of Power illustrates ways in which schools, media and other social institutions perpetuate ignorance. In Boston, twelve-year-old student David Spritzler faced disciplinary action from his school for his vocal questioning of the Pledge of Allegiance, which celebrates liberty and justice for all. The boy's concerns were not taken by the teacher as an opportunity to engage the class in a discussion of the country's problems, such as homelessness, which could be seen just outside on Boston's streets. Across the river, at prestigious MIT, a linguist student told her colleague that she could not take time to read literature outside of theoretical linguistics if she wanted to be a top scholar in her field. Even essays that linked linguistics to its historical and social context fell outside her diligent pursuit of theory. What do these two seemingly disparate events have in common? According to Donaldo Macedo, they are part of an educational legacy that stifles critical thinking favour of indoctrination and specialization. students in the kind of broad, critical thinking necessary for responsible citizenship. Challenging conservatives like Allan Bloom and E.D. Hirsch, Macedo shows why so-called common culture literacy is a form of dominant cultural reproduction that undermines independent thought and goes against the best interests of our students. Offering a wide-ranging counterargument, Macedo shows why cultural literacy cannot be restricted to the acquisition of Western heritage values, which sustain an ideology that systematically negates the cultural experiences of many members of society - not only minorities but also anyone who is poor or disenfranchised. Macedo calls on his own experience as a Cape Verdean immigrant from West Africa who ad to surmount the barriers imposed by the world's most entrenched monolingual system of higher education. His eloquence in this book is testimony to the very idea that critical thinking and good education are not and must not be culturally or linguistically bounded.

Free Speech is a philosophical treatment of a topic which is of immense importance to all of us.
Writing with great clarity, wit, and genuine concern, Alan Haworth situates the main arguments for free speech by tracing their relationship to contemporary debates in politics and political philosophy, and their historical roots to earlier controversies over religious toleration.
Free Speech will appeal to anyone with an interest in philosophy, politics and current affairs.

Journalism and Free Speech brings together for the first time an historical and theoretical exploration of journalism and its relationship with the idea of free speech. Though freedom of the press is widely regarded as an essential ingredient to democratic societies, the relationship between the idea of freedom of speech and the practice of press freedom is one that is generally taken for granted. Censorship, in general terms is an anathema.

This book explores the philosophical and historical development of free speech and critically examines the ways in which it relates to freedom of the press in practice. The main contention of the book is that the actualisation of press freedom should be seen as encompassing modes of censorship which place pressure upon the principled connection between journalism and freedom of speech. Topics covered include:

• The Philosophy of Free Speech
• Journalism and Free Speech
• Press Freedom and the Democratic Imperative
• New Media and the Global Public Sphere
• Regulating Journalism
• Privacy and Defamation
• National Security and Insecurity
• Ownership
• News, Language Culture and Censorship

This book introduces students to a wide range of issues centred around freedom of speech, press freedom and censorship, providing an accessible text for courses on journalism and mass media.

First published in 1987 this book considers the practical implications of increasing public access to official information in Britain, both from the perspective of increasing Freedom of Information and reforming Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act. It draws attention to the practical problems such changes would pose for both politicians and civil servants working in an adversarial system of government. It examines the effects of proposed changes on the conventions which are a fundamental feature of the British constitution. It also considers the political significance of reforms, both to demands for increased public participation in policy-making and to actual policies. Local and international perspectives on open government are included in order to provide an informed insight into an important issue of contemporary concern.

Since 2005, Thailand has been in crisis, with unprecedented political instability and the worst political violence seen in the country in decades. In the aftermath of a military coup in 2006, Thailand s press freedom ranking plunged, while arrests for l se-majest have skyrocketed to levels unknown in the modern world. Truth on Trial in Thailand traces the 110-year trajectory of defamation-based laws in Thailand. The most prominent of these is l se-majest, but defamation aspects also appear in laws on sedition and treason, the press and cinema, anti-communism, contempt of court, insulting of religion, as well as libel. This book makes the case that despite the appearance of growing democratization, authoritarian structures and urges still drive politics in Thailand; the long-term effects of defamation law adjudication has skewed the way that Thai society approaches and perceives "truth."

Employing the work of Habermas, Foucault, Agamben, and Schmitt to construct an alternative framework to understand Thai history, Streckfuss contends that Thai history has become "suspended" since 1958, and repeatedly declining to face the truth of history has set the stage for an endless state of crisis.

This book will be of interest to students and scholars of South East Asian politics, Asian history, and media and communication.

David Streckfuss is an independent scholar who has lived in Thailand for more than 20 years. His work primarily concerns human rights, and political and cultural history.

Commentators on the media in Southeast Asia either emphasise with optimism the prospect for new media to provide possibilities for greater democratic discourse, or else, less optimistically, focus on the continuing ability of governments to exercise tight and sophisticated control of the media. This book explores these issues with reference to Malaysia and Singapore. It analyses how journalists monitor governments and cover elections, discussing what difference journalism makes; it examines citizen journalism, and the constraints on it, often self-imposed constraints; and it assesses how governments control the media, including outlining the development and current application of legal restrictions.

If the Al-Qaeda terrorists who attacked the United States in 2001 wanted to weaken the West, they achieved their mission by striking a blow at the heart of democracy. Since 9/11 governments including those of the USA, the UK, France and Australia have introduced tough, intimidating legislation to discourage the legitimate activities of a probing press, so greatly needed after the Iraq War proved that executive government could not be trusted. Often hiding behind arguments about defending national security and fighting the war on terror, governments criminalised legitimate journalistic work, ramping up their attacks on journalists' sources, and the whistle-blowers who are so essential in keeping governments honest. Through detailed research and analysis, this book, which includes interviews with leading figures in the field, including Edward Snowden, explains how mass surveillance and anti-terror laws are of questionable value in defeating terrorism, but have had a 'chilling effect' on one of the foundations of democracy: revelatory journalism.

The essays in this volume portray the debates concerning freedom of speech in eighteenth-century France and Britain as well as in Austria, Denmark, Russia, and Spain and its American territories. Representing the views of both moderate and radical eighteenth-century thinkers, these essays by eminent scholars discover that twenty-fi rst-century controversies regarding the extent of permissible speech have their origins in the eighteenth century. The economic integration of Europe and its offshoots over the past three centuries into a distinctive cultural product, "the West," has given rise to a triumphant Enlightenment narrative of universalism and tolerance that masks these divisions and the disparate national contributions to freedom of speech and other liberal rights.

A factory worker is fired because her boss dislikes the political bumper sticker on her car in the parking lot. Another is canned after refusing to display an American flag at his workstation. A flight attendant is grounded because her airline doesn't like what she's writing in her personal blog. Is it legal to fire people for expressing themselves, even when it's unrelated to performing their jobs? Can you lose your job because of a bumper sticker? For many American workers, the answer is yes. In "Speechless," Bruce Barry confronts the state of free speech in the American workplace. He shows how employers and courts are eroding workers' abilities to express themselves on and off the job, with damaging consequences for individuals, their employers, and civil society as a whole. In defense of free speech in and around the workplace, Barry argues that the experience of liberty in a free society, as well as in life, in general, depends in part on the experience of liberty at work.

Fifty years after the event, here is the first full account of an audacious publishing decision that - with the help of booksellers and readers around the country - forced the end of literary censorship in Australia. For more than seventy years, a succession of politicians, judges, and government officials in Australia worked in the shadows to enforce one of the most pervasive and conservative regimes of censorship in the world. The goal was simple: to keep Australia free of the moral contamination of impure literature. Under the censorship regime, books that might damage the morals of the Australian public were banned, seized, and burned; bookstores were raided; publishers were fined; and writers were charged and even jailed. But in the 1970s, that all changed. In 1970, in great secrecy and at considerable risk, Penguin Books Australia resolved to publish Portnoy's Complaint - Philip Roth's frank, funny, and profane bestseller about a boy hung up about his mother and his penis. In doing so, Penguin spurred a direct confrontation with the censorship authorities, which culminated in criminal charges, police raids, and an unprecedented series of court trials across the country. Sweeping from the cabinet room to the courtroom, The Trials of Portnoy draws on archival records and new interviews to show how Penguin and a band of writers, booksellers, academics, and lawyers determinedly sought for Australians the freedom to read what they wished - and how, in defeating the forces arrayed before them, they reshaped Australian literature and culture forever.

In 1994, artistic freedom pertaining inter alia to literature was enshrined in the South African Constitution. Clearly, the establishment of this right was long overdue compared to other nations within the Commonwealth. Indeed, the legal framework and practices regarding the regulation of literature that were introduced following the nation's transition to a non-racial democracy seemed to form a decisive turning point in the history of South African censorship of literature. This study employs a historical sociological point of view to describe how the nation's emerging literary field helped pave the way for the constitutional entrenchment of this right in 1994. On the basis of institutional and poetological analyses of all the legal trials concerning literature that were held in South Africa during the period 1910-2010, it describes how the battles fought in and around the courts between literary, judicial and executive elites eventually led to a constitutional exceptio artis for literature. As the South African judiciary displayed an ongoing orientation towards both English and American law in this period, the analyses are firmly placed in the context of developments occurring concurrently in these two legal systems.

The infuriating tale of a young Palestinian punished for exercising his freedom of speech. Like many of his generation, Waleed Al-Husseini began a blog in his twenties. However, unlike many, Waleed also had the misfortune of having been a blogger in Palestine; worse yet, he often criticized Islam and its adherents and declared himself an apostate in his writings. The Palestinian Authority did not take well to this and eventually put Waleed in jail without a trial or even a wisp of legal justification. As if this was not bad enough, they placed Waleed in solitary confinement. This state of affairs continued for 11 months. Over the course of this time, Waleed was tortured and suffered innumerable indignities and deprivations simply for having the audacity to speak his mind. Eventually his unjust imprisonment began to draw international attention from foreign governments and human rights organizations, which pressured the Palestinian Authority and finally forced it to provide him a trial and parole. After being paroled, Waleed fled Palestine, first to Jordan and then to France, where he has become an outspoken advocate for freedom of speech and a critic of the state of contemporary Islam. The Blasphemer is a sobering, impassioned recounting of this Kafkaesque experience as well as a searing polemic against the corruption and hypocrisy that define contemporary Palestine.

When we think of the word "censorship", we imagine blacked out words and authoritarian political regimes of the past. However, censorship is alive and well today, and just as pervasive in capitalist democracies as repressive regimes. Offering a potted history of the phenomenon from the execution of Socrates in 399BC to the latest in internet filtering, Petley provides an impassioned manifesto for freedom of speech. Also explaining how media monopolies and moguls censor by limiting what news/entertainment they impart, this is an invaluable resource for anyone interested in global media in the information age.

Never in human history was there such a chance for freedom of expression. If we have Internet access, any one of us can publish almost anything we like and potentially reach an audience of millions. Never was there a time when the evils of unlimited speech flowed so easily across frontiers: violent intimidation, gross violations of privacy, tidal waves of abuse. A pastor burns a Koran in Florida and UN officials die in Afghanistan. Drawing on a lifetime of writing about dictatorships and dissidents, Timothy Garton Ash argues that in this connected world that he calls cosmopolis, the way to combine freedom and diversity is to have more but also better free speech. Across all cultural divides we must strive to agree on how we disagree. He draws on a thirteen-language global online project - freespeechdebate.com - conducted out of Oxford University and devoted to doing just that. With vivid examples, from his personal experience of China's Orwellian censorship apparatus to the controversy around Charlie Hebdo to a very English court case involving food writer Nigella Lawson, he proposes a framework for civilized conflict in a world where we are all becoming neighbours.

Hate speech laws have existed in various forms in Australia for well over a decade. Unlike other countries, such as the United States and Canada, they have not faced constitutional hurdles to their existence. The general acceptance of hate speech laws in Australia opens intellectual space for the exploration of a range of interesting questions regarding the laws' operation, the underlying values they pursue and the context within which hate speech is occurring. How should the regulation of hate speech be balanced against Australia's political and cultural commitment to freedom of speech? Who are the hate speakers and how does their speech manifest? What types of hate speech are targeted by existing laws? How are these laws enforced? How can the laws be changed to improve governments' response to hate speech? How does the emergence of bills of rights affect the regulation of hate speech? Drawing on a broad range of academic and practical experts, this book addresses these questions. The essays in first part of this book outline the landscape within which hate speech regulation occurs. They include consideration of the legal, policy and historical context for vilification, the ways in which the language of hatred is changing, and a new look at the longstanding debate about the tension between freedom of speech and hate speech as a conflict between liberty and equality. In part two, the book considers the practice of hate speech regulation in a variety of Australian institutions and includes practical perspectives from the legal profession. In the final part the essays consider hate speech regulation within a broader human rights framework, taking into account the emergence of bills of rights in Australian states.

In 2014, renowned professor Steven Salaita had his appointment to a tenured professorship revoked by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in response to his tweets criticizing the Israeli government's assault on Gaza. Salaita's firing generated a huge public outcry, with thousands petitioning for his reinstatement and more than five thousand scholars pledging to boycott UIUC. His case raises important questions about academic freedom, free speech on campus and the movement for justice in Palestine. In Uncivil Rites, Salaita reflects upon the controversy.

Now that the Supreme Court has equated money with speech and thrown out campaign spending limits, Americans want to know what they can do about it. Derek Cressman gives them the tools, both ideological and tactical, to fight back. Cressman points out that there's nothing inherently unconstitutional in limiting speech. We do it all the time-for example, cities control when and where demonstrations can take place, or how long people can speak at council meetings. More importantly, he argues that while you choose to patronize Fox News, MSNBC, The New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal when they exercise their free speech rights, political advertising is forced upon you. It's paid speech-not at all what the Founders had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment. Cressman looks at why attempts to limit paid political speech have failed so far, what a constitutional amendment limiting paid speech should say, and explains how citizens can use an overlooked political tool to help gain its passage. Seven times in our history we've passed constitutional amendments to overturn wrongheaded rulings by the Court-there's no reason we can't do it again.

Most modern democracies punish hate speech. Less freedom for some, they claim, guarantees greater freedom for others. Heinze rejects that approach, arguing that democracies have better ways of combatting violence and discrimination against vulnerable groups without having to censor speakers. Critiquing dominant free speech theories, Heinze explains that free expression must be safeguarded not just as an individual right, but as an essential attribute of democratic citizenship. The book challenges contemporary state regulation of public discourse by promoting a stronger theory of what democracy is and what it demands. Examining US, European and international approaches, Heinze offers a new vision of free speech within Western democracies.

Most people believe that the right to privacy is inherently at odds with the right to free speech. Courts all over the world have struggled with how to reconcile the problems of media gossip with our commitment to free and open public debate for over a century. The rise of the Internet has made this problem more urgent. We live in an age of corporate and government surveillance of our lives. And our free speech culture has created an anything-goes environment on the web, where offensive and hurtful speech about others is rife.
How should we think about the problems of privacy and free speech? In Intellectual Privacy, Neil Richards offers a different solution, one that ensures that our ideas and values keep pace with our technologies. Because of the importance of free speech to free and open societies, he argues that when privacy and free speech truly conflict, free speech should almost always win. Only when disclosures of truly horrible information are made (such as sex tapes) should privacy be able to trump our commitment to free expression. But in sharp contrast to conventional wisdom, Richards argues that speech and privacy are only rarely in conflict. America's obsession with celebrity culture has blinded us to more important aspects of how privacy and speech fit together. Celebrity gossip might be a price we pay for a free press, but the privacy of ordinary people need not be. True invasions of privacy like peeping toms or electronic surveillance will rarely merit protection as free speech. And critically, Richards shows how most of the law we enact to protect online privacy pose no serious burden to public debate, and how protecting the privacy of our data is not censorship.
More fundamentally, Richards shows how privacy and free speech are often essential to each other. He explains the importance of 'intellectual privacy, ' protection from surveillance or interference when we are engaged in the processes of generating ideas - thinking, reading, and speaking with confidantes before our ideas are ready for public consumption. In our digital age, in which we increasingly communicate, read, and think with the help of technologies that track us, increased protection for intellectual privacy has become an imperative. What we must do, then, is to worry less about barring tabloid gossip, and worry much more about corporate and government surveillance into the minds, conversations, reading habits, and political beliefs of ordinary people.
A timely and provocative book on a subject that affects us all, Intellectual Privacy will radically reshape the debate about privacy and free speech in our digital age.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental right at the heart of any democratic society. It is, however, inevitably restricted by other important values, including the right to privacy: the control individuals exercise over their sensitive personal information. The English law, since the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998, has undergone a tectonic shift in its recognition of this right protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which the Act assimilated into domestic law. The new civil wrong, 'misuse of private information,' now affords greater protection to an individual's 'private and family life, home and correspondence.' The press is, of course, no longer the principal purveyor of news and information. The Internet offers abundant opportunities for the dissemination of news and opinions, including the publication of intimate, private facts. Social media, blogs, and other online sites are accessible to all. Indeed, the fragility of privacy online has led some to conclude that it is no longer capable of legal protection. This book examines the right of privacy from a legal, philosophical, and social perspective, tracing its genesis in the United States, through the development of the law of confidence, and its recent recognition by the Human Rights Act. The English courts have boldly sought to offer refuge from an increasingly intrusive media. Recent years have witnessed a deluge of civil suits by celebrities seeking to salvage what remains of their privacy. An extensive body of case law has appeared in many common law jurisdictions over the last decade, which shows no sign of abating. The Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices, and ethics of the press, sparked by the hacking of telephones by newspapers, revealed a greater degree of media intrusion than was previously evident. Its conclusions and recommendations, particularly regarding the regulation of the media, are examined, as well as the various remedies available to victims of intrusion and unsolicited publicity. The law is locked in a struggle to reconcile privacy and free speech, in the face of relentless advances in technology. The manner in which courts in various jurisdictions have attempted to resolve this conflict is critically investigated, and the prospects for the protection of privacy are considered.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 came into force on 1 January 2005, creating a new statutory 'right to open government'. It imposed new duties on public authorities regarding the disclosure and handling of information. The fifth edition of this popular Guide offers the most up-to-date guidance on the Act, taking into account all the changes since the publication of the last edition. Most significantly, the developments have been in relation to the case law and this Guide features expert analysis of the most noteworthy decisions and their impact on this area of law. The Guide is essential reading those working within, or advising, public bodies; those advising clients with a personal, professional, or commercial interest in obtaining information; and those advising business clients on the accessibility of commercially sensitive information. The Blackstone's Guide series delivers concise and accessible books covering the latest legislative changes and amendments. First published soon after enactment, they offer expert commentary by leading names on the scope, extent, and effects of the legislation, plus a full copy of the Act itself. They provide a cost-effective solution to key information needs and are the perfect companion for any practitioner needing to get up to speed with the latest changes.

This title uses the dramatic life stories of different women to reflect on America's long-running inability to forge a shared public discourse. Ackerman situates the Hellman-McCarthy case in the history of failed American dialogues from the late 1920s to the present.

A first-person account of the fight to preserve First Amendment rights in the digital age. Lawyer and writer Mike Godwin has been at the forefront of the struggle to preserve freedom of speech on the Internet. In Cyber Rights he recounts the major cases and issues in which he was involved and offers his views on free speech and other constitutional rights in the digital age. Godwin shows how the law and the Constitution apply, or should apply, in cyberspace and defends the Net against those who would damage it for their own purposes. Godwin details events and phenomena that have shaped our understanding of rights in cyberspace-including early antihacker fears that colored law enforcement activities in the early 1990s, the struggle between the Church of Scientology and its critics on the Net, disputes about protecting copyrighted works on the Net, and what he calls "the great cyberporn panic." That panic, he shows, laid bare the plans of those hoping to use our children in an effort to impose a new censorship regime on what otherwise could be the most liberating communications medium the world has seen. Most important, Godwin shows how anyone-not just lawyers, journalists, policy makers, and the rich and well connected-can use the Net to hold media and political institutions accountable and to ensure that the truth is known.

Free speech and freedom of the press were often suppressed amid the social turbulence of the Progressive Era and World War I. As muckrakers, feminists, pacifists, anarchists, socialists, and communists were arrested or censored for their outspoken views, many of them turned to a Manhattan lawyer named Gilbert Roe to keep them in business and out of jail. Roe was the principal trial lawyer of the Free Speech League-a precursor of the American Civil Liberties Union. His cases involved such activists as Emma Goldman, Lincoln Steffens, Margaret Sanger, Max Eastman, Upton Sinclair, John Reed, and Eugene Debs, as well as the socialist magazine The Masses and the New York City Teachers Union. A friend of Wisconsin's progressive senator Robert La Follette since their law partnership as young men, Roe defended ""Fighting Bob"" when the Senate tried to expel him for opposing America's entry into World War I. In articulating and upholding Americans' fundamental right to free expression against charges of obscenity, libel, espionage, sedition, or conspiracy during turbulent times, Roe was rarely successful in the courts. But his battles illuminate the evolution of free speech doctrine and practice in an era when it was under heavy assault. His greatest victory, including the 1917 decision by Judge Learned Hand in The Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten, is still influential today.