Traditionally, our society has broadly agreed that the "good university" should teach the intellectual skills students need to become citizens who are intelligently critical of their own beliefs and of the narratives presented politicians, society, the media, and, indeed, universities themselves. The freedom to debate is essential to the development of critical thought, but on university campuses today free speech is increasingly restricted for fear of causing "offense." In this daring and intrepid book, which was originally withdrawn from publication by another publisher but is now proudly presented by Academica Press, the famous intelligence researcher James R. Flynn presents the underlying factors that have circumscribed the range of ideas now tolerated in our institutions of learning. Flynn studiously examines how universities effectively censor teaching, how social and political activism effectively censors its opponents, and how academics censor themselves and each other. A Book Too Risky To Publish concludes that few universities are now living up to their original mission to promote free inquiry and unfettered critical thought. In an age marred by fake news and ever increasing social and political polarization, this book makes an impassioned argument for a return to critical thought in our institutions of higher education.

Since ratification of the First Amendment in the late eighteenth century, there has been a sea change in American life. When the amendment was ratified, individuals were almost completely free of unwanted speech; but today they are besieged by it. Indeed, the First Amendment has, for all practical purposes, been commandeered by the media to justify intrusions of offensive speech into private life.

In its application, the First Amendment has become one-sided. Even though America is virtually drowning in speech, the First Amendment only applies to the speaker's delivery of speech. Left out of consideration is the one participant in the communications process who is the most vulnerable and least protected--the helpless recipient of offensive speech. In "Rediscovering a Lost Freedom," Patrick Garry addresses what he sees as the most pressing speech problem of the twenty-first century: an often irresponsible media using the First Amendment as a shield behind which to hide its socially corrosive speech. To Garry, the First Amendment should protect the communicative process as a whole. And for this process to be free and open, listeners should have as much right to be free from unwanted speech as speakers do of not being thrown in jail for uttering unpopular ideas.

"Rediscovering a Lost Freedom" seeks to modernize the First Amendment. With other constitutional rights, changed circumstances have prompted changes in the law. Restrictions on political advertising seek to combat the perceived influences of big money; the Second Amendment right to bear arms, due to the prevalence of violence in America, has been curtailed; and the Equal Protection clause has been altered to permit affirmative action programs aimed at certain racial and ethnic groups. But when it comes to the flood of violent and vulgar media speech, there has been no change in First Amendment doctrines. This work proposes a government-facilitated private right to censor. "Rediscovering a Lost Freedom" will be of interest to students of American law, history, and the U.S. Constitution.

This book is the first to outline the history of the tactic of 'no platforming' at British universities since the 1970s, looking at more than four decades of student protest against racist and fascist figures on campus. The tactic of 'no platforming' has been used at British universities and colleges since the National Union of Students adopted the policy in the mid-1970s. The author traces the origins of the tactic from the militant anti-fascism of the 1930s-1940s and looks at how it has developed since the 1970s, being applied to various targets over the last 40 years, including sexists, homophobes, right-wing politicians and Islamic fundamentalists. This book provides a historical intervention in the current debates over the alleged free speech 'crisis' perceived to be plaguing universities in Britain, as well as North America and Australasia. No Platform: A History of Anti-Fascism, Universities and the Limits of Free Speech is for academics and students, as well as the general reader, interested in modern British history, politics and higher education. Readers interested in contemporary debates over freedom of speech and academic freedom will also have much to discover in this book.

William Hone is the forgotten hero of the British Press. In 1817 he was compelled to defend himself against a government determined to enforce censorship. His fellow journalists, opposition MPs and the ministers believed that a verdict against Hone would silence all critical voices. It was a show trial, and Hone - a self-educated and obscure Fleet Street journalist who had to defend himself against the Lord Chief Justice and the Attorney General and in front of a jury hand-picked by the ministry - was the underdog, a supposedly easy victim for the state. Hone's crime was ridiculing the government. He was a noted satirist, who used laughter as a weapon to destroy censorship. His humour captured the imagination of the public; his satires sold in the hundreds of thousands. They were symbols of resistance for an angry public and were genuinely feared by his enemies. The Laughter of Triumph looks at the history of the struggle for free expression against repressive laws through the life of William Hone. Could the state push the law so far that humour was a crime? Or was it the only way to subvert censorship? As Hone implored his jury on the second day of his trials, 'Is a laugh treason? Surely not.'

How does censorship affect our basic right to freedom? Donald Thomas gives a disturbing insight into what those in power consider too dangerous to be seen, or said, by ordinary people. Freedom's Frontier reveals how censorship has restricted freedom of expression in the past, including obscenity prosecutions of major and minor writers in the first half of the twentieth century, and continues to silence us in the present with the more insidious tool of political correctness. From the use of seditious libel proceedings to stop rumours of George V's bigamy to the Mutiny Act used to silence Communist publications in the 1920s; from the use of the Official Secrets Act to ban the publication of Spycatcher to the Salmon Rushdie controversy in 1989, Donald Thomas chronicles a broad range of censorship cases. Freedom's Frontier argues that although we have won greater freedom of expression in some areas, we have lost the absolute liberty of political expression that was present in the Victorian era. This is a timely and thought-provoking book that challenges the boundaries of censorship and questions the definitions of freedom in today's society.

How free are students and teachers to express unpopular ideas in public schools and universities? Not free enough, Joan DelFattore suggests. Wading without hesitation into some of the most contentious issues of our times, she investigates battles over a wide range of topics that have fractured school and university communities - homosexuality-themed children's books, research on race-based intelligence, the teaching of evolution, the regulation of hate speech, and more - and with her usual evenhanded approach offers insights supported by theory and by practical expertise. Two key questions arise: What ideas should schools and universities teach? And what rights do teachers and students have to disagree with those ideas? The answers are not the same for all schools as they are for public universities. But far from drawing a bright line between them, DelFattore suggests that we must consider public education as a whole to determine how, and how successfully, it deals with conflicting views. When expert opinion clashes with popular belief, which should prevail? How much independence should teachers have? How do we foster the cutting-edge research that makes America a world leader in higher education? What are the free-speech rights of students? This uniquely accessible and balanced discussion deserves the full attention of everyone concerned with academic goals and agendas in our schools.

Over the past two decades, there have been a series of events that have brought into question the concept and practice of free expression. In this new book, Winston provides an account of the current state of freedom of expression in the western world. He analyses all the most pertinent cases of conflict during the last two decades - including the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, the incident of the Danish cartoons and offended celebrities - examining cultural, legal and journalistic aspects of each case. A Right to Offend offers us a deeper understanding of the increasingly threatening environment in which free speech operates and is defended, as well as how it informs and is central to journalism practice and media freedom more generally. It is important reading for all those interested in freedom of expression in the twenty-first century.

'Chris Marsden maneuvers through the hype articulated by Netwrok Neutrality advocates and opponents. He offers a clear-headed analysis of the high stakes in this debate about the Internet's future, and fearlessly refutes the misinformation and misconceptions that about' Professor Rob Freiden, Penn State University Net Neutrality is a very heated and contested policy principle regarding access for content providers to the Internet end-user, and potential discrimination in that access where the end-user's ISP (or another ISP) blocks that access in part or whole. The suggestion has been that the problem can be resolved by either introducing greater competition, or closely policing conditions for vertically integrated service, such as VOIP. However, that is not the whole story, and ISPs as a whole have incentives to discriminate between content for matters such as network management of spam, to secure and maintain customer experience at current levels, and for economic benefit from new Quality of Service standards. This includes offering a 'priority lane' on the network for premium content types such as video and voice service. The author considers market developments and policy responses in Europe and the United States, draws conclusions and proposes regulatory recommendations.

Seasoned CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson reveals how she has been electronically surveilled while digging deep into the Obama Administration and its scandals, and offers an incisive critique of her industry and the shrinking role of investigative journalism in today's media. Americans are at the mercy of powerful figures in business and government who are virtually unaccountable. The Obama Administration in particular has broken new ground in its monitoring of journalists, intimidation and harassment of opposition groups, and surveillance of private citizens. Sharyl Attkisson has been a journalist for more than thirty years. During that time she has exposed scandals and covered controversies under both Republican and Democratic administrations. She has also seen the opponents of transparency go to ever greater lengths to discourage and obstruct legitimate reporting. Attkisson herself has been subjected to "opposition research" efforts and spin campaigns. These tactics increased their intensity as she relentlessly pursued stories that the Obama Administration dismissed. Stonewalled is the story of how her news reports were met with a barrage of PR warfare tactics, including online criticism, as well as emails and phone calls up the network chain of command in an effort to intimidate and discourage the next story. In Stonewalled, Attkisson recounts her personal tale, setting it against the larger story of the decline of investigative journalism and unbiased truth telling in America today.

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.

Professor Fiss examines contemporary free-speech issues in the context of the collision of liberal ideas of equality and freedom with modern social structures and speculates on what role the state might play in furthering robust public debate.

Does American free speech doctrine discriminate against women and minorities? In "Hate Speech, Pornography, and the Radical Attack on Free Speech Doctrine, " James Weinstein carefully examines the charge that in interpreting the First Amendment as protecting hate speech and pornography while allowing myriad other exceptions to free speech, American courts have privileged the interests of the rich and powerful over the interests of women and people of color. The author concludes that while free speech doctrine is not in any deep sense as neutral as some of its apologists believe, the claim that free speech decisions and principles systematically discriminate against women and minorities does not withstand scrutiny. He shows that this claim of discrimination is based upon a profound but widely shared misunderstanding of the actual workings of free speech doctrine.In order to expose this misunderstanding, the first section of the book thoroughly explores the basic cases and principles upon which free speech doctrine is built. The second section demonstrates that the relationship between free speech and equality is far more complex than either radical critics or many liberal defenders of doctrine suppose. The third section considers the cost and benefits of modifying free speech doctrine to allow for the suppression of hate speech and pornography. After reviewing the experience of hate speech and pornography in other democracies, Weinstein concludes that while such a modification would not lead straight to totalitarianism as alarmist defenders of current doctrine contend, it would nonetheless likely inhibit legitimate debate and artistic expression. Also contrary to dogmatic defenders of current doctrine, the author concludes that although the scientific evidence that pornography causes violence to women is not nearly as conclusive as radical feminists assert, this evidence is nonetheless cause for concern.While offering a scholarly analysis of the radical critique of free speech doctrine, this book has even larger ambition: to provide nonlawyers with the background to participate knowledgeably in the continuing debate about the role of free speech in a democratic society.

If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely the unexamined media is not worth heeding. Sentinel Under Siege traces the evolution of the media in the United States and its capacity to examine and regulate itself, from its earliest colonial roots to the modern explosion of digital technology.Once the Bill of Rights was enacted in 1791, the press became the first and only enterprise explicitly protected by the United States Constitution. This book is concerned with the legal content given to freedom of the press by the Supreme Court, and the fitful attempts of media criticism?both intramural and external?to build a greater sense of responsibility among the practitioners.Stanley Flink, former correspondent of Life Magazine and writer/producer at NBC and CBS, is concerned less with the people's right to know than with the people's need to know. Only a competent, responsible press?whatever its means of distribution?can perform the role of watchdog over official abuse of power, business corruption, and political distortions. But the acquisition of so many newspapers, magazines, and broadcasting facilities by corporate conglomerates threatens a new kind of prior restraint on an independent press?the conflicts of interest; the power of advertising; the unspoken self-censorship of reporters and editors, print or electronic, based on the perceived predilections of their employers; and the financial interests of related companies.Flink believes that responsible journalism can also be economically viable in the twenty-first century because the mass communication of reliable news reporting and media accountability will be vital to the democratic process. Unless the news media persistently seeks the high moral ground of public service, the first casualty will be an informed electorate. The second may well be constitutional protection.

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.

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.

An exploration of the meaning of academic freedom in American higher education Debates about academic freedom have become increasingly fierce and frequent. Legislative efforts to regulate American professors proliferate across the nation. Although most American scholars desire to protect academic freedom, they have only a vague and uncertain apprehension of its basic principles and structure. This book offers a concise explanation of the history and meaning of American academic freedom, and it attempts to intervene in contemporary debates by clarifying the fundamental functions and purposes of academic freedom in America. Matthew W. Finkin and Robert C. Post trace how the American conception of academic freedom was first systematically articulated in 1915 by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and how this conception was in subsequent years elaborated and applied by Committee A of the AAUP. The authors discuss the four primary dimensions of academic freedom-research and publication, teaching, intramural speech, and extramural speech. They carefully distinguish academic freedom from the kind of individual free speech right that is created by the First Amendment. The authors strongly argue that academic freedom protects the capacity of faculty to pursue the scholar's profession according to the standards of that profession.

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.