You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Very troubling what happened to @JoshMBlackman being heckled so he could not speak. I disagree with Josh about more things than I can list. But people should be allowed to speak, especially on a college campus, about controversial subjects
(especially abt free speech on campus!)https://twitter.com/lsolum/status/984513633827762176 …
Not only is such organized heckling counterproductive---turning Josh into a symbol of squelching conservative speech on campus---it is morally wrong. If you don't like what he has to say, there are ways to protest consistent with the First Amendment which don't shut him down
I agree, but it's important to note that Josh was able to speak. The protesters disrupted the opening of the lecture, and that was quite morally wrong, as you say; but a lesser degree of fault than if they had prevented him from talking at all.
I’m not sure that a brief disruption followed by an opportunity for the speaker to say stuff is even “morally wrong.” The heckler can’t veto. But he can heckle.
no doubt depends upon how long the disruption is.
I agree—it’s a matter of degree. But public lecturers aren’t entitled to rapturous silence from their audience. If the Prime Minister can endure the MPs, I’d think a law professor could do the same with students.
The British HOC is a mad house. I don’t think that example should be followed. People need to give speakers a chance to say what they want to say. If they don’t like it, they’re free to respond with their own counterspeeches. Heckling is undemocratic, obnoxious, immature, & rude.
Hear, hear! (See what I did there?)
Major knee-slapper, lol. To be fair, I admire many aspects of the Westminster System, & I like the expression, “Hear, hear!”. But I dislike the way they interrupt each other. I much prefer the American model in which greater respect is shown to the speaker in legislative sessions
Though I have to admit that MPs actually sit through debates. And I wish we had PM's Question Time in the US.
Three points: 1) Yes, it matters that he was able to speak. One may dislike even brief heckling but view it as different from the heckler's veto or no-platforming. But at least based on his account, this seems less to have been a matter of planning to briefly heckle then leave, /
...and more a matter of heckling with no fixed intention to stop & let him be heard, but then responding to the administrator's warning to let him speak. I'm not in a position to draw that conclusion definitively. But the latter seems very different from the former. /
2) Due credit to the administrator who spoke up. Ideally someone should have remained to follow through, but I give her credit for making the ground rules clear. A soundly functioning campus requires adminis who are willing to make the rules clear and risk making students.../
...unhappy. At least that is true for those who worry about campuses taking a passive approach to these issues because of irrelevant factors like the consumer-oriented nature of some modern students, or the competition for tuition dollars, etc. Of course one can disagree about...
...what those grounds rules should be. But I still want to give credit where it's due. 3) Frankly I've forgotten what the third point was. Please assume it was insightful as all get-out.
The Federalist Society invited John Yoo to one of its recent events, and Josh Blackman seemed to be okay with that. So, I have no sympathy for him. Of course heckling was no soil for intellectual exchange, but it was free speech nonetheless.
I don't understand your point here.
My point is: I support campus free speech, but I can’t help thinking “ah, that guy deserved this just a little bit, not the whole thing, but just a little bit of it”.
Sounds like fainthearted support for campus free speech to me. The principle of free speech is important precisely when it applies to those with whom we disagree, and disagree strongly.
Yeah. You can call that fainthearted, but i would publicly support his speech even though I privately felt something different.
Is heckling not covered by your free speech dictate?
Prof. Hasen isn't saying heckling is or should be prohibited by the law. He's saying it is wrong to not allow your opponent to speak. I'd add, it could lead some to incorrectly assume you don't have an effective argument so instead you're shouting down the other side.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
