Content related to United Kingdom

			
					What is ‘dehumanising’ speech?
				
Eric Heinze provocatively argues that no-platformers need to look into the mirror and examine their own blind spots. 

					Glasnost! Nine ways Facebook can make itself a better forum for free speech and democracy
				
Free Speech Debate co-authors an Oxford-Stanford report on Facebook.

					Teresa M. Bejan discusses ‘mere civility’, disagreement and the limits of toleration
				
Lewis Willcocks talks to Dr Teresa M. Bejan, Associate Professor of Political Theory at the University of Oxford, about her recent book ‘Mere Civility: Disagreement and the Limits of Toleration’ (Harvard University Press) and what early modern debates over religion can teach us about diversity and discourse in the twenty-first century. 

					It’s the institutions, stupid!
				
Calvin Chan proposes a new framework for conceptualising free speech.

					Are you sitting comfortably? How safe spaces became dangerous
				
We must distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate safe spaces, argues Eric Heinze.

					The UK can show the way on platform regulation. But not by treating Facebook and Google as publishers
				
Mark Bunting argues that the tech giants should accept ‘procedural accountability’.

					Don’t blame news polarisation on the internet…it’s not the technology, stupid!
				
The internet does not guarantee polarised news, argues Richard Fletcher.

					The left’s version of hate speech: guilt by association
				
Leftists who argue for hate speech bans ignore the far left’s own version, argues Eric Heinze.

					Israel, no-platforming – and why there’s no such thing as ‘narrow exceptions’ to campus free speech
				
Eric Heinze argues that it is contradictory to the principles of free speech to criticise the Israeli ambassador to Britain online and then no-platform him at a university talk.

					Is there a universal right to free speech and what are its limits?
				
Timothy Garton Ash in conversation with Nigel Warburton, as part of the Philosophy in the Bookshop series at Blackwell’s, Oxford.

					Free Speech? Not for critics of Israel
				
Avi Shlaim argues that when it comes to debates concerning Israel, free speech has become stifled in British academia.

					Data visualisations: why facts don’t speak for themselves
				
William Allen calls for a robust debate of how data are presented.

					Dunja Mijatović: What are the biggest threats to free speech in Europe?
				
Dunja Mijatović, OSCE Freedom of the Media Representative, in conversation with Timothy Garton Ash

					Antizionism and antisemitism in British politics
				
Avi Shlaim explores the quality of debate within British politics of the Israel-Palestinian conflict and argues that an anti-racist movement has been portrayed as a racist one.

					Should Indian politicians be allowed to appeal to voters based on their religion, race, and caste?
				
Udit Bhatia discusses a landmark ruling concerning the conduct of elections and its potential to stifle democratic debate.

					Can you teach people how to disagree without being disagreeable?
				
Tony Koutsoumbos explores the lessons from his own experiences in building an environment of robust and strong public debate.

					Free speech debates are more than ‘radicals’ vs ‘liberals’
				
Eric Heinze argues that the radicals and liberal grounds for free speech are not mutually exclusive.

					Six monarchs, 140 dissidents, one rule: Keep your mouth shut
				
Nicholas McGeehan explores restrictions on free speech and protest in the Arab Gulf states and the foreign policy responsibilities of Western governments.

					From censorship by government to censorship by terrorism
				
Paul Cliteur and Tom Herrenberg, editors of a book on The Fall and Rise of Blasphemy Law, consider the changing nature of censorship.

					What next for Rhodes Must Fall?
				
Free Speech Debate organised a panel discussion on the Rhodes Must Fall campaign and its future. In this video and its highlights, panelists debate the range of issues surrounding the campaign and its impact on free speech. Panelists include Dr David Johnson, Professor David Priestland, Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh and Monica Richter.

					5 podcasts and our 10 principles on the BBC
				
Timothy Garton Ash introduces his BBC broadcasts and online version of the Free Speech Debate principles.

					Evgeny Morozov on the dark side of internet freedom
				
Evgeny Morozov highlights the dangers that can emerge when governments and corporations harness the internet to serve their own objectives.

					Policing the internet for extremist material
				
Josh Cowls discusses the Oxford Internet Institute’s report on the complexities of balancing security and privacy online.

					Who decides what is ‘extreme pornography’ that could send you to jail?
				
Clarissa Smith examines the flawed narratives underlying pornography laws in the UK.

					Should universities practice no-platforming?
				
In these video highlights for Free Speech Debate, panelists debate whether “no-platforming” ought to have a place in modern universities. Student discussants included Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh, Barnaby Raine, Monica Richter, Damien Shannon, Chi Chi Shi, and Charles Vaughan.

					‘No-platforming’ on university campuses: political correctness and the subversion of free speech
				
Monica Richter argues that no-platforming is more about censoring unpalatable views than protecting marginalised groups.

					Don’t ban no-platforming
				
Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh argues that no-platforming is an expressive act that can expand the field of debate, rather than the denial of free speech.

					Ten arguments for – and against – ‘no-platforming’
				
Eric Heinze sets out the flaws in the commonly heard arguments for no-platforming.

					‘Oxford University has no regard for black life’
				
Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh argues that Oxford has shown itself to have no regard for black life in its decision not to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes.

					Cecil Rhodes in Oxford: from unnoticed statue to political scapegoat
				
Monica Richter argues that the inward looking Rhodes Must Fall campaign detracts from greater issues of social justice.

					Ken MacDonald: Should British universities be responsible for counter-terrorism?
				
In this interview, Ken Macdonald, formerly Britain’s Director of Public Prosecutions and now Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, talks about the importance of free speech and the introduction of “prevent” duties to universities.  He also comments on the Rhodes Must Fall campaign.

					Why people shouldn’t feel the need to censor themselves
				
Roger Scruton argues that self-censorship can be as much a threat to free speech as its government equivalent.
1 2 3 4 Next »
Search

Your account

Language
