Free Speech Debate

Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.

Log in | Register | Mailing list

Loading...
1We – all human beings – must be free and able to express ourselves, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.»
2We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by both public and private powers.»
3We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life.»
4We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.»
5We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.»
6We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.»
7We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.»
8We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as is in the public interest.»
9We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.»
10We must be free to challenge all limits to freedom of expression and information justified on such grounds as national security, public order, morality and the protection of intellectual property.»

What’s missing?

Is there a vital area we have not addressed? A principle 11? An illuminating case study? Read other people's suggestions and add your own here. Or start the debate in your own language.

Home | Archives | Discussions
Freedom Square

Dziesięć zasad

Po Polsku! Our 10 draft principles translated into Polish by Maciej Stasiński of Gazeta Wyborcza

Published on: May 15, 2013 | Principle 11 | Comments: 0

75404102_7d6826d75a_z

The difference between genocide and crimes against humanity

We regularly highlight comments that have made an impression on us. Antoon de Baets left an insightful response to Josie Appleton's discussion of memory laws in France.

Published on: May 10, 2013 | Principle 5 | Comments: 0

7887048118_2c41da8a9a_z

When does hate speech become dangerous speech? Consider Kenya and Rwanda

The forthcoming trial of Kenyan broadcaster Joshua Arap Sang poses vital questions about the connections between words and violence, argues Katherine Bruce-Lockhart.

Published on: April 26, 2013 | Principle 4 | Comments: 2

286771729_a0440dcae0

Child pornography and freedom of expression

Did the European Court of Human Rights wrongly considered the distribution of child pornography to be an exercise of freedom of expression in the case Karttunen v. Finland, asks Rónán Ó Fathaigh.

Published on: April 24, 2013 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

601px-Seal_of_Prime_Ministry_of_the_Republic_of_Turkey.svg

A Turkish journalist’s censored plea for press freedom

Kerem Oktem introduces our translation of a column by Hasan Cemal, which his newspaper, Milliyet, refused to print.

Published on: April 12, 2013 | Principle 3 | Comments: 1

6915188757_b176fbdf0f_z

The Copyright Alert System: coming to a home near you?

The question of how best to respond to the unauthorised dissemination of copyright-protected expression over the internet has long troubled copyright owners. But the proposed solution of a Copyright Alert could potentially erode free speech, writes Graham Reynolds.

Published on: April 10, 2013 | Principle 2 | Comments: 0

Eugène_Delacroix_-_La_liberté_guidant_le_peuple

Freedom for history? The case against memory laws

Josie Appleton talks to Pierre Nora and Olivier Salvatori of the Liberté pour l’Histoire initiative in France.

Published on: April 3, 2013 | Principle 5 | Comments: 2

402-the-delaunay-bar

Who should guard the Guardian?

Alan Rusbridger, editor-in-chief of the Guardian, argues that Britain needs both a free press and reform of its failed regulatory system. Since this will require both time and openness, a new independent press regulator should therefore be given a year's trial run.

Published on: April 2, 2013 | Principle 3 | Comments: 0

buildings in Zawiyah damaged in fighting 2011

Free speech and the gun in Libya

Libyan media are crippled by their Gaddafi legacy. Without new regulations and, above all, bravery to stand up to violent intimidation, freedom of speech remains a distant dream, writes Jerry Timmins.

Published on: March 29, 2013 | Principle 3 | Comments: 0

3540249671_e4fc6bee94

Mustn’t ask, mustn’t tell

Data protection laws now touch everyone’s lives and those living within the EU are about to have their regulations updated, writes David Erdos. These proposed laws are overly restrictive: the time has come to take a stand for those working in research.

Published on: March 25, 2013 | Principle 5 | Comments: 0

8509961275_b2c99ea907_z

Is Burma sliding back into censorship?

For all its talk of press freedom, the Burmese government has produced a surprise new bill containing oppressive provisions and undermining the press council it created. Ellen Wiles reports.

Published on: March 21, 2013 | Principle 3 | Comments: 0

santorini-86840_640

Our draft principles in Greek

Marianthi Palazi translated our 10 draft principles on free speech into Greek.

Published on: March 19, 2013 | Principle 1 | Comments: 0

6554315179_69fbac133f_z

Scholarly publication in (slow) transition to open access

Academic ‘open access’ journals make articles freely available and the dissemination of knowledge and citation easier. However, the pace of change is slow, writes Cristobal Cobo.

Published on: March 12, 2013 | Principle 5 | Comments: 0

6920613184_f4a9b04431_z

China’s public expression philosophy: a case of too little theory?

The Chinese government’s stance towards the question of free speech is guided by a philosophy that is complex but intelligent. Rogier Creemers diagnoses the underlying causes.

Published on: March 7, 2013 | Principle 10 | Comments: 0

111459002_5da7e623eb_z

“Speakers’ Corner” Bugun ne anlama gelmeli?

Peter Bradley describes a British initiative promoting free expression, public debate and active citizenship.

Published on: February 26, 2013 | Principle 1 | Comments: 0

2123355780_1eef804dcc_z

Free speech as seen by a believer in an Abrahamic religion

Islam, Christianity and Judaism are often accused of wanting to restrict free speech. Dominic Burbidge suggests a radically different perspective, from inside the thought-system of the Abrahamic faiths.

Published on: February 25, 2013 | Principle 4 | Comments: 2


Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk