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.
4

We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.

Timothy Garton Ash
A personal introduction

Most of us encounter more diverse people than our ancestors did. We encounter them virtually, through the internet and mobile devices, but also physically. As a result of air travel and mass migration, big cities like London, Hong Kong, Dubai and Toronto are filled with men and women from every country, faith and background. (more...)
Do you agree with this principle? Yes No

Discussions

  • 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.

    April 26, 2013 | Comments: 2
  • 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.

    February 25, 2013 | Comments: 2
  • 6021327208_f5eea5cb78_z

    Prevent harm, allow offence?

    Robert Simpson suggests a way to distinguish between harm and offence.

    January 8, 2013 | Comments: 2
  • 4 Performer_Lee_Davern_Photographer_Matt Nettheim

    Can theatre talk about this?

    How a dance theatre production addresses issues of free speech, Islam and multiculturalism. Lloyd Newson, creator of 'Can we talk about this?', speaks to Maryam Omidi.

    December 12, 2012 | Comments: 0
  • Hrant Dink

    Combatting hate speech in Turkish media

    The Hrant Dink Foundation has run the Media Watch on Hate Speech project since 2009 to counter racist and discriminatory discourse in Turkish press. Project coordinators Melisa Akan and Nuran Agan explain the initiative.

    September 17, 2012 | Comments: 0

More discussions

Case studies

More case studies

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