Don’t let freedom of speech be put at risk by online abuse – Archbishop of Canterbury

MPs and peers will know what it is to be on the end of robust criticism, which we expect; abuse, which we put up with; and sometimes physical threats, which we have learned, through grave and tragic experience, to take seriously.
Justin Welby is the Archbishop of Canterbury and led a House of Lords debate on freedom of speech.Justin Welby is the Archbishop of Canterbury and led a House of Lords debate on freedom of speech.
Justin Welby is the Archbishop of Canterbury and led a House of Lords debate on freedom of speech.

At its most intense, this kind of targeting can make fear the senior partner of judgment. The anticipation of being howled down on social media is a constraint on speaking freely.

It is fear not of being argued with but of the abusive and threatening hecklers in their thousands and tens of thousands.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The setting up of fake websites, the use of hacking and the effectiveness of bots all bring the heckler’s veto from a point of irritation to a threat to sanity and stability, even to the threat of social chaos.

How can freedom of speech be protected in the age of social media abuse?How can freedom of speech be protected in the age of social media abuse?
How can freedom of speech be protected in the age of social media abuse?

Algorithms reinforce choices. At the same time, we must bear in mind that, in many countries, social media has been the main bulwark of struggles for freedom.

The online world has completely changed the way in which we share and receive ideas. We are increasingly our own curators, editors and publishers.

The partial upending of traditional power dynamics is a good thing, but we find ourselves in somewhat uncharted territory, in grey areas where the law is just beginning to catch up, and in a different culture in which the rules of engagement are still being developed and understood.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

We see trade-offs, in that our exposure to variety is determined by impersonal and market-driven algorithms. Privacy is as much a choice as it used to be a given.

The lesson from all times, including from monopolistic owners of media companies in the past and social media today, is that all legislation and social pressure must stand against the commodification of speech.

When it becomes a tradeable commodity, it ceases to be a freedom-building community. We see this reflected in the words of Zechariah Chafee, a key figure in the modern American First Amendment tradition, who said “it is hopeless for the law to draw the line between liberty and license”, but we can look into our own hearts and make that decision before we speak out.

The struggle in a connected world is to distinguish what is morally reprehensible from that which is criminally punishable.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

In this country we are at the point where we say that, if we explicitly incite violence and stir hatred that will lead to violence, there should be criminal sanctions.

Outside incitement or our established defences of slander and defamation, we must focus our efforts on cultivating – through education, higher education, further education and many other ways – a culture that is permissive rather than prohibitive, by which I mean encouraging of fitting speech rather than attempting to ban bad speech.

Freedom of speech also requires respect for truth. The spread of misinformation by conspiracy theorists – notably around the vaccine – political agitators or hostile actors is a serious problem that big tech companies and Governments must do more to tackle.

Another threat to our freedom of speech is the dehumanisation of those with whom we disagree: the devaluation of others to diminish their arguments.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

We must be alert to how our habits of communication can stifle our creative imagination – how they might make us see others as somehow less than fully human.

Much of what is problematic with the online world is that it is not conducive to seeking truth and that it gives equal opportunity to deliberate and dangerous misinformation designed to cloud the truth.

To put it another way, sunlight is no more always the best disinfectant – no more than disinfectant is ever medicine for treating Covid. When people are too scared to express their genuinely held and legally protected beliefs, that is very dangerous for democracy.

My great predecessor Lord (Rowan) Williams said: “No one’s interests are best served by avoiding the hard encounters and the fresh insights.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

I believe that God’s purpose for humanity is not to have fearful slaves but loving children. We are called to treat each other as we would ourselves like to be treated, with recognition of our flawedness, space for forgiveness and support of our freedom.

In so doing, we are able to create good communities of justice, truth and generosity.

Support The Yorkshire Post and become a subscriber today. Your subscription will help us to continue to bring quality news to the people of Yorkshire. In return, you’ll see fewer ads on site, get free access to our app, receive exclusive members-only offers and access to all premium content and columns. Click here to subscribe.

Related topics:

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.