Archive

“Some Pundits Say There’s No Campus Free Speech ‘Crisis.’ Here’s Why They’re Wrong,” Reason, March 2018. 
Robby Soave challenges a recent rash of articles claiming that there is no Free Speech crisis on college campuses. It’s not that the number of people censoring free speech on campuses has increased, he writes. It’s that their influence has grown. 

“8 Ways College Student Views on Free Speech Are Evolving,” The Knight Foundation on Medium, March 2018. 
The Knight Foundation analyzes the top eight takeaways from a recent Gallup survey of U.S. college students.

“I Helped Get Milo Yiannopoulos Disinvited From UCLA. Here’s Why,” The Weekly Standard, February 2018. 
A member of the UCLA College Republicans explains her decision to support the disinvitation of Milo Yiannopoulos from campus by the organization.

“The Free-Speech University,” The Wall Street Journal, February 2018. 
An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal discusses the University of Chicago’s policies in support of Free Speech on its campus. 

“Beijing Hinders Free Speech in America,” The New York Times, November 2017.
Wang Dan, a former leader of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, explains how the Chinese Communist Party limits the Free Speech of Chinese students and scholars within the United States.

“Colleges Should Protect Speech—or Lose Funds,” The Wall Street Journal, October 2017.
An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal argues that universities should be required to guarantee Free Speech and inquiry as a condition of receiving federal funding.

“LARKIN: Reaffirm Free Speech to Battle Hate,” The Hoya, October 2017.
Tanner Larkin, a student columnist at Georgetown University, recounts his experience protesting a panel that featured former White House official Sebastian Gorka. Larkin argues that student protesters should resist shouting down controversial speakers and instead engage in a “battle of ideas.”

“Flip-Flopping on Free Speech: The fight for the First Amendment, on campuses and football fields, from the sixties to today,” The New Yorker, October 2017.
Jill Lepore, a professor of history at Harvard University, traces the partisan politics of Free Speech debates over the last 50 years, paying particular attention to the Free Speech Movement at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Campus Speech and Anti-Klan Laws: Have you been censored or shouted down? You may have legal recourse. Here’s a handy guide,” The Wall Street Journal, October 2017.
An opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal writes that anti-KKK laws provide recourse for college speakers who have been shouted down.

“Who Is Blocking Campus Speakers Now?” Inside Higher Education, September 2017.
Recent incidents at Catholic and Harvard Universities suggest that liberal voices are facing censorship on college campuses.

“Berkeley Students Speak Out About Free Speech,” The New York Times, September 2017.
In the midst of a national media frenzy surrounding the cancellation of “Free Speech Week,” The New York Times asks 12 UC Berkeley students about their views on the First Amendment. 

“What Stunts Like Milo Yiannopoulos’s ‘Free Speech Week’ Cost,” The New York Times, September 2017. 
An English professor at Colby College reflects on the controversy surrounding “Free Speech Week” at UC Berkley, raising concerns that “expensive provocateurs” are undermining the cause of intellectual diversity on campus. 

“Views among college students regarding the First Amendment: Results from a new survey,” Brookings Institution, September 2017.
A survey from the Brookings Institution reported that, among other findings, slightly less than half of the surveyed college students do not believe that hate speech is constitutionally protected.

“A chilling study shows how hostile college students are toward free speech,” The Washington Post, September 2017.
An op-ed from The Washington Post analyzes the Brookings Institution’s survey and the views college students possess toward the First Amendment. 

“University of Virginia ill-prepared for torch-bearing marchers, report finds,” The Washington Post, September 2017.
A report released by the University of Virginia found that the university’s administration was not adequately prepared for the “Unite the Right” rally in August 2017. 

“Sex Offenders, Social Media and the Supreme Court: Why Have the Justices Relaxed Restrictions?” Newsweek, July 2017.
Newsweek explains a recent ruling by the Supreme Court overturning a North Carolina law that bans sex offenders from using certain social media, finding that social media outlets constitute “the modern public square.”

“Most Republicans Think Colleges Are Bad for the Country. Why?” The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 2017.
This article studies the low opinion that many Republicans hold about higher education in the United States, placing partial blame on negative news reports published by conservative media outlets about liberal protesters on campus.

“When Is Speech Violence?” The New York Times, July 2017.
Lisa Feldman Barrett, a professor of psychology at Northeastern University, writes that certain speech, particularly that which causes prolonged stress, leads to physical harm and should consequently be considered violence.

“Why It’s a Bad Idea to Tell Students Words Are Violence,” The Atlantic, July 2017.
Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff push back against Lisa Feldman Barrett’s “conflation of words and violence,” arguing that on college campuses, as well as in civil society more generally, individuals ought to be able to engage peacefully with controversial ideas.

“Conservatives Are Souring on Colleges. Blame Colleges,” Bloomberg, July 2017.
This op-ed chastises colleges and universities for being hostile to conservative viewpoints, urging them instead to “[offer] both sides some living room.”

“It’s Disadvantaged Groups That Suffer Most When Free Speech Is Curtailed on Campus,” The Atlantic, July 2017.
This piece by Musa Al-Gharbi and Jonathan Haidt calls on progressives to work with conservatives who are concerned about campus Free Speech issues in order to create institutional protections for minority viewpoints.  

“These Campus Inquisitions Must Stop,” The New York Times, June 2017.
New York Times columnist Frank Bruni criticizes student protesters at Evergreen State College for failing to engage civilly with a biology professor who made controversial statements.

“Inside the Meme Thread, a Growing Forum for College Students Nationwide,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2017.
The Chronicle of Higher Education takes a closer look at an online habit that recently caused 10 students to lose their offer of acceptance to Harvard College.

“Hate speech vs. free speech: Where is the line on college campuses?” Los Angeles Times, June 2017.
In a survey of recent incidents on college campuses, this article examines trends and definitional issues within the debate over regulating speech.

“The New Censorship on Campus,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2017.
Jeffrey Herbst and Geoffrey R. Stone criticize the hampering of public discourse by students who “too often see free speech as the enemy,” encouraging them instead to confront in a civil manner those with whom they disagree.

“Charles Murray gets attacked? Outrage! A liberal professor gets threatened? Silence,” Vox, June 2017.
While protests that silence conservative voices typically earn significant media attention, Vox’s Samantha Harris highlights the fact that liberal speech is also being threatened and suppressed.

“Free Speech Loses Ground as Harvard Retracts Offers to Admitted Students,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2017.
Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, criticizes Harvard’s decision to rescind its offer of admission to 10 students who posted offensive memes, arguing that this could lead to increased censorship on campus.

“Professors’ Growing Risk: Harassment for Things They Never Really Said,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2017.
The Chronicle of Higher Education recounts the experience of professors who received criticism and even threats of violence due to comments they deny ever making.

“The Right Way to Protect Free Speech on Campus,” The Wall Street Journal, June 2017.
The president of Middlebury College contends that institutions of higher education should foster a campus environment inclusive of all students, but this goal cannot supersede the institution’s commitment to Free Speech and open discourse.

“Colleges Pledge Tolerance for Diverse Opinions, but Skeptics Remain,” The Wall Street Journal, June 2017.
The Wall Street Journal reports on the efforts of college and university administrators to protect controversial speakers on campus from student protesters.

“Do Free Speech and Inclusivity Clash?” Inside Higher Education, May 2017.
Inside Higher Ed summarizes a panel discussion among Greg Lukianoff, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education; professor Geoffrey Stone; and others, hosted by the National Association of College and University Attorneys. Lukianoff reportedly said that students now constitute a greater threat to Free Speech on campus than administrators, marking a departure from the previous dynamics on campus.

Harvard University President Drew Faust’s 2017 Commencement Speech, Harvard University, May 2017.
President Drew Faust’s speech touched on the importance of Free Speech in academia, as well as concerns about fostering an inclusive community, “where argument is relished, not feared.”

“The Conservative Force Behind Speakers Roiling College Campuses,” The New York Times, May 2017.
In analyzing the recent spate of free speech controversies on college and university campuses, The New York Times examines Young America’s Foundation, a conservative organization that has sponsored speakers such as Ann Coulter and Ben Shapiro on campuses across the country.

“Why Academic Freedom Should Be Covered at Freshman Orientation,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 2017.
A former president of a public university in New York argues that the importance of academic freedom should be taught during the orientation of new students at all colleges and universities. A sample syllabus includes readings from John Dewey and the American Association of University Professors.

“The Dangerous Safety of College,” The New York Times, March 2017.
The New York Times’ Frank Bruni expresses concern that colleges and universities are failing to expose their students to a diversity of political beliefs and thereby prepare them to engage in civil society.

“A Violent Attack on Free Speech at Middlebury,” The Atlantic, March 2017.
Peter Beinart argues that liberals should protect the right of conservative students to invite conservative speakers and that the students who interrupted Charles Murray’s speech should be punished. 

“The Contours of Free Expression on Campus: Free Speech, Academic Freedom, and Civility,” Association of American Colleges and Universities, Spring 2017.
In a report for the American Association of Colleges and Universities, Frederick M. Lawrence provides in-depth analysis of the intersection among Free Speech, hate speech, and civility in public discourse, paying particular attention to incidents that occurred at Williams College and Brandeis University.

“And Campus for All: Diversity, Inclusion and Free Speech at U.S Universities,” PEN America, October 2016.
PEN America surveys issues relating to Free Speech on college and university campuses, paying particular attention to incidents at Yale University; the University of California, Los Angeles; and Northwestern University.

“Today’s Freshman Class Is the Most Likely to Protest in Half a Century,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 2016.
A survey by the Cooperative Institutional Research Program found that “nearly one in 10 freshmen said there was a very good chance they would participate in a protest in college,” constituting an increase from previous generations.

“The Facebook free speech battle, explained,” Vox, May 2019. 
Jane Coaston argues that the debate over what Facebook can and can’t moderate is more about politics than law.

“Regulating free speech on social media is dangerous and futile,” Brookings Institution, September 2018. 
Niam Yaraghi argues why regulating free speech online a losing battle.

“Why can’t Facebook and Twitter be more transparent about free speech?” The Guardian, September 2018. 
Nathan Robinson reasons why social media giants need to be more open about how they wield their power.

“The slippery slope of regulating social media,” The New York Times, September 2018. 
Peter Suderman says speech on Twitter and Facebook should not be treated like a collective good that should be subject to political control.

“Who’s the Real Internet Censor: Comcast or Facebook?” The Wall Street Journal, September 2017. 
Mark Epstein writes on how Silicon Valley firms claim net neutrality will protect free speech — and then they take down your ‘hate.’

“Facebook and Free Speech,” The Wall Street Journal, October 2016. 
James Taranto calls to censor Donald Trump’s statements on Facebook.

“Does Freedom of Speech Exist on Social Media,” Loyola University, 2016. 
Gabrielle Byrd, a grad student, argues that social media sites must give users a platform to safely express their views without fear of punishment. 

“Netflix Chose a New Market Over Free Speech. That Sets a Disturbing Precedent,” The New York Times, January 2019. 
Ursula Lindsey says Netflix does not face the pressures and dangers that Arab networks and artists do, which makes its bowing to Saudi censorship demand even more disappointing.

“Netflix chose Saudi Arabia over artistic freedom,” CNN, January 2019.
Bill Carter writes that the innovation of broadband streaming has not quite ushered in a brave new world of artistic freedom of expression after all.

“Baby, there’s a chilling effect outside,” The Wall Street Journal, January 2019. 
Peggy Noonan writes, “Political correctness could destroy the arts and entertainment. Only the left can defeat it.”

“Art is all about nuance. Let’s not lose it in the alarmist censorship debate,” The Guardian, February 2018.
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett contends that the outrage that follows the removal of a painting shows that some hate to have their view of art challenged.

“’Repulsive to children and adults’: how explicit should public art get?” The Guardian, October 2018. Elle Hunt says that censorship in metro stations and other public places reveal limits to how far we’re prepared to be challenged by art.

“Ai Weiwei: How Censorship Works,” The New York Times, March 2017. 
Artist Ai Weiwei makes the case for individual freedom of expression in China.

“The Art of Destroying an Artwork,” The New York Times, October 2017.  
David Xu Borgonjon argues for creative acceptance of the pressure to withdraw an artwork, rather than either outright rejection or reluctant acquiescence.

“The Acrid Stench of Neo-Nazi Content on YouTube,” The Diplomat Courier, January 2019.
Ambassador Marc Ginsberg declares, “So long as the U.S. lacks an effective, coherent strategy to counter the malfeasance of social media platforms, notably Facebook and YouTube, the body count of extremist victims of domestic terror will surely continue to rise.”

“Hate speech should always be condemned regardless of who it comes from,” WJLA, January 2019. 
Boris Epshteyn writes that elected officials of both political parties are not necessarily responsible for the rhetoric of their coworkers. However, they are responsible for condemning hate speech no matter who it comes from.

“The killing of Gdańsk’s mayor is the tragic result of hate speech,” The Guardian, January 2019.
Piotr Buras contends that what happened to Paweł Adamowicz isn’t just a Polish problem: Wherever toxic public debate is indulged, violent acts may be committed.

“Republican lawmakers: Hate crimes legislation would restrict free speech,” Indy Star, December 2018.
Indy Star writers contend that when someone holds a viewpoint most find disagreeable, we should not seek to criminalize and stifle that person’s thoughts or speech.

“The Power of Hate Speech,” The New York Times, November 2018. 
Ben Jones, a psychiatrist, offers an antidote to reacting automatically to the “other.” 

“Hate speech, fake news, privacy violations — time to rein in social media,” The Hill, November 2018.
Sandeep Gopalan says that we should acknowledge the dangers posed by platforms such as Facebook and hold them to account through legal measures.

“The Neuroscience of Hate Speech,” The New York Times, October 2018.
Richard Friedman, a psychiatrist, says that humans are social creatures easily influenced by the anger and rage that we see everywhere these days. 

“Mail Bombs: Hate speech can have consequences,” CNN, October 2018.
Ruth Ben-Ghiat argues that mail bombs are part of a larger critique against authoritarian regimes. 

“If We Silence Hate Speech, Will We Silence Resistance?” The New York Times, August 2018. 
Erik Nielsen argues that “hate” is a dangerously elastic label, one that has long been used to demonize unpopular expression, particularly among people of color. 

“Hate speech leads to violence. Why would liberals defend it?” The Guardian, March 2018.
Nesrine Malik argues that, though Britain’s banning of three right-wing extremists has been criticized, the right to a platform isn’t absolute.

“Netflix’s Bow to Saudi Censors Comes at a Cost to Free Speech,” The New York Times, January 2019. 
Jim Rutenberg asks: As America’s new media overlords grow at a stunning rate, are they compelled to defend universal values like Free Speech that their home country was founded on?

“What the Arab world needs most is free expression,” The Washington Post, October 2018.
Jamal Khashoggi argues that by creating an independent international forum, isolated from the influence of nationalist governments spreading hate through propaganda, ordinary people in the Arab world would be able to address the structural problems their societies face.

“Where Free Speech should be promoted, Free Speech is under attack,” Fox News, January 2018.
Rachel Brand writes that even where they don’t limit speech directly, schools’ actions often enable students to silence others’ speech through shouting, threats of violence, or actual violence.

“The Pro-Free Speech Way to Fight Fake News,” Foreign Policy, December 2017.
Suzanne Nossel writes that most cures for fraudulent news threaten to be worse than the disease. There’s at least one exception.

“How Europe’s New Internet Rules Threaten Freedom of Expression,” Foreign Affairs, December 2017. 
David Kaye contends that while certain restrictions on internet use in Europe reflect legitimate concerns about the abuse of online space, many risk interfering with fundamental rights to freedom of expression. What’s more, the possibility of this trend spreading beyond Europe is high.

“Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age,” Foreign Policy, November 2017.
Lee C. Bollinger says that across the world, the battle for Free Speech is pitting governments and corporations against activists and average citizens.

“A ‘Foreign Policy Exception’ to the First Amendment?” ACLU, September 2012. 
Gabe Rottman says that President Barack Obama’s stance on the First Amendment could remind many overseas that U.S.-style freedom of speech isn’t their enemy, and may even be their friend.

“The fight for free speech intensifies as threats escalate,” The Hill, May 2019.
Christie Hefner says that now more than ever, we must be vigilant in our protection of Free Speech and celebrate those who stand up for freely expressing ourselves and accessing all avenues of truth.

“Civility at Berkeley,” Inside Higher Education, November 2018.
Jeremy Bauer-Wolf notes that, more than a year after violent protest broke out over the canceling of a Milo Yiannopoulos speaking engagement, UC Berkeley’s campus is seemingly free of such drama. Students and administrators credit the change in part to the intent of the speakers coming to the university: not to rile up the student body, but instead to engage in discussion. 

“Mob rule? Forget it. The First Amendment is not a license to protest anywhere, anytime,” USA Today, October 2018.
Chris Truax argues that the First Amendment doesn’t actually give you the right to Free Speech, and it certainly doesn’t give you the right to protest “whenever and wherever you want.” Instead, it prevents the government — and only the government — from interfering with your right to Free Speech. With a few exceptions, anyone else, including a restaurant, a football team, or a cable news network, can act to limit speech any way it likes.

“College students support free speech — unless it offends them,” The Washington Post, March 2018.
Jeffrey Selingo suggests that if violent college campus protests seem more common nowadays, it is partly due to student attitudes toward the First Amendment and Free Speech; students, research shows, increasingly have a tenuous relationship with the First Amendment.

“In a Major Free Speech Victory, a Federal Court Strikes Down a Law that Punishes Supporters of Israel Boycott,” The Intercept, January 2018.
A federal court struck down a law that punished supporters of Israel boycotts, deeming it “an unconstitutional denial of free speech.” Glenn Greenwald describes a case in which a Kansas woman who participated in a boycott of Israel was denied a teaching job under the law.

“In Congress, a Move to Affirm Free Speech on Campus,” National Review, June 2017.
An undergraduate student at Harvard College praises a resolution proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives to support freedom of speech on college campuses.

“Republicans Want to Punish Students Who Shut Down Controversial Speakers on Campus,” Time, May 2017.
Katie Reilly reports on the recent wave of Republican state legislators who have proposed mandatory punishments for students who interrupt speakers at public colleges and universities.

“Free Speech and the Right to Protest,” ACLU-Texas.
Because the government has an interest in maintaining peace and public order, it may restrict some protest activities in certain ways.

“Do we have an unfettered right to protest on government property?” The Freedom Forum Institute.
“No,” writes the FFI. 

“The Freedom of the Press Is Enshrined in the First Amendment—But What That Means Has Changed,” Time, May 2019.
Reporter Olivia Waxman writes that the modern idea of a free press is a newer innovation than it seems.

“The alarming assault on the free press,” CNN, May 2019.
Suzanne Nossel asserts that press freedom is not like most other freedoms, and we should be alarmed to witness mounting encroachments upon it both here in the United States and around the world.

“Objectivity lost when the media omits the news,” The Center Square, May 2019.
Chris Krug says that he can’t help but expect to see complete and fair coverage in his home state and across the country. Moreover, every consumer of news should demand the same. 

“Defending the Free Press,” The New York Times, May 2019.
Reporter Charles Blow suggests that the media is not the enemy of the people; rather, the enemy to the people is ignorance — obliviousness to truth, ignoring it, or having incredulity about it. 

“Journalism’s Assange problem,” Navy Times, April 2019.
Kathy Kiely and Laurel Leff argue that granting Julian Assange journalist status is beyond problematic; it’s likely to draw more attacks on press freedom. 

“New report paints a grim picture of global press freedom,” The Washington Post, April 2019.
The media advocacy group Reporters Without Borders released its 2019 Press Freedom Index, which highlights the downward spiral in free expression happening around the world. The atmosphere is bleak, and alarmingly so in some locales where the press has long thrived. 

“What Does Mueller’s Indictment of Russians Say About Free Speech?” Newsweek, February 2018.
John Samples of the CATO Institute argues that national security concerns surrounding Russia’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election may damage the Free Speech of U.S. citizens.

“Leaks are actually the lifeblood of American democracy,” The Washington Post, August 2017.
Free Speech Project Director Sanford Ungar counters the Trump administration’s strong condemnation of leaks, citing the historical and contemporary importance of leaks to the U.S. democratic system.

“Trump blocking people on Twitter is childish, but it’s hardly a 1st Amendment violation,” Los Angeles Times, July 2017.
This editorial condemns President Donald Trump for blocking certain people on his private Twitter account, although it stops short of claiming that doing so violated the First Amendment rights of the blocked individuals.  

“The Washington Post’s New Social Media Policy Forbids Disparaging Advertisers,” Washingtonian, June 2017.
Washingtonian reports on The Washington Post’s revised social media policy for employees, noting concerns expressed by The Post’s chapter of the Newspaper Guild.

“Why I Have Nothing to Say About the NSA Leak,” Council on Foreign Relations, June 2017.
Robert K. Knake, a senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations, criticizes the federal government’s outdated regulations concerning classified material and leaked documents.

“Tracking Trump-era assault on press norms,” Columbia Journalism Review, May 2017.
The Columbia Journalism Review compiles instances in which President Donald Trump or his administration threatened the freedom of the press.

“What Is Anti-Facism?” The Nation, May 2019.
Author Natasha Lennard offers a crystalline vision of how fascism can be fought without reliance on the state, and why it must be.

“College students support free speech — unless it offends them,” The Washington Post, March 2018. 
Jeffrey Selingo suggests that if violent college campus protests seem more common nowadays, it is partly due to student attitudes toward the First Amendment and Free Speech; students, research shows, increasingly have a tenuous relationship with the First Amendment.

“Fighting Words: A Battle in Berkeley Over Free Speech,” Time, June 2017.
Kathy Steinmetz, in discussing the protests that erupted at UC Berkeley in 2017, noted that it’s hard to decide which expressions can be reasonably called attacks and who deserves to be silenced.

“Data shows a surprising campus free speech problem: left-wingers being fired for their opinions,” Vox, August 2018.
Zack Beauchamp writes that there’s a consistent pattern in the data when it comes to conservative speech on college campuses — one that tells a different story than you hear among free speech panickers.

“The Government Had to Approve This Op-Ed,” The New York Times, April 2019. 
Mark Fallon, who spent 31 years in sworn duty to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, does not think this is not how the First Amendment is supposed to work. 

“The ‘free speech’ debate isn’t about free speech,” The Week, March 2019.
Damon Linker writes that aside from very narrow categories of so-called fighting words, along with facts and ideas that are proscribed for pressing national security reasons, the federal government permits Americans to say pretty much anything they want without fear of prosecution. There is therefore no Free Speech crisis in the United States today.

“You must help protect our freedoms,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 2018. 
Ken Gormley and Maxwell King argue that all Americans must defend the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment or we will lose our freedom. 

“Antitrust law does not Trump the right to free speech,” The Hill, October 2018. 
To Stephen Houck, any suggestion that any social media company has a monopoly on the dissemination of news is ludicrous.

“Civil servants can’t stop Trump. Stop asking them to,” The Washington Post, September 2018. 
Loren DeJunge Schulman argues that, instead of avoiding working for government, the most profound form of protest against the Trump administration may be for men and women to serve professionally. A bureaucracy — or military — that openly fights the White House plays into Trumpists’ wildest fantasies.

“Free Speech Is Part of Our National Identity,” The New York Law Journal, March 2019.
Jeffrey Winn writes that Free Speech is more than just a mere legal principle. It is a part of “our national identity, and in so many ways we have learned to define ourselves as a people through the process of creating the principle itself.”

“Whose Freedom of Speech?” Inside Higher Education, March 2019. 
Patricia McGuire asserts that President Donald Trump’s executive order is all about protecting only certain kinds of speakers — those toward the right side of the political spectrum.

“Free Speech Will Not Save Us,” The New York Times, May 2018. 
Columnist Mark Douthat argues, “Like everything associated with ‘classical liberalism’ — to borrow a label claimed by some of the shouted-down academic dissidents — the idea of free speech is part of a superstructure that can easily be pulled apart from below by contending factions, or crumble when its cultural foundation disappears.”

“Half of college students aren’t sure protecting free speech is important. That’s bad news,” Los Angeles Times, April 2018. 
Cathy Young argues that the climate on college campuses in recent years is very much a threat to the principles of a free society.

“The Facebook free speech battle, explained,” Vox, May 2019. 
Jane Coaston argues that the debate over what Facebook can and can’t moderate is more about politics than law.

“Free speech cannot be sacrificed to strike fake news,” The Hill, April 2018.
Sandeep Gopalan, a professor of law at Deakin University in Australia, explains why the problem of “fake news” should not and cannot effectually be addressed by anti-fake news laws.

“The Free Speech States,” The Wall Street Journal, March 2018.
A report from the Free Speech Institute explores and evaluates how each state handles political contributions.

“Why the ACLU is adjusting its approach to ‘free speech’ after Charlottesville,” Vox, August 2017.
Vox’s Dara Lind reviews the criticism that the American Civil Liberties Union faced in the wake of events in Charlottesville, noting that the organization may begin considering whether or not protesters are armed before defending their right to protest.

“The A.C.L.U. Needs to Rethink Free Speech,” The New York Times, August 2017.
K-Sue Park, a former volunteer for the American Civil Liberties Union, encourages the organization to learn the lessons of Charlottesville and embrace more “contextual, creative advocacy.”

“A Sad and Terrible Verdict in Massachusetts,” National Review, June 2017.
National Review’s David French criticizes the conviction of a young woman charged with involuntary manslaughter after she encouraged her boyfriend to commit suicide. French argues that the defendant’s speech, though reprehensible, was likely protected by the First Amendment.

“In Major Free Speech Victory, SCOTUS Rules for ‘The Slants’ and Strikes Down Federal Trademark Restriction,” Reason, June 2017.
Damon Root analyzes a recent Supreme Court ruling that the First Amendment protects the right to use an offensive term when registering a trademark.

“Can Words Kill People?” The Washington Post, June 2017.
Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker asserts that words cannot kill people and criticizes the conviction of a Massachusetts woman who encouraged her boyfriend to kill himself.

“Howard Dean’s wrong tweet that the Constitution doesn’t protect ‘hate speech,’” Politifact, April 2017.
Responding to Ann Coulter’s canceled appearance at the University of California, Berkeley, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean (D) tweeted that “hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.” Politifact rated this statement as false, citing numerous Supreme Court cases in which the First Amendment was applied to protect hate speech.

“Free Speech Isn’t Dead on College Campuses, But It Might Be Ailing,” RealClearEducation, April 2019.
Journalist Robby Soave writes that while it’s a stretch to call the censorship of certain speakers on college campuses a full-blown crisis, there is significant Free Speech problem.

“If we lose free speech on college and university campuses, we lose America,” Fox News, March 2019.
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, writes that peaceful expression of opinion is not a nuisance or triggering event, but a fundamental freedom all deserve to enjoy

“A Campus Is Not the Place for Free Speech,” Inside Higher Education, February 2019.
In this op-ed, Union College President David R. Harris claims that Free Speech, in its purest form, is an exercise in what is achieved when a person yells a view and then leaves, after which someone with an opposing perspective does the same. The speakers do not grow as a result of the experience, and the audience has no opportunity to probe the opposing points of view. On campuses, we must strive for something more than free speech.

“Psychology and Free Speech,” Inside Higher Education, May 2018. There are no good alternatives to free expression, write Wendy M. Williams and Stephen J. Ceci, who draw on their recent research on bias and reasoning to suggest paths forward for higher education.

“The New Censorship on Campus,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 2017. Writers Jeffrey Herbst and Geoffrey R. Stone opine that it is an illusion for minority groups to believe that they can censor the speech of others today without having their own expression muzzled tomorrow.

“Free speech is flunking out on college campuses,” The Washington Post, October 2015.
In response to the uptick in Free Speech “crises” on college campus, columnist Catherine Rampell says that the solution to speech that offends should always be more speech, not less.