Freedom of speech is an essential part of any healthy debate.
It’s so vital, in fact, that both the Charter of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protect it.
The digital age offers countless opportunities for us to enjoy this right to free speech. Whether you’re lip syncing to Nickleback or tweeting controversial views, the Internet gives you a platform to share that speech with the world.
More opportunities to enjoy free speech mean more opportunities to hold people accountable for the things they say. While free speech is often defended, people tend to get a bit hesitant when accountability becomes a part of it.
Free speech doesn’t guarantee immunity from public reaction. In fact, open debate is an essential part of the freedom – without that debate, your “free speech” isn’t really free at all.
Throughout history, protests and dissidents have used this debate to increase the rights and capabilities for members of marginalized communities.
Through discussion and the ensuing change in societal norms, much that was once considered acceptable has come to be understood as hurtful and socially unacceptable.
Women were once not allowed to vote. There was a time when white people would win libel cases if they were mistaken for a person of colour. While these attitudes may still persist in small segments of society, the free debate and reaction to these views shifted dominant social norms. You have the right to free speech, but it is crucial that others are entitled to react and debate that speech.
Some politicians learned this the hard way when old videos and tweets got them into hot water during last year’s election. What you tweet today may haunt you tomorrow.
But it isn’t only politicians who are faced with the difficult side of free speech. This ability to speak openly recently made waves in the local music community.
Local activist collective Babely Shades called out the lead singer of the Queers, Joe Queer, for posting allegedly racist statements on social media. He was also alleged to have behaved in a sexist and transphobic manner in public. He denied this behaviour and a debate ensued, resulting in a 100-signature petition calling for the cancellation of his band’s Ottawa show.
The cancellation initially succeeded – at least until a few members of the local community rallied in support of the band, reinstating the Queers show.
Within mere hours of the new event being posted, there was an onslaught of commentary both condemning and commending the action. The show organizers, who were defending freedom of speech for the Queers, proceeded to ban some dissenting voices from the Facebook event page.
This hypocritical action was a brazen violation of the freedom of speech they claimed to defend.
Babely Shades did not push for laws discriminating against the Queers nor did they try to shut down their entire ability to speak. They simply shifted the dominant dialogue in a more compassionate direction, one that makes it uncomfortable to side with arguably racist statements.
`If we do not allow people to react to those who toe the fine line between free speech and so-called hate speech, change will be much harder to achieve.
Perhaps the Queers show shouldn’t be cancelled. Perhaps, based on the reaction of individuals directly affected by Joe Queer’s speech, it should. What is certain is that dialogue is essential to figure that out.
Free speech is your right, but you need to be prepared to deal with the consequences of its enjoyment.