Britain bans university censoring of free speech

[Trumptonium1]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... akers.html

Sam Gyimah, the universities minister, has announced tough new guidance which will see institutions disciplined if they allow valid debates to be shut down.

He vowed to stamp out the 'chilling' trend of speakers being blocked from campuses simply because there is institutional hostility to unfashionable views. This will include vicarious actions of students.

It will be the first government intervention on the issue since the free speech duty was imposed on universities as part of the Education Act in 1986.

The new guidance will state that all speech must be welcome at universities, as long as it does not violate existing laws – for example, on encouraging terrorism

Any institution in breach of the rules may be named, shamed or fined by the new Office for Students (OfS) regulator, which also has the power to deregister universities.

Union officials claim they must 'no-platform' anyone who might say something controversial because they have a duty to protect the feelings of students and provide 'safe spaces'.

But Mr Gyimah said a free exchange of ideas must be integral to universities and warned some people were shutting down views to suit 'their own ends'.

He said: 'A society in which people feel they have a legitimate right to stop someone expressing their views on campus simply because they are unfashionable or unpopular is rather chilling.

Thoughts on this?

I think it's a great step to repair crap higher education which has been blighted by enforced groupthink.

[Albrenia]

I'm cool with this. It's always nice to err on the side of freedom.

[New Emeline]

I can't find any reason to be opposed

[Kubrath]

Good stuff.

[Mzeusia]

I haven't looked at your sources or anything of that nature, but everyone should have the freedom to say whatever they want in my opinion. So yes, I think this is good.

[Confederate Nations of Africa]

Shouldn’t even have come to this in my opinion. No law such as this should have to be enacted in a “free” country that supposedly already protects freedom of speech.

[Kyneland]

Oy vey, it bloody took us long enough.

Anyway, I am rather pleased with this.

[Albrenia]

Oy vey, it bloody took us long enough.

Anyway, I am rather pleased with this.

Between this and Count Dankula getting mad cash for his stupid pug video, maybe things aren't so bad as they say in the UK?

[Apple-Loosa]

Now we just wait for the Student Union's attempt to oust Sam Gyimah.

Censoring free speech helps no sides and just creates a greater divide. Discussions and debates should be encouraged so this is a welcome change in my opinion.

[Liriena]

So university students are being refused the right to no-platform?

Guarantees for freedom of expression are good... But we need to stop conflating the right to free speech with the right to a platform... And maybe cool it with the moral panic over college students?

[Pargesia]

Now THIS is certainly not a courageous decision. An easy vote winner. Or not if British society and/or the British Civil Service says otherwise.

[Liriena]

Also, gotta lmao at the OP complaining about groupthink while using the Daily Mail as a source.

[Apple-Loosa]

Also, gotta lmao at the OP complaining about groupthink while using the Daily Mail as a source.

I was hoping for a more credible source too. The Daily Mail isn't a great source...

[Radiatia]

Thank Christ, there might be hope for Britain yet.

There's still have a LONG way to go though when one considers how restrictive the so-called "hate speech" laws are.

[Liriena]

Also, gotta lmao at the OP complaining about groupthink while using the Daily Mail as a source.

I was hoping for a more credible source too. The Daily Mail isn't a great source...

I don't doubt that this policy exists, but it's all in the framing.

[Liriena]

Thank Christ, there might be hope for Britain yet.

There's still have a LONG way to go though when one considers how restrictive the so-called "hate speech" laws are.

There shall be no hope in Britain until Jezza sits on the throne. *nod*

[Shamhnan Insir]

A good step indeed, as long as the measures are appropriate.

[Aclion]

Really? Britain did that? Are you sure?

So university students are being refused the right to no-platform?

Guarantees for freedom of expression are good... But we need to stop conflating the right to free speech with the right to a platform... And maybe cool it with the moral panic over college students?

Why do these students have any more right to the platform then anyone else? Last I checked they're clients of the universities, just as the speakers are.

[Caracasus]

So university students are being refused the right to no-platform?

Guarantees for freedom of expression are good... But we need to stop conflating the right to free speech with the right to a platform... And maybe cool it with the moral panic over college students?

After the Daily Mail has consistently defended the right of universities to invite contraversial Muslim clerics to speak for years now, I am very glad to see them taking this completely not hypocrytical tone when it comes to other potentially contraversial speakers.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

The game will become trying to get speakers prosecuted for breaking existing laws.

[Pope Joan]

A good step indeed, as long as the measures are appropriate.

Yes, it looks good on paper; let's see if the enforcement can be truly "values free"

[Vassenor]

A good step indeed, as long as the measures are appropriate.

Yes, it looks good on paper; let's see if the enforcement can be truly "values free"

Or if it turns into "you're not allowed to be offended by or complain about what I say because that's taking away my free speech!"

[Pope Joan]

Yes, it looks good on paper; let's see if the enforcement can be truly "values free"

Or if it turns into "you're not allowed to be offended by or complain about what I say because that's taking away my free speech!"

Then there is the piece I read in the Washington Post "We will enforce freedom of speech, but the speech must be truthful, and we will decide what is truth and what is not." Nope, not gonna work if you do that.

[Conserative Morality]

Or if it turns into "you're not allowed to be offended by or complain about what I say because that's taking away my free speech!"

Then there is the piece I read in the Washington Post "We will enforce freedom of speech, but the speech must be truthful, and we will decide what is truth and what is not." Nope, not gonna work if you do that.

How dare people want to only spread things they think are true. =^(

[Dovena]

Yes, it looks good on paper; let's see if the enforcement can be truly "values free"

Or if it turns into "you're not allowed to be offended by or complain about what I say because that's taking away my free speech!"

I don't think that's plausible. I see no reason why they would try to silence people if they get offended, they are favoring free speech in this case.