Free speech, hate speech, and the problem of (manufactured) authority

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

In this paper, I suggest that the concept of incitement as a way of identifying hate speech sometimes locates the harm caused by speech in the wrong sorts of places. Hate speech expressed in the form of reasoned argument or academic debate by persons with the relevant authority or expertise potentially causes more harm, though perhaps in less obvious ways. Literature on the concept of authority has demonstrated the way authoritative speakers or speakers with perceived expertise are able to secure uptake for their views. In this paper, I demonstrate how authority and expertise can also be manufactured, enabling speakers to secure uptake in the same sorts of ways as legitimately authoritative or expert speakers. While I am not suggesting legal penalties for speakers who manufacture authority in these ways, I am arguing that we should nevertheless be sensitive to the ways in which this can occur, how it might cause various kinds of harm, and how these harms might be mitigated.

LanguageEnglish
Pages59-75
Number of pages17
JournalCanadian Journal of Law and Society
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

hate
expertise
cause
penalty
expert
human being

Keywords

  • free speech
  • hate speech
  • incitement
  • authority
  • Holocaust denial

Cite this

@article{327f7979e3c74ebf8b8660a635641acd,
title = "Free speech, hate speech, and the problem of (manufactured) authority",
abstract = "In this paper, I suggest that the concept of incitement as a way of identifying hate speech sometimes locates the harm caused by speech in the wrong sorts of places. Hate speech expressed in the form of reasoned argument or academic debate by persons with the relevant authority or expertise potentially causes more harm, though perhaps in less obvious ways. Literature on the concept of authority has demonstrated the way authoritative speakers or speakers with perceived expertise are able to secure uptake for their views. In this paper, I demonstrate how authority and expertise can also be manufactured, enabling speakers to secure uptake in the same sorts of ways as legitimately authoritative or expert speakers. While I am not suggesting legal penalties for speakers who manufacture authority in these ways, I am arguing that we should nevertheless be sensitive to the ways in which this can occur, how it might cause various kinds of harm, and how these harms might be mitigated.",
keywords = "free speech, hate speech, incitement, authority, Holocaust denial",
author = "Sarah Sorial",
year = "2014",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1017/cls.2013.43",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "59--75",
journal = "Canadian Journal of Law and Society",
issn = "0829-3201",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

Free speech, hate speech, and the problem of (manufactured) authority. / Sorial, Sarah.

In: Canadian Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 29, No. 1, 04.2014, p. 59-75.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Free speech, hate speech, and the problem of (manufactured) authority

AU - Sorial, Sarah

PY - 2014/4

Y1 - 2014/4

N2 - In this paper, I suggest that the concept of incitement as a way of identifying hate speech sometimes locates the harm caused by speech in the wrong sorts of places. Hate speech expressed in the form of reasoned argument or academic debate by persons with the relevant authority or expertise potentially causes more harm, though perhaps in less obvious ways. Literature on the concept of authority has demonstrated the way authoritative speakers or speakers with perceived expertise are able to secure uptake for their views. In this paper, I demonstrate how authority and expertise can also be manufactured, enabling speakers to secure uptake in the same sorts of ways as legitimately authoritative or expert speakers. While I am not suggesting legal penalties for speakers who manufacture authority in these ways, I am arguing that we should nevertheless be sensitive to the ways in which this can occur, how it might cause various kinds of harm, and how these harms might be mitigated.

AB - In this paper, I suggest that the concept of incitement as a way of identifying hate speech sometimes locates the harm caused by speech in the wrong sorts of places. Hate speech expressed in the form of reasoned argument or academic debate by persons with the relevant authority or expertise potentially causes more harm, though perhaps in less obvious ways. Literature on the concept of authority has demonstrated the way authoritative speakers or speakers with perceived expertise are able to secure uptake for their views. In this paper, I demonstrate how authority and expertise can also be manufactured, enabling speakers to secure uptake in the same sorts of ways as legitimately authoritative or expert speakers. While I am not suggesting legal penalties for speakers who manufacture authority in these ways, I am arguing that we should nevertheless be sensitive to the ways in which this can occur, how it might cause various kinds of harm, and how these harms might be mitigated.

KW - free speech

KW - hate speech

KW - incitement

KW - authority

KW - Holocaust denial

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919442767&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/cls.2013.43

DO - 10.1017/cls.2013.43

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 59

EP - 75

JO - Canadian Journal of Law and Society

T2 - Canadian Journal of Law and Society

JF - Canadian Journal of Law and Society

SN - 0829-3201

IS - 1

ER -