Languaging – Blog

Defamation is not something new. It dates back to 17th century England, where the growth of the press and publication industry led to a simultaneous growth of libel. In simple words, libel are defamatory statements that are published or broadcast. What makes libel illegal is that those statements are false but are still published and spread to the public. 

However, defamation was not subject to constitutional baselines. In fact, In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Supreme Court gained renown for categorizing libel as a form of speech not protected by the First Amendment, placing it in the same bracket as obscenity and fighting words.

Moreover, In 1964, the Supreme Court departed from the longstanding common law tradition in the New York Times v. Sullivan case. This landmark decision marked a significant shift in libel laws. At that time, numerous libel suits totaling over $300 million, primarily filed by southern officials and individuals, were pending against newspapers that had covered the civil rights movement. The outcome of the New York Times v. Sullivan’s case had profound implications for these libel suits and established a new legal precedent regarding the protection of press freedom and the First Amendment in cases involving public figures and defamation.

So what is the difference between freedom of speech and freedom of hate today? 

Elon Musk, who acquired twitter earlier this year rebranded the platform to what is now called “X”, under the main phrase that he is defending free speech for all, and no individuals shall be banned from the platform for expressing their controversial views. Further controversy came when, based on what he said, he actually reintroduced Donald Trump to twitter, even though he had previously been banned for hate speech. This rebranding has diminished the worth of the company he impulsively acquired for $44 billion and brought it down to about $15-29 billion, it’s Musk’s own actions.

The distinction between freedom of speech and freedom of hate in today’s context lies in the delicate balance between protecting the right to express one’s opinions and curbing speech that promotes discrimination, violence, or harm. While freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it does not extend to hate speech, which encompasses language that incites violence, hatred, or discrimination based on race, religion, gender, or other protected characteristics. The line between these freedoms can be complex, and the challenge is to ensure that legitimate discourse and differing perspectives are safeguarded, while also addressing the harmful consequences of hate speech. Striking this balance requires a nuanced approach that respects the principles of free expression while preventing the incitement of harm, ensuring a fair and just society for all.

Citations

• Criminal Libel – The Free Speech Center. (2023, September 20). The Free Speech Center. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/criminal-libel/
• Sullivan, M. (2023, September 9). Elon Musk’s hypocrisy about free speech hits a new low. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/07/elon-musks-hypocrisy-about-free-speech-hits-a-new-low
• Freedom of Speech – Defamation. (n.d.). http://constitutionallawreporter.com/amendment-01/freedom-speech/defamation/#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20changed%20this,on%20the%20civil%20rights%20movement.