Alex Massie: Freedom of speech is universal or it's worth nothing

Alex Massie has a good piece in The Times today in response to those who would regulate the press.

Here are some extracts.

"Free speech is universal or it’s worth nothing

Those who want to police the press appear to like the idea of freedom of expression for themselves but not for others."

Alex Massie

"Anyone wishing to catch the last of the summer vibes could do very much worse than keep an eye on Zack Polanski. Earlier this week the Green Party leader objected that “once again, parts of our media are failing at the most basic part of their job — reporting the truth”. In this instance, the failure was to link wildfires in Britain with climate change at every opportunity.

Last Saturday, on the other hand, Polanski was busy condemning Andy Burnham’s “spineless response” to the Jason Arday affair on the grounds that the prime minister fails to appreciate this is an opportunity “to tackle the press”. Notwithstanding the tragedy of the Arday story — for such it is, despite it also being a saga seemingly designed for an acutely acidic satire — the accusation here is that the press spent too much time reporting the truth without ever once pausing to consider the possible consequences of doing so.

On Sunday Polanski was at it again. Responding to an opinion piece in the Daily Mail in which the author suggested a long, hot, dry summer was actually very pleasant in very many ways, Polanski reiterated that: “It’s time we sorted out the press.” The author of that op-ed might indeed be insouciant in the face of changing weather patterns but — bear with me here — it’s not obviously something which needs “sorting out”. Being wrong on the internet or even in the pages of the Daily Mail is not, or not yet, a crime.

There is a lot of this stuff about. Elsewhere, Will Self made a fine case for keeping novelists away from politics. After Arday, “Police should be impounding computers”, he intoned, adding that: “This is not an attack upon a free press — it is a necessarily immediate defence of one.” As defences of press freedom go, “Jail the journalists” is an unorthodox one. Arday was newsworthy because almost everything about his life and his desperate death was rare and unusual."

"It feels important to stress that the underlying attitudes displayed here are not confined to novelists and left-wing politicians. Nigel Farage has spent a good portion of the summer protesting against entirely legitimate reporting of his financial affairs and those of his party. Reform’s leader promises “serious consequences” and asks us to infer, I think, that his party is now open to further Leveson-style restrictions on the press. The iron-ribbed tribunes of the people can be snowflakes too.

Then again, everyone loves free speech until a reporter is in their face or up their backside. In few other realms of public life is the gap between theory and practice so very wide. Actually, of course, what people really love is speech for themselves but not for others. That this is a very human failing should not blind us to its dangers. Even those few countries with hitherto robust speech protections are tiring of them in this Age of Hurt Feelings. Donald Trump cannot take a punch either and many of his acolytes are even feebler. Maga is just as fond of banning books or academic courses as any po-faced left-wing scold."

"Unfortunately, a well-behaved media never held anyone or anything to account. You may say that we would say that, wouldn’t we, and yes, we would, but not just because this is a self-serving, even self-flattering, suggestion but also, importantly, because it is true. For better or worse, bad or even objectionable journalism is the price paid for the good stuff. There is almost no way of controlling the former that does not also impinge upon the latter.

The temper of the moment runs against liberty and liberalism, however. “It’s a free country, innit?” is a phrase heard less frequently today than in the past and no one ever erred by underestimating the great British public’s enthusiasm for banning things, scolding others or suppressing views with which they happen, individually, to disagree.

Bad speech is not the same as criminal speech, and disliking something, even for good reasons, is not ipso facto justification for suppressing it. This is both elementary and somehow something close to transgressive, now that social media has helped fuel an inferno of whataboutery and made reasonable disagreement so much harder."

"Pluralism is unfashionable and dissent increasingly considered a sign of terminal weakness. Hence most of our political parties now suspend or expel parliamentarians or prominent supporters for the flimsiest of reasons. Criticising the leadership ought not to be grounds for disciplinary action save in the most extravagant cases. Yet it has become routine.

All the churches seem to be becoming narrower to the point where they should more accurately be deemed sects. Labour MPs have lost the whip for trivial reasons."

"The punishment beatings now cascade down to include media outriders; Tim Montgomerie, once of this parish, has been suspended from Reform for daring to criticise the dear leader. This does not seem like a sign of a healthy political and social culture.

A liberal democracy stands for liberalism and an open society or it ceases to merit its own label. We should strive to be kind, but not at the expense of the truth or legitimate inquiry. So while there is indeed often something sulphurous about the spectacle of Fleet Street in full cry, the only thing worse than an unchained press is a muzzled one. Some of the commentary on Arday (as distinct from the reporting) was unpleasantly vindictive and gleeful and even the press’s supporters might concede that, whatever the fourth estate’s effect on the enemy, it can terrify its friends too. We can recognise that without giving succour to those who will use any issue, any occasion and any excuse to hobble a free press.

Of course speech can have consequences. We need only look to Batley for evidence of that. It is now five years since a teacher there was forced into hiding for the “crime” of using a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad during a lesson exploring issues of speech and blasphemy and religious disputation. The mob got its way as, shamefully, the school suspended the teacher and offered an “unequivocal” apology for something that merited no apology at all. The council, naturally, backed the school and so did the local MP. If you want to go in search of a “culture war” you can find it in Yorkshire and I do not think identifying the villains is difficult.

Blown hither and thither by these gales and menaced by left and right alike, the centre struggles to be heard. But there is nothing small or weak about a centrism which insists upon the old liberal virtues. Liberty is constrained enough and has no need of additional chains or safety rails. This is not an equivocating or modest position; in the current atmosphere it feels almost radical."