Thoughts on a Thinker-Based Approach to Freedom Of Speech

While agreeing with Seana Shiffrin that any free speech theory must depend on assumptions about our need for free thinking, I am sceptical about her claim that her thinker-based approach provides the best explanation for freedom of speech. Her argument has some similarities with Mill’s argument from truth and with self-development theories, though it improves on the latter. But the thinker-based approach does not show why political discourse, broadly construed, is protected more strongly in all jurisdictions than gossip and sexually explicit speech. Nor does it explain why the ‘mass’ speech of corporations and the mailings of political parties and charities are fully protected by provisions such as the First Amendment. My article concludes with some reflections on the relationship of abstract political theory such as Shiffrin’s to constitutional law; abstract theory must inevitably make some compromises if it is fully to explain constitutional jurisprudence

What Is the Harm of Hate Speech?

In Jeremy Waldron’s book, The Harm in Hate Speech, it is not always clear whether he argues that hate speech causes harm or whether it constitutes harm. This article considers this uncertainty, concluding that the best understanding of Waldron’s argument is that hate speech tends to cause harm - a weak form of the consequentialist case for its proscription. His argument is not advanced by his apparent reliance on speech-act theory

Press regulation in an era of convergence: An introduction

While the transition of traditional newspapers and magazines to the online space is gathering pace, and the literature on multimedia journalism is proliferating, little attention has been paid to date to the implications of convergence for the press in regulatory terms. One such regulatory dilemma arises from the proliferation of video content on newspaper websites. It is this question and others at the conjuncture of press freedom and the dynamics unleashed by convergence that the papers in this special section seek to shed light upon

Closed Data: Defamation and Privacy Disputes in England and Wales

The Coalition Government has prioritised 'open data' as a 'powerful tool' to 'empower citizens', with a 'transparency commitment' to publish more crime and anonymised sentencing data and the Ministry of Justice has set out an open data strategy covering both civil and criminal courts. However, legal researchers frequently encounter inaccessible or 'closed' data, when they attempt to access basic information concerning civil cases. Better-organised and more open information would help inform public debates relating to procedural and substantive civil law - the discussion around libel reform and privacy-related interim injunctions, for example. This paper will argue that a lack of public data about defamation and privacy litigation, indicated by the Impact Assessment for the Defamation Bill 2012 and the report by the Master of the Rolls' Committee on Super-Injunctions in 2011, hampers the policy-making process, public debate and academic research around these issues of public interest

Regulating for Responsibility: Reputation and Social Media

The framework brought forward by the United Kingdom's Defamation Act 2013 underlines a traditional hierarchy of expression in which news media are viewed as high-level speech. Although of a different form, social media are a dominant means of expression. The current study explores the rationale for a more robust and forceful discussion of responsibility in speech on social media platforms. The underlying premise here is that speech should be viewed as a qualified good and that a more appropriate paradigm is one found in the phrase ‘freedom to participate’

A public health approach to understanding and preventing violent radicalization

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Very recent acts of terrorism in the UK were perpetrated by 'homegrown', well educated young people, rather than by foreign Islamist groups; consequently, a process of violent radicalization was proposed to explain how ordinary people were recruited and persuaded to sacrifice their lives.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Counterterrorism approaches grounded in the criminal justice system have not prevented violent radicalization. Indeed there is some evidence that these approaches may have encouraged membership of radical groups by not recognizing Muslim communities as allies, citizens, victims of terrorism, and victims of discrimination, but only as suspect communities who were then further alienated. Informed by public health research and practice, a new approach is proposed to target populations vulnerable to recruitment, rather than rely only on research of well known terrorist groups and individual perpetrators of terrorist acts.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This paper proposes public health research and practice to guard against violent radicalization.</p

“Making voices heard…”: Index on Censorship as Advocacy Journalism

The magazine Index on Censorship has sought, since its launch in 1972, to provide a space where censorship and abuses against freedom of expression have been identified, highlighted and challenged. Originally set up by a collection of writers and intellectuals who were concerned at the levels of state censorship and repression of artists in and under the influence of the Soviet Union and elsewhere, ‘Index’ has provided those championing the values of freedom of expression with a platform for highlighting human rights abuses, curtailment of civil liberties and formal and informal censorship globally. Charting its inception and development between 1971 and 1974, the paper is the first to situate the journal within the specific academic literature on activist media (Janowitz, 1975; Waisbord, 2009; Fisher, 2016). In doing so the paper advances an argument which draws on the drivers and motivations behind the publication’s launch to signal the development of a particular justification or ‘advocacy’ of a left-libertarian civic model of freedom of speech

The masked demos: Associational anonymity and democratic practice

The increased use of anonymous digital platforms raises substantive concerns about accountability in digital spaces. However, contemporary evaluations of anonymity focus too narrowly on its protective function: its ability to protect a diversity of speakers and ideas. Drawing on two examples of anonymous political engagements – Publius’s writing of the Federalist Papers and college students’ use of the social media platform Yik Yak – we develop an account of anonymity’s associational function: the processes by which people generate and negotiate collective identities, discussions, and actions in wider publics. As we argue, anonymity’s associational function can (1) generate conditions under which individuals develop collective interests and identities to foster collective action, and (2) enable novel interactions between these individuals and communities and the larger publics of which they are part. We conclude with a discussion of how attention to associational anonymity can contribute to a more nuanced account of democracy in practice

A statistical framework for assessing pharmacological responses and biomarkers using uncertainty estimates

High-throughput testing of drugs across molecular-characterised cell lines can identify candidate treatments and discover biomarkers. However, the cells’ response to a drug is typically quantified by a summary statistic from a best-fit dose-response curve, whilst neglecting the uncertainty of the curve fit and the potential variability in the raw readouts. Here, we model the experimental variance using Gaussian Processes, and subsequently, leverage uncertainty estimates to identify associated biomarkers with a new Bayesian framework. Applied to in vitro screening data on 265 compounds across 1074 cancer cell lines, our models identified 24 clinically established drug-response biomarkers, and provided evidence for six novel biomarkers by accounting for association with low uncertainty. We validated our uncertainty estimates with an additional drug screen of 26 drugs, 10 cell lines with 8 to 9 replicates. Our method is applicable to any dose-response data without replicates, and improves biomarker discovery for precision medicine