🎙️ Some notes on freedom of speech

TL; DR – To unlock the promise of freedom of speech, we need to pair it with the duty to be constructive. Without thoughtfulness, we have a less free, less flourishing life and world.

Freedom of speech has been on my mind recently for two reasons. 

In Sweden and Denmark last year, people burnt copies of the Holy Qu’ran. The most prominent Qu’ran burning was by Salwan Momika, an Iraqi refugee. In his words, his homeland had been “usurped by Muslims” (in this case ISIS), forcing him to seek asylum in Sweden. Burning the Qu’ran, then, was a statement of revenge. Momika, and subsequently others, justified their actions morally and legally as ‘freedom of speech’.

Also last year, Twitter became ‘X’ and adopted a laissez-faire approach to moderating content, under the banner of free speech. In the world’s “global town square”, freedom of speech is a core value and content moderation is down. 

Freedom of speech has always been dear to my heart. 

I was a wide-eyed 20 year old when the Arab Spring saw young people, championing freedom of speech, protest against old, autocratic regimes. 

And in the years since, I’ve become convinced that freedom of speech is absolutely core to a flourishing life.The good life is one you have the agency to shape. To have agency includes the agency to express yourself. And agency needs exposure to new ideas and information, which you can use to shape a life that means something to you. 

Burning the Qu’ran is a hateful act. It does, though, embody an idea about geopolitics and global justice. It stirs emotion. A maximalist take on freedom of speech would argue it is valid (even if it’s abhorrent), and shouldn’t be stopped. Salwan was expressing a justifiable opinion, you could say, violently in proportion with his anger.

I’m really uncomfortable with this, as a Muslim and someone who values civility and compassion. 

And what that discomfort makes me realise, is that freedom of speech isn’t enough. 

What’s missing is a duty to be constructive. 

Joel, a friend who I asked to look at a draft of this piece, put it this way: “I’m hearing you invite us to rise above the floor of freedom of speech, toward a higher calling, by making constructive contributions instead of trolling others with extreme, destructive speech”. 

Aristotle, the Greek philosopher, saw the life well lived as a life where we inquire, deliberate, and reason. These are the faculties that separate humans from animals, and to exercise them is to exercise our humanity. If we asked Aristotle about freedom of speech, he’d approve – but tell us we need to pair it with thoughtfulness.

Simone de Beauvoir, one of my philosophical idols, talks about the artist or writer as embodiments of an ethical ideal. The very nature of what they do is to propose and reveal new meaning to us. We can reject it, take it up, or adapt it as we see fit. But through writing, music, art, tweets, blogs, or whatever else, they’ve given us something constructive, that we can grapple with and that has the possibility to shift us. 

A duty to be constructive, is separate from a freedom to express yourself. One is a right; the other a virtue. 

It’s not just freedom of speech I hold dear; it’s the positive intent behind that speech too.

Having said that, the two are intrinsically linked. 

If I speak with the intent to harm, then I stop you from speaking. And by stopping you from speaking, my freedom of speech has created a less free world. A world where less people find safety and value in sharing their ideas. A world less brimming with information, perspectives, and authenticity.

Twitter (X) illustrates how untrammelled freedom of speech is, paradoxically, creating a smaller and smaller space for speech. Layoffs in content moderation are up. One study shows that hate speech has doubled. And, at the same time, the number of daily active users fell in 2023, for the first time in the company’s history. Users, confronted by more trolling and hate, are opting out of speaking at all. 

When you speak with the duty to be constructive, you nurture the freedom of speech of everyone else. 

To be fair to Twitter, Community Notes is an example of how a product feature can incentivise thoughtfulness and nuance, and diminish hateful and false speech. One study, published a couple of months ago, showed that Community Notes shared accurate information 96% of the time. That information helped users understand and grapple with topics like the COVID-19 vaccine, without widespread censorship undermining trust and free speech.

A duty to be constructive leads to more freedom of speech, and greater likelihood that freedom of speech gives us a flourishing life. So, if you really do value freedom of speech, then exercising and protecting this duty is as important as speaking your mind.

There’s still lots I’m not sure about though. 

How do you nurture or incentivise the duty to be constructive, whether in the digital or physical world? Community Notes are great. So is invoking Aristotle and Simone de Beauvoir. What else?

And who gets to decide what counts as ‘thoughtful and constructive’, and what counts as hateful and harmful? Shock, humour, and provocation can all provoke thought. And can something be constructive and hateful?

Here, I very much doubt there’s a right answer. 

We’re left – as always with questions of ethics and tech – with the need for thoughtfulness and trade-offs. 

🎬 Thanks to Joel Christiansen, Alice Sholto-Douglas and Jude Klinger for looking at drafts of this.

🤔 Got thoughts? Don’t keep them to yourself. Email me on asad@asadrahman.io. Let’s figure this out together.

If you enjoyed this, subscribe to get pieces just like it straight to your inbox. One email, every so often (and nothing else).

Banner…