Ann Coulter speech protests/cancellation

[lector]

I doubt the people at this university dislike Coulter any more than the Ivy League, but she's never been physically blocked or sabotaged from giving talks at any of those schools.

The OP misquoted Coulter. She actually said that this sort of thing has never happened TO HER. That may be true.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Do I really have "free speech" if, every time I open my mouth someone over-shouts me with a bull-horn?

No, you don't. "Freedom of speech" means that if you want to say something, and I want to hear you, and we do what it takes to make that happen, nobody else has the right to prevent it.

 

[Segnosaur]

How about the right of protesters to physically block the event hall so she and others can't get in?
How about the right of protesters to create a false alarm to force the event to adjourn?

um...that's not speech. one person's speech should not violate another person's ability to use the same right.

But that's exactly what was happening here.

A fire alarm was pulled.
And, if I remember correctly, prior to the hall being evacuated, there were protesters who were in attendance who had already started up chants to disrupt the meeting. (Could be wrong about that though.)

 

[ksbluesfan]

When I lived in the dorms oh so many years ago, it seemed like the fire alarm was pulled at least once a month, usually early on Sunday morning.

 

[Segnosaur]

Just wondering... who exactly do you suggest is responsible for making a decision about what is "bush league" when it comes to free speech? How do you determine what is acceptable for universities and what should be restricted to just 'bar talk'?

All good questions and should be determined by the university administration...

So, if the university administration were run by right-wing conservatives who wanted to ban, for example, any art on campus that featured nudity, would you be in favor of that? After all, if you think the university administration should be vetting acceptable activities on campus, shouldn't you be prepared for all such eventualities?

The one problem with going down the "who determines what is respectable" route is that if this becomes our overriding fear, then the logical end of that route is an open-season in which any and all speakers are invited to speak at the university, even if their intellectual worth is at the level of WWE pre-match speeches...

Of course, you're assuming that such unworthy speakers would find enough of an audience to make such invitations useful. (It does cost time and money to rent the hall, arrange the speakers, publicize the event, etc.) . If too many unworthy speakers are invited, the "market" will be saturated, attendance will fall, and most of the 'unworthy' speech will just fall by the wayside.

 

[Segnosaur]

The OP misquoted Coulter. She actually said that this sort of thing has never happened TO HER. That may be true.

I never actually quoted Coulter... I summarized her claim when I stated:
that such protests would never have happened
I never specified whether such protests would have happened to just her, or to other conservative speakers as well.

I believe there was an episode of Penn&Teller: Bullsh*t where they talked about free speech oppression at U.S. colleges.

 

[Praktik]

So, if the university administration were run by right-wing conservatives who wanted to ban, for example, any art on campus that featured nudity, would you be in favor of that? After all, if you think the university administration should be vetting acceptable activities on campus, shouldn't you be prepared for all such eventualities?

They already are vetting activities on campus, its not like we're asking to introduce anything new in that respect, and for the record, I would be against that, we're not talking art here, where I think the boundaries are fuzzier and harder to determine.

If you're saying its just as hard to rank Anne Coulter and say, Andrew Coyne on an "intellectual respectability" scale, well, you're just wrong.

I'm ok with people with views on politics from any place on the spectrum, be it hard core republican, libertarian, eco-warrior or communist. I only ask that the ideas presented be a few notches up on the scale from the E! Hollywood cesspool of intellectual debasement.

Of course, you're assuming that such unworthy speakers would find enough of an audience to make such invitations useful. (It does cost time and money to rent the hall, arrange the speakers, publicize the event, etc.) . If too many unworthy speakers are invited, the "market" will be saturated, attendance will fall, and most of the 'unworthy' speech will just fall by the wayside.

Is there anything the magic of the free market can't fix? Glory be!

 

[Fnord]

This is just my "two cents" -- and it likely isn't even worth that much -- but if I were in charge of bringing guest speakers into a college forum so that impressionable young students could hear their words and learn their wisdom, among those people that I would NOT invite would be Sylvia Browne, Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter.

Better to not invite ignorant, bigotted and deceitful people to speak in the first place, then to invite them now just to dis-invite them later.

 

[Vic Vega]

No, you don't. "Freedom of speech" means that if you want to say something, and I want to hear you, and we do what it takes to make that happen, nobody else has the right to prevent it.

That is not what it means. Not in the United States anyway.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Is there anything the magic of the free market can't fix?

Liberal cynicism.

 

[dudalb]

Wow, someone on the Political Left finds all kinds of reasons to deny someone on the Political Right the right to speak. What a surprise.

 

[quadraginta]

Did the University tell Coulter she was not allowed to speak, or did Coulter choose not to speak?

 

[Fnord]

Just because someone has the right to speak, does not mean that anyone is obligated to provide a forum for their free speech, or to even listen to them when they speak. For example, Ann Coulter's freedom of speech does not trump my right to exercise freedom from her speech.

Aren't there sufficient street-corners and soap-boxes? Doesn't Ann Coulter have a web-page or a blog? Can she not simply buy time on a public-access cable channel and scream at the camera? Has she no idea that she can self-publish her own books, or find some hack publisher to print a few thousand copies for her?

Does she absolutely, positively, have to speak at that particular college, or can she not convince some other college to let her use their facilities to spread her particular "philosophy"?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Just because someone has the right to speak, does not mean that anyone is obligated to provide a forum for their free speech, or to even listen to them when they speak. For example, Ann Coulter's freedom of speech does not trump my right to exercise freedom from her speech.

That's true. However, it's also true that if I want her to speak, you don't have the right to physically block her from coming to me or sabotage my environment so that I can't hear her.
The students were well within their rights to appeal to the college administration and ask them to cancel the engagement. Certainly the college was well within its rights to never invite her in the first place. But rioting to prevent her from coming when the college has decided to invite her? That's inappropriate.

 

[Segnosaur]

So, if the university administration were run by right-wing conservatives who wanted to ban, for example, any art on campus that featured nudity, would you be in favor of that? After all, if you think the university administration should be vetting acceptable activities on campus, shouldn't you be prepared for all such eventualities?

They already are vetting activities on campus, its not like we're asking to introduce anything new in that respect,

Well, it does sound like you're asking them to make value judgements on the worthiness of speakers, something that they didn't do when Coulter was first invited to speak.

...and for the record, I would be against that, we're not talking art here, where I think the boundaries are fuzzier and harder to determine.

I used 'conservatives banning art' as just a simple example. I could have used others:
- What if a conservative administration wanted to ban a speaker who was a homosexual activist?
- What about banning an Israeli or Palestinian speaker?

If you're saying its just as hard to rank Anne Coulter and say, Andrew Coyne on an "intellectual respectability" scale, well, you're just wrong.

I have no problem claiming Coulter is, shall we say, intellectually challenged. I even pointed that out in my opening post.

What I do have a problem with is trying to define some sort of dividing line between "worthy of speaking" and "not worthy of speaking".

... If too many unworthy speakers are invited, the "market" will be saturated, attendance will fall, and most of the 'unworthy' speech will just fall by the wayside.

Is there anything the magic of the free market can't fix? Glory be!

I'm assuming that's sarcasm.

So, you have any proof that won't happen?

Personally, I feel much more comfortable with the idea that 'bad' speech will get eliminated through indifference by the audience than the idea that a vocal minority will be able to dictate what is acceptable.

 

[Drudgewire]

Just remember, if you're going to mess with Ann Coulter make sure the moon isn't full first:

 

[Segnosaur]

Just because someone has the right to speak, does not mean that anyone is obligated to provide a forum for their free speech...

You're right...

In this case however, I believe that the hall where she was going to speak was rented for the occasion, and if that's the case "we" were not actually providing the forum, people that wanted to hear her speak were. (At the very least, the the hall would have been reserved by students who had the same rights to reserve halls as anyone else.)

...or to even listen to them when they speak.

You're right... you should never be subjected to speech that you don't want to hear. But this wasn't the case here. Coulter was not running through campus with a megaphone, she was in a hall where people actually had to make a decision to attend or not.

Does she absolutely, positively, have to speak at that particular college, or can she not convince some other college to let her use their facilities to spread her particular "philosophy"?

A group of people at the university invited her. If there was no invitation from the University of Ottawa, she would not have spoken there.

 

[Fnord]

Rioting is rarely ever a good way to get one's point across, and I can not justify such an act in most cases -- certainly not in this one.

What was the university's reason for inviting her in the first place? For her conservative views? There are other conservatives that inspire less controversy. For her widespread appeal? Someone like Dr. William H. Cosby Jr, Ed. PhD. has far greater appeal and is also conservative in his opinions.

I hypothesize that the college administrators were looking more towards all those potential annuities and other donations that the wealthier and more conservative fans of Ms. Coulter could bring in, and when they saw how much a destructive riot could cost them, they caved in to the students' demands.

Eh ... maybe not ...

 

[AvalonXQ]

What was the university's reason for inviting her in the first place? For her conservative views?

It was mentioned earlier that she was part of a series on free speech that was based on inviting controversial figures to campus.

 

[lomiller]

Hmmm on further consideration I think there is some valuable free speech lessons to be learned here.

While many people are focusing on Coulters ability to say her piece I think the other side may be more interesting. How far do you go in preventing the protesters from having their say as well? Does free speech mean they can incite violence against her? Does it mean they should not be allowed to express their opinions in a way that stops Coulter from speaking?

Coulter seems greatly concerned that her ability to speak in whatever way she wants may be curtailed, but if that’s so why should the protesters have their speech restricted in a way her speech isn’t? Of course the protesters themselves could be accused of the same thing so it becomes a legitimate question to ask just how do you allow for free speech in this situation?