You can’t have a debate with someone unless you share at least some values. I can’t convince you that turnstile-hopping is wrong if you don’t think theft is wrong.
This is a problem in our current debates over free speech. When politicians say the government needs to crack down on misinformation or hate speech — and when colleges or other large institutions impose speech codes — you can’t appeal to them on the grounds of free speech, because they evidently don’t believe in free speech.
Yes, the Constitution bars Congress from infringing on free speech, but the Constitution isn’t very popular these days either. It’s just an old-fashioned document we were told forged by racist and sexist white men more than 200 years ago. So appealing to the principle of free speech, or appealing to the Constitution, doesn’t fly with the speech police. How then can we convince them that censorship is a mistake? Maybe we can teach them a little bit of humility, and thus give them a practical reason not to silence misinformation. Specifically, some of what they call dangerous misinformation today will prove to be the truth tomorrow. How do I know? It’s already happened a bunch of times since the Left got on this misinformation kick a few years ago.
Let’s start with the origins of COVID. In 2020, Twitter suspended a Chinese virologist for suggesting that the virus leaked out of the Virology lab in Wuhan. The World Health Organization asked Facebook to remove any posts arguing that “COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured. This was misinformation that WHO insisted. Facebook complied. The mainstream media agreed with the WHO slapping the misinformation tag on any suggestion that the virus leaked out of a Virology lab.
Democrats, the news media and a huge swath of the intelligence community also branded as misinformation, the details of law breaking and cronyism leaking from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop. The ultimate goal of calling something misinformation is to render that information undeserving of any free speech protections. Misinformation is knowingly false information that causes harm. Protecting the world from this supposed harm is more important than the freedom of speech, the misinformation cops insist.
Again, these people don’t value free speech as a principle. But they should value truth. And these days, the lab leak theory and the damning information about Hunter Biden both appear to be true. U.S. intelligence sources are now saying that the virus most likely emerged from the Wuhan Virology lab.
And the details of Hunter Biden’s debauchery and cronyism are now accepted fact. If the US intelligence community, the World Health Organization, big tech and the major media could repeatedly be so certain yet so wrong, maybe they could use a dose of humility. The beliefs or reports they want to censor as misinformation today might turn out to be true tomorrow. That alone is reason enough to refrain from censorship. American liberals used to talk about the right to be wrong. They no longer believe in that. Hopefully, though, the last few years will convince them of the possibility that the speech police are not immune from being wrong.
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
The impact of hurricanes on oil and energy supplies
18 hrs ago Peter ZeihanThe future of Taiwan and advanced semiconductor chips
Yesterday Peter ZeihanThe self-inflicted downfall of Mexican energy
Friday Peter ZeihanWill the far-right take over Germany (again)?
Thursday Peter ZeihanWhat Democrats get wrong about misinformation and free speech
By Straight Arrow News
College students protesting conservative campus speakers. The media arguing that all Hunter Biden critics are biased. Government officials promoting COVID-19 misinformation. These are just some of the examples many conservatives believe illustrate how “woke” liberals are promoting misinformation and threatening free speech in America.
Straight Arrow News contributor Timothy Carney explains why some of what liberals call “dangerous misinformation” today can prove to be the truth tomorrow.
You can’t have a debate with someone unless you share at least some values. I can’t convince you that turnstile hopping is wrong if you don’t think theft is wrong.
This is a problem in our current debates over free speech. When politicians say the government needs to crack down on misinformation or hate speech — and when colleges or other large institutions impose speech codes — you can’t appeal to them on the grounds of free speech, because they evidently don’t believe in free speech.
Yes, the Constitution bars Congress from infringing on free speech, but the Constitution isn’t very popular these days either. It’s just an old-fashioned document, we were told, forged by racist and sexist white men more than 200 years ago. So appealing to the principle of free speech, or appealing to the Constitution, doesn’t fly with the speech police.
How then can we convince them that censorship is a mistake? Maybe we can teach them a little bit of humility, and thus give them a practical reason not to silence misinformation. Specifically, some of what they call dangerous misinformation today will prove to be the truth tomorrow. How do I know? It’s already happened a bunch of times since the Left got on this misinformation kick a few years ago.
You can’t have a debate with someone unless you share at least some values. I can’t convince you that turnstile-hopping is wrong if you don’t think theft is wrong.
This is a problem in our current debates over free speech. When politicians say the government needs to crack down on misinformation or hate speech — and when colleges or other large institutions impose speech codes — you can’t appeal to them on the grounds of free speech, because they evidently don’t believe in free speech.
Yes, the Constitution bars Congress from infringing on free speech, but the Constitution isn’t very popular these days either. It’s just an old-fashioned document we were told forged by racist and sexist white men more than 200 years ago. So appealing to the principle of free speech, or appealing to the Constitution, doesn’t fly with the speech police. How then can we convince them that censorship is a mistake? Maybe we can teach them a little bit of humility, and thus give them a practical reason not to silence misinformation. Specifically, some of what they call dangerous misinformation today will prove to be the truth tomorrow. How do I know? It’s already happened a bunch of times since the Left got on this misinformation kick a few years ago.
Let’s start with the origins of COVID. In 2020, Twitter suspended a Chinese virologist for suggesting that the virus leaked out of the Virology lab in Wuhan. The World Health Organization asked Facebook to remove any posts arguing that “COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured. This was misinformation that WHO insisted. Facebook complied. The mainstream media agreed with the WHO slapping the misinformation tag on any suggestion that the virus leaked out of a Virology lab.
Democrats, the news media and a huge swath of the intelligence community also branded as misinformation, the details of law breaking and cronyism leaking from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop. The ultimate goal of calling something misinformation is to render that information undeserving of any free speech protections. Misinformation is knowingly false information that causes harm. Protecting the world from this supposed harm is more important than the freedom of speech, the misinformation cops insist.
Again, these people don’t value free speech as a principle. But they should value truth. And these days, the lab leak theory and the damning information about Hunter Biden both appear to be true. U.S. intelligence sources are now saying that the virus most likely emerged from the Wuhan Virology lab.
And the details of Hunter Biden’s debauchery and cronyism are now accepted fact. If the US intelligence community, the World Health Organization, big tech and the major media could repeatedly be so certain yet so wrong, maybe they could use a dose of humility. The beliefs or reports they want to censor as misinformation today might turn out to be true tomorrow. That alone is reason enough to refrain from censorship. American liberals used to talk about the right to be wrong. They no longer believe in that. Hopefully, though, the last few years will convince them of the possibility that the speech police are not immune from being wrong.
The government isn’t the answer to a stressed-out parenting culture
Real birth rate crisis lurks beneath the ‘childless cat ladies’ debate
How Biden’s tax on Chinese metal harms Americans
Democrats use climate change issues to help sell liberal agenda
HHS Secretary Becerra’s crusade against Catholicism
Underreported stories from each side
Ann Arbor police, University of Michigan probing suspected ‘bias-motivated assault’ of Jewish student
25 sources | 9% from the left Getty ImagesRussian election interference efforts targeting Harris campaign, Microsoft finds
16 sources | 13% from the right ReutersLatest Stories
Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs denied bail in racketeering, sex trafficking case
Trump, Harris use assassination attempt to highlight policy proposals
Hezbollah blames Israel for deadly pager explosions
Operation Hard Kill’s counter-drone warfare showcased: Weapon of the week
Filling in capability gaps with Lockheed Martin’s hypersonic weapon: The Mako
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
DOJ guidance on voter list maintenance targets election integrity
14 hrs ago Ben WeingartenTucker Carlson’s free speech isn’t a blank check for hate speech
20 hrs ago Ruben NavarretteWhat could impact US election in the final weeks that remain?
Yesterday David PakmanIn debate, Harris proved that Trump will only ever serve himself
Friday Dr. Rashad Richey