A group of panelists discussed the difference between hate speech and free speech in relation to the First Amendment Thursday at Oswego State for the first Oz Speaks program of the semester.
The discussion, moderated by Dean of Students Jerri Howland, included Provost for Academic Affairs Scott Furlong, assistant professor in the communications department Jason Zenor and SUNY General Counsel Joe Storch, an alumnus of Oswego State.
Howland introduced the topic and urged the audience to allow others to speak their own truths and remain respectful, in accordance to the principles of participation as followed at each Oz Speaks event.
“We hope that by being here, you are indicating that you appreciate the value of having space and validating each other’s experience regardless of whether or not you agree with them,” Howland said. “We can’t always understand why others look at the world in different lenses than we do, but it does not diminish our human need to be heard and listened to and cared for.”
She opened the discussion by questioning the phrase “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
Furlong said, as a father, he does not believe in this phrase because “some of the most deep wounds come from words.”
Zenor said he believes words are powerful and have a long-lasting effect, but we should separate action from speech and learn to move on and figure out what the issues are.
College students typically think hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment, Howland said. Storch said some forms of hate speech are not protected by the amendment, including fighting words and that of imminent threat.
Hate speech does not violate the First Amendment, but all three panelists agreed to the need to foster civil discourse and have healthy debates on topics where people have differing opinions.
“Hate speech is protected, and we cannot arrest people simply for the words they say,” Storch said. “Some of the best ways to change minds is not by yelling hate speech to hate speech; it’s positive speech to hate speech.”
The topic of the internet in relation to the First Amendment sparked the discussion of social media. Storch said the First Amendment does not bind speech via social media because it is not part of the government. In relation to how social media affects society in general, Furlong said there is a lot of “noise” that one must filter through.
Storch said speech is punishable by law when there is a true threat to harm someone else. The panelists used the U.S. Supreme Court case of Snyder v. Phelps in 2011 as an example to show that even if speech is negative and harmful, it can be protected by following correct protocols such as being on public property and using political speech. This case was argued after members of the Westboro Baptist Church picketed at the funeral of a man in the military who was killed in the line of duty. The act was deemed protected by the First Amendment.
The topic of the recent school shooting in Parkland, Florida, was also brought up, including that the shooter had posted to social media he wanted to be a famous school shooter. Zenor said people who go online and post threatening things are flagged by authorities and watched.
“What is the point in time where we can start arresting people based on predictive analytics of whether they are going to commit a crime? That is a very hard question,” Storch said. “The answer is essentially impossible.”
The discussion concluded with Howland stating that free speech is a vital part of civic engagement as a student and to not waste the opportunities to articulate their views.
Photo: Kassadee Paulo The Oswegonian
