For those of you who have not read the letter: https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/
At first glance, this letter is wholeheartedly agreeable. It speaks out on the intolerance of opposing views, the lack of free exchange of ideas, and the dire professional consequences that await for you if you dissent from the acceptable viewpoints. However, I have mulled over it, and I have come to the conclusion that I do not like it.
Each publisher, each institution, has a brand, an image, that it tries to uphold. If you are employed, then you are expected to adhere to that brand/image. If you don't, well, then you simply do not fit the brand/image of the company and you can be fired. Is this just? Is this fair? If I am say, the head of PR for a company, and I say something controversial, I will likely get sacked. This is obviously going to depend on what I say. For instance, if I said the word "Fuck", even as an accident, I will get sacked. If you are an editor of a left-wing newspaper and you run a right-wing opinion piece, you will also get sacked because the story is not what the readers want to read-- if they want to read it, then they will go to a different news outlet. Similarly if you publish an anti LGBT piece in a pro LGBT magazine. I, honestly, do not see the issue in these sorts of scenarios.
While I do not condone hate speech, people inciting/promoting violence, etc, I do support "cancelling". Cancelling, to me, is the same as boycotting the Wal-mart. Wal-mart has controversial ideas on operating: anti-union, minimum wage, kills smaller businesses etc. But I, a participant of the free market, am free to boycott Wal-mart AND can encourage others to do the same. To some of you who are saying, "well, when we boycott, it is against the company not the people", I respond that often when boycotting, people call out the CEOs and other prominent figureheads in the company. For instance, I saw posts on Spinster regarding Steve Huffman and how he hates women, as Reddit hates women from the banning of r/GC. Reddit's controversial opinion was that gender critical was hateful. Should we not be able to "cancel" Reddit? Of course not! And if Reddit goes under, then so will Steve Huffman. His livelihood depends on the success of Reddit.
A prominent individual, such as a writer, in the public eye should not be exempt from criticism. They have a larger soapbox than us normal folk, not just because they are famous but also because they publish what we read, have a lot of followers/fans, and appear in the media outlets. They have an incredible ability to influence our opinions through the words we read, hear, and the actions they take. I do not feel that they should have more protections than any one of us. They always have "free speech", it is just a matter of which soap box they can use. And us, the free market, will dictate the rise and fall of the soap boxes.
I will quote a segment of the letter that caused some rage: "We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement." Is losing one's wealth and status really something to be feared? There are writers, artists, journalists in the world who actually fear their lives, fear being exiled, for the pieces they write/publish. Wealth and status is really nothing in comparison.
Finally, I love freedom of speech. I truly do. I can come on here and spout out my nonsense. But the thing is, being a participant here, using this soap box, if I post things that have no relevance to the sub or is contradictory to the sub's views, then I will get called out, I will get ridiculed, and I will get banned. I have seen calling out on a "clumsy" mistake of using the pronoun "they" to refer to an individual. We too restrict the voice of dissenting opinions on this platform. Is it because we are "trying to silence or wish them away"? Should we, as this letter suggests, become a more tolerant community?
[–]jkfinn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]Lilith_Fair 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]Lilith_Fair 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]OrneryStruggle 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[+][deleted] (8 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (7 children)
[+][deleted] (6 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (5 children)
[+][deleted] (4 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (3 children)
[+][deleted] (2 children)
[deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (0 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (0 children)