In the week that saw Milo Yiannopoulos lose a book deal, a speaking gig and his Breitbart platform, he left the burning building, still slow dancing with his core value of free speech. I want people to be able to be, do, and say anything, he asserted at his press conference. Thats the ideal. But Milo is proof that free speech obviously isnt free. It has limits. Even in the US, where the First Amendment is a revered cornerstone of the Constitution and a wrong word can cost you sorely.

Its a curious anomaly, and it could be the wording thats the problem. Free speech sounds like an absolute term. Say what you like and done.

But in reality, it more likely exists in gradations; refracted through a variety of subjective differentiators. Free-ish might be the better term.

Pew Research gauging support for freedom of expression confirms where the main fault lines lie: in the US, 95% agree that they should be able to publicly criticize government policies.

Support drops to 77% when it comes to offending religious beliefs. 67% thought people should be able to make statements offensive to minority groups.

Half (52%) say that sexually explicit statements are OK. And 44% are comfortable with calls for violent protests.

Compared to the global median, the research shows the US values freedom of expression more highly across a wider range of issues. But the pattern of depreciation is there. The more racial, explicit and likely to incite violence the more support drops.

There are even more variables you could factor in partisanship, class, gender and the range of what could tick people off becomes so wide that censoring yourself against every potential instance of offence isnt feasible.

Free speech becomes a mire; a tight-rope walk. But the one good guide among the blurred lines is reciprocity. If you can flip what youre saying, so that it applies to you and yours, and youre still cool with expression of the sentiment, then congratulations. Youre a free speech absolutist.

But if you cant take the same back; or dont want to weather the inquiry and criticism that are products of free speech then it has limits. And youve defined them.

See the original post here:

Un-blurring the lines of free speech - Huffington Post