Meet the people carrying out courageous, high-impact and determined journalism that exposes censorship and threats to free expression
A new row between the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, sees both sides claiming to be working in the interest of freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
In one corner, the CCDH claims that X is not moving quickly enough to tackle online hatred that finds a home on the social media platform. They claim to highlight examples where hatred goes unchallenged and then in turn encourage X’s advertisers to use their commercial clout to bring about change on the platform, including through the use of boycotts and removing their accounts.
In the other corner is X who refute all the claims made by CCDH but rather than engage with CCDH to disprove their claims are now suing CCDH, asserting they have violated X’s terms and conditions.
X has accused CCDH of trying to silence those they disagree with, CCDH claims X is trying to silence them through legal action because they are exposing X’s failures and X claims to be standing up for freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
But while this argument between CCDH and X is being dressed up as a battle for the principle of freedom of speech, I’m not completely convinced that this really is X’s position – rather it looks to me as if they are seeking to protect their own commercial position. However what is clear is that these two organisations have a very different view of what the digital universe should look like.
CCDH is not immune from having their own research criticised and robustly reviewed. This is the same threshold applied to any academic work that presents its findings as fact. And debate of research is a key element of freedom of expression.
Likewise, it would be churlish not to acknowledge that hate speech exists on X. Those who have followed my own experiences with social media will know I am no stranger to online hate and have often made clear that free speech does not excuse hate speech.
And while CCDH are now subject to a lawsuit, they retain their ability to speak about the failings of X and do so on X. However, the legal action could encourage them to step away, deterring them from making further criticism of X.
Using the law to scare into silence those who you disagree with is a clear affront to freedom of speech and is something Index has campaigned against for decades.
If X wanted to be the bastion of freedom of expression they claim to aspire to be, then they should welcome their site being home to those who are critical of them.
The question is now for X and their leadership and it is simple. Can you really claim to be standing up for freedom of speech while taking action to silence dissent? Do you want to champion freedom of speech or do you simply want to wield it as a tool to silence those you disagree with? You can’t do both.
Threats to freedom of speech can come from a variety of places. Sometimes it is tyrants seeking to crush dissent. But it can also come from well-meaning attempts to improve society, that come with unintended consequences. The European Union is currently discussing ways of regulating online political advertising and is in danger of creating mechanisms which will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech.
So as Spain assumes the rotating presidency of the EU, now is the time to take stock, reflect on debates so far and recommit the European Union as an ally of freedom of expression. I’ve written to the Prime Minister of Spain urging a rethink.
Dear Senor Sanchez,
With Spain having assumed the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, it is an opportune moment for the European Union to reflect on the draft Political Advertising regulations.
Index on Censorship has raised a series of concerns about the impact that the proposals will have on free speech and the power that it places in the hands of tech companies to arbitrate on what is and what isn’t legitimate free expression.
We know that countering disinformation and bringing transparency to political processes is good for democracy. We support that activity around the world where dissidents are using their voice to stand up against totalitarian regimes.
Unfortunately, the draft proposals which are currently being considered in trialogue have the potential to have a chilling effect on free speech across the European Union.
We have welcomed the recognition by the European Union that any new rules governing political advertising in the digital sphere should only apply to content promoted through paid-for political advertising services.
The original “catch-all” proposals would have wrongly sought to impose restrictions on journalists, individual citizens expressing their own point of view and/or civil society campaigns seeking to promote a cause or policy.
It would have seen unacceptable interference into free speech and free expression with the work of journalists, reporting on elections or referendums, subject to state-determined censorship administered by algorithms within big tech corporations.
Imagine if, in your own upcoming general election, a citizen wishing to express how they intend to vote via their own social media had to be regulated? It would reduce the citizen’s right to speak their mind.
However, while some advancement has been made on the scope of the proposals, we still have serious concerns about the processes for flagging content, how that should be regulated and how the proposals will safeguard against bad faith actors.
Platforms are risk adverse and when faced with new rules requiring them to consider concerns raised about content or face fines themselves, bad faith actors will overwhelm those systems and subsequently content will be removed while it is assessed.
Misuse and these unintended consequences will be the tools of censorship for those seeking to silence dissent and close down campaigns and campaigners they disagree with.
As you assess your priorities for the Spanish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, I would urge you to be an ally for freedom of expression.
Yours sincerely
Ruth Anderson
The publishing industry last night paid tribute to Sir Salman Rushdie, who was presented with the British Book Award for the Freedom to Publish. The award, supported by Index on Censorship, is given to authors, publishers or booksellers who make an exceptional stand for free expression.
Last August Rushdie survived an assassination attempt when he was attacked by an Islamist extremist at the Chautauqua Institution in New York State.
The award was presented by fellow author Monica Ali, who told guests at the Grosvenor House hotel in central London: “No one has been more courageous, more steadfast, more brilliant in the pursuit of truth and artistic freedom than tonight’s recipient… Every nation, every group, clan or community is worthy of serious dissidents and deserves to have them. Now, more than ever, we have to hold fast to the absolute centrality of freedom of thought and the freedom to express that thought.”
Rushdie, who accepted the award by video link (see image above), added: “We live in a moment, I think, at which freedom of expression, freedom to publish has not in my lifetime been under such threat in the countries of the West.
“Obviously, there are parts of the world where censorship has been prevalent for a long-time, quite a lot of the world – Russia, China, in some ways India as well. But in the countries of the West, until recently, there was a fair measure of freedom in the area of publishing. Now I am sitting here in the US, I have to look at the extraordinary attack on libraries, and books for children in schools. The attack on the idea of libraries themselves. It is quite remarkably alarming, and we need to be very aware of it, and to fight against it very hard.”
Index has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Rushdie since he found himself at the centre of a controversy about his novel The Satanic Verses, published in 1988. Following a death threat issued in a “fatwa” by the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini, Index was active in the support campaign for the writer.
A citation from Index to mark the award read: “We can only aspire to his intellectual curiosity, his generosity towards other writers and the level of courage he has always shown in facing down the enemies of free expression. Last year’s attempt on the life of Salman Rushdie was designed to silence one of the most important voices of our times. His survival is a tribute to his courage and determination.”
Philip Jones, chair of the British Book Awards judges and editor of The Bookseller, said: “There can scarcely be a more important winner of this prize at a more important moment. Freedom to Publish is about the right to read, write, speak and hear without interference, and without the dire consequences so often now threatened by those who would restrict, censor and circumscribe. More than most, Rushdie has lived his defiance, and continues to pay a huge price for it. His cause belongs to all of us.”
You can watch his acceptance speech below.