PERSONA NON GRATA: The Death of Free Speech in the Internet Age

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
In February 2013, Tom Flanagan, acclaimed academic, University of Calgary professor, and former advisor to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, made comments surrounding the issue of viewing child pornography that were tweeted from the event he was speaking at and broadcast worldwide. In the time it took to drive from Lethbridge to his home in Calgary, Flanagan's career and reputation were virtually in tatters. Every media outlet made the story front-page news, most of them deriding Flanagan and casting him as a pariah. He was made to apologize publicly for his use of words but the bottom line was that Tom Flanagan simply sounded an opinion (he in no way whatsoever suggested that he was anything but virulantly opposed to child pornography) in an academic setting. In effect, his university, several of his colleagues, and much of the media, including the CBC -- and most of Canada! -- made him persona non grata.

Mr. Flanagan’s new book is two things: The author's side of the story, and what he endured during what he calls "The Incident," and a passionate and convincing defense of free speech, not just in Canada but everywhere. While Flanagan's is hardly the first book on the subject, what makes this book different is the component of the internet, a tool that is very much a double-edged sword when it comes to freedom of expression--it allows people to have an unfiltered voice to say what they want, but it also allows those to use it to be judge, jury and executioner against those whose opinions they disagree with. The book is also a sobering look into the kind of political correctness that has become a staple in the academic world. What happened to the author illustrates important tendencies in contemporary Canada threatening freedom of speech and discussion, and how the new technology is playing an increasing and menacing role.

Free Thinking Film Festival
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
Flanagan is wrong. The right to free speech protects you from actions of the state. As far as I know he was never arrested or charged with any crime. The blurb above said he was "made to apologize" but in fact he chose to apologize. He was not forced to. It does not protect you from the outrage of others who are also using their freedom of speech.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Tom Flanagan lol

The problem with the internet isn't free speech (although some folk can be a bit TOO free) It's the anonymity around that free speech

And even that can be circumvented through responsible moderation.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
Flanagan is wrong. The right to free speech protects you from actions of the state. As far as I know he was never arrested or charged with any crime. The blurb above said he was "made to apologize" but in fact he chose to apologize. He was not forced to. It does not protect you from the outrage of others who are also using their freedom of speech.

I hate when people confuse free speech with some imaginary right that protects you from people disagreeing with you.

He expressed his opinion without any interference from the government, and everyone else expressed their opinion of his opinion.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Yea but the man is an absolute genius!!!

Right up there with Shmezra and Shteiner!
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
At least he now admits that the toxic political environment is in part thanks to his own actions. Live by the sword and die by it.

And lol at the death of free speech. It's a catchy title.

A better title, The death of consequence-free speech by politicos.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
What is this world coming to when a politician can't say something ridiculously inflammatory?

Like, come on already.
 

BruSan

Electoral Member
Jul 5, 2011
416
0
16
I am so tired of these so-called intelligent people who seem to lack the common sense required o moderate the thoughts before they put their mouth in gear.


Where do these simpletons come from? You're giving a presentation and somehow or another you think it appropriate to defend the rights of pedophiles as an example. It didn't occur to him in this day and age of the mainstream media taking everything out of context to compete, he'd be pilloried for his opinion. How dumb is that?


He shot off his petard and then claims foul when the mothers of the nation hoisted him on it.
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
What exactly does "hoisted by your own petard" actually mean? Is it like an Atomic Wedgie?

Actually I happen to agree with Flanagan about the political correctness in academia. There are certain subjects that are taboo, and intellectual exploration is not welcome. Quite a few subjects actually. When I was in school, some poor sod put out a study showing that Asians scored higher than whites scored higher than blacks on IQ tests, and no known environmental factors could account for the difference. That guy was pilloried (which I presume is also similar to an Atomic Wedgie).
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
What exactly does "hoisted by your own petard" actually mean? Is it like an Atomic Wedgie?

Actually I happen to agree with Flanagan about the political correctness in academia. There are certain subjects that are taboo, and intellectual exploration is not welcome. Quite a few subjects actually. When I was in school, some poor sod put out a study showing that Asians scored higher than whites scored higher than blacks on IQ tests, and no known environmental factors could account for the difference. That guy was pilloried (which I presume is also similar to an Atomic Wedgie).

Hoist with your own petard
Origin

The phrase 'hoist with one's own petar[d]' is often cited as 'hoist by one's own petar[d]'. The two forms mean the same, although the former is strictly a more accurate version of the original source. A petard is, or rather was, as they have long since fallen out of use, a small engine of war used to blow breaches in gates or walls. They were originally metallic and bell-shaped but later cubical wooden boxes. Whatever the shape, the significant feature was that they were full of gunpowder - basically what we would now call a bomb.

The device was used by the military forces of all the major European fighting nations by the 16th century. In French and English - petar or petard, and in Spanish and Italian - petardo.

The dictionary maker John Florio defined them like this in 1598:

"Petardo - a squib or petard of gun powder vsed to burst vp gates or doores with."

The French have the word 'péter' - to fart, which it's hard to imagine is unrelated.

Petar was part of the everyday language around that time, as in this rather colourful line from Zackary Coke in his work Logick, 1654:

"The prayers of the Saints ascending with you, will Petarr your entrances through heavens Portcullis".

Once the word is known, 'hoist by your own petard' is easy to fathom. It's nice also to have a definitive source - no less than Shakespeare, who gives the line to Hamlet, 1602:

"For tis the sport to have the enginer Hoist with his owne petar".
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
There really shouldn't be topics of conversation that should be taboo. Any and all subjects, particularly in academia, should be able to be examined, even the uncomfortable ones should one choose to examine them. They aren't actions, they are words, and sometimes the only way to really understand something in it's entirety is to examine it from all angles.

And I also think there is a small but very vocal group who would suppress unpopular speech, and there can be a fine line between doing that and exercising their own right to counter expressed statements by utilizing their own free speech.

What exactly does "hoisted by your own petard" actually mean? Is it like an Atomic Wedgie?

Actually I happen to agree with Flanagan about the political correctness in academia. There are certain subjects that are taboo, and intellectual exploration is not welcome. Quite a few subjects actually. When I was in school, some poor sod put out a study showing that Asians scored higher than whites scored higher than blacks on IQ tests, and no known environmental factors could account for the difference. That guy was pilloried (which I presume is also similar to an Atomic Wedgie).

Actually if I'm not mistaken that's more akin to the Wet Willy.

Both are unpleasant.
 

BornRuff

Time Out
Nov 17, 2013
3,175
0
36
What exactly does "hoisted by your own petard" actually mean? Is it like an Atomic Wedgie?

Actually I happen to agree with Flanagan about the political correctness in academia. There are certain subjects that are taboo, and intellectual exploration is not welcome. Quite a few subjects actually. When I was in school, some poor sod put out a study showing that Asians scored higher than whites scored higher than blacks on IQ tests, and no known environmental factors could account for the difference. That guy was pilloried (which I presume is also similar to an Atomic Wedgie).

Academics are incredibly harsh on one another regardless of the subject, so the treatment of the guy you mention may not be all that out of the ordinary.

This is a bit of a different situation, since it isn't like this is a subject in which he has any real academic qualifications to make him an authority.

If you are going to muse about your opinion on pretty much anything, it is wise to consider the context and company.

If you want to start down a path about how you are not against child porn, you are going to need an audience willing to really really give you the benefit out the doubt. Clearly that wasn't the audience he was facing.

He also needs to consider his close ties with political parties. Even a second of forethought would have allowed him to realize that the Conservative Party of Canada could not do anything other than distance themselves from him decisively as possible.

The simple fact of the matter is that he is a man that chose a public life, and chose to make these comments in a public forum where they are open to critique, and he chose to muse on a subject that elicits very strong reactions.
 

BruSan

Electoral Member
Jul 5, 2011
416
0
16
What exactly does "hoisted by your own petard" actually mean? Is it like an Atomic Wedgie?

Actually I happen to agree with Flanagan about the political correctness in academia. There are certain subjects that are taboo, and intellectual exploration is not welcome. Quite a few subjects actually. When I was in school, some poor sod put out a study showing that Asians scored higher than whites scored higher than blacks on IQ tests, and no known environmental factors could account for the difference. That guy was pilloried (which I presume is also similar to an Atomic Wedgie).



You are gonna love this:


Petard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Yeah, the point he was making was lost in the strident blowback but hell, the man should have realized of all the examples he could have used to illustrate his point that one would bring him the most risk.