IMPORTANCE OFFREE SPEECH
It is hard to think of a more sobering phenomenon over the past decade than the #MeToo movement. Since that hashtag went viral a year ago, it has been harrowing to see how many individuals — mostly women — have come forward to reveal that they were sexually abused or harassed at school, at work, at home.
As we said in an editorial earlier this week, we salute the courage of those who have triumphed over fear and shame to speak out. There is no time limit on pain. There is no deadline for reporting abuse or harassment.
That is the belief of the Calgary Herald editorial board. But it is not the only point of view. There are others who observed the lead up to this week’s confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and came to a different conclusion. One of them is columnist Naomi Lakritz, who explained her opinion in a Wednesday column.
Since the column was published, we have been the recipients of a social media backlash.
We have heard from many people who were outraged by the Lakritz column. Local and national media have contacted us for comment. City councillors Druh Farrell and Jyoti Gondek announced on Twitter that they currently are not responding to interview requests from Herald reporters.
We will not apologize. We are a platform for free speech.
Freedom of speech is foundational to a democratic society. That is why Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.”
That freedom extends not just to opinions that align with our editorial views, but to opinions
We will not apologize. We are a platform for free speech.
that might be diametrically opposed.
We publish a variety of commentaries that reflect a wide range of viewpoints. Some readers will agree with the opinions expressed; some will not. But we believe it is important that our readers have access to points of view that might be different from their own.
Why? To quote the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, “It is only through exposure to different ideas and opinions that each person can make their own informed choices about their core beliefs.”
We have all seen the toxic effects of the social media echo chamber. More and more, consumers of information have their own views reinforced without hearing or seeing anything that might contradict them. It’s called confirmation bias. At its most extreme — and we’re certainly not talking about sexual abuse survivors and their advocates — it gives rise to movements like the anti-vaxxers, people who believe vaccinations are harmful to children in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, or “9/11 truthers,” who believe the U.S. government was responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
News organizations like the Herald, which has had a 135-year relationship with this community, are accorded a great privilege. In a time of growing extremism and insularity, we have the ability to share different ideas and points of view with our readers.
So we published the Lakritz column and two subsequent columns that strongly disagreed with her. Airing those disparate points of view is not only a privilege, it is a sacred trust.
Freedom of speech pertains not only to speech we agree with but speech of all kinds. We stand by our columnists’ right to express their opinions. And no amount of pressure from social media will change that.