Facebook, Charlottesville, University Of Oklahoma discussed on Hidden Brain


Enraged white men. Using the Nazi, salute and marching with torches shocked many Americans and since, then many of? Us have been doing a lot of soul-searching who, are we what are? We stand for and as a nation what do we tolerate The constitution upholds the rights of Americans to see almost anything no matter how distasteful. Without censure from legislatures the? Police or the courts are protections. For speech even hate-filled vitriolic speech go further than most. Nations in the weeks following Charlottesville many people made free speech arguments to defend the, white supremacists who'd, marched when people defend free speech what are they really defending that's a. Question Chris Crandall study he's a professor of psychology at the university of, Kansas we started? By talking about an incident that happened a few, years ago before Charlottesville In two thousand fifteen members of the sigma alpha. Epsilon fraternity at the university of Oklahoma were caught on video singing a racist song They were saying there will. Never be a n word in SAE and they were seeing happily and clapping along about the exclusion of African Americans from the fraternity the video of the song was put on Facebook. And it spread around the campus and the two song leaders of the fraternity who, were captured on video were expelled from the university and the fraternity itself was shut down on the, campus of the university of Oklahoma and there was really a media firestorm about. Their singing the song? In, the aftermath of the incident one of your, graduate students noticed something unusual about the responses to the incident what did, you, notice yeah Mark white was. Following this on the internet and he looked at the tenor of the comments and people were saying well this is simply free speech these. People, have a right to say these things because Americans have the right, to free speech But underneath the surface in, the background or sometimes right out of the forefront it really looked like what people were doing. Was justifying the content of what was said not the fact that they have the, right to say something freely but rather that they seem to be justifying the racist speech itself by. Giving an account hey free speech that allowed them to do that without punishment now, it's what pointing out of course at the first amendment protects people against government intrusions on free speech, at doesn't actually prevent private companies or universities from deciding what is or isn't. Acceptable speech in the? Workplace, or on a college campus but setting aside, that distinction you conducted an experiment where you had fallen shares listen to, racially, charged commentary and you evaluated. Whether they would reach for free speech arguments to defend it what walk me through the experiment Yeah so in one version of the experiment we did several of these. People read about somebody who wrote something on Facebook that was deeply, racist for example a barista wrote on Facebook that the black customers were problematic that they, were, noisy and rude and other racially stereotypical actions and the. People, on the study read, that the, person had been fired for posting this racist. Speech in the other condition people read about a guy complaining about customers but no racial information was given so the same behavior was described but the racial, alma was a radical and, so the question was do racial attitudes of our, participants determine how much they're going to defend the speaker in the racialist condition the more you had negative. Attitudes towards African Americans the straw Longer you endorsed free, speech as a justification for why the person should have. Been. Able to say that without being fired, so that suggests that racial attitudes might be behind free speech defense but you might say quite easily. That's simply, a correlation I'm not impressed maybe people who have negative racial attitudes are also libertarians and they believe that free speech is. Super important and they're just simply expressing that the problem with that argument is when you remove the racial content from the. Story so the in the condition where the, guy complaints about customers but there's. No racial helmet racial attitudes correlate, zero with free speech defense it seems. That people pull them out, and deploy them when they're appropriate. So people pull out free speech as a defense when they're defending racist. Speech but not when they're defending simply aggressive.

Coming up next