Comments on: The Paperhouse guide to free speech

By: The Twitter mob rules, OK? | Richard Hartley

The Twitter mob rules, OK? | Richard Hartley — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 14:38:23 +0000

[...] of her old pal Liddle misses the fundamental point: that criticism is not the same as censorship.As Sarah Ditum writes:It's the same measly logic used by Nick Cohen: freedom of speech, if it means anything, [...]

By: Where you won't read all about it ... | Left Foot Forward

Where you won't read all about it ... | Left Foot Forward — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 14:25:38 +0000

[...] of the Facebook and blogosphere challenge to Liddle’s possible editorship. Her argument was memorably summarised by Sarah Ditum as being that: “freedom of speech, if it means anything, means journalists [...]

By: Pickled Politics » Hari Kunzru comes to Rod Liddle’s defence

Pickled Politics » Hari Kunzru comes to Rod Liddle’s defence — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:46:00 +0000

[...] I’m not buying this argument at all. Sarah Ditum covered this quite well too – this liberal intelligentsia penchant for mixing up criticism and campaigning with [...]

By: The Twitter mob rules, OK? | Sunny Hundal | Twitter News - Twimmer.com

The Twitter mob rules, OK? | Sunny Hundal | Twitter News - Twimmer.com — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:52:45 +0000

[...] of her old pal Liddle misses the fundamental point: that criticism is not the same as censorship.As Sarah Ditum writes:It’s the same measly logic used by Nick Cohen: freedom of speech, if it means [...]

By: dsquared

dsquared — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:38:11 +0000

The thing I don’t understand is, why is Catherine Bennett surprised that Rod Liddle’s journalism, which is clearly written with the intention of provoking outrage from various groups of people, does in fact provoke outrage from those groups? And since Catherine herself certainly writes publicly when something annoys her, why is she surprised that other people also write publicly when something (like Rod Liddle’s journalism) annoys them?

This is one thing I always liked about Julie Burchill and Steven Wells – they never pretended that they weren’t doing it on purpose. This pretence of total innocence, feigning that one was only expressing the truth as one saw it, and was terribly surprised and even wounded that others might find it offensive, seems to me to be a particularly modern attitude and not one I find attractive.

By: I’ve Said Too Much » Some wise words on free speech

I’ve Said Too Much » Some wise words on free speech — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:14:10 +0000

[...] via The Paperhouse guide to free speech « Paperhouse. [...]

By: Alex Higgins

Alex Higgins — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:42:53 +0000

I love this post.

I was looking for a way to articulate the silliness of the argument that freedom of speech means you can’t take issue with what people more important than you write, but you beat me to it and did it better than I would have.

I salute you!

By: Freedom Of Speech, Not Freedom From Criticism « Stuff And Nonsense

Freedom Of Speech, Not Freedom From Criticism « Stuff And Nonsense — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:55:04 +0000

[...] Sarah Ditum, Enemies of Reason, Left foot forward. [...]

By: Sarah Ditum

Sarah Ditum — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:32:10 +0000

No one’s ever said that to me before. *Swoon*

By: Anton Vowl

Anton Vowl — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:15:26 +0000

Marvellous post. You sounded a bit like Dr Cox in the final paragraph. Which is no bad thing.