Legal Action Fighting Against Censorship
A civil liberties organization recently filed suite against the University of Michigan. The trouble started over a U of Michigan creating and using something called a Bias Response Team.
The Bias Response Team goes on to specifically identify what they consider a bias incident."A bias incident is conduct that discriminates, stereotypes, excludes, harasses or harms anyone in our community based on their identity (such as race, color, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, age or religion)." - University of Michigan Bias Response Team. Based on this definition, anyone could claim offense to just about anything for it to rate as a "bias incident".
Above the definition of what constitutes a "bias incident" the BRT, (Bias Response Team), has placed a "Report Online" button. So beyond the sketchy parameters for getting in big trouble for hardly even trying, they feel you might want to start your report before knowing what exactly constitutes a bias incident. Go ahead! Fill it out! Maybe you do not like the new Star Wars and some jackass was wearing some swag you didn't like. Call the BRT! You might have something for them to do.
It seems anyone can fill out a complaint. You can simply pick "other" in the drop down box on the BRT "bias incident" report form. And while I did not proceed and fill it all out, what I think this means is that anyone, anywhere can fill one of these out.
Speech First is the organization that is calling the BRT a regime and essentially accuses them of disallowing their constitutional right of free speech on campus.
Kennesaw State University was recently sued by Alliance Defending Freedom representing a Christian group on campus and their free speech being limited to "free speech zones".
So what this all means is that while we have taken steps to ensure free speech will continue unabated with the Steem blockchain, real world issues of free speech still need to be addressed. Are organizations such as University of Michigan's BRT the model for a anti free speech national police? In the spirit of expression and building one's character through love and tolerance, how can silencing someone ever be a good idea?
I don't see anything wrong with a BRT. If someone puts up hate speech and stops you from going through a hallway for being black or w/e then there should be someone to prevent the bias. At least this is the impression I got.
Yes, there's no automatic filtering in their site, but a human still has to read them and decide what they're going to do about it. I doubt anyone will give chase for swag, though.
Well, in and of itself a BRT is created to infringe on free speech. And, the key to free speech is to hear all sides and all opinions, allowing the listener to make their own judgement.
For instance the best way to get a Nazi to seem like a lunatic is to let the Nazi talk.
But in this case the University of Michigan BRT ironically overstepped the 1st Amendment and acted more deplorable than anyone they were silencing.
And we are so much more socially advanced to ever expect signs that read no black/whites/Asians...etc.
And the point of all this being that free speech is so important to our way of life, we will sue colleges that attempt to stop it.
Oh so they don't act only when there's something very serious, they act on every little thing? Okay, that's hedious.