Abstract
Chilling Effects occur when the risks surrounding a speech restriction inadvertently deter speech that lies outside the restriction’s official scope. Contrary to the standard interpretation of this phenomenon I show how speech deterrence for individuals can sometimes, instead of suppressing discourse at the group level, intensify it – with results that are still unwelcome, but crucially unlike a ‘chill’. Inadvertent deterrence of speech may, counterintuitively, create a Heating Effect. This proposal gives us a promising explanation of the intensity of public debate on topics for which there is, simultaneously, evidence of people self-censoring, for fear of breaching speech restrictions. It also helps to pinpoint two problems with existing theoretical analyses of the Chilling Effect: (i) in how they construe the relation between individual- and group-level discursive phenomena; and (ii) how they characterize the distinctively wrongful nature of inadvertent speech deterrence.
Publisher
Open Library of the Humanities
Reference67 articles.
1. Alexander, Gerard. 2006. Hear no evil, speak no evil. CBS News, 6th April 2006. cbsnews.com/news/hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil
2. COVID-19 and friendships: agreeableness and neuroticism are associated with more concern about COVID-19 and friends’ risky behaviors;Ayers, Jessica D.Diego Guevara BeltránAndrew van HornLee Cronk’ Hector Hurmuz-SkliasPeter ToddAthena Aktipis;Personality and Individual Differences,2023