https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn Made with love en-us 2020-09-18 14:16:57 UTC 2020-09-23 13:55:28 UTC hello@padlet.com sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758857441 RHS
Speaker: Thane Rosenbaum, an American writer and law professor

Purpose: To persuade the limitation of hate speech.

Audience: Readers/debaters of whether there should be limitations of free speech

Context: The recent limitation of free speech in France and Israel.

Exigence: Compared to other countries, free speech in the US is becoming an impediment to civil society.

Claims: "Free speech should not stand in the way of common decency." Although everyone is granted the right to free speech, emotional harm and libel is just as damaging as physical trauma.

Evidence: Studies on effect of emotional vs physical trauma on the brain. Court cases as precedent.

Evidence Type: Statistical
Qualitative
Logos

Evidence Strength: 
mithra - effective
devina - effective
nikhail - effective
david - effective
kenny - effective

]]> 2020-09-18 14:22:13 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758857441 sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758953851 RHS
Speaker:  Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at the University of California Los Angeles School of Law.

Purpose: To provide input to the growing opinion that "hate speech" should be an exception to the First Amendment

Audience: Readers/debaters who think that there should be a "hate speech exception" to the First Amendment

Context: The rise of the belief in the United States that hate speech isn't covered under the first amendment.

Exigence: The author personally kept hearing people believing that there is a hate speech exception to the first amendment.

Claims: 
- "Hateful ideas are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas." 
- "isn't because it's 'hate speech'; it's because it's illegal to make true threats and incite imminent crimes against anyone and for any reason" 
- "Calls for a new First Amendment exception for 'hate speech' shouldn't just rely on the undefined term 'hate speech'"

Evidence:  
Supreme Court case (Beauharnais v. Illinois) - "outlawed statements that expose racial or religious groups to contempt or hatred," considering intent. Uses other court cases as precedent.

Evidence Type: 
historical precedent, second-hand, cites many court cases

Evidence Strength - 
mithra - ineffective
devina - ineffective
david - ineffective
nikhail - ineffective
kenny - ineffective]]> 2020-09-18 14:42:50 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758953851 sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758960047 RHS
Speaker:  Sean Stevens and Nick Phillips, postdoctoral researchers at New York University and New York University School of Law, respectively.

Purpose: To persuade and give input into the notion that limiting the rights of Free Speech is not a good route to take while also giving possible alternatives

Audience: Readers/debates who discuss the topic of whether hate speech should be limited at colleges

Context:  Texas A&M University will host an alt-right leader named Richard Spencer who is openly a white supremacist.

Exigence: The rising impulse of U.S citizens to limit hate speech.

Claims: 
- "perceived discrimination by an outgroup increases ingroup identification, and can increase anger, hostility and aggression towards outgroups."
- "Speech can deployed … to counter speech that advocates for harmful ideas and outcomes."

Evidence:
The study of the desire to hear the censored material. Telling people they cannot hear the censored material made them want to hear it more.

Evidence Type: secondary- experiment, firsthand-inclusion of Richard Spencer which then leads into a call for action

Evidence Strength: 
mithra - effective
devina - effective
david - effective
Nikhail - effective
kenny - effective]]> 2020-09-18 14:44:06 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758960047 sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758983550 RHS
Speaker:  Lata Nott, a lawyer and Executive Director of the Newseum Institute's First Amendment Center in NYC

Purpose: To give the author's insight into the notion that although Free Speech, in practice, may be undesirable, it is nonetheless essential.

Audience: Those who advocate for laws that silence hate speech

Context: The rise in popularity of The Wall Street Journal's "Blue feed, Red feed" and Milo Yiannopoulo's controversial debates.

Exigence: The urge to inform people that we must respect the rule that free speech holds, even if we personally don't agree with it.

Claims: 
- "The First Amendment protects your speech from government censorship." It's not meant to protect you from those who disagree with you.
- "You don't have to love the first amendment. Just acknowledge that we all need it."

Evidence:
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell that explained that you have to resist the urge to limit free speech because everyone should be able to say their ideas and opinions.

Evidence Type:
historical quotes+pathos
Evidence Strength: 
mithra - effective
devina - effective
nikhail - effective
david - effective
kenny - effective]]> 2020-09-18 14:49:01 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/758983550 sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/759030328 RHS
Speaker:  Laura Beth Nielsen, a Director of the Center for Legal Studies, a professor of sociology, a research professor, and an author of a book pertaining to the First Amendment and its implications

Purpose: To provide the reader with the notion that hate speech is in tandem with other forms of speech that are exceptions to the First Amendment

Audience: Those who believe that free speech should be applied to all, regardless of the outrageousness of the statement

Context: The Supreme Court's recent decision to allow potentially hurtful or harmful names to be accepted by the trademark office.

Exigence: The author's struggle to explain the true boundaries of free speech.

Claims: 
- "our regime of free speech protects the powerful and popular." Laws protect consumers from "panhandling" because they are considered more sophisticated.
- "Because we are 'free' to be hateful, members of traditionally marginalized groups suffer."
Evidence:
Data that shows how hate speech leads to physical and emotional problems such as high blood pressure, depression, eating disorders, etc.

Evidence Type:
personal anecdote, examples of court cases, qualitative data 
Evidence Strength: 
mithra - effective
devina - effective
nikhail - effective
david - effective
kenny - effective]]> 2020-09-18 14:59:04 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/759030328 sankarmithra https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/759032657 RHS
Speaker:  Signe Wilkinson, a well known American Political cartoonist.

Purpose: To show the irony of the situation of different groups of society have different opinions on who should and should not have free speech

Audience: To the general public, trying to show that free speech covers everyone, even people you dislike

Context: The current heated political climate..

Exigence: The author wrote this because of the current divisive political climate.

Claims: 
- Everyone has their own opinions on who deserves free speech, what counts as hate speech, and who should be protected.

Evidence:
The people under the free speech umbrella all represent different groups of society.

Evidence Type:
examples, personal observation (?), illustration, reference to fictional icon

Evidence Strength: 
mithra - effective
devina - effective
nikhail - effective
david - effective
kenny - effective]]> 2020-09-18 14:59:37 UTC https://padlet.com/pateldevina/cu2s66rtd88vlbtn/wish/759032657