Skip to content

Freedom of Speech or Racist Slander?

In a recent edition of PeakCare’s Enews, “In The Loop”, I commented upon a letter that I had sent to the Editor of the Sunday Mail in response to an article by Mr Andrew Bolt entitled “Very sorry state of affairs indeed”.

After submitting my letter to the Editor, a finding was brought down by Federal Court Justice Mordecai Bromberg that Mr Bolt had breached the Racial Discrimination Act in his authoring of two articles published by the Herald Sun in 2009 – “It’s so hip to be black” and “White fellas in the black”.

Unfortunately, the Sunday Mail elected to not publish my letter to the Editor.  Perhaps it was thought that the story had now moved on.  It would seem that instead of sparking further debate about the racist vilification so often experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Justice Bromberg’s decision mostly raised the ire of journalists concerned about the implications of this decision in regard to freedom of speech and the rights of columnists (and others) to express an opinion.

So let’s go with the flow and talk about that for a while.

In her Courier Mail article entitled “Bolt decision has a chilling effect”, Ms Madonna King described Mr Bolt as someone who “can be offensive and his comments cruel; the language he uses sometime inflammatory and his arguments often skewed to give evidence to those ideologies his supporters crave and his critics loathe”.  Despite this, Ms King nevertheless argues that there are “dangerous consequences” arising from Justice Bromberg’s decision that “might impact on your right to say what you think and ask legitimate questions about issues of public interest”.

Similar sentiments were expressed by Mr David Penbarthy in his Sunday Mail article, “Poor law makes a martyr of Bolt” in which he vigorously stated his disagreement with “what Andrew Bolt says”, but just as vigorously defended “his right to say it”.

Whilst fully respecting the views of both Ms King and Mr Penbarthy concerning the worth of the opinions often expressed by Mr Bolt and also acknowledging their concerns about and commitment to “freedom of speech”, there must surely be a line drawn that distinguishes between the right to freely question, debate and express opinion and the ability to promote opinion based on an untruthful representation of facts or distortions of the truth.

Is this not what Justice Bromberg did?  In accordance with the law, he clearly drew that line and reached a determination that Mr Bolt had indeed crossed that line.

This appears to also be the opinion formed by Mr Des Houghton in his Courier Mail article, “Even free speech comes at a price” in which he concluded that “freedom of the speech doesn’t give anyone the right to break the law” and “the best defence of free speech is to curb its excesses”.

Notwithstanding the complexity and importance of the debates that must occur from time to time about freedom of speech, it is unfortunate that this debate has, in many ways, served as a distraction from fully debating and addressing the content of Mr Bolt’s articles.

For as long as Mr Bolt chooses to practise his style of journalism and elects to mis-represent facts and distort the truth concerning the injustices that have been, and continue to be, experienced  by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, we must all be prepared to also claim our rights to freedom of speech and publicly state our rejection of his views.

As called for by Mr Bolt himself in his article “Very sorry state of affairs indeed”, let the truth be told.  As evidenced by Justice Bromberg’s findings, these truths are far removed from the opinions Mr Bolt has been seeking to promote.

Lindsay Wegener

Executive Director, PeakCare Queensland

One Comment Post a comment
  1. Vanessa #

    As usual Lindsay’s comments are very thought provoking! I often worry about how covert racism is these days; often hidden quietly and dangerously in social policy and behind ‘politically correct’ language. I tend to surround myself with ‘like minded’ people who share my personal views and values. As a result, I often find it shocking and distressing to read, hear or observe such overt racism. My response (shock) seems strange to me when considering I am sadly aware of the racism experience by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and I try my hardest to do what I can to combat this experience. Maybe my response is based on the fact that when these situations occur it feels like a loud scream of the racist vilification experienced in this country!! I am horrified to admit that maybe without these occurrences I and others sit with a measure of comfort in the ignorance allowed by covert racism???

    When I consider freedom of speech, I strongly agree that there needs to be a balance and it should not allow someone to break the law. If this balance is not adhered to I can only imagine the implications, especially when I consider social media sites where people freely and openly share their values and views, in relation to people’s cultural background, gender, sexual orientation and physical appearance. I also wonder if these situations did not arise, would these discussions occur? If as a white person, you are not working in the human services sector and/or exposed to the impact of historical and current racism experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, would you be aware of what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander continue to experience? Would we be fooled into thinking that this sort of treatment does not continue to occur in this country? Are people in Australia so complacent that we require the pendulum swing to sit up and take notice? And…did anyone sit up and take notice??

    I am often ‘offended and insulted’ by the expression of views and values different from my own, I have to remind myself of the right for people with different views to express these views. I can choose not to engage with these people. This choice may be based on my privileged position in Australia when considering I am a white Anglo Saxon female. I do not believe that people should be silenced just because they do not agree with my values. Having said this, I will never develop acceptance or patience for humiliation or intimidation tactics or the use of untruthful facts and the purposeful distortion of the truth. What makes me even more frustrated with these types of tactics is that many Australian’s rely on mass media for education about ‘social issues’ – these tactics just breeds ignorance!

    Hmmm…..I have also just become distracted with freedom of speech rather than discussing the the content of Mr Bolt’s article???

    October 7, 2011

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: