Hate Speech

"Free Speech Rules," My New YouTube Video Series—Episode 2 (Hate Speech) Now Out

Please share it widely -- there will be at least nine more in the upcoming months.

|The Volokh Conspiracy |

Thanks to a generous grant from the Stanton Foundation, and to the video production work of Meredith Bragg and Austin Bragg at Reason.tv, I'm putting together a series of short, graphical YouTube videos—10 episodes to start with—explaining free speech law. We posted the first video, "7 Things You Should Know About Free Speech in Schools," several weeks ago, and have now released the second, "The Three Rules of Hate Speech and the First Amendment."

We'd love it if you

  1. Watched this.
  2. Shared this widely.
  3. Suggested people or organizations whom we might be willing to help spread it far and wide (obviously, the more detail on the potential contacts, the better).
  4. Gave us feedback on the style of the presentation, since we're always willing to change the style as we learn more.

Please post your suggestions in the comments, or e-mail me at volokh at law.ucla.edu.

Our next video, which we hope to get out in three or four weeks, will be on Fake News; future videos in the series will likely include most of these, plus maybe some others:

  • Alexander Hamilton: free press pioneer.
  • Free speech at college.
  • Free speech on the Internet.
  • Money and speech / corporations and speech.
  • Speech and privacy.
  • Who owns your life story?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

14 responses to “"Free Speech Rules," My New YouTube Video Series—Episode 2 (Hate Speech) Now Out

  1. Great video! Bravo. I don’t like it’s presumption of judicial supremacy, but that’s a quibble for an informative 3:42 video.

  2. A little fast on the talking but I understand why that is.

    Maybe add a reference screen at the end that people could pause to review where you list the references you, um, referenced.

    How much credit do we get towards our Volokh Conspiracy University LLD?

    1. If you watch on YouTube at a computer, press < (less than sign or shift+comma) to reduce the playback speed.

    2. The commentary is WAY too fast. It sounds like the speaker was ordered to squeeze all of the text into less than four minutes. A casual pace for the same script might take an extra 30 seconds, but would make the video far more pleasant.

      Also agree that prior (or future) videos in the series should be referenced at the end. Also needs a frame with links to web references of cited materials.

      Good work!

  3. Thanks for working on these!
    I’d echo the comment regarding the speed. Definitely understand the need to keep up the pace, but this one was just *slightly* too fast.

  4. For the life of me, I can’t understand why religious college students have not filed complaints against atheist professors for saying that God does not exist. What could be more ‘hateful’ than denying a fundamental belief of one’s life? I I were one of those billionaire dudes, I would certainly have already funded at attack on college hate speech regulations through this door. What would the Usual Suspects do if the same charges were made on 200 campuses across the country within a single semester? After all, doesn’t the ‘victim’ decide what is and isn’t hate speech?

  5. Suggestion: when posting about this, always include links to previous videos in the series and a link to the playlist for easy sharing. [Redundant? Yeah, but you want it to be easy for people to watch and to share.]

  6. Suggestion: when posting about this, always include links to previous videos in the series and a link to the playlist for easy sharing. [Redundant? Yeah, but you want it to be easy for people to watch and to share.]

    1. I don’t know why my comment is posted twice.

        1. That’s funny?but seriously, I didn’t post it twice. Being an @$$hole? is not my trademark.

        2. That’s funny?but seriously, I didn’t post it twice. Being an @$$hole? is not my trademark.

  7. I think the video should have used the ? symbol rather than the TM symbol when describing the case where The Slants couldn’t register their trademark.

  8. This is actually very good and engaging too!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.