Prof. Franciska Coleman (Wisconsin) on "The Anatomy of Cancel Culture," Now at the Journal of Free Speech Law

From the Abstract; read the whole article here:

In this paper, I undertake a qualitative exploration of how social regulation of speech works in practice on university campuses, and of the extent to which social regulation in practice affirms or undermines the stereotypes and caricatures that characterize the cancel-culture wars.

I first summarize the two narratives that anchor public debates over the social regulation of speech—consequence culture and cancel culture. I then describe the social regulation of speech and its five phases: dissemination, accusation, pillory, sanction and direct action.

I explain how these five phases were reflected in the speech events under study and the extent to which their real-world features challenge or support the cancel-culture and consequence-culture narratives. I end by suggesting further research on the implications of this phases framework for efforts to balance universities' dual commitments to free speech and inclusive community on their campuses.

Comments

[Archibald Tuttle]

Great topic for a paper, but 54 pages!!! Lawyers need to learn to be laconic if they want the public to look at their arguments.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

What makes you think lawyers *do* want the public to look at what they do?

[Eugene Volokh]

What do you think about academic books, whether about law, history, or whatever else? Those are even longer, right?

[Archibald Tuttle]

I've read my share of textbooks. I have a graduate degree.

But I rebel when someone writes a book to make a point that could be stated on 2 pages.

[Eugene Volokh]

Well, I agree that there's no need to make things needlessly long. But sometimes there is some need, it seems to me -- for instance, if the key point is 2 pages, the argument behind it is 20 pages, and the supporting evidence is 200 pages.

[Ben_]

But then you can write it in two pages with embedded references to the details so the reader doesn’t have to wade through 222 pages to know the ideas in the two pages.

[Nige]

After reading it I can see why you'd prefer it to be kept dumbed down.

[Ben_]

After reading 54 pages, does it manage to say bullying is bad?

I’ll read it later. But bullying people — off stage, off campus, off the internet, out of employment, etc. — is bad. And the people who endorse it as a general tactic are bad people.

Not sure why it takes even 5 pages to explore that idea.

Does the author use every other paragraph for I’m not saying XYZ disclaimers and both sides BS?

[Nige]

No, she explores the issue rather than indulging in simple declaratives.

[Nige]

Funny to see the first two examples are about people being punished for being racist to white people and disrespecting the flag. Most hand-wringing about ‘cancel culture’ leave out lots of certain types of examples and incidents.

Uh-oh, she might have stumbled across some institutional racism.

‘The over-sanctioning of people of color found in the FIRE study accords with other studies that have shown that African Americans are punished more harshly than white Americans for similar behaviors.’

Uh-oh she might have stumbled across the fact that Republicans aren’t really as into the free exchange of ideas as they claim.

'Florida House Bill 233 mandates the “exposure of students, faculty, and staff to, and the encouragement of their exploration of, a variety of ideological and political perspectives.”Other language in the bill makes clear that this provision is about free speech and ensuring that “students, faculty, and staff, feel free to express their beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom.” The racial and political coding of this language becomes apparent only when considered in tandem with H.B. 7, which singles out critical race theory as a prohibited ideological perspective.’

Oh dear. Is this critical race theory?

‘One of the earliest cases to reject “cancellation” of a speaker overturned the conviction of Angelo Herndon, an African American man. After organizing a peaceful, biracial protest for unemployment relief in Atlanta during the Great De-pression, Herndon barely avoided the death penalty.150 He was convicted under a Georgia law which prescribed the death penalty for “[a]ny attempt, by persuasion or otherwise, to induce others to join in any combined resistance to the lawful authority of the state,” but allowed jurors to show mercy. Herndon’s “mercy” was a sentence of 18–20 years on a prison chain gang, a form of punishment which generally resulted in death within five years.’

(Eventually overturned by the Supreme Court.)

‘Social regulation of academic speakers often takes the form of a clash of absolutes, pitting a university’s commitment to academic freedom against its commitment to equity, inclusion and belonging. More problematically, social regulation often seems like a flash-mob phenomenon, occurring spur of the moment without rhyme or reason, and with participants who embrace very different narratives of social speech regulation.’

‘Flash-mob phenomenon’ is an incredibly apt phrase for how so much of public debate works these days.

[Nige]

I guess it's not really surprising that this post on college cancel culture isn't getting the comments...