Newspapers, television stations and websites are politically aligned with agendas to push, and try to shape public debate to focus the public’s attention on particular topics. Yet despite access to so many sources, we tend to seek out information that aligns with our own views. There is so much noise.
“For democracy to happen, we have to involve ourselves in it,” says Professor Katharine Gelber from UQ’s School of Political Science and International Studies.
Professor Gelber’s area of expertise is freedom of speech and, on the other side of that coin, hate speech. After starting her academic career with an interest in censorship, her work has evolved through human rights to anti-vilification laws. She firmly believes evidence, data and research are integral to public debate. In 2017, she saw firsthand how difficult it can be to cut through the noise.
The evidence Professor Gelber brought to the table showed the difference between the isolated and discrete incidents of public vilification brought before the courts and the everyday, lived experience of racism in Australia.
The bill the federal government was proposing was to have the words ‘insult’ and ‘offend’ removed from section 18C, citing that including these words in the legislation imposed unreasonable restrictions on freedom of speech.
“Removing these words would send a troubling symbolic message to the communities that section 18C is supposed to protect: that the government feels they should bear the burden of more harm so that others can have free speech.
The evidence from Professor Gelber’s study of racially and religiously motivated abuse shows:
-
In Australia, experiences of racially and religiously motivated abuse are frequent, and indeed routine, for many Indigenous and ethnic communities.
-
Racially and religiously motivated abuse takes place in public places, both directly and indirectly.
-
Racially and religiously motivated abuse is not limited to slurs or epithets. The cumulative effects of moderate abuse can be harmful.
-
Racially and religiously motivated abuse covers a wide spectrum of harm.
-
While anti-vilification laws are ‘invisible’ and inaccessible to most target communities, they are nonetheless symbolically important to these targeted communities.
In the course of Professor Gelber’s research, she has heard numerous accounts of the damage done by racist comments. They can crush people’s self-esteem and leave them feeling paralysed, silenced and excluded from the wider community. Racist comments and abuse may also cause people to modify their behaviour, such as avoiding going out in public, being unwilling to identify with their ethnicity in the workplace, or only speaking English in public.
Professor Gelber said plans to amend parts of the Racial Discrimination Act could have had dire consequences.
“If we remove the protections of the anti-vilification law there will be more discrimination every day, on street corners, in public parks, on public transport and in schools.
“It would support those who want a national debate infused with discrimination and those who believe that anything goes in the name of free speech.”
Professor Gelber's story so far:
2011: Is appointed President of the Australian Political Studies Association (currently still a member of the Executive Committee)
2011: Is invited by the United Nations to be the Australian Expert Witness at a regional meeting examining States' compliance with the free speech and racial hatred provisions of international law
2011: Is awarded PEN Keneally Award for community leadership in the promotion of freedom of expression
2011: Is a finalist, Australian Human Rights Awards Literature (Non-fiction) category, for Speech Matters (UQ Press, 2011)
2011–2018: Is Chair, Local Organising Committee for the 2018 World Congress of the International Political Science Association, to be held in Brisbane
2012: Presents evidence at a Council of Australian Governments’ Review of Counter-Terrorism Laws
2012–2015: Is awarded ARC Future Fellowship, ‘Free Speech After 9/11’
2014: Is awarded the Mayer journal article prize, with Professor Luke McNamara, for the best article in the Australian Journal of Political Science in 2013
2015: Presents research findings at seminars at the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Commission
2017: Presents evidence at the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights’ Freedom of Speech Inquiry
2017: Admitted to the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia
(Photo credit, including for opening page: iStock/maniart)