Episode Description:
In this episode of What If? For Authors, Claire tackles a provocative and timely topic: the potential loss of free speech. Drawing on the historical significance of the First Amendment, Claire explores how these protections have empowered authors—especially satire writers—to express themselves without fear. She delves into the evolving political landscape and the implications for authors in the United States and beyond. Expect a mix of humor, snark, and deep insight as Claire challenges us to examine our own beliefs and the power dynamics at play in our society.
Key Takeaways:
Understanding Free Speech:
Learn what the First Amendment truly guarantees for writers and how it supports creative expression, including satire and critique.
The Erosion of Rights:
Reflect on the historical context of free speech in America and the ongoing threats posed by authoritarian tendencies.
Navigating the Debate:
Consider how differing interpretations of free speech fuel polarizing debates, from the use of hate speech to the protection of controversial ideas.
Empowerment Through Expression:
Realize that exercising free speech is not only a personal right but a collective responsibility to foster liberation rather than oppression.
Maintaining Balance:
Learn to ground yourself in truth and facts, even when facing external pressures that aim to sow confusion and doubt.
Why You Should Listen:
If you're an author who values the freedom to express your ideas and critiques, or if you're concerned about the subtle shifts in free speech rights under current political pressures, this episode is essential listening. Claire offers a thoughtful, unfiltered exploration of how our legal and cultural landscape is changing—and what that means for your voice as a writer. Whether you’re a staunch defender of free expression or just looking for reassurance amid uncertainty, you’ll find valuable insights and a healthy dose of perspective in today’s discussion.
Support the Show:
If you found this episode thought-provoking, please leave a review on your favorite podcast platform and share it with fellow authors. Every review helps us reach more writers and fuels this ongoing conversation about creativity, freedom, and responsibility.
Join the Conversation:
What are your thoughts on the current state of free speech in our society? Have you noticed any changes that affect your work as an author? Share your insights and experiences by reaching out to Claire at contact@ffs.media or connect with her on social media.
Happy Writing!
TRANSCRIPT:
Claire: [00:00:00] Welcome back to another episode of What If for Authors. I'm glad you're here. My name's Claire Taylor, and I'm an Enneagram Certified Coach for Authors as well as a Human Mystery Writer. My latest book, Sustain Your Author Career, is all about how to root out the unsustainable practices in our writing life, and how to spot the right opportunities for us when they come along.
Check it out by going to ffs. media forward slash sustain.
This is one of those episodes that probably pertains more to my American audience, but if you're outside of the US, you might gain some understanding, if not compassion for what it feels like to be an author in the US right now. Now, I don't agree with everything the Founding Fathers did, but they really threw down an absolute banger with the First Amendment, y'all. They really fuckin ate. And because they did, I get to say whatever the fuck I want on this podcast.
Yes, there are some [00:01:00] forms of speech that do not fall under the free speech protections, but I don't want to do those, so I'm all set.
The First Amendment also means that I can write my books without worrying too much about whether I'll go to prison for life or be sued for them. And so can you. As a satire writer, there are additional protections that allow me to make fun of things or parody things without worrying about legal trouble.
Now, those protections came a little later in the form of legal precedents, but they were only possible because of the badass First Amendment.
Now, I am by no means a legal scholar. And nothing I say here is legal advice, but I will say that I did pay attention in history and government class. And I read a bunch of shit about this pretty frequently because I like to be right. And the best way I found to do that is to keep reading and exposing myself to new ideas. That's not everyone's approach to being right, [00:02:00] obviously. Some folks prefer to just pick an idea and double down on it every time it's challenged. But for me, I like updating and adjusting as I encounter more robust ideas. To each their own, of course, and I think we can confidently say that some people have made it clear which approach they prefer, and it is getting more obvious by the day.
Okay, it's Been a long week, y'all. Maybe I'm feeling a little bit snarky. I would not be shocked if my reformer came out in full force today. Maybe that's appropriate for this episode, though, because today we're going to ask and answer the question, what if we lose the right to free speech? Let's start by defining what constitutes free speech. So we're on the same page with that.
Then I'll dive into why some folks are feeling a little worried, and then we'll walk through what is still within our power. If the [00:03:00] bozos in charge try to take away our right.
Free speech is one of these terms that has been warped by authoritarian political power. So, like, if I were to have a conversation with a particular kind of person, I might be saying free speech, meaning the legal ability to express whatever idea, fact, or opinion I want, regardless of whether it's popular, correct, or hateful, etc.,
as long as it isn't defamation or a threat. That is what I would mean by free speech, but because I'm not an asshole, the way I usually enjoy my free speech is through the ability to, I don't know, critique public figures and tell stories that have dirty words or that make fun of people who I deem silly.
What this other particular person might mean by free speech is their freedom to use slurs whenever and wherever they please without facing any consequences, whether legal or social. By the way, there is no legal protection from someone calling you a racist if you say racist [00:04:00] things. This antagonistic person might also be referring to their freedom to say dumb bitches like you deserve to die on the internet, which is a thing I've had said to me in various iterations, many, many times. Turns out, while that feels very thready, It is not considered a threat, so most social media platforms do consider it free speech.
Fantastic. Multiply that by a thousand bots, and you can create quite the hostile environment to certain types of free speech by using your free speech rights. Ah, interesting. But I digress.
What does free speech really mean under the law? It's not that complicated, but it's becoming more complicated by the day. So Google will serve you up an AI summary of free speech if you ask it, but if you're not interested in relying on that, which is a little bit more dystopian than I can handle today, you can go to uscourts. gov.
[00:05:00] The Constitution says, Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. But things have developed since then, you know? Freedom of speech includes not speaking. Which more people should exercise. It covers advertising, protesting, the symbolic speech, like burning an American flag.
Yes, you can do that. I actually saw a funny clip of an interview with Stacey Abrams, the former, , Georgia state representative, recalling a moment when Georgia officially changed its state flag to remove the Confederate flag from it. And she stood outside the Georgia Capitol building with a couple other activists and she lit that old flag on fire.
But, she made sure to get a permit for lighting it on fire in a public place, and she made sure to have the metal pan to catch the ashes as per the permit requirements. I don't know, I got a kick out of that. Make the statement, but also don't give them a reason to [00:06:00] slap dumb charges on you. Smart woman!
Almost like she's had a lifetime to learn how to navigate oppression. Okay, so the First Amendment also now includes political donations as free speech, which I'm not even going to get started on that. If you're curious, Google Citizens United, if for no other reason than to see that the Citizens United organization responsible for that Supreme Court case has a 1.
3 star rating on Google. That's pretty cool. Haha. I've literally seen prisons with a higher rating. Okay, what the First Amendment does not protect is incitement to lawless action, distributing obscene material, and if you think that sounds vague, it's designed to be that way, and then a bunch of rulings about what schools can ban, basically.
Books aren't listed on there, as things schools can ban, by the way. Oh, also, you can't burn your draft card. I just, public service announcement for all [00:07:00] those people thinking of burning your draft card. You can't. It's not protected. Uh, very relevant to our modern life. protected Form of free speech.
If you spread false information that harms someone's reputation, you can be fined or given criminal charges. This is probably the most relevant restriction for authors because y'all know how those industry crusaders get going and start trying to rope everyone else in, right? And they're naming names.
They're not keeping it vague. They're not addressing a problem. They're naming names. So here's not legal advice, but maybe some common sense advice. It doesn't matter how much you think a fellow author was in the wrong. It is not worth getting involved and naming them. That is a great way to be named in a lawsuit.
Later on. Besides, all of that drama strips your attention away from writing and publishing your [00:08:00] books. If someone you know was wronged, and you're pretty sure of it, you can reach out to them and offer moral support that doesn't lead you to slandering or libeling someone else in the industry. It's possible to do that.
It's not even like threading a needle. It's more like threading the Golden Gate Bridge. It's not that hard. And yet, three major instances of a bunch of authors being pulled into legal trouble that they didn't have to be in come to my mind immediately without much mental rewinding required.
So that's what free speech is. Hate speech is actually protected speech. Interestingly enough, a lot of people think it's not, but it is. The reason it is legally protected is that it's really hard to start limiting that without setting us up for some bad news when, just say, a crazy person takes power and decides that anything that's unflattering to his ego is hate speech, it can therefore be penalized.
So even though being subject to [00:09:00] legit hate speech Sucks. And private companies like social media platforms don't actually have to allow it because they are a private company and can make their own policies. You can see where not constitutionally banning it might be very useful to dissenters, should, say, a malignant narcissist with paper thin skin come into power and want to label every true but unflattering thing people say about him as hate speech.
He's relegated to claiming its defamation, which is trickier, but still does the trick of creating a legal nightmare for whomever he chooses. I mean, were someone like that to rise to power, then those things might happen. I was just having a conversation with one of my friends from Spain the other day, and he was pointing out how Americans don't appreciate what a wonderful thing we have with the first amendment.
And I think he's right. It's an uncommon constitutional right to have globally speaking. We [00:10:00] certainly take it for granted.
I know that I use it and enjoy it all the time. I'm doing so right now. But as we're seeing, more and more of the norms for how power operates in this country are being obliterated. So I think it's important that we do ask the question, what if I lose my right to free speech? From where I sit today, I do not think it's likely that the First Amendment will somehow be erased or removed.
Maybe I'm being naive here, but I think the more likely approach we'll see is one that erodes it bit by bit with Supreme Court rulings like the Citizens United case. Authoritarianism tends to creep disguised as This idea of we have to keep you safe until suddenly you're so safe and sound that you don't have a single freedom to put yourself at risk with.
So the fact that I don't think we'll see the First Amendment overturned doesn't mean that I think it'll be applied [00:11:00] equally for everyone. And, you know, it never has been, but as imperfect as it is, it's about to be brazenly less equal in application.
So I paid close attention to the movements and strategy of the new administration in the first 48 hours, like many people did, um, the first 48 hours after What's His Name was sworn in. Um, and, so to, my goal was to figure out what their playbook would look like. So it's, We have some hints, but it's like watching a football team you follow frequently play a big game.
You know what their usual game looks like. Maybe they rely more on the passing game than the running game, but that doesn't mean that they'll do that against an opponent with, like, a strong secondary. They might have to switch it up. You don't know until you start to see the game unfold.
I'm not a political strategist. But what I noticed is that the goal of those executive [00:12:00] orders doesn't seem to be overturning existing amendments because that's too difficult. There's no power to do that. And there's no official path for it, but rather The goal is to create enough confusion around the application of the amendment so that those in power can start to benefit.
And the point is to make that application of the law dependent on what the person in power says in a given moment. Creating confusion and legal grayness seems to be the approach they're taking to claim all the power under the executive branch. So we're already seeing this with the 14th amendment and birthright citizenship.
The executive order revoking birthright citizenship, something established quite clearly under section one of the 14th amendment. It's already being challenged that executive order and it'll go up to the Supreme court. The Supreme Court would have to be going completely and blatantly [00:13:00] rogue, more so than they already have, to rule in favor of the executive order.
But it doesn't really matter what they rule, because in the meantime you have people scratching their heads. You have confusion. And in that confusion you have a lot of people who have birthright citizenship at risk of being deported, and everyone wondering if they should allow it to happen or not. And now to be.
Intellectually honest here, I'll just say that the threat applies almost entirely to people who don't appear strictly Caucasian. So if you have birthright citizenship and you're white, the risk is probably pretty low for you because it's never been about citizenship. It's always been about scapegoats.
We saw this in the 1930s with the Mexican repatriation. That was not about citizenship because it's estimated that anywhere from 30 to 60 percent of the people who were relocated to Mexico were in fact American citizens. Whoopsie! Same thing happened with Japanese internment camps. It always happens when people pull this shit.
It'll happen [00:14:00] again if you keep your eyes open. Maybe if enough eyes are open, we can keep it from happening too much. All this to say, things might get a bit fuzzy around free speech. And if that's the case, and you're starting to feel a little insane as a result, I really encourage you to take a deep breath and a step back and remember that confusion is straight out of the playbook.
You're not losing your grip. It is designed to make you feel this way. The more you doubt yourself, the less you're in a position to push back. That's why it's, frankly, not a bad strategy for power to take. It might also be helpful to summon up Brandolini's Law here. Brandolini's law is also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle.
It states, the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce [00:15:00] it. So this can be applied to the intentional confusion being created. It's in the best interest of your career and your mental health to spot when something is bullshit, not a lie, which is committed with grudge to the truth, but bullshit, which is.
spouted with complete disregard for reality. And when you spot that it's bullshit, don't waste your time trying to refute it. You know better. Fight back by remaining grounded in truth and facts. Bullshitters aren't going to be convinced by your facts anyway, so they do not care. You can reclaim your mind.
Bullshit, by the way, is protected under the First Amendment. So as long as it's not defamatory, people can keep doing it. And they will.
Okay, I think I've done a pretty good job of scaring the shit out of you if this is the first time you've given your First Amendment rights much thought in this new day and age we're living in. Maybe this is the place where I should start [00:16:00] explaining why you don't need to worry too much even though your author career is predicated on these rights.
There is a lot of external noise right now that is novel and feels incredibly threatening. I won't say you don't need to proceed with caution or that everything will turn out okay, but none of that was ever in our power to begin with. We could never make sure that everything turned out okay for us.
When we feel scared, it can help to turn our attention to what is still within our power. And there is a lot. Your thoughts are still within your power. You do not have to expose yourself to the anti intellectualism, what I like to call pro stupid, talking points. Those are not healthy for your head center, and we can exhaust ourselves by letting them inside of us to wage a mock trial against them.
We can be mindful of finding a [00:17:00] balance between rejecting all new information and opening ourselves up to every idea being thrown at us. Somewhere in the middle is a practice of entertaining new ideas from sources with a reputation of acting in good faith to the discussion at hand. If a source, a media outlet, an expert, an author, a neighbor, a family member, has a reputation of debating not to get to the truth but to win, that may be a source you can engage with mindfully and only when you feel the presence of mind to listen deeply without letting the bullshit lodge itself in your brain.
Now if you never find yourself feeling that way, having that mindfulness, then you can also never engage with those bad faith sources. This is okay. You have permission. Just because they have the freedom to spout nonsense doesn't mean you're stripped of your freedom to ignore it.
When you're exercising your free speech [00:18:00] through your writing, you still have the power to imagine a receptive audience who's eager for your book, rather than an audience of your critics who you somehow have to Prove yourself to, and who are probably acting in bad faith and are determined to find fault with your work no matter what.
Visualizing a receptive and supportive audience will give you the courage to say what's true for you. And not only exercise free speech, but exercise right speech.
Sometimes we write with our critics in mind, attempting to figure out how to phrase something just right so that no one will ever be able to find fault in it. This is a miserable way to be a writer, and it's a game you lose as soon as you start playing. You have the power to imagine a receptive audience to your words, and I suggest that you not hand over that freedom willingly.
Your emotions are still within your power. Yes, they are. As we change our views on the world, [00:19:00] And our role in the world, and what we can and cannot control will see our emotional reaction to events change. Something that felt like a personal rejection might not feel that way anymore. Something that we overlooked before might bring us great joy as we learn to slow down and see it. If we're tired of feeling angry, we can shift our attention to more things that bring us joy.
We can practice gratitude. If we notice ourselves feeling hopeless, we can turn to people who bring us hope. We can read history that shows us that hope is a choice and not an objective reality.
If we feel bitter about the way things are playing out externally, we can look deep inside ourselves and ask why we feel entitled to things turning out the way we want them to. From that truth, we may learn enough to let go of our bitterness. We may feel sad and learn that it's not weakness or a moral failing, but that we're allowed to feel sad [00:20:00] and we then give ourselves space to feel it so that we can have it pass all the way through us and make space for other emotions to come in.
It's when we pretend. We cannot control what emotions we feel, that we give up this important power and hand it over to whomever wishes to abuse it. The power hungry want every bit of us under their control. Learning how to alchemize our emotions into a liberating rather than depressing force is one of the most radically free things we can do.
If you give up power over your heart, your books will show it. But through your free speech, you can touch the hearts of people in ways that keep them free and encourage them to practice their free and right speech with others. Now you may not see yourself or even want to see yourself as some sort of activist through your writing.
Okay. But I can tell you right now that every time we speak, and this includes writing books, we're either encouraging [00:21:00] liberation or we're encouraging oppression. Our protagonists don't have to be perfect, and we don't have to write allegories for this to be true. Many, many people want to pretend. That this is not the case because of the responsibility this truth places on them for what they bring into existence through their stories.
They may not want to face that they've been proliferating narratives that encourage control and oppression over liberation. And I'm not telling you what you have to do here. But if you want to see things clearly, this is how they look. What you say can liberate or it can oppress. What you write can liberate or it can oppress.
You're free to do either. And lastly, your actions. Are still within your power. What you choose to say and not say is within your power, how you choose to conduct yourself, that freedom is still yours. You may feel like I have no choice, but that's your fear. [00:22:00] Talking. You always have a choice. E courage is the choice to act in a way aligned to your values.
Despite fear, fearlessness and courage are not the same thing. I've been fearless, rushing into situations, and when people called it courageous, I was like, wait, was that dangerous? It hadn't even occurred to me to be afraid, so it couldn't be courageous. Because only when we're afraid but act with integrity anyway can we be called courageous.
You don't need to be fearless in your career, but you might decide to be courageous. You might decide to speak up and speak out through your books or elsewhere. against actions and ideas that are being proliferated and forced by those in power. The authors who don't see how much has fundamentally changed in the last month are speaking up and speaking out fearlessly. Those of us who see the seismic shift are speaking up. and speaking out courageously.
You may face pushback or punishment for [00:23:00] exercising your right for free speech. I won't say otherwise. And if you choose to hold your tongue from time to time or pick your battles, there's certainly some wisdom in that. Here's my Enneagram type one swooping in though.
I don't think that the darkness and confusion we're experiencing right now will last forever. I think there will be a time when we make it to the other side of it. And when we do, each of us will be faced with the decisions we made along the way. I don't have to live with your decisions, but I will have to live with mine.
The more decisions we make out of fear along the road, the more difficult it will be to look at ourselves through a mirror of truth and honesty without averting our eyes. I don't have to live with your decisions. I only have to live with mine. That's why I'm exercising my right to free speech, as I believe is granted to me, to record this podcast.[00:24:00]
I know it will not be universally well received. Not just because of the message, but because of some of my snarky delivery. You know what? That doesn't keep me from falling asleep at night. What does keep me from falling asleep at night is knowing that I had a chance to speak the truth that might liberate others, but that I let my fear stop me.
That I let my perfectionism step in and say, no, you don't know how to do it perfectly yet. You have to wait until you know how to do it perfectly. What keeps me up at night is the idea that I let the threat of a pro stupid oligarchy and their cowardly pick me minions keep me silent.
No thanks. Not for me. So if you're wondering, what if we lose the right to free speech, I'll tell you this.
The right is not within anyone's power to take away from you. You always get to decide how [00:25:00] you think, feel, and act, which means you always get to decide what to say and what not to say. The consequences of doing so may vary, but it's still your choice. Never let anyone convince you it's not.
When I look back on some of the times we now consider to be the darkest in history, I see people sustained by the stories of authors like you and me. Maybe these stories had to be circulated secretly, and maybe there was an effort to burn the books that carried these stories, but the stories spread. Now, some of the stories and narratives being spread lately are ones of fear, designed to scare and confuse us.
So we need stories that counteract that.
Whether you write comedy, romance, sci fi, horror, mystery, or anything in between, your stories can move the needle, for those who read them, toward courage and liberation or toward fear and [00:26:00] oppression. That's a whole hell of a lot of power we have, and it's why dictators like to ban free speech. They know.
But sometimes we forget.
I can't tell you that your free speech will be free from consequences. It never has been before anyway. But I can tell you that sometimes the consequences are ones we quite like.
Ignoring the power and responsibility we have as authors doesn't make it go away, it just makes us irresponsible and frequently complicit. Sorry. That's just the shit part of empowerment. When you claim the power you have, you kind of have to take responsibility for it. That's why so many people prefer to pursue.
Power over others instead of their own empowerment.
So I guess that's it. That's it for this week's dystopian as fuck episode. They can't all feel good, right? I hope you'll join me for the next episode of What If for Authors. [00:27:00] I'm Claire Taylor. Happy writing.