Statement from Free Expression Advocates on SXSWi Cancellations
This week, South by Southwest Interactive announced that, due to threats of violence at the 2016 conference, it has canceled two panels devoted to discussions of culture in the gaming community. We, the undersigned freedom of expression advocates, condemn the tactic of silencing speakers through threatening violence and harassment and urge SXSWi to reverse this decision and reinstate the panels.
An environment pervaded by harassment can have a serious chilling effect on constructive dialogue. But one of the most pernicious forms of harassment is the heckler’s veto: the ability of an agitator to silence another speaker by shouting them down. When an institution decides to support the heckler over the person who is being targeted, it only serves to strengthen the power of this cowardly tactic.
It is important for SXSWi organizers to focus on promoting the safety and security of all panelists and attendees, but this should be done in a way that creates — not forecloses — opportunities for discussion. In his statement announcing the cancellation of the panels, the Director of SXSWi expresses concerns about harassment leading to a “compromised” environment within the community of SXSWi attendees.
But the decision to cancel panels, effectively declaring these topics off-limits, has already distorted the marketplace of ideas at SXSWi. It is an irony beyond belief that SXSWi has allowed panelists attempting to engage the SXSWi community in a dialogue about combating online harassment to be harassed into silence.
As speakers on the SXSWi panel “How to Fight ISIS Without Breaking the Internet”, we strongly support finding alternatives to censorship when addressing challenging topics. We call on SXSWi to reinstate the “Level Up: Overcoming Harassment in Games” and “SavePoint: A Discussion on the Gaming Community” panels while taking appropriate measures to ensure the physical security of all panelists and participants who attend the conference.
Signed,
Shahed Amanullah, Co-Founder, Affinis Labs; CEO, LaunchPosse
Emma Llanso, Director, Free Expression Project, Center for Democracy & Technology
Andrew McLaughlin, Partner, betaworks
Rebecca MacKinnon, Director, Ranking Digital Rights
Not All Guardrails Are Created Equal: Comparing Content Safety and Copyright Filtering
As courts and policymakers work through questions about chatbot liability, they should be wary of analogies that flatten meaningful technical differences. Copyright filtering and safety intervention share real challenges around ambiguity and evasion, but they diverge in what each control must assess, how each manifests over the course of a conversation, and how much can be verified from the outside.
Op-Ed: France’s Constitutional Council Ruling Tests the Limits of Social Media Bans
Read our analysis the legal and policy significance of the Constitutional Council’s decision on ongoing social media age restriction and age assurance debates ahead of the most-anticipated EU-wide approach on child online safety due by December 2026.
The brief explains that Section 230’s liability protections are essential to enable free expression online and they extend to the use of automated systems to engage to rank and order content as part of traditional publishing activities.
