Inflammatory Language or Freedom of Speech

Discussing the power of language and introducing the term, “inflammatory language.” During the 1980s and early ’90s in the United States many public colleges and universities sought to combat discrimination and harassment on campuses through the use of so-called speech codes. Proponents of the codes often argued the codes were necessary to prevent a rise in discriminatory harassment. Others said the push for the codes was merely part of a general movement of political correctness. Please listen to the 15 minute podcast below which covers speech codes on campuses in 2015 and answer the discussion questions.

The Drive for Campus Speech Codes (Links to an external site.)
If necessary, download transcript herePreview the document.
For this discussion:

After listening to this podcast, I’d like for you to discuss whether you feel speech codes restricting certain types of speech on college campuses are necessary and useful, or whether the codes infringe on freedom of speech and expression.
Do you feel that there are exceptions to these speech codes/rules? Explain. Might you agree with the intent of the rules but not the reality? Support your opinions.
Based on what we have discussed in this course, why does the way that we use language effect the way that view the world and those around us?
Keep in mind that you will need to support your opinion with details and examples.

Full Answer Section

I believe that there are exceptions to speech codes. For example, I believe that speech codes should not be used to punish students for expressing unpopular or offensive opinions. However, I also believe that speech codes can be a useful tool for protecting students from discrimination and harassment.

I agree with the intent of speech codes, but I am not sure that the reality lives up to the intent. I believe that speech codes should be carefully crafted to ensure that they do not infringe on freedom of speech. I also believe that speech codes should be enforced fairly and consistently.

The way that we use language affects the way that we view the world and those around us. Words can be used to build up or tear down, to promote understanding or to sow discord. The words that we use can shape our perceptions of others and ourselves.

In the context of the debate over speech codes, it is important to remember that words can have a powerful impact. Speech codes can be a useful tool for protecting students from discrimination and harassment, but they must be used carefully to avoid infringing on freedom of speech.

Here are some additional thoughts on the issue of speech codes on college campuses:

  • Speech codes are often challenged in court, and the courts have ruled on them inconsistently. This makes it difficult for colleges and universities to know what is permissible and what is not.
  • Speech codes can be expensive to enforce. Colleges and universities must have procedures in place for investigating and adjudicating complaints, and they must also train their staff on the codes.
  • Speech codes can create a chilling effect on free speech. Students may be afraid to express their opinions for fear of being punished.

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to have speech codes on college campuses is a difficult one. There are strong arguments on both sides of the debate. Colleges and universities must weigh the potential benefits of speech codes against the potential costs before making a decision.

Sample Answer

The use of speech codes on college campuses is a complex issue with no easy answers. There are strong arguments to be made on both sides of the debate.

Proponents of speech codes argue that they are necessary to protect students from discrimination and harassment. They point to the fact that hate speech can create a hostile and intimidating environment for students, making it difficult for them to learn and participate in campus life. They also argue that speech codes can help to prevent the spread of harmful stereotypes and prejudices.

Opponents of speech codes argue that they infringe on freedom of speech. They argue that speech codes are too vague and can be used to stifle legitimate criticism or debate. They also argue that speech codes can be used to silence minority viewpoints.