This article defends the democratic ideal of inclusive public discourse, as articulated in Democratic Speech in Divided Times, against the critiques offered by Billingham, Fraser, and Hannon. Specifically, it considers and responds to three core challenges. The first challenge argues, notably, that the “shared reasons” constraint should either apply everywhere or not at all, and that, if this constraint is to apply in divided circumstances, its justificatory constituency must be idealized. The second challenge contends that the resistance of hate speech (...) and misinformation to counterspeech cannot adequately be explained by considerations of salience, and therefore cannot adequately by countered (as I suggest) by “positive” forms of counterspeech. Finally, the last challenge objects that the ideal of inclusive public discourse I defend remains, as pessimists allege, excessively idealistic. (shrink)

Purpose At times, a traditional minority group that opposes a change in the patriarchal structure is violent toward women who wish to adopt modern lifestyles. This study aims to examine online comments regarding a shooting at a café in an Arab-Bedouin city in Israel, where women were employed as servers. The event was framed in Israeli media as an act of backlash by young men, who call themselves “The Modesty Guard.” Design/methodology/approach In this qualitative study, the authors collected 916 online (...) comments that were published on five main online news sites. A thematic and rhetorical analysis of online comments was conducted. Findings The findings uncovered five main themes: the expression of support for Bedouin women; ideas for dealing with the Modesty Guard; blaming Bedouin tradition for the shooting; comparison of the violent behavior to a parallel phenomenon among Charedim; and criticism of the lack of treatment by Israeli security forces. The responses reflected a supportive stance toward Arab-Bedouin women, who were open to progress. Conflict discourse, however, expressed alienation and increased social-national schism between the Jewish majority and Arab-Bedouin minority groups in Israel. Originality/value This study sheds light on the backlash phenomenon in Negev Bedouin society. Moreover, it exposes the lack of significant supportive actions and a lack of understanding of the deep processes unfolding in this traditional society. (shrink)

This paper argues that the well-established fact of political irrationality imposes substantial constraints on how governments may combat the threat of political misinformation. Though attempts at regulating misinformation are becoming increasingly popular, both among policymakers and theorists, I intend to show that, for a wide range of anti-misinformation interventions (collectively termed “debunking” and “source labeling”), these attempts ought to be abandoned. My argument relies primarily on the fact that most people process politically-relevant information in biased and motivated ways. Since debunking (...) or factual correction of politically relevant misinformation (as well as source labeling) themselves consist of providing politically-relevant information, they are also very likely to be processed in irrational ways. This makes it extremely difficult to effectively correct people’s political beliefs and political information processing. Since governments should not pursue policies likely to be futile, they should refrain from mandating such interventions. My conclusion is of relevance to considerable literature in digital ethics of misinformation. It shows that many celebrated works in the field ignore political irrationality and fail to consider its implications. (shrink)