Brickbat: No Spilled Tea
The article presents a potential hate crime charge against a pro-Palestinian speech advocate using the euphemistic 'Brickbat' column format—a staple of libertarian critique of perceived government overreach. Word choice like 'possible hate crime charges' (rather than 'arrested for' or 'charged with') frames the situation as prosecutorial excess. The framing emphasizes the absurdity of criminalizing speech rather than examining the substance of the speech itself, reflecting Reason's consistent editorial skepticism toward speech restrictions and government enforcement.
Primary voices: media outlet
- This article does not address the specific language used by the student
- This article does not include statements from the university or law enforcement explaining the basis for potential charges
- This article does not provide context about UK hate speech law or relevant precedents
Framing may shift if charges are formally filed or dismissed, which would either validate or undermine the 'overreach' narrative.
Dissenting framingCharged language
Brodie Mitchell, a student at Royal Holloway, University of London, is facing possible hate crime charges after saying a pro-Palestinian… The post Brickbat: No Spilled Tea appeared first on Reason.com.
Full article not available — click below to read at the source.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first.
Sign in to leave a comment.