The Conformity Crisis - Sarah McLaughlin On The Quiet Erosion Of Free Speech

📌 Buy Tickets for Sarah's NZ Tour: https://www.fsu.nz/events/mclaughlin-tour 

📅 Tour dates: 

📍 Auckland - Sun 19 April  
📍 Tauranga - Tue 21 April  
📍 Wellington - Wed 22 April  
📍 Christchurch - Thu 23 April  
📍 Dunedin - Fri 24 April 

We talk with Sarah McLaughlin from FIRE about why free speech threats spread across borders faster than most people notice, especially online. We dig into how self-censorship, “online safety” rules, and hate speech laws can shrink debate in universities and everyday life, including here in New Zealand.

• internet censorship and regulation crossing borders quickly
• young people bearing the brunt of speech control and pushing back
• universities self-censoring under pressure from foreign governments and funding
• why Europe and the UK matter for Kiwi free speech debates
• the UK Online Safety Act and spillover effects on global platforms
• under-16 bans, age verification, anonymity risks, and VPN crackdowns
• why hate speech laws can backfire and empower the wrong people
• defending a principle rather than defending a person

If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and consider sharing the podcast with others. If you have any questions, feedback, or suggestions, you can contact us at podcast at fsu.nz. If you want to find out more about the New Zealand Free Speech Union, visit fsu.nz.

Transcript

Welcome And Meet Sarah McLoughlin

SPEAKER_03 0:00

Welcome to Free to Speak, the New Zealand Free Speech Union podcast. If you enjoy the show, subscribe for uncensored conversations and free speech news from New Zealand and beyond.

SPEAKER_01 0:20

And today we have with us Sarah McLoughlin. Sarah is a senior scholar for FIRE. That's the foundation for individual rights and expression. I love the way acronyms always We do have a good one. Yeah, you have a good one. I mean, it's just great. It just works so well. It's like chaos from Get Smart or something, you know? Brilliant.

SPEAKER_04 0:41

We even updated our acronym a couple years ago, our organization name, but we're like, we got to keep the acronym. It's too good to lose.

SPEAKER_01 0:48

Well, it is fire. Fire is fire. Um, so Sarah, your special focus is global expression, right?

SPEAKER_02 0:58

Absolutely.

SPEAKER_01 0:59

Great, great. Okay. Well, well, Sarah's gonna be joining us for a tour here, and that's gonna kick off in April. So um, and as you'll know, our supporters will know, our tour is uh just fantastic, and uh, we've brought some great people here, and uh we're we're in that tradition with you. Like I've been reading some of your stuff, and it's just fantastic. And and the global focus is interesting. I'm really looking forward to to discussing that um and and and getting into it and and why why it's important for us in little old New Zealand to be concerned about what's happening in the UK and uh uh uh um you know China and places like that. I think sometimes we look at it and it's it's good rage bait. We go, oh, look what they're doing over there. And we can also be, well, hey, it hasn't happened here, so that's good. At least we're not like them. But it uh the world's a lot more connected than than we think, isn't it? Um when it comes to free speech.

SPEAKER_04 1:55

Absolutely. And there's there's so many things going on right now. I I can't keep up to a certain extent with writing about everything that's happening globally. Um, but you're right, it's so important to keep track of this because uh, you know, all of these laws that are being passed in countries, the speed at which they're trans, you know, they're they're going across borders is incredible. Not just in a way that um, you know, if China passes a censorship law, they'll start trying to threaten people in other parts of the world, which is happening, and a number of countries do that, but also a number of, you know, the countries that will look at what um, you know, their neighbor did and say, oh, maybe we should do that too, whether it's a hate speech law, whether it's a tech regulation. And so the possibility that something that your neighbor does is, you know, going to be a bill that your legislators are looking at a week from now is really likely. Um, you know, especially when it comes to internet censorship, internet regulation, those uh rules are crossing borders faster than most of us can keep track of them. Uh and you know, I kind of think this is, you know, the whole, the whole ball game to a certain extent. Um, internet censorship. Um, you know, the it's not even just the future of free free expression. You know, what's happening right now on the internet is um, you know, kind of the most important question for free speech, not just five years from now, 10, 10 years from now. So uh the laws that are being passed today are, you know, really gonna have a huge influence on what we can say uh in the future, what kind of information stays uh accessible to any or all of us someday. So uh, you know, I I think we're in such an important moment for free speech, and I hope that uh, you know, I can help people understand what this moment means better. And I'm very much looking forward to coming to New Zealand for those conversations next month.

SPEAKER_01 3:45

Yeah, well we'll look we'll we'll get into your tour at the end of it, but I think we'll even start now. Um you you're in Auckland on the 19th, Todonga, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin. Dunedin on the 24th. Um, all the dates obviously will be uh attached to us. Um there'll be a link uh to in the podcast to all the tour dates. So Dunedin, now, you know that you know where that is, don't you? That's right down the bottom.

SPEAKER_04 4:11

I do, yes.

SPEAKER_01 4:12

Right down Jacob Michigama didn't go to Dunedin. Yeah, he's not gonna like this.

SPEAKER_04 4:18

Well, I'm sorry, sorry, Jacob, but I have to uh do better than you on my New Zealand tour.

SPEAKER_01 4:25

Some penguins may wander into your talk, you realize it.

SPEAKER_04 4:29

Hey, anyone's welcome. I'm I'm I'm willing to debate anyone, no matter what they bring to the question.

SPEAKER_01 4:36

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 4:38

They dress well, they show up in little Tufts.

SPEAKER_01 4:42

Yeah. You may well see, I would think they were people in Texas until I put my glasses on. Yeah. Well, there's a lovely peninsula around there that you can have a look at. We work you guys hard when you come here, but uh you can't.

SPEAKER_04 4:55

I would expect nothing less.

SPEAKER_01 4:56

Yeah, but but it's one of those uh I I I make documentary, and in the past, you know, I went across the states and went to Springfield, Missouri. And you know, no New Zealander was gonna like visit there just randomly.

SPEAKER_04 5:09

I haven't even done there, so well, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 5:12

Well, that's the good thing about work, these work trips, and and uh you know, you you go to places that you're not selecting and and you just get this unique experience that you never would have got.

SPEAKER_04 5:23

Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, but sometimes life takes you places that you didn't plan for.

SPEAKER_01 5:29

No, the deep south, it'll be wonderful. I think you're really gonna enjoy it. And of course, our supporters will really appreciate that you came down there. So yeah, big student town.

unknown 5:39

Great.

SPEAKER_01 5:40

Yeah, no, it'll be great.

SPEAKER_04 5:41

I I speak to a lot of students uh in the US and around the world at this point, and uh I think young people uh are kind of bearing the brunt of a lot of censorship right now. So I'm I'm looking forward to seeing what they have to say.

SPEAKER_01 5:55

Before we get into it, let's just start there. Um how do you feel about younger people? Well, because you know, I've got children myself, and and I I wonder, not generally, but it's a very open-ended question. I hate kids. No. Um but but in in terms of like let's say my children are um are very pro-free speech. I you know, that could be just me or or I um I don't know, you know, like my sense is there has been a little bit of a thaw with even the under-20s, like the 18-year-olds and and and everything. I mean, these things are quite they can be like phases, uh, as Jacob's wonderful book shows. We have these recessions and then uh everything sort of becomes a bit more enlightened again, and it's there's a lot of people.

SPEAKER_04 6:49

We relive the same cycles over and over again.

SPEAKER_01 6:52

Yeah, yeah. So so is your sense that there's a hunger for free speech with um the younger tech group at the moment?

SPEAKER_04 7:00

Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I think uh right now, um, you know, obviously my experience is um to a certain extent more in the United States, at least with talking to people and seeing uh what their feelings are like. But I I think young people are right now really feeling like um they've perhaps been misled to a certain extent by authority figures, and and they're starting to see that there are a lot of people setting rules um on what they can say, what they can write, what they can read, what they can do. And maybe those people don't actually know that much better than them. Maybe the people trying to determine um, you know, what they can protest about on a campus, what they can uh what books they can use in a classroom, um, you know, what they can even access on the internet in the privacy of their own homes. Maybe uh the people in charge don't know everything, and maybe uh they shouldn't be in the position of trying to dictate um what young people who are, you know, just starting out in the world trying to understand what's going on. Um, you know, the fact that we're essentially rescinding, you know, access to basic information to young people is really incredible. And um, you know, I think there's, you know, maybe three or four um big justifications people have for censoring free speech. And one is always and always will be, think of the children. We have to protect kids, we have to do what we can to keep them safe. Um, I think maybe young people are realizing that uh this isn't necessarily about keeping them safe, it's about control, it's about censorship. Uh and you know, this is something that is really impacting young people. But um one thing I've been trying to explain to people is that uh these these things that we use to censor young people are gonna censor people who are 15 years old as well. And if we think that they will, um uh I think maybe billions of people are in for a rude awakening soon.

SPEAKER_01 8:55

Yeah, well we'll we'll touch on the under 16 ban and and all of that hysteria that that's um maybe later in the interview. But so um your journey to fire, like did you uh were you a little girl thinking one day I'm gonna work in free speech? I mean, what what brought you what brought you towards it? Like I was kind of that little boy, I've got to say.

SPEAKER_04 9:18

Well, you know, it's funny. I uh growing up, I'm not sure. I I think I was pretty certain that I was going to um work, you know, with dolphins and then realized I was terrified of the ocean, so I had to, you know, move on from that one. But uh I I was a political science major in college. Uh I've spent um, probably to my parents' chagrin, my entire teen years debating them about matters of the day. Um, I'm sure they loved it. But uh, you know, it's something that I've I've always cared about. I've I've always uh, you know, it's this might not sound like the most intellectual reason, but I'm gonna be honest with you. I don't like being told what to do, and I'm suspicious of people who tell others what to do.

SPEAKER_00 10:02

That's the best reason.

Why Sarah Joined FIRE

SPEAKER_04 10:04

That's the best reason. You know, there are very noble reasons that I agree with to support free speech. I think it's how we uh create better societies. I think it's how we um, you know, the only way that you can really search for truth, whether it's scientific, um, philosophy elsewhere. Um, but I also just don't like being told what to do. And I don't think uh all of us should be in the position of trying to tell each other what to do. Uh I think it's um disrespectful to each other's humanity to try to limit what we can think and see and say. And so that's always been a little bit of my motivating factor. Um so uh in college, I was political science. Um, and I then interned uh when I was 20 years old at FIRE. That was 13 some years ago. Okay. And I I never left FIRE. Um, so I've been here that a whole time, just building out um my research, the work I've been doing. Uh, and it led me to write a book that came out last year, which is um you can see it right here, uh, part of the things I'll be talking about when I'm in New Zealand. Um, but it's the ways uh I wrote about the ways that um authoritarian governments are um influencing, censoring, controlling higher education, and uh effectively trying to be the world police for what can be said on college campuses. And uh there's a lot of reasons why that's really scary. Um one is you know, campuses, uh for better or worse, um, you know, people debate about this, but they're hotbeds for political activism where you know the the political ideas of the future are being discussed on college campuses today. That's always been the case, hopefully always will be, that that freedom exists. Uh, but it also influences the research, um, the ways we understand the world. The the idea that um a government like the Chinese Communist Party is uh in some ways influencing or even directly dictating uh what a university is going to teach or study is really disturbing. Uh and that affects, you know, what we know today, but also the research that people 50, 100 years from now are going to rely on. There's there's really long-term impacts from this.

Foreign Influence And University Self-Censorship

SPEAKER_01 12:13

Uh oh completely. Well, we've we've had a few cases involving Chinese influence. Um, you know, even I think one of them where it started was posters were being taken down. There was an order to take these posters down, and we looked into it as the free speech union. And I remember thinking at the time, oh, this is a bit uh spy novelly. Well, is this true? But now, yeah, I just accept it. I mean, but they are very active and um and stroppy. Yeah, it's it's even more stroppy, actually. Like they're they're um we our um former chief executive uh wrote a piece for our one of our major newspapers, and the embassy just said, hey, newspaper, you shouldn't have done that. It's like whoa, they're not even hiding it now. So it's a it's quite concerning. I I think if we knew the depth of some of the conversations that were happening uh with university management, we'd would I think most a lot of people would be quite shocked.

SPEAKER_04 13:12

Um yeah, people be very, very disturbed. I I hope very disturbed. Yeah. Um but that that's the issue. A lot of it just goes under the radar because people don't think to ask. And um the scariest thing to me is uh the kind of censorship or self-censorship that's taking place uh that's never been ordered. Um and so this is something that I I write about a lot in the book. It's um institutions that are choosing to self-censor because there's it's very lucrative um to pursue these ties and relationships in China or in the Gulf states, Qatar, the UAE. And so universities will build out these relationships with government officials, and then they know what those government officials want. They know what kind of things you're not supposed to say.

SPEAKER_01 13:55

So they don't even have to be instructed.

SPEAKER_04 13:57

Exactly. Uh, you know, this this happened at one of the most high-profile universities in the world, Harvard University. Uh a vice dean at the law school forced uh a Chinese dissident on the campus to cancel an event. Um, nobody ever told this administrator he had to do that, but he thought it was the appropriate thing to do. And and that's the scariest thing.

SPEAKER_01 14:19

Yeah, that's that's really bad. But I mean, censorship will always lead to self-censorship, and I guess vice versa. Uh I mean, what becomes self-censorship can start becoming entrenched, and then uh the de facto laws by that stage, I think. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_04 14:36

And then, you know, you you could have people in leadership who choose to self-censor, and self-censorship for them becomes censorship rules that they enforce upon people they have authority over. And so, yeah, it's a chain of um people choosing to self-censor and then choosing to enforce that censorship upon others. And uh it's it's not really complicated why it's happening. Um, for the most part, it's money. Uh, and you know, that's that's something that's not just a problem in higher education, it's a problem everywhere. Um, there's been a lot of high-profile incidents, um, you know, where perhaps uh even a you know a media outlet will feel like they need to self-censor because there could be some threat, perhaps a lawsuit. Uh, it's just not worth the risk. And so that's scary to me. Um the idea that um, you know, we have people silently making these decisions because they think it's uh financially useful, you can't really um issue a freedom of information request, right? To get records when someone self-censors and never writes it down. That's that's the really difficult thing. Sometimes um this is even harder to track, harder to fight when we don't have uh the Chinese consulate brazenly said sending a letter threatening to censor someone. If someone just assumes they might get one of those letters and acts anyway, then you have no record, but you have the censorship anyway. Uh it's it's really terrifying.

SPEAKER_01 16:06

You're starting to answer the the like the central question that I had for this interview, and that is why global why is global expression such a um a big deal for us in little old New Zealand, you know, or anywhere. Why does it matter what happens in the UK? Why does it matter um uh what happens in France? Why are all these things connected? Um we we did talk um initially about J.D. Vance's trip to Europe and how he told them off, which I think is a it's a nice sort of narrative to kick off there because there has been quite a bit of pressure from the the Trump administration on what pressure or or just rhetorical?

SPEAKER_04 16:55

Is he doing that for his domestic audience as well, you know, like I I think there's been across the board um a mix of rhetoric and pressure uh to a certain extent. I think um, you know, some officials who are um you know working in a diplomatic fashion uh with counterparts in Europe have also, you know, made very clear perhaps even uh in trade negotiations these things are going to be discussed. Uh but you know, I'd love to address the you know JD Vance speech elephant in this. Um, you know, it's it's a really frustrating uh incident because a lot of the things that JD Vance pointed out were right. Um, censorship in Europe is worse than most people realize. Uh, I think people have this um idea that because Europe is largely democratic um and largely free, that means that you don't really have to worry about what's going on. Um, you know, they still have free elections. Uh how bad can it be? How bad can it be? Um, but but there's a lot of censorship that people might not realize, both um, you know, in-person protesters, people who um just say something that's offends their neighbor, uh, but also on the internet. Um, the the regulatory behemoths that um Europe, both at in the EU and as individual nations are building out, um, are are really serious and can have um long-term ramifications for what's on the internet, who can read what, uh, and also um, you know, influence companies perhaps to censor even more information than they technically legally have to because of the risk of more fines, regulations. It's just not worth how many times have I said that? It's just not worth the risk of losing money, right?

SPEAKER_02 18:40

There's this theme here. Well, it's all about money, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 18:44

So so we have that going on. But um there's there's one big problem um with what JD Vance was saying, and it's that um, you know, at least in my lifetime, I can't think of uh a president who has censored more speech, committed more free speech violations and First Amendment violations in the United States. So we have a real messenger problem, and that's a shame because uh I think people maybe rightfully might say, why should I listen to JD Vance on free speech in Europe when uh, you know, you can list the 50 different things that just happened last week that were bad for free speech in the United States. So that's the really frustrating thing.

SPEAKER_01 19:25

Um, more egregious, sorry, sorry for jumping in. Well, what are some of the more egregious um uh censorship that you think you've seen from this this administration?

SPEAKER_04 19:37

Oh, where to start? So so we have a lot of things. So um just uh a few days ago, for example, um the the chairman of our FCC, which does our our you know broadcast regulation in the United States, um, he started threatening the broadcast licensing of outlets who were uh expressing what he claimed to be um fake news about the war with Iran. So we have the federal government saying, Oh, we're gonna be the Ministry of Truth and decide, free press be damned, what people can say about the war in Iran. That's kind of you know one of the big classic issues. You need to be able to talk about the military action your government is undertaking.

SPEAKER_01 20:18

Especially something an emergency scenario or war scenario, well, anything, but like the the need for free speech becomes even more vital in a democracy.

SPEAKER_04 20:29

Yeah, that's when you most need free speech, when you have the most difficult problems. And people think it's gonna be over. That's what it's for. It's not for to talk about the weather, it's not to say what a beautiful day we're having, it's to say, uh, here's what I think about the bombs this government is dropping. That's that's what I'm doing.

SPEAKER_01 20:50

I've found corruption. Uh I've uh yeah, all of that stuff.

SPEAKER_04 20:54

Exactly. So uh, you know, that's just one example. But uh at FIRE, we've been combating um, you know, a lot of a lot of these threats. Um, and to be clear, fire is nonpartisan. No matter what uh your political views are, we'll defend you no matter no matter what political views are. If you're censoring someone, we'll fight you. Um so this isn't just because uh of a you know a specific political view, it's just because this is a First Amendment violation and we believe that has to be fought. Um so we're also um, for example, uh working to fight this administration's um viewpoint-based deportations, uh targeting people who are here legally in the United States, who just express a political opinion that the government doesn't like. And the Secretary of State Marco Rubio is saying we want to get rid of them because we don't like what they say. Uh and that's that's a real problem. Um, the idea that just because you say something the government doesn't like, they're gonna revoke your ability to be here, that's not what America's about. That's not what we pride ourselves on.

SPEAKER_01 21:55

Well, well, no. He I mean, he's a very articulate speaker. He he makes Makes as good a case, I guess, as you can make with this, but I'm not convinced at all. Uh I mean, his thing is like, hey, you know, you're a guest. Character's a factor when you get these visas in there. And if we discover this, and then why not? You know, so I mean, what what would be your counter to some of those specific points that have um come up?

SPEAKER_04 22:22

Absolutely. So, number one, um, if you like what speakers are being deported today, you might not like when the next president says, I don't want Jordan Peterson in this country, expressing his viewpoints. I think they are dangerous for this country. Jordan Peterson has to go. There, there's a lot of different speakers from around the world coming to the United States who you very much might agree with if you support what Rubio is doing here, who you would really hate to see kicked out just because the administration doesn't like what they have to say. Um, but even, you know, on a more broad level, um, something people don't totally understand is that um, you know, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, that's our free speech protection. Um First Amendment, Congress shall make no law, you know, abridging our freedom of speech. Uh and so some people think that means, you know, the First Amendment gives us our rights as citizens, but that's actually not the case. Um, what we believe in this country is that just whether you want to say it's God given, whether you want to say it's just uh part of being a human being, but you have freedom of speech just because of because you're a human being. And so the First Amendment doesn't give us those rights. The First Amendment limits what the government can do about those rights. And I think that's really important for people to understand.

SPEAKER_01 23:40

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 23:40

And so that's it limits what the government can do when it doesn't like speech, but it doesn't say, oh, because you're an American, you have free speech. That's not how it works. And I think it's a good thing.

SPEAKER_01 23:49

Because we're such a lovely government and we're so kind-hearted, you can have some free speech.

SPEAKER_04 23:54

Exactly. It's not a gift, it's not a gift the government gives us. It's something that as human beings we innately have. Uh, and I I think that's important. And, you know, if you want to even remove the legal question, I think that's really beautiful. Um, this idea that we believe free expression is an innate part of the human spirit. I feel that way, and I I want to keep fighting for an America that believes that too.

SPEAKER_01 24:18

Well, we well, you know, we are creative beings, you know, and we need speech in order to uh become the best version of ourselves, really.

SPEAKER_04 24:30

You know, there's um one case, uh Supreme Court case in the US that I really like to talk about. Uh it's Cohen v. California. Um, it's about a man who wore uh a jacket that's criticized the draft using a certain four-letter word, which I don't know if I should say on your podcast.

SPEAKER_01 24:47

Um we wear it blue here sometimes.

SPEAKER_04 24:53

Uh but in this uh opinion, um, you know, defending this man's rights, uh, there's this one phrase that the Supreme Court used, and it was one man's vulgarity is another's lyric. And it's this idea that, you know, free speech protections allow us to find what's meaningful to ourselves. And for each different person, that might be a different thing. Um, you know, my vulgarity might be your lyric, and vice versa. But that's the beauty of a free country that you can have that chance to find what's meaningful for you without the government dictating it to you. Uh, and so that's kind of what free speech means to me. Uh, letting you see, letting you find meaning.

SPEAKER_01 25:33

That's wonderful and so well articulated, um, and a really good example. Uh I think back to the punk rock movement, right? And we know I I'm a little young for the the movement. I would have still been at primary school, you know, when um when it when it was happening, but I've always been a fan of it. And and I've always been really tickled by just how far they'd go with some of the lyrics, which were just offensive and just absolutely ridiculous. You had to laugh at them. You you couldn't be too off. But it it was a it was a whole group of people in this sweaty little box, moshing, throwing each other around and listening to this ridiculous stuff. It was just it was a celebration of freedom, really. Um that's that's what it was. And and there was something, there's something cathartic about it. The fact they can do that, you know, um, blow out the cobwebs by just what's the worst thing you can think or say? Get it, get it, put it on the table, you know.

SPEAKER_04 26:35

Let's I I sometimes think uh about horror that way. I'll be very clear. I do not like horror, it is not of interest to me.

SPEAKER_01 26:43

I write I write horror scripts.

SPEAKER_04 26:44

I have friends who tell me how meaningful uh a certain horror film they watched was to them, and they have a totally different perception of it than I do, and I think that's really incredible. That's a more interesting world when you can have people who see things differently than you do and explain to you why it's meaningful, and maybe it broadens your mind a little bit, and then maybe what you love can broaden their mind. I don't know, you you can't have a very interesting, fulfilling world uh without people having the freedom to discover these things um that others may hate and find disgusting and disturbing. Uh that's very funny.

SPEAKER_01 27:21

I was talking about horror with with um another guest, and and for me, I think there's something vicarious, and this is a dimension of you know free speech and free expression too. I think that you know, when you think, when you think, you know, because I'm a screenwriter and um in my day job, um, and I've written a few horror films and had commissions, and and I do get to that moment where I'm going, this is so disgusting. Why am I doing this and why is this happening? You know, you could you because I'm under the bonnet, and and I'm like, why is it happening? Like the Friday the 13th films, it's like they all arrive at camp, kill, kill, kill, kill, end. It's like, well, then it's just what's compelling about that, but it is about, I think, and I could be wrong, but it's it's a vicarious you you're living vicariously through a trauma. And yes, you're having to make ethical and moral decisions for yourself. What would I have done? Oh, I because you know, often people yell at the screen screen in horror films and go, oh, you stupid woman.

SPEAKER_04 28:26

Don't go in that beast.

SPEAKER_01 28:27

Don't go down, jump out the window. You know, you it's quite interactive in that way. It's like jump out the window, or you know, don't open that box. You know, it's uh so it feels like there is a it's allowing for uh yeah, these vicarious sort of judgments to be made by the viewer. Um a little bit of a detour there, but I think it's quite interesting.

SPEAKER_04 28:49

Um, and and uh it's it's not something that I enjoy, but uh as I mentioned, but I I think there's probably some value to um you're thinking about the deaths of you know, human depravity. Um, because yeah, unfortunately that actually happens in real life and not just in horror films. And I don't know, maybe horror is a safe place to think about those um, you know, the the bad things about the human capacity for good and bad.

SPEAKER_01 29:18

Yeah. No, I think so.

SPEAKER_04 29:19

I I don't want to watch them, but may all the horror writers out there keep working on their craft.

SPEAKER_01 29:24

Oh, I've got a stack of DVDs we gotta watch when you come down. Don't worry about that. So so um uh all right, so so going back to the global expression thing, uh so JD Vance, he's got a point, but he needs to probably tend to his own garden.

UK Arrests And Policing Opinion

SPEAKER_04 29:46

Exactly. Um, and and I think you know, earlier you were asking uh for an example maybe of you know what this looks like. And and I think um the United Kingdom is a pretty good example of this in in sort of every single way they're choosing censorship and over-regulation uh in ways that really are stifling their people's uh ability to speak freely. And so you have thousands of people being arrested for what's basically mean tweets each year. Um, and you also have um last year, probably a couple of thousand people were arrested for um criticizing the ban on Palestine action. And I'm not even discussing the ban on Palestine action, uh, which um, you know, the ban was over them um vandalizing some military planes. Um, but people who just held signs saying, I disagree with that ban were arrested. Uh and and here's the crazy part they were hit with terrorism charges. Yeah, because they held signs.

SPEAKER_01 30:49

I mean, material support for terror is different, but just saying it is.

SPEAKER_04 30:53

That's saying I'm writing a thousand dollar check.

SPEAKER_01 30:56

Here's a check, yeah, buy by a couple of rockets. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 31:01

But but just saying a sign isn't terrorism.

SPEAKER_01 31:05

Well, what if you were wanting to challenge what if you were protesting to challenge that um uh not ban? What's what's the word I'm looking for? The the ruling, you know, the the ruling that it was a terror group. What if you're like, hey, we think that's unfair, so we're gonna protest about this until there's a you know, this is looked at again? I mean, that would be criminal, wouldn't it? Because that's sort of what I think.

SPEAKER_04 31:26

I believe some people were arrested just for saying I have a problem with the ban. Not even so many people for saying I support this group and not saying, you know, I offer financial support, I'm helping to buy things I use and evandalize, but just saying I support this group more broadly. Um, and then people saying I oppose the ban getting arrested and hit with terror charges. That's that should make a step back, and that it's become so normalized that people weren't really thinking about it is incredible. So we have those things going on, and then we also have the UK Online Safety Act, which is an absolute disaster. Uh it it treats um, you know, broadly defined harms as um, you know, words as harms that are so dangerous that um there needs to be mass fines, mass regulation. Um, I just a couple weeks ago, uh Ofcom, which is their media regulation uh board, they issued um or they announced new rollings are coming for streamers. So like Netflix, Hulu, ones that aren't based in the UK, but uh allowing people to make complaints over offensive and harmful content. So now we're going to have, and now if you want an example of how um, you know, these kinds of regulations can influence other countries' free speech, we now might have Netflix, for example, saying, all right, we don't want to risk a fine for putting up a show in the UK that people will say is offensive. So it's maybe not worth us making the show at all if we can't show it to millions of customers. So we're just not gonna make this show for anyone. And that's how you can, you know, more quietly influence content on a global scale. And people might not notice it. We won't know that Netflix is saying we're not gonna green light this show.

SPEAKER_01 33:16

No, they're never gonna be pr transparent about that. We'd love to give you bit of content and more edgy stuff, but those bloody palms, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 33:25

But again, one man's vulgarity is another lyric. We should have the ability to watch these shows without a government regulator saying, we're gonna decide what's right for you. Um, and you know, I think earlier we hinted we might get to the um age gating question, uh, you know, the under 16, but part of this is also about um limiting minors' access to uh you know offensive shows on Amazon Prime or Netflix. I already know of a way to limit minors' access. They're called parents.

SPEAKER_02 33:57

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 33:58

Exactly. Exactly. We don't need the government deciding when everyone's kids are allowed to watch. That's probably a job for the parents.

SPEAKER_02 34:10

Yeah, yeah.

Online Safety Act And Age Checks

SPEAKER_04 34:12

And and so, you know, we have this going on in the UK, but this is happening everywhere. It's happening in the US, it's happening, uh, you know, uh, the the biggest origin of it was Australia, uh, with the under 16 law it passed, I believe, last year, might have been two years ago at this point. Um, but that kind of set off a global uh domino collapse. That's an interesting part of it too.

SPEAKER_01 34:36

The fact that they come up, someone comes up with this idea. Like we've got people down that we've got the government here now wanting to push it. And we're we're gonna challenge that. Um, because it's there's a lot of different strands to to an under-16 ban.

SPEAKER_04 34:53

Exactly. People think it's it's simple, it's not.

SPEAKER_01 34:55

No, it's an octopus. It's it's like you've got the end of anonymity on the net or potentially uh that's that's what it is. That's what it is, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 35:06

Um because you know, so so here's a couple reasons why uh it's the end of anonymity. So you might say, okay, they're gonna contract with private companies that they'll be the ones that are really doing the identity checks. Um, so you don't have to worry about it because it's not gonna be the government knowing that you know what you're posting on Reddit, what you're seeing on Reddit. Uh people are are a little overconfident in the cybersecurity of these companies. We've already had a uh a number of hacks where people's information that they've handed over to age verification companies has been released. So on that front, that information's gonna come out. Um I don't want to be harsh, but you're a fool if you think it won't.

SPEAKER_02 35:48

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 35:48

Uh, but then also some it might be actual government run. So you might have to show your ID to the government and say, I want to access this content you say is harmful and you can see why my that might cause some free speech issues on the internet from people who don't want to speak their minds, uh, who don't want to tell the government what they're doing.

SPEAKER_01 36:10

Well, if if anyone thinks that the UK within a couple of years wouldn't just go, you're not allowed to ever be on the internet again, buddy. You have three strikes, you're out. They they would they would have a Kia Starmer would have no problem doing that. No problem.

SPEAKER_04 36:26

And there's already been suggestions that they might try to look at banning VPNs because obviously adults don't want to have to verify their age to post on the internet, so they're using VPNs, but obviously governments don't like that. Um, it's a very clear, easy workaround to their rules. So and if you look at the list of countries that currently ban VPNs, it's not a good one to be on. No, you're not in good company.

SPEAKER_01 36:52

It's one of the like those lists at the UN. It's like this is who supported Iran, and you read it and go, woo.

SPEAKER_04 36:59

Yeah, it's it's usually um, you know, uh murderer.

SPEAKER_01 37:05

Yeah, just terrible terrible. Um yeah, I mean, Keir Starmer, uh, there was a meeting I think Trump might have been in the in the room with him and uh could have been at the White House actually, where he's like, Yeah, well, you know, we can assure you we do have free speech. It's like, are you Chutzpah? Where's the lightning strike? You know, it's like, dude, who do you think but I mean, do you think they believe in their heads that it's still free speech, we're just getting rid of all this other stuff. I mean, I I wonder, uh I mean, I try to get in their heads all the time. Um I think that to me a leader like that is wanting to ban to the degree they are feels like they're losing a grip on society um that they should have. I I'm not even sure that a leader should yeah, to me, culture is ground up, it's not not top down. But um uh and but but it's it's one of those situations where once you I think they're in a situation where we ban this, okay. Now we're accused of not applying it equally because censorship is never applied equally, you know? And so they go over here, and before you know it, you got the situation where it's whack-a mole. They're just whacking all these gophers as they or moles as they come up, you know. That's my read on it. But but also the thing with England too is that it's it's got a I think it's long had a culture of of suppression, which I would probably tie to the class system. Um I interviewed a very interesting uh English guy who who's in the States now, he imports um uh or restores old Italian zombie films and things like that from the from Everything's Back to Horror. Everything's back to horror. No, but it's a fascinating story, this guy, because in in in the in the 80s when the VHS came out, there was a lot of hysteria around that. Like and the chief censor at the time, he was there from like 75 to like 85, right right through into the the Thatcher era. He was making decisions like if you see uh uh blood on a breast, we we edit it. Now there's no science that says people will be instantly inflamed when they see this, society will crumble. That that was his taste, you know, that was his um he was reacting to it, so cutting it out. So what I meant is like this this guy, he's a young kid at the time, and he's wanting to collect all these films, most of them are banned, and and and cut to ribbons. If they're there, they're they're heavily edited. So he's going to hot to the to Holland and places like that, the Netherlands and stuff, and and doing these little black market sort of swaps and smuggling his VHS's back in to the to the country. But the pause button was a big one for people back then. Talk about the the printing press causing all this sort of trouble, because you could you could pause on the dirty bits and the violent bits.

SPEAKER_04 40:17

Yep. Well, it's incredible. Every every piece of technology represents an existential threat to society. Well, every time.

SPEAKER_00 40:26

And you know, we I mean we're we're laughing about this now, but at the time it was like, how are we gonna deal with the pause button?

SPEAKER_01 40:31

Like it was actually quite a big a big deal. But but for him the this this guy was telling me that um there there was a statement or or some sort of public um an interview where where the chief censor said, I'm not worried about certain people, it's the it's the panel beader in his bed sit in Bedford. So he's saying it's the working class guy in his studio, you know, pausing this thing and rewinding and looking again. He said, I'm worried about the lower classes. And of course, art cinema wasn't treated that harshly, you know, because educated people would be watching it.

SPEAKER_04 41:10

Um I think it's the responsibility of the upper class to protect the lower class against their their base insults, their base instincts.

SPEAKER_01 41:19

Yeah. So that that and I think that in England that that class system is just way more pronounced still in a way that we sort of it's easy probably for an American and even a New Zealander to to not grasp like a lot of this is driving it for me. You know, that's my theory anyway.

SPEAKER_04 41:37

Yeah, that's that's interesting. Oh, and I want to return to your your earlier question about Starmer saying, well, of course we have free speech. Uh I I think it's it's interesting because um, you know, if you look at sometimes countries like China or what's happening in Hong Kong, they will say, of course we have free speech, but what you're talking about isn't free speech. So it's very easy to say we have free speech when you make these huge exceptions to it and just decree by fiat that that's no longer free speech. If we don't like it, that means it isn't free speech. So why would you want to you know protect something that isn't free speech in the first place? Uh and this is something you can see um, you know, across countries, across governments, across political parties. Um, everybody has their uh little carve-outs that aren't actually free speech. Um and so it's very uh I think it's it's sort of a cognitive dissonance that comes really simply to people because most people don't want to say they're on the side of censorship. It's uncool. Um, you know, you don't want to come across that way. So it's it's you know, just an easy out to say, yes, I absolutely, you know, the the free speech, but of course I scored free speech, but yeah, that's not free speech.

SPEAKER_01 42:51

Well we get that on our on our social medias, people going, it's not free speech, you clowns. It's hate speech. That's the difference. And it's like, well, no, no, I'm sorry, that won't do it. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 43:02

I I I hope someday um you know people can understand the the risks of really broad um conceptions of hate speech. You know, I I've been following the news um in Australia, for example, with the new uh laws that have been passed uh after the terrific shooting uh in December. And uh I hope it's clear to people how dangerous these laws are. If um, you know, I saw someone was wearing uh wearing a t-shirt with a slogan that the government decreed hateful and is now arresting people for. That's scary. That's not something healthy in a democracy.

SPEAKER_01 43:34

No, it's not, and I don't know how it helps the Jewish community, I don't know how it helps any minorities to for for people who might be uh naturally hostile to see a government cracking down on what should be completely permissible in a do uh in a democracy for us, you know? That's where the whole narrative of like we're driving this comes from. You know, I I think it's damaging to relations between groups.

SPEAKER_04 44:08

Yeah, absolutely. Uh one example that I I really think is is interesting, and I I'm not sure if these numbers have changed in the past couple of years, but I would have to, you know, see if there's been new data on it. But uh there are a number of countries that ban Holocaust denial. Um, you know, especially European countries, the idea that um this kind of speech is so fundamentally um disruptive to society, disruptive to minority communities, uh specifically the Jewish community, that governments have to censor it to protect people from harm and to protect people from anti-Semitism. But the countries that ban it have higher rates of anti-Semitism than the United States, for example, which does not ban Holocaust denial, um, which under the First Amendment could not ban it. And a lot of people will point to the US and say, how horrible is it that um you allow people to say this without censorship? Well, it doesn't actually make society more hospitable um to Jewish communities to ban this speech. Well, there's no and that's important.

SPEAKER_00 45:07

Yeah, it is.

SPEAKER_04 45:08

I mean, there's no real proof that any of this stuff works to to um I mean have you hit have you uncovered anything that that suggests that uh hate speech laws mean less racism or or uh less if if I did maybe I would change my mind about the the big beautiful project of free speech, but I I don't see it there. What I I I don't see it fixing problems, I see it causing more polarization, censorship, uh and I also see it giving governments power, uh vast power, to censor political speech uh in ways that I think infringe on really important debates, even if those debates um sometimes contain speech that I find offensive, disagree with, don't really think is right or accurate or kind. Uh it gives governments a lot of power uh to infringe on uh what should just be core political speech. And that's always a thing you need to avoid. I I personally I believe in human beings. I believe ultimately we can solve our problems. I don't necessarily believe that um government officials can solve those problems for us by telling us what we can see and think and believe.

SPEAKER_01 46:16

No, w with with some of the cultural issues, um there is a like let's force a consensus here. Like let's take the debate away from uh from society and we'll just we'll make the call for you, I think, with the the gender critical thing. And I'm sympathetic to both sides of that debate, but um it it had to be a debate. People had to talk about it. People had to get into the corners, the nooks and crannies, the the difficulties, the uh we had to learn where there was going to be complete impasses, it would not go away. I mean, I can live with that sort of ambiguity and and and and stuff like that, but um uh many can't, many probably a bit more black and white.

SPEAKER_04 47:03

But and one thing that I go on.

SPEAKER_01 47:05

No, no, well, we just had to we had to have that debate. We have to have those debates. It's it's it's you have to be able to talk about things.

SPEAKER_04 47:12

And and one thing I I I like to point people to is, you know, in the US, um I I think in the past hundred years there have been a lot of that there's still a lot of work to be done, but there have been a lot of really incredible um advances and movements uh by people advocating for minority communities. I mean, uh until the 70s, women couldn't have credit cards in their own names. Uh it's this stuff takes time, uh, it's a lot more recently than one might realize.

SPEAKER_01 47:40

Two marriages later. No, it's right.

SPEAKER_04 47:44

Um but you know, free speech is vital to those movements. And if you take away free speech, um who do you think the government is going to silence? Minority communities. Yeah, progress isn't isn't going to be achieved uh by giving government the power to silence progress.

SPEAKER_01 48:02

No, no. Well, you know, the the the Palestine thing's interesting because a lot of the people that are really up in arms now would have been very pro-hate speech laws two years ago or three years ago. They would have been. They are the same people. Even in in our country, a lot of the people that are getting, quote, worked up about bans and everything uh were the people that were really championing hate speech laws. Um so a bit of self-reflection goes a long way because what they're basically saying is everything I believe is good speech, everything you believe is bad speech. It's like, well, is really, really, is that the way it works?

SPEAKER_04 48:43

It's like that's something that I've been uh, you know, especially trying to convey. Um, because when I speak to students, um, students tend college students tend to be more left-leaning, more liberal. That's often tends to be the case. And uh, you know, sometimes I've gotten questions from them like, how can you think it's okay for hateful speech, for cruel speech, uh to be protected, to for people to uh be allowed to walk down the street yelling hate slogans, and it's just fine. Um, and one, they have their own speech, they can counteract it. Uh, but two, I I'd like to explain to these people who's in power today. Do you really want Donald Trump deciding what hate speech is? You probably wouldn't like that outcome. Uh, and in fact, I think we're seeing the outcome of what it means uh when you know, we we had our Pam Bandi uh say not too long ago that hate speech isn't protected. Do you really want the Trump administration to decide what's hateful? Probably not. So the only safe way to make sure that your rights can't be violated is to make sure other people's rights can't be violated. It's not always comfortable, it's not always fun, but that's just the basics of a free society. That's the that's the trade-off.

SPEAKER_01 49:56

Yeah, well, uh, I say this to people that sort of push back on me. It's like, oh, you defended this group and you shouldn't have defended them, and you should. It's like we've never really defended individuals at all, honestly, if we were to be honest about it. It's always defending a principle. That's all all it ever is. The principle can ever face at times, but it's interchangeable because if I'm allowing for um if I'm pushing against a ban on say publicly public venues, uh having having a a controversial speaker in, if I win, then every speaker is going to win along with me. Exactly. The person's polar opposite the counterpart is going to be able to um benefit from that. Uh but but you know, people still don't still don't get it. It's a simple, it can it's very simple free speech, but people do get tangled out still, don't they?

SPEAKER_04 50:55

Um they do. Uh and I I think it's uh, you know, people who care about the principle of free speech, they're always gonna be cisphists, they're always gonna be rolling that boulder up the hill. Uh, but that's it's been that way throughout human history. Uh I I think obviously some things are different now. Social media is a little different, um, you know, the way that certain technology operates, sure, is a little different than it was 500 years ago. But human beings are still the same, uh, for the most part. And so we're still going to be fighting those same impulses that we all have. I think all of us have a little sensor in us, some bigger than others. Uh, and that's just human nature. And so um I I'm okay with knowing that I will always be rolling this boulder up the hill.

What Sarah Will Cover On Tour

SPEAKER_01 51:42

Yeah. Well, um, so we've been talking a while, it's been fantastic. I've really enjoyed it. Um, but but let's just let's go through a little bit of a preview of what you would like to speak about when you're here, and then we'll go through some of your dates again. But um so so what would you like to speak to New Zealanders about, to Kiwis? What would you like to do? What do you want to apart to Kiwis?

SPEAKER_04 52:06

Um so I want to uh you know use my book as a launching off point about you know, a broader discussion about institutions um not being able to stand by free expression um and choosing um other things over free speech, uh things that seem more appealing at the time, but are actually really damaging to society in the long run. Um so in this case, it's universities saying, uh, yeah, I'm gonna take that two million check. And if it comes with some strings attached, um, so be it. Uh and you know, I I want to talk about how that exchange, um, that price tag that you're willing to put on your values actually hurts a lot of people. Uh, it hurts um students who are actually maybe dissonance from uh that government that you are from the country that you're taking money from, how it hurts academics who want to be able to speak. Um, and so, you know, using that as a launching off point, I'm gonna talk about, you know, more broadly in society, how we're um choosing other things over free expression and how uh, you know, it might create uh a quieter, less interesting, um, less intellectual, less free world.

SPEAKER_01 53:20

Going back to what we were just talking about, there could be pushback on the whole Trump thing because I think a lot of people who are upset at the wogue, who have sort of gravitated towards us, may be like, well, no, no, no, he's he's better than the others. He's actually doing really so articulating that's gonna be quite important and and and re revealing, you know, the depth of some of the censorship that that is happening.

SPEAKER_04 53:42

I I am more than happy to uh you know explain the full picture of that, uh, because you know, especially if you're not living in the US, maybe you're not seeing all of it. Uh, but it's really been a society-wide effort uh from the Trump administration trying to silence its critics. So universities, um, law firms, media outlets, politicians, he's accused of sedition. I I mean, it's incredible. We're having uh, you know, in some ways, debates that we thought we settled a hundred years ago in the United States about sedition, uh and things like that. Uh, but it, you know, some people look at that and they say, well, you know, I don't like universities on like media outlets anyway. So who cares? Um obviously I really strongly disagree with that, but um, you know, he's also targeting everyday people too. Uh the administration's targeting everyday people. We have um our Department of Homeland Security uh actually sending out uh these secretive subpoenas to uh sites like Google to get the information of people who have criticized ICE uh and you know immigration enforcement in the United States on social media. That's incredible. It's disturbing and shocking.

SPEAKER_00 54:53

Yeah, what are they gonna do with that information?

SPEAKER_04 54:55

Like what what there's been a few people have come forward who have said they've had DHS agents visit their house and question them uh about emails they've sent criticizing ICE. It's it's shocking levels of oppression.

SPEAKER_01 55:11

Uh and so just to just to intimidate, probably. Sure. So that there might not be arrests or anything.

SPEAKER_04 55:18

Sure. And and that uh intimidation alone, you know, that's the whole concept of chilled speech. This idea that, you know, okay, maybe this time they were just questioning me. What's gonna happen the next time they show up at my door? Yeah, and that's that that's that fear that's being instilled. And I think the fear that you see in um societies around the world, some very authoritarian ones, that uh there might be a real consequence if I speak my mind about the government. And to see that happening in the United States is shocking. Uh, it's unacceptable. So uh that's something we're we're fighting here, and uh we we hope to see that.

SPEAKER_01 55:57

Um yeah, because because that pushback may happen. It's like, oh, he's a free speech hero, you know. Um look, with all of these people, that yes, they do do some good things that you you like and you appreciate. Biden would have, Trump would have, all all our leaders, Starmer's probably done a few things that that but you you've got to be consistent with the principle. Um because because again, it's not about that the administration, it's what what gets normalized that people really have to appreciate. It's like you know, the whole police arriving at your door and and knocking and talking for like 15 minutes and then leaving. That's a really unsettling experience. Yes.

SPEAKER_04 56:42

No matter what country you're in. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 56:44

It reminds me of the beginning of the trial by Franz Kafka. That's a horrible scene, isn't it? Where he wakes up and it's like, why it's because the thing with free speech is you often uh with speech or or with speech problems, that the government taking taking issue to things you say is you often don't know what you said that could have offended them. Like Franz K. You know, you're going, I did say that surely it wouldn't have been that. Oh, it's that.

SPEAKER_04 57:15

And then so everything you say, you have a second thought about everything. Oh, what if this gets me in trouble? And so you you become your own internal censor. Um, the state kind of forces you to be your own police, uh, to stop yourself and to say, is that safe for me to say? Is that allowed? And and you know, that's kind of the scariest, most disturbing form of censorship when we're forced to internalize it into ourselves. And I I don't want to see that happen to Americans.

SPEAKER_01 57:42

No, no, or anyone. Well, it can happen to you, but not me. No, but no, that that's right. Well, um, look, we've been talking uh an hour and it's been fantastic. I've really, really enjoyed it. And I I hope to meet you in Wellington. I'll come down and and great, looking forward to it.

SPEAKER_04 57:58

Yeah, no, don't bring your horror DVDs.

SPEAKER_00 58:02

I'll have a stack of them under my trick. Where do I put these? Get them out of here.

SPEAKER_01 58:09

Um, so so you'll be in Auckland on the on the 19th. So this is like um a month away now. Um yeah, it's coming up. Yeah, it's coming up. Auckland on the 19th. We've got Toronga, which I was I just actually did a panel up there last week, and that's uh a lovely um lovely town, actually. A smaller center, but it's on on the um the the east coast there and uh the Bay of Plenty, it's called, and uh that i i it's one of us, it's a smaller center, but normally there's a really good turnout for us, so that's awesome. Wellington is is that's the beltway, that's our DC. So that'll be that'll be fun. That's on the 27th.

SPEAKER_04 58:48

Well then I'm not going, no.

SPEAKER_01 58:52

We'll get some dignitaries and important people to meet you. Um Christchurch in the South Island, uh, our second largest city, that's on the 23rd. And Dunedin, the penguin place. Yeah, so happy feet. Um, so that's on the 24th. So that's a really good tour. Uh, and yeah, getting you down to Dunedin's grade, like I said, uh a student town. And um hopefully there'll be some really good conversation to be had there. So fantastic. Looking forward to it. Um, I think what what you're speaking about is very important, especially with the uh some of the laws that are coming up here. It's like wildfire, isn't it? Obviously, there's coordination. I don't want to sound conspiratorial, but it's like, oh, well, they're doing the band. Well, let's give it a go now. Like they're doing our buddies are backing us up, you know. It's got that.

SPEAKER_04 59:44

Yeah, I don't even think it's even conspiracy. I think they say, you know, oh, that looks good over there. Let's try it here.

Tour Dates And How To Reach Us

SPEAKER_01 59:50

Well, yeah. Yeah. Anyway, okay, so um, Sarah, thanks um for joining us. It was it was wonderful. And I'll do my sign-off, which I hope I get right this time. So, people, if you um enjoyed this uh fantastic episode, I don't know why you wouldn't, but anyway, if you enjoyed this fantastic episode or and you want to speak to us uh about anything, or maybe talk about uh you have questions or or you know, there's ideas you have for future episodes, reach out to us at pod or podcast at fsu.nz. That's podcast at fsu.nz. And do uh look at our socials. Um uh we'll have a link here advertising the tour, but you really want to be a part of this, it's gonna be a fantastic tour. You there'll be QA's, you'll get to ask questions, it'll be really good. So um uh support Sarah and come and um get get your questions ready and uh be ready for a very enlightening uh enlightening evening.

SPEAKER_03 1:00:49

All right, can we? Thank you for listening to Free2Speak. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and consider sharing the podcast with others. We release new episodes regularly, and subscribing is the easiest way to stay up to date. If you have any questions, feedback, or suggestions, you can contact us at podcast at fsu.nz. If you want to find out more about the New Zealand Free Speech Union, visit fsu.nz.