With free speech comes responsibility

On Monday, Elon Musk brokered a deal to buy Twitter for some $44 billion. That deal, which may or may not go through, seems to be animated by Musk’s desire to advance free speech on the platform.

Shortly after announcing his bid to buy the social media giant, Musk said, “Twitter has become kind of the de facto town square, so it’s just really important that people have both the reality and the perception that they are able to speak freely within the bounds of the law.” Musk has repeatedly critiqued Twitter’s censorship. He criticized Twitter’s suspension of the New York Post (for the media outlet’s reporting of the Hunter Biden laptop story) and spoke out when The Babylon Bee was banned from the site (for its satirical article about Rachel Levine).

As Musk works to clarify his goals on Twitter, he’s made it clear that he thinks the platform is currently one-sided. In his view, “For Twitter to deserve public trust, it must be politically neutral, which effectively means upsetting the far right and the far left equally.”

Musk additionally stated, “By ‘free speech,’ I simply mean that which matches the law.” He stated on Twitter, “I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law.” So for Musk, Twitter’s bans and suspensions go beyond the law of the land, but is that the only principle that should govern freedom of speech?

The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states, “The value of freedom, as an expression of the singularity of each human person, is respected when every member of society is permitted to fulfill his personal vocation; to seek the truth and profess his religious, cultural and political ideas; to express his opinions; to choose his state of life and, as far as possible, his line of work; to pursue initiatives of an economic, social or political nature” (no. 200). Here the Church explicitly calls for the right to articulate one’s own opinions. It seems reasonable to conclude that this would extend to social media platforms, which as Musk sees, have become the public square.

For the Church, however, this does not mean anything goes. Critics of Musk worry about the limits of free speech. In the past, Twitter permitted posts directly inciting violence, as happened during the “Arab Spring.” Others are concerned about re-living the experience of harassment which they’ve endured previously on the site.

The Catholic Church teaches that limits exist for “the common good and public order.” But this requires from citizens the twin virtues of prudence and responsibility.

For Thomas Aquinas, the medieval Dominican theologian, prudence is the queen of moral virtues. According to Aquinas, prudence is regnetive, or, as he puts it, “wisdom about human affairs.” Prudence is the virtue that, as Thomas Hibbs says, “involves not simply the subordination of particulars to appropriate universals, but the appraisal of concrete, contingent circumstances.” Prudence guides the application of moral principles, animating the prudent person to apply them in day to day living.

On Twitter, prudence ought to restrain detraction and unnecessarily derogatory speech. Because prudence directs men and women to authentic human flourishing, it animates the Catholic principle which demands free speech be ordered to the common good. Authentic human freedom ultimately allows a person to distance him/herself “from everything that could hinder personal, family or social growth” (Compendium, no. 200).

In the Catholic perspective, “Human life in society is ordered, bears fruits of goodness and responds to human dignity when it is founded on truth.” For this to be brought about in a society, men and women must accept responsibility for their actions. 

On a digital platform, it’s easy to interact carelessly or anonymously. At best they can be fun and carefree. At worst, these exchanges distort reality and harm the fabric of society, of persons living in communion with one another. Particularly vicious aspects of personalities can be amplified, while personal virtues are muted or hidden. Responsibility requires authenticity and vulnerability. Only with this core of virtues can authentic exchanges take place.

Musk’s Twitter bid raises many questions about the nature of free speech. Hopefully other Catholic voices will take advantage of the moment to reflect more thoroughly on what it means in the digital public square.