- About
- Courses
- Research
- Computational Social Science
- Critical Data Studies
- Data Science
- Economics and Information
- Education Technology
- Ethics, Law and Policy
- Human-Computer Interaction
- Human-Robot Interaction
- Incentives and Computation
- Infrastructure Studies
- Interface Design and Ubiquitous Computing
- Natural Language Processing
- Network Science
- Social Computing and Computer-supported Cooperative Work
- Technology and Equity
- People
- Career
- Undergraduate
- Info Sci Majors
- BA - Information Science (College of Arts & Sciences)
- BS - Information Science (CALS)
- BS - Information Science, Systems, and Technology
- MPS Early Credit Option
- Independent Research
- CPT Procedures
- Student Associations
- Undergraduate Minor in Info Sci
- Our Students and Alumni
- Graduation Info
- Contact Us
- Info Sci Majors
- Masters
- PHD
- Prospective PhD Students
- Admissions
- Degree Requirements and Curriculum
- Grad Student Orgs
- For Current PhDs
- Diversity and Inclusion
- Our Students and Alumni
- Graduation Info
- Program Contacts and Student Advising
The Information Science Colloquium speaker for Wednesday, October 25, will be James Grimmelmann, a professor of law at Cornell Tech and Cornell Law School. Gimmelmann studies how laws regulating software affect freedom, wealth, and power, saying, "I try to help lawyers and technologists understand each other by writing about digital copyright, search engines, privacy on social networks, online governance, and other topics in computer and Internet law."
Talk: "Listeners' Choices and the First Amendment"
Abstract: The “freedom of speech,” it is thought, primarily protects speakers. Listeners benefit from speech, but speakers do the work requiring protection. And where speakers' and listeners' goals conflict, the conventional wisdom is that speakers win. To quote the Supreme Court. "Many are those who must endure speech they do not like, but that is a necessary cost of freedom."
This view is almost completely backwards. The reason is that freedom of speech is a matching process. Who speaks to whom is determined by speakers' and listeners' choices, technical architecture, and free-speech law. In the modern communications environment, there is a fundamental structural asymmetry between speakers and listeners, because the capacity to speak vastly exceeds the capacity to listen. In a world where attention is scarce, most of the time is a listener's choice to hear rather than a speaker's choice to speak that provides the crucial normative basis to protect the freedom of speech. There is no general principle favoring speakers over listeners: the cases that appear to take the speaker's side almost always rest on the interest of some potential listener. Paying closer attention to listeners' choices makes the structure of First Amendment doctrine clearer.