Hey everyone! I am super excited to bring you this edition of Through Conversations Podcast, featuring the impressive Professor Katharine Gelber. Professor Gelber is Head of the School of Political Science and International Studies, and Professor of Politics and Public Policy at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her expertise is in freedom of speech and speech regulation. Her most recent book is called Free Speech in the Digital Age where she analyzes from a range of disciplinary perspectives, how the new technologies and global reach of the Internet are changing the theory and practice of free speech. This conversation was much needed as we talked about an issue that has been increasingly influential in our society: Hate Speech.We talked about how difficult it is to define hate speech and how can we identify if something really is hate speech, what have we interpreted as freedom of speech, hate speech and its repercussions on civil discourse, what is the chilling effect, social media and its effect on civil discourse and much more.Regarding the chilling effect, I have to point out something that I have been thinking about a lot. Professor Gelber has found evidence that this does not happen--I decided not to define what’s the chilling effect right now because I want you to listen to the conversation and get the idea by yourself.However, how can we quantify the true preferences of people if they hide it from the public? In other words, if the chilling effect is truly happening, I still don’t see how can we find evidence that supports it.In this conversation I tried to understand in a deep manner what professor Gelber has found regarding hate speech and speech regulation and I find it truly amazing and important for us to understand what hate speech really is so we can have tools to identify it but also acknowledge what is not hate speech. One thing for sure is that something that offends one but does not restrain any of one's rights, subordinates one and ranks one as inferior is not hate speech.This conversation will really help you to see clearly that there has been a disconnect in the way we communicate with ourselves, specially regarding difficult topics. When someone hurts one's feelings it does not mean one is being a victim of hate speech, and it has become increasingly evident that we have associated hate speech with feeling offended.After this episode, we will take a break for the holidays and we’ll return on Mid-January with more. I want to thank everyone who has supported this Podcast by reviewing it, subscribing to it or sharing it with a friend. It means a lot.I hope this conversation gives you as much as it gave me to reflect on.With you, Katharine Gelber.---Read More about Professor Gelber's work hereBooks:Free Speech in the Digital Age.Free Speech After 9/11Speech Matters: Getting Free Speech Right.Journal ArticleThe Effects of Civil Hate Speech Laws: Lessons from Australia---HIGHLIGHTS(3:40) How did Professor Gelber become interested in freedom of speech?(4:42 ) Has censorship migrated towards hate speech?(5:09) Why is hate speech an elastic term? Who defines hate speech?(6:29) Hate speech means a lot of things nowadays.(7:00) Should we even be using the term hate speech?(7:21) The definition of hate speech(7:59) Quanitifying hate(8:36) How can we know if hate speech is happening in the public discourse?(10:35) For it to be considered hate speech, it must fulfull three criteria: Ranking one as inferior, subordinating one and depriving one from powers.(10:46) What is the chilling effect?(11:46) Should we regulate speech?(12:24) How can we evaluate if the chilling effect is truly happening?(12:53) Report on chilling effect in the United States. Read more here(13:40) Chilling effect in Western Democracies(15:14) Confusion between public and private spheres of expression(15:57) What is the speech doing in the conversation? Are you ranking them as inferior? Are you subordinating them? Are they being deprived f