Heckling and free speech

Abstract

Heckling receives little attention in the vast literature on freedom of speech. But, in a recent contribution, Jeremy Waldron explores a positive case for the practice. Waldron asks us to see heckling as a spectrum of activities, some of which should be both protected and encouraged. In his view, a primary speaker’s right to speak is not a right to a perfectly tailored (or choreographed) presentation before a subdued audience. A great deal of heckling should be treated as legitimate counter speech, covered by audience members’ own expression rights. Waldron also sees heckling as making an important contribution to broader free speech values such as pursuit of truth and political accountability. I argue that the case for treating heckling as wrongful interference with the free speech rights of primary speakers and their willing listeners is much stronger than Waldron makes out. More boisterous forms of heckling should usually be restricted to presentations by political officials or state sponsored events. In other cases, heckling should be restricted to visual forms and displays that do not directly interfere with a primary speaker’s voice.