To the extent that such desires take on official sanction, they constitute censorship. We must be careful in our zeal not to undo Article 19. Even in difficult times, we believe this. Again, I strongly agree. The World Press Freedom Committee on numerous occasions has asserted that more speech, not restriction of speech, is the best response to hateful utterances.
Truth drives out lies.
But it only can do this if it is permitted to be heard. In the WPFC's recent book, New Code Words for Censorship, which I hope some of you have had occasion to see, Frances D'Souza, former director of the human rights group Article XIX, expresses the same view. The best defence against racist insults, hate speech and offence is more speech, not less. Censoring expressions of hate from public discourse, she says, only drives it to deeper, darker forms. Pretending racism does not exist will not make it disappear.