Kamal Haasan finds himself cornered for his statement on language links that he insists was made out of affection. That did not stop a section of social media users from calling it an insult that breached their definition of linguistic decorum. Meanwhile, an IAS officer has drawn criticism for suggesting that students should learn to clean toilets and hostel rooms. A BJP minister faces public ire for remarks against a woman army officer that have been considered Islamophobic. Comedian Kunal Kamra’s “gaddar” jibe against a government functionary refuses to leave him in peace. These are the latest instances of prominent figures venting thoughts that are uncalled-for or avoidable in public—inadvertently or with intent—on the one-way communication lanes that characterise today’s public sphere.
We have also recently seen comedians, politicians, film stars, activists, and influencers on the wrong side of the law because their social messaging, humour, or satire is deemed discriminatory, divisive, polarising, or outright abusive. The result is a polity overwhelmed by innumerable debates on free speech limits and eroding ethics, and courts overcrowded by the likes of Rahul Gandhi, Prem Shukla and Munawar Faruqui, who insist they are victims of deliberate attempts to misinterpret or twist their comments out of context.
It is time to step back and assess how free-for-all speech, as opposed to free speech, is harming normative societal behaviour and relationships. In our society, social media users and public figures alike weaponise outrage and abuse to promote us-versus-them binaries, and desensitisation is becoming a norm. People with mass bases or holding responsible positions must desist from exploiting the shrill social media noise to float their narratives through false messaging, and by raising identity issues related to religion, caste and gender. The right to free speech gives enough leeway to articulate one’s agenda without poisoning language to dominate, dissent or distract. Social media platforms and regulators must understand the sociology of insult, which reveals three primary trends: those outraged by anything, those on the lookout for opportunities to get outraged and those who create outrage. We need to curb their expressions laced with slogans and catchlines to distort meaning and feed mistrust, and fight the gendered structuring of public insult to humiliate and domineer. Language abuse warrants a national de-addiction campaign.