FSU’s Sara Gon on how to cool SA’s heat generated by freedom of speech (especially on social media)

In this fascinating interview, the director of SA’s Free Speech Union Sara Gon examines examples of where applying that freedom landed protagonists in hot water – referencing Elon Musk and Pavel Durov and local examples Tim Noakes, Roman Cabanac, Chris Hart, Renaldo Gouws and Pretoria Girls High. Her suggestions are to identify yourself, take responsibility, and act respectfully, even if opposing ideas seem abhorrent. Ms Gon practised law for 17 years and is the head of strategic engagement policy at SA’s oldest think-tank, the prestigious Institute of RaceRelations. She spoke to BizNews editor Alec Hogg.

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

Join us for BizNews’ first investment-focused conference on Thursday, 12 September, in Hermanus, featuring top experts like Frans Cronje, Piet Viljoen, and more. Get insights on electricity and exploiting SA’s gas bounty from new and familiar faces. Register here.

Watch here

Listen here

Highlights from the interview

In this interview with Alec Hogg, Sara Gon, Head of Strategic Engagement at the Institute for Race Relations, discusses the complexities of social media, free speech, and the challenges these pose in modern society. Gon argues that social media, unlike traditional media, is more akin to a communication tool like a telephone, rather than a curated source of information. She highlights the dangers of misinformation and how social media allows unverified information to spread rapidly without accountability. Gon expresses concern over the growing influence of “Wokeism,” which she sees as limiting free speech by imposing a narrow set of moral values, particularly on university campuses.

She also touches on the issue of anonymity online, suggesting that it can lead to irresponsible behaviour, as people are not held accountable for their statements. The conversation shifts to the controversial handling of the Pretoria Girls High incident, where Gon criticizes the Department of Education for its mismanagement, which, in her view, perpetuated harm instead of resolving the issue. She emphasizes the need for a balance between freedom and responsibility, warning that the unchecked power to destroy others’ lives on social media can eventually backfire on the perpetrators.

Edited transcript of the interview ___STEADY_PAYWALL___

00:00:08:23 – 00:00:43:19
Alec Hogg
While many minds have been occupied recently by the whole debate around free speech, Elon Musk is a libertarian, but someone who thinks like Elon Musk in South Africa is considered a right-winger. What the heck is going on? We also have Pavel Durov, the billionaire who founded Telegram, being arrested because his app is not moderating itself as the French authorities believe it should be.

00:00:43:21 – 00:01:13:15
Alec Hogg
Sara Gon is with the Institute for Race Relations. This means she comes with a whole lot of credibility. Before we start, this is the oldest think tank in South Africa, and she’s the head of strategic engagement there. But she also has a particular interest in free speech, and we’ve asked her to give us some insights into what the heck is going on in the world.

00:01:13:17 – 00:01:33:05
Alec Hogg
Sara, thanks for joining us. Maybe we can just go back into your background to start off with. I see from your various bios that you were actually in the legal profession, a lawyer for 17 years, and then decided to, I guess you could call it, move into public service.

00:01:33:07 – 00:01:58:18
Sara Gon
Yes, I helped found and, for a period, managed the Johannesburg Philharmonic Orchestra. I’m not a musician, but I played admin—let’s put it that way—which, like all other good entities, needs someone to do. Eventually, I drifted back into what I guess is my love for politics in general.

00:01:58:19 – 00:02:33:05
Sara Gon
I now run the unit linked to the Free Speech Union of South Africa. I am currently the sole employee, but we are allied with the UK, Australian, and New Zealand organizations. We’ve just formed an international association to assist and encourage other organizations in other countries to join the fight for free speech.

00:02:33:07 – 00:03:00:19
Alec Hogg
So this is your sweet spot. What about free speech? Let’s start with Elon Musk. He regards himself as a free speech absolutist. Now, when you talk to guys in the crypto field, if they’re Bitcoin absolutists, they say, “Forget anything else in cryptocurrency, stick with Bitcoin.” What does it mean in Elon’s perspective when he describes himself that way?

00:03:00:21 – 00:03:23:05
Sara Gon
If you are an absolutist, I think it essentially means what it says. Anything can be said, which means anything can be heard or read, whether you like it or not, irrespective of whether it may have consequences for the country, such as encouraging insurrection. You’re okay to say it.

00:03:23:07 – 00:03:49:06
Sara Gon
South Africa is interesting because we have a lot of free speech. The limits on our free speech constitutionally are really only around attempts to overthrow the state or hate speech that incites violence immediately. It’s fairly circumscribed, covering areas such as race, religion, gender, and a fourth area. It was expanded by what we call the Equality Act, where people can sue civilly for committing hate speech. We’ve seen the Penny Sparrows of the world be subject to the consequences of that.

00:03:49:08 – 00:04:19:22
Sara Gon
I would say that although we haven’t had any decisions that have said it’s completely unconstitutional, I would favor the limitations provided by the Constitution. I think free speech is best dealt with in the public sphere, which, for better or worse, is what you see happening on social media. It’s people responding to things, calling out, writing alternatives. I think the courts should be the last option for dealing with free speech and its consequences and should be used very, very rarely. We’re not supportive of the criminalization of hate speech.

Read more: RW Johnson – Why has SA not followed Zimbabwe (yet)? – Part Two

00:04:19:22 – 00:04:51:21
Alec Hogg
I guess the problem with all of this is that individuals who get attacked for exercising their right to free speech often have their lives changed, sometimes almost destroyed. I remember what happened with Chris Hart. He wrote something pretty innocuous, if you go back to it today, and that caused him to be fired by Standard Bank. They didn’t like the reaction that it evoked. You have something similar right now with a serious protagonist of free speech, Roman Cabanac, who’s been appointed by John Steenhuisen, the leader of the opposition, to be his chief of staff in the Department of Agriculture.

00:04:51:21 – 00:05:20:08
Alec Hogg
There’s a lot of unhappiness about that in certain quarters because he is a guy who’s exercised his right to free speech, but it could indeed affect his career prospects. How do you view something like that?

00:05:56:01 – 00:06:31:05
Sara Gon
Well, you see, the problem is that this is largely a feature of where things are politically and ideologically, depending on which group of elites has the currency. In this country, one of those issues is your political views or your attitudes toward or against issues of race. To my mind, not only do you have the right to free speech, but there is a responsibility involved.

00:06:31:06 – 00:07:04:12
Sara Gon
This means that, for example, if you post something on X (formerly known as Twitter) that may be misinterpreted, you must be prepared to defend it or face the consequences. It’s very much a societal response, and the arguments for and against free speech shape how society reacts. I think the only problem is that while we’re very eager to exercise our free speech, we’re not particularly well-versed in recognizing the responsibilities that come with it, and that there could be repercussions.

00:07:04:17 – 00:07:34:14
Sara Gon
That’s part of the equation. Of course, social media is the ideal medium for expressing things poorly, impulsively, or unwisely. So much of it is about how you say something. You are absolutely entitled to say it, but when you enter a very public platform, you need to be alert to the potential consequences, and that responsibility lies with you.

00:07:34:14 – 00:07:57:09
Sara Gon
I think in Roman’s case, part of the problem is that his podcast has a clear leaning, but the issues he grapples with are things that have appeared on broader platforms where anyone can see them, share them, and they spread like wildfire.

00:07:57:12 – 00:08:23:09
Sara Gon
This is where the idea of responsibility comes in. I’m very keen on promoting to future generations the idea of controversy, insults, and criticism, but also helping people understand the distinction between those things and actually being homophobic or racist. This is part of a process that has to be learned, debated, and discussed, and we don’t do nearly enough of that regarding the issues behind subjects that lead to cancellation or attack.

00:08:23:09 – 00:08:32:20
Alec Hogg
It’s interesting when you consider another member of the Democratic Alliance, Renaldo Gouws, and the controversy that erupted. I guess he was being a bit of a shock jock when he said what he said, and then backtracked because if you watch the whole clip, he said some horrific things to grab the attention of the viewer.

00:08:32:22 – 00:08:57:09
Alec Hogg
But afterward, he kind of backtracked, saying that if he had really believed that, people would have canceled him or something similar. Unfortunately for him, what he said was so shocking that people have now taken that and used it against him. I guess there’s a very big lesson in that as well.

00:08:57:12 – 00:09:19:22
Alec Hogg
Sara?

00:09:20:17 – 00:09:47:09
Sara Gon
There is, but as you said, the point Renaldo was making was not necessarily an unusual or singularly held view. He was using shock jock language to try and convey his point. But now you’ve got a report from the press ombudsman who has essentially ordered IOL to issue an apology because what they did—and this is what I mean about poor journalism, maybe even unprofessionalism—was nasty. They spliced out something that looked fundamentally racist in its extreme, outside of context.

00:09:47:11 – 00:10:16:17
Sara Gon
Now, Renaldo probably realized fairly quickly that the capacity for that to happen can completely undermine the point he was trying to make, which was not invalid. But we live in a society where racism and the use of race and race nationalism are political tools to up the ante and convey a view.

00:10:44:03 – 00:11:08:00
Sara Gon
And we’ve seen it from the other side, Julius Malema and others often use similar tactics. It’s not that these subjects can’t be discussed, but it all comes with responsibility. I think it’s unforgivable—it’s just extraordinarily poor journalism. It got a result they wanted, but he didn’t, as simple as that.

00:11:08:05 – 00:11:43:07
Sara Gon
So he’s really using institutions like ombudsmen and councils that monitor these sorts of things to keep professionals honest and on track. That’s how society works—whether through the media in a broad sense or other means. It’s not always clean; it’s sometimes very messy and can have appalling results. But that’s why you have to tackle the ideas and have the debates, which we’re not doing enough of.

00:11:43:09 – 00:12:11:22
Alec Hogg
Sorry to interrupt, but what about the arrest of Pavel Durov? He arrives on his private jet—he’s a very wealthy guy, obviously brilliant. He left Russia ten years ago because of the issues he was facing there. He goes to France, gets off the jet, and is arrested and put into jail because his platform, Telegram, is not being moderated well enough, according to the French officials, and presumably others as well.

00:12:12:00 – 00:12:18:22
Alec Hogg
It doesn’t seem fair, but on the other hand, I guess the responsibility has to lie somewhere.

00:12:19:00 – 00:12:47:09
Sara Gon
Well, you see, I think the problem here is that we don’t know enough. I’ve read a report that said the most the French have advised about the matter is that he breached criminal law by supposedly knowing about some of the criminal activities crossing his platform, like drug trafficking, terrorism, etc.

00:12:47:11 – 00:13:13:12
Sara Gon
Without knowing the details, it’s very difficult to comment on whether there’s justification or if it’s an overreach—an impingement on free speech. So it’s terribly difficult to comment wisely on this. I’m not well-versed in the DSA, and I don’t think anyone is. I think the French are keeping it very close to the chest for the meantime.

00:13:13:14 – 00:13:53:12
Sara Gon
But it does raise a broader issue. Let me go back a step. One of the problems with treating social media as a publisher of information and requiring moderation is that it’s a thankless task. So you’re either going to let everything go through, or you clamp down on aspects and require moderation, which cannot be properly policed anyway. This is left up to the platform’s discretion to judge whether something doesn’t pass muster or might be criminal.

00:13:53:14 – 00:14:28:11
Sara Gon
The problem is that it may just be a view people don’t like. There’s been a plethora of people removed from other platforms for committing hate speech when all they were doing was expressing an opinion that a particular powerful, vested interest group doesn’t like. I don’t think that social media platforms will ever be able to properly monitor this because it becomes subjective and outside their area of expertise.

00:14:28:11 – 00:14:58:19
Sara Gon
Now, to compare that with the legacy media, we’ve never had issues with the fact that traditionally, radio, television, and print could monitor what they broadcast and decide what to publish. That’s the whole purpose of professional engagement and the release of information. That’s why media outlets will have different biases, but they still adhere to a professional code.

00:14:58:19 – 00:15:19:00
Sara Gon
They do decide what to curate, and they won’t print every letter in a newspaper. I know from my days of furious letter writing that I had to sign my name even if they didn’t agree to print it. It had to happen, and they knew it was legitimate.

00:15:19:03 – 00:15:42:03
Sara Gon
They had to have an address so they could verify I wasn’t just some party political operative trying to get a view across. Those controls existed, but we didn’t see that as interfering with freedom of speech because the right to say anything is not, per se, the automatic right to have it published to the world.

00:15:42:05 – 00:16:03:19
Sara Gon:
And I think one of the problems is that social media has been treated as a form of media, and I’m not sure it really is. I’m not sure that social media isn’t much more like a cell phone or telephone. It’s a means for getting stuff out. It’s not a source of curating information. And so, the problem with misinformation, disinformation, is a bit like having a phone call.

00:16:03:19 – 00:16:35:14
Sara Gon:
If I were to phone you and say, “Look, I think it’s time we sort of, you know, initiated a coup against the government,” if the conversation is between you and me, then unless there’s suspicion from the authorities that something may be going on, they can’t intervene. In such cases, they can then subpoena information in terms of criminal law, which is how things have always been done, and presumably, how it works in France as well.

00:16:35:16 – 00:17:08:11
Sara Gon:
Then you’re dealing, you’re going outside of the speech to attack the potential criminality. And I think regarding social media as media is probably fundamentally wrong. It’s a means of communication; it’s not a professional publication service. The problem is that everyone is expressing any view left, right, and center, and people are being canceled and disconnected at a rapid rate.

00:17:08:16 – 00:17:32:09
Sara Gon:
But it always brings up—and I think the type of measures that countries want to put in place for curation miss that point. For example, you can’t create a fake name. Your identity should be known, in other words, the way it would be if you were publishing in a newspaper. Most celebrities, whatever they say, you know they’ve said it.

00:17:32:14 – 00:18:04:10
Sara Gon:
But I’m inclined to think that people who sit in dark rooms and want to, for example, progress transgender women in women’s sports might be a little less rude, abrasive, and aggressive if their names were out there, and they could be perhaps sued for defamation. You know, it’s a mean and nasty environment, but it’s really like a gigantic billboard.

Read more: Exposed: The modus operandi of SA’s cyber crime cartels…

00:18:04:12 – 00:18:29:01
Alec Hogg:
I like that because where I come from in the financial game—and again, this has also gotten distracted somehow—if you wrote a story about a company that could move the price of that company, you had to identify yourself. That was one of the regulations George Palmer started introducing years and years ago.

00:18:29:01 – 00:18:57:16
Alec Hogg:
Today, anybody can write any damn thing they want about any company. In fact, there are people who live in anonymity and could be pumping and dumping shares for all we know because we don’t know who these people are. It’s almost like a regression, a drift of society, where you can hide behind anonymity. I love the quote that you have from one of my heroes, Benjamin Franklin.

00:18:57:18 – 00:19:21:21
Alec Hogg:
On your page about free speech. I’m going to read it because I think it leads into the final point I wanted to talk to you about. It says, “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech.” Absolutely love that. And surely that’s what we’re in pursuit of—wisdom as human beings.

00:19:21:23 – 00:19:53:04
Alec Hogg:
But my final point was about Tim Noakes. He is a guy who is internationally highly respected and regarded for the research that he’s done. He’s also a man who had the courage to change his mind on some very fundamental nutritional areas. He believes—and he said this at one of our conferences—that every idea you have, you should attack as though you were the other side, to see if there are any flaws in it.

00:19:53:06 – 00:20:17:08
Alec Hogg:
And yet Tim Noakes has been canceled, attacked on Covid-19, his views on Covid-19, which you may or may not agree with, but surely he has the right to say them. In many instances, he’s not given a platform anymore to even express himself. If anybody has the credibility to share ideas, it must be a man like him.

00:20:17:10 – 00:21:00:10
Sara Gon:
What you see, that’s a political fashion. We have very much the influence of Wokeism, for want of a better word. And it’s always saying that there’s a very limited moral set of values that are deemed by the people who hold them to determine whether you have a right to say anything. We’re seeing this on college campuses. I mean, the whole Israel-Gaza conflict and the response to it are examples where sort of adults are not quite entering the room. Free speech is not a free-for-all in the sense that, as I said, there are no consequences. People can even accuse Israel of committing genocide. But what they do is shut down or deny access to those who would refute that view, subjecting them to discipline. This is very much what the UK found and why the Free Speech Union of the UK was formed. Universities, once associated with being able to say the most outrageous things, are now environments where you can only reach the truth, even if you can’t always get there. The goal is to seek it by expressing ideas, attacking them, agreeing with them, changing your mind, etc.

00:21:00:12 – 00:21:45:06
Sara Gon:
So it’s a very authoritarian impulse. Generally, in South Africa, we’ve managed to avoid that, but there are pockets of it in our political sphere. We’ve seen it in schools and universities here. And that’s where the ideas on social media come in. You know, people believe they can say whatever they want, but that’s the essence of the debate on what should govern social interaction. And it’s important. I mean, we’re so used to insulting politicians. I think if you took away South Africans’ right to insult a politician—and I think they’ve tried it a few times—it’s never quite succeeded, but it’s come close.

00:21:45:07 – 00:22:12:04
Sara Gon:
The recent security legislation ran that risk. The bottom line is, if you can’t defend your ideas, even if you don’t defend them in personal terms, if someone doesn’t defend them successfully or doesn’t think they have a good point, you don’t know what you’re dealing with. You can’t advance a conversation, you can’t implement new ideas because a particular elite has decided that a certain ethos should prevail.

00:22:12:08 – 00:23:10:09
Sara Gon:
And that’s really what much of the Anglosphere is dealing with at the moment. And I think that I’ve seen it particularly with regard to Musk—there’s this idea that left-wing media is calling for him to be banned because he can say what he likes on X; he can interview Donald Trump. It’s extraordinary. Do you mean to say that the people on the left, whom they admire, that other people are critical of, can speak, but those perceived as right-wing can’t? If they can’t possibly be correct, you can’t deal with what you don’t know about. And that’s why the insulting, the odious, the critical is important—so that you can deal with it, so that you know if there are problem areas in society. And I think, as I say, that industry particularly is running into problems in that respect.

00:23:10:11 – 00:24:06:13
Alec Hogg:
You mentioned schools—Victoria Girls. Have you got an opinion on what went on there?

00:24:06:15 – 00:24:35:00
Sara Gon:
You know, I think the biggest problem, at the end of the day, lies at the feet of the Department of Education because they have pursued this in a political manner. It’s destructive. It’s reminiscent of the attacks on alleged racism in schools. And when the hard work was done and the evidence was out there, it invariably failed. And it appears that his successors have just followed the same path, without ideas on how to deal with it.

00:24:35:03 – 00:25:47:10
Sara Gon:
Schools need to be empowered to handle things. Issues should not be managed by the GDP—they should respond to something properly investigated. In the end, the result of all the allegations made on different sides was that children, both black and white, were not found guilty of racism. Although that won’t necessarily be prominently reported in the media, there’s something particularly heinous about allowing a very niche set of views that restrict people’s rights to speak. They need to learn how to say what they want, how to debate, and how to engage.

00:25:47:12 – 00:26:14:03
Sara Gon:
Sure. Pretoria Girls was an awful example of how things shouldn’t be done, particularly when dealing with children and social media. It’s a very easy issue to exploit, and in that respect, I think a lot of the culpability lies with the Department of Education because they handled it in every way that it shouldn’t have been handled.

00:26:14:05 – 00:26:37:01
Sara Gon:
It allows things to be perpetuated because it limits the ability for the evidence to come out, and lives can be destroyed. And I think that’s the other thing people misunderstand—if they feel empowered to destroy a life, they must understand that they are at risk of having their own lives destroyed in the long run.

00:26:37:06 – 00:26:51:06
Sara Gon:
It’s not a fair world; guarantees can’t be made. But the risks are there, and that’s why with every freedom, there’s a corresponding responsibility. We need to understand the responsibilities, but not shut down the opportunities.

00:26:51:08 – 00:26:59:23
Alec Hogg:
Thoroughly enjoyed chatting with Sara Gon, who is Head of Strategic Engagement at the Institute for Race Relations. I’m Alec Hogg from BizNews.com.

Read also: