speech and debate in spanish translation

speech and debate

• Pronunciation

THE BEST SPANISH-ENGLISH DICTIONARY

Get more than a translation, written by experts, translate with confidence, spanish and english example sentences, examples for everything, regional translations, say it like a local.

Making educational experiences better for everyone.

Immersive learning for 25 languages

Marketplace for millions of educator-created resources

Fast, easy, reliable language certification

Fun educational games for kids

Comprehensive K-12 personalized learning

Trusted tutors for 300+ subjects

35,000+ worksheets, games, and lesson plans

Adaptive learning for English vocabulary

• Look up in Linguee
• Suggest as a translation of "debate"

Linguee Apps

▾ dictionary (english), debate noun —, debate ( sth. ) verb ( debated , debated ) —, heated debate n —, ongoing debate n —, fierce debate n —, vigorous debate n —, further debate n —, considerable debate n —, timely debate n —, controversial debate n —, popular debate n —, passionate debate n —, forum for debate n —, wide debate n —, constructive debate n —, lengthy debate n —, ▸ dictionary (spanish), debate noun, masculine ( plural: debates m ) —, discussion n ( plural: discussions ), debatir ( algo ) verb —, discuss v ( discussed , discussed ), debate v ( debated , debated ), argue v ( argued , argued ), moot sth. v, foro de debate m —, tema de debate m —, objeto de debate m —, amplio debate m —, intenso debate m —, debate público m —, club de debate m —, debate acalorado m —, extenso debate m —, profundo debate m —, largo debate m —, debate grupal m —, sesión de debate f —, duro debate m —, debate constructivo m —, posterior debate m —, mayor debate m —, lugar de debate m —, debate franco m —, debate existente m —, agitado debate m —, debate oportuno m —, enérgico debate m —, debate definitivo m —, debate en profundidad m —, controvertido debate m —, debate popular m —, debate global m —, debate de seguimiento m —, debate general m —, nuevo debate m —, debate adicional m —, importante debate m —, círculo de debate m —, debate inicial m —, proposición para el debate f —, debate importante m —, preguntas para debatir pl f —, lugar para debatir m —, debatir acerca de algo v —, debatir sobre algo v —, ▸ wikipedia, ▸ external sources (english), ▾ external sources (spanish).

• This is not a good example for the translation above.
• The wrong words are highlighted.
• It does not match my search.
• It should not be summed up with the orange entries
• The translation is wrong or of bad quality.

4 Translation results for debate in Spanish

Debate noun.

Example sentences of debate noun

• • The candidates participated in several debates before the election was held.
• • The meaning of the text has been the subject of considerable debate among scholars for many years.

debate verb

Example sentences of debate verb.

• • Scholars have been debating the meaning of the text for years.
• • Whether or not the tax cuts benefit the lower classes is still hotly debated among economists.
• • The energy bill is currently being debated in Congress.
• • The President debated his challenger in front of a live audience on Tuesday.
• • The students debated for an hour.

Synonyms of debate verb

Detailed synonyms for debate verb, debate sustantivo, debatir verbo, reverse translation for debate.

English-Spanish translator

English to Spanish translator

Spanish to English translator

English to Spanish translation

Spanish to English dictionary

Learn English

English Vocabulary

English Grammar

Learn English by playing

English Grammar Quizzes

English Vocabulary Quizzes

Saved English translations

My English words

My English translations

My English mistakes

Stay Connected

Voice speed

Text translation, source text, translation results, document translation, drag and drop.

Website translation

Enter a URL

Image translation

Spanish translation of 'debate'

Browse Collins English collocations debate

Examples of 'debate' in a sentence debate

Trends of debate

View usage for: All Years Last 10 years Last 50 years Last 100 years Last 300 years

Browse alphabetically debate

• debate issues
• debate topic
• All ENGLISH words that begin with 'D'

Related terms of debate

• fierce debate
• final debate
• View more related words

Quick word challenge

Quiz Review

Score: 0 / 5

Wordle Helper

Scrabble Tools

• Slovenščina
• FAQ Technical Questions
• Text Translation
• Vocabulary Trainer
• Online Dictionary
•   Login
• Online dictionary
• Products & Shop
• Conjugation

Vocabulary trainer

• Dictionary API
• Add to home screen
• Browse the dictionaries
• Terms and conditions of use
• Supply chain
• Data Protection Declaration
• Legal notice
• Privacy Settings
• Haitian Creole
• German Learner's Dictionary
• Dictionary of German Spelling
•   Search in both directions
•   Change language direction

My search history

Debate in the oxford spanish dictionary, debate in the pons dictionary, debate examples from the pons dictionary (editorially verified), monolingual examples (not verified by pons editors), translations for debate in the english » spanish dictionary (go to spanish » english ), i. debate [ am dəˈbeɪt, brit dɪˈbeɪt] n.

•  Show synonyms for debate.
•  Send us feedback

1. debate C (public, parliamentary) :

•  Preselect for export to vocabulary trainer
•  View selected vocabulary

2. debate U (discussion) :

Ii. debate [ am dəˈbeɪt, brit dɪˈbeɪt] vb trans, 1. debate question/topic/motion :, 2. debate (weigh up, consider) :, adjournment debate n.

•  Show synonyms for adjournment debate.

Translations for debate in the Spanish » English Dictionary (Go to English » Spanish )

I. debate [dɪˈbeɪt] n no pl, ii. debate [dɪˈbeɪt] vb trans, iii. debate [dɪˈbeɪt] vb intr, parliamentary debate n.

•  Show synonyms for parliamentary debate.

Would you like to add a word, a phrase or a translation?

Browse the dictionary

• debarkation

Look up "debate" in other languages

Links to further information.

You can suggest improvements to this PONS entry here:

We are using the following form field to detect spammers. Please do leave them untouched. Otherwise your message will be regarded as spam. We are sorry for the inconvenience.

How can I copy translations to the vocabulary trainer?

• Collect the vocabulary that you want to remember while using the dictionary. The items that you have collected will be displayed under "Vocabulary List".
• If you want to copy vocabulary items to the vocabulary trainer, click on "Import" in the vocabulary list.

Please note that the vocabulary items in this list are only available in this browser. Once you have copied them to the vocabulary trainer, they are available from everywhere.

• Most popular
• English ⇄ German
• English ⇄ Slovenian
• German ⇄ Spanish
• German ⇄ French
• German ⇄ Greek
• German ⇄ Polish
• Arabic ⇄ English
• Arabic ⇄ German
• Bulgarian ⇄ English
• Bulgarian ⇄ German
• Chinese ⇄ English
• Chinese ⇄ French
• Chinese ⇄ German
• Chinese ⇄ Spanish
• Croatian ⇄ German
• Czech ⇄ German
• Danish ⇄ German
• Dutch ⇄ German
• Elvish ⇄ German
• English ⇄ Arabic
• English ⇄ Bulgarian
• English ⇄ Chinese
• English ⇄ French
• English ⇄ Italian
• English ⇄ Polish
• English ⇄ Portuguese
• English ⇄ Russian
• English → Serbian
• English ⇄ Spanish
• Finnish ⇄ German
• French ⇄ Chinese
• French ⇄ English
• French ⇄ German
• French ⇄ Italian
• French ⇄ Polish
• French ⇄ Slovenian
• French ⇄ Spanish
• German ⇄ Arabic
• German ⇄ Bulgarian
• German ⇄ Chinese
• German ⇄ Croatian
• German ⇄ Czech
• German ⇄ Danish
• German ⇄ Dutch
• German ⇄ Elvish
• German ⇄ English
• German ⇄ Finnish
• German ⇄ Hungarian
• German → Icelandic
• German ⇄ Italian
• German ⇄ Japanese
• German ⇄ Latin
• German ⇄ Norwegian
• German ⇄ Persian
• German ⇄ Portuguese
• German ⇄ Romanian
• German ⇄ Russian
• German → Serbian
• German ⇄ Slovakian
• German ⇄ Slovenian
• German ⇄ Swedish
• German ⇄ Turkish
• Greek ⇄ German
• Hungarian ⇄ German
• Italian ⇄ English
• Italian ⇄ French
• Italian ⇄ German
• Italian ⇄ Polish
• Italian ⇄ Slovenian
• Italian ⇄ Spanish
• Japanese ⇄ German
• Latin ⇄ German
• Norwegian ⇄ German
• Persian ⇄ German
• Polish ⇄ English
• Polish ⇄ French
• Polish ⇄ German
• Polish ⇄ Italian
• Polish ⇄ Russian
• Polish ⇄ Spanish
• Portuguese ⇄ English
• Portuguese ⇄ German
• Portuguese ⇄ Spanish
• Romanian ⇄ German
• Russian ⇄ English
• Russian ⇄ German
• Russian ⇄ Polish
• Slovakian ⇄ German
• Slovenian ⇄ English
• Slovenian ⇄ French
• Slovenian ⇄ German
• Slovenian ⇄ Italian
• Slovenian ⇄ Spanish
• Spanish ⇄ Chinese
• Spanish ⇄ English
• Spanish ⇄ French
• Spanish ⇄ German
• Spanish ⇄ Italian
• Spanish ⇄ Polish
• Spanish ⇄ Portuguese
• Spanish ⇄ Slovenian
• Swedish ⇄ German
• Turkish ⇄ German

Identified ad region: ALL Identified country code: RU -->

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Real Fast Spanish

Learn Real Spanish Fast and Stay Motivated

7 Types of Spanish Transition Phrases to Win Any Argument

“He who knows only his own side of the argument knows little of that.” —  John Stuart Mill.

I don’t know about you, but I enjoy a good healthy debate every once in a while.

Provided the discussion doesn’t get personal and participants don’t get offended, it can be a great way to learn.

Moreover, if you are learning a second language, having a debate in your target language is a great way to practice and refine your skills.

So, if you want to win an argument in Spanish, what should you do?

Over my years of arguing with friends and colleagues, I have come to one important conclusion. The key to winning an argument is not how strongly you can assert your ideas. The secret is to simply have better logic.

The more logical your points, the more likely you are to win.

If you want to start logically defining your arguments in Spanish, you will need some key vocabulary called Spanish transition phrases.

What transition phrases allow you to do is to set up an argument in a logical sequence.

Some examples of transition phrases in English would be ‘on the one hand’, ‘therefore’, ‘thus’, and ‘in conclusion’.

For this article, instead of giving you a list of random examples of these types of phrases in Spanish, I thought I would provide a flowing argument the whole way through.

And the point that I’m going to argue is:

‘Why every English native should learn Spanish.’

So there is my challenge. Let’s see if I can pull it off.

And feel free to debate me in the comments—even if you agree 😉

1. How to open your argument

The first place you need to start building your argument is with a solid opening.

A strong opening will help you transition your listener into your main points in a logical way.

There are two Spanish transition phrases you can use to open your argument:

English: In the first place… Español: En primer lugar…

English: To begin with… Español: Para empezar…

For the point I’m going to argue in the article, I will start with why you should learn a language in general because this is the first place where someone could argue against me.

English: To begin with , I have to talk about the importance of language learning. Español: Para empezar , tengo que hablar de la importancia del aprendizaje de idiomas.

English: In the first place , the goal of learning another language is very important… Español: En primer lugar , el objetivo de aprender otro idioma es muy importante…

Here I have taken a good position—language learning is super important. But, I’ll need to explain why.

Note, I’ve also written an article detailing many more reasons to learn Spanish , you can also use any one of these ideas if you also wanted to take on this debate amongst your friends.

2. Two Spanish transition phrases to back up your point

If you want to be convincing, it is always a good idea to back up your point with logic or evidence.

To do this in English you can use phrases such as ‘because’ and ‘since’. In Spanish, these are:

English: Because… Español: Porque…

English: Since… Español: Ya que…

So to back up, and complete, my opening statement I’ll say:

English: In the first place, the goal of learning another language is very important since it improves your brain, it helps you with opportunities to find work, and it increases your knowledge of other cultures. Español: En primer lugar, el objetivo de aprender otro idioma es muy importante  ya que mejora el cerebro, te ayuda con las oportunidades para encontrar trabajo, y aumenta tu conocimiento de otras culturas.

Now that I have set up the importance of language learning, I’ll next need to transition to more specific arguments for Spanish.

3. How to add to your case

Once you have successfully opened your argument, you’ll need to further build your case.

I have already said that language learning is important. Now I need to start building towards Spanish being the number one language to choose.

In order to strengthen your argument you can use these two transitional phrases:

English: Second(ly), third(ly)… Español: En segundo lugar, tercer lugar…

English: Further / also / additionally… Español: Además…

Here is why I think Spanish is the best:

English:  Secondly , you should learn Spanish because it is the second most spoken language in the world by the number of native speakers, and is spoken in the fourth-largest number of countries by language. Español: En segundo lugar , deberías aprender español porque es la segunda lengua más hablada en el mundo por el número de los hablantes nativos, y se habla en el cuarto mayor número de países por idioma.

English: Further , Spanish is one of the easiest languages to learn. Español: Además , el español es uno de los idiomas más fáciles de aprender.

English: Also , Spanish is a good language to learn because the food is amazing, the culture is fascinating and people are very friendly. Español: Además , el español es un buen idioma para aprender porque la comida es increíble, la cultura es fascinante y la gente es muy amable.

If you are curious as to where I got my facts above, here are the sources I used from Wikipedia: List of languages by the number of countries and  List of languages by the number of native speakers .

4. How to introduce the other side of the argument

One of the best techniques to win an argument is to not only present your side but to rebut the opposing views before the opposition has a chance.

I mentioned in the previous section that Spanish is the second most spoken language by the number of native speakers. The obvious thought may be: why not learn the first language?

To introduce opposing sides of an argument, use these phrases:

English: About / regarding… Español: Respecto a…

English: As to / with regards to… Español: En cuanto a…

English: On the other hand… Español: Por otra parte…

Here is how I’ll introduce the opposing side:

English:  With regards to  the most spoken language by the number of natives, mandarin, yes it is true that it is spoken by a lot of people… Español: En cuanto a la lengua más hablada por el número de nativos, mandarina, sí es cierto que se habla por muchas personas…

This is how you can introduce the opposing idea, but you’ll need a few more Spanish transition phrases to rebut it.

5. How to argue against the opposing idea

To refute the opposing sides of your argument, you’ll need these phrases:

English: But… Español: Pero…

English: However / nevertheless / nonetheless… Español: Sin embargo…

Now I can complete the idea from the last section:

English: With regards to the most spoken language by the number of natives, mandarin, yes it is true that it is spoken by a lot of people, nonetheless it is difficult to learn and is only spoken in three countries. Español: En cuanto a la lengua más hablada por el número de nativos, mandarina, sí es cierto que se habla por muchas personas,  sin embargo es difícil aprender y sólo se habla en tres países.

6. How to deduce or infer

What can you deduce or infer from a rock-solid argument?

In English, you would transition to make a deduction with phrases like ‘so’ or ‘therefore’. There are five phrases you can use to do this in Spanish:

English: Therefore… Español: Por (lo) tanto…

English: So… Español: Así que…

English: Hence / therefore… Español: Por eso…

English: Then… Español: Entonces…

English: Accordingly / in consequence… Español: En consecuencia…

Before I wrap up with the final conclusion, here is the obvious deduction from the points made thus far:

English: Language learning is important and Spanish is the best language to learn, therefore , if you haven’t already started, you have to start right away. Español: El aprendizaje de idiomas es importante y español es el mejor idioma para aprender, por lo tanto , si todavía no lo has empezado, tienes que empezar ahora mismo.

7. How to conclude or finish

Of course, the last thing to do is finish your argument well.

When you want to transition to your final statements, try to use the following Spanish phrases:

English: Ultimately… Español: Por último…

English: To end… Español: Para terminar…

English: In conclusion… Español: En conclusión…

Note, you’ll need to be careful with prepositions here, especially for por and para .

Here are my final thoughts on a debate that is very close to my heart:

English: In conclusion , Spanish is not only one of the most widely spoken languages in the world but it is easy to learn and you will have incredible experiences if you travel to Spanish-speaking countries. I have enjoyed learning Spanish a lot and I think you will too. Español: En conclusión , el español no sólo es uno de los idiomas más hablados en el mundo, sino es fácil de aprender y tendrás experiencias increíbles si viajas a los países hispanohablantes. He disfrutado mucho de aprender español y creo que tú también lo disfrutarás.  

In the end, the most important thing to do is remind the audience of all of your strongest arguments.

Are you convinced? Did I win you over?

If you want to build a solid argument, use the above Spanish transition phrases to logically move from your first point to the next, to the next.

If you make the right transitions logically, you’ll hopefully win the hearts and minds of your listeners.

How else can you use Spanish transition phrases to win an argument?

Reader Interactions

November 27, 2016 at 5:57 pm

I’m loving your articles. They are very well-written and researched and presented, and they should be an asset to any language instructor’s material bank! I just have a couple of minor suggestions regarding a couple of your Spanish translations of your English arguments above. The first thing I noticed was in your 3rd point at the bottom: “El español es un buen lenguaje aprender porque……” You need a preposition in between “lenguaje” (por cierto, yo pondría idioma o lengua en vez de lenguaje) and “aprender”, such as “Es un buen idioma para aprender….” or “es un buen idioma de aprender..” Also, the last paragraph of your post, you need a “de” after “fácil” (fácil de aprender) and “he disfrutado mucho DEL aprendizaje….” Hope that helps 🙂

January 22, 2017 at 1:12 am

Hola Laura, thanks for your kind words and for the suggestions. You’re right, “es un buen idioma para aprender” is better, and so is “fácil de aprender”, I have updated both of these suggestions. For “del aprendizaje”, I have updated this to “aprendiendo” because it sounds more natural. ¡Gracias de nuevo!

November 23, 2017 at 12:34 pm

Can you address the cultural issue that Latinos tend to want to create division when in a debate, even or perhaps especially with family?

November 23, 2017 at 1:02 pm

Haha, thanks for the comment Brad. I think debates around the family dinner table are in fact universal everywhere!! (At least they are at my family gatherings)

April 29, 2021 at 5:35 pm

I’d say that rather than “create division”, it’s more of a healthy debate (or maybe just “create a diversion”) rather than the overly careful some of us may have been raised (never discuss politics, religion…) I love this about my Hispano-American friends! Much more fun than discussing what color to paint the living room.

April 29, 2021 at 6:06 pm

Thanks for sharing Ela! 🙂

April 29, 2021 at 11:41 pm

I really liked this article, lots of good connector words included. One thing though surely it was ‘una broma’ when you said Spanish is easy to learn 😄

April 30, 2021 at 10:36 am

Hahaha, yes Sorcha, that’s a great point!! 🙂 I should have said ‘easier’ than other languages but definitely not easy!!!

May 1, 2021 at 2:13 pm

Tiene raison, en su primero argument (sera buen tener la plabra en espnanol) que es importante aprender un otro idioma. Pero por un hablador (?speaker) de ingles, sera mejor aprender su propio idioma primero. Por lo tanto, Aprenderia los idiomas del cual viene ingles — el frances y el germano. Lo siento, no puedo anadir los accentos espanol.)

May 1, 2021 at 2:34 pm

Gracias Goyo 🙂

June 15, 2023 at 8:13 pm

An excellent presentation . . .

June 17, 2023 at 12:05 pm

Thanks Garry! 🙂

March 14, 2024 at 9:18 pm

Thank you for this exposition and for the phrases which I must add to my spreadsheet. I really enjoyed reading the article. It would be nice to remember it!!

March 15, 2024 at 6:08 am

Thanks Dianne, I’m glad you enjoyed the article! 🙂

March 15, 2024 at 6:28 pm

Thank you, Andrew. This was an excellent lesson. Not only did I learn important transition phrases, but your manner of teaching reinforced each phrase in a way that enabled me to integrate the lesson more easily.

March 20, 2024 at 1:44 pm

Thanks Jay, I appreciate the feedback! 🙂

March 29, 2024 at 4:30 pm

I’m always looking for easier / more natural (for me) ways to say things.. and ChatGPT just helped me realize that “por último” is only to be used while presenting a list of things.

I was trying to say ultimately as in “at the end of the day”. I will just stick with “a fin de cuentas” jajaja but now I know! Thanks Andrew! 😊

Is there an article for the Spanish versions of our most common English expressions?

March 31, 2024 at 5:57 pm

Hola Simone, we have to be really careful with ChatGPT as it is a probabilistic algorithm and it is not fact checked. I have seen it get several things wrong in my own testing of Spanish sentences. It’s a fun tool but it must be checked by a human. I’ve done a Youtube video on the top 50 Spanish expressions. In the video I talk about the best translations of common English expressions where they fit with the Spanish expressions.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Definitive Guide to Conversation Hacking in Spanish

If you want to develop a conversational level of Spanish, then this guide will help you get there in the most effective way.

• Spanish Courses

FOR STUDENTS

• El Cuentacuentos
• El Conversador

FOR TEACHERS

• Work with Us

CONNECT WITH US

• © Real Fast Spanish. All Rights Reserved
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• Live classes
• Self-study courses

25 Common Spanish Verbs and Their Corresponding Prepositions PDF

We will only send you  cosas muy útiles !

How to Use The Spanish Past Perfect Tense

THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE TO CONVERSATION HACKING IN SPANISH

We will only send you cosas muy útiles !

How to Say “Debate” in Spanish: A Comprehensive Guide

Welcome to our comprehensive guide on how to say “debate” in Spanish! Whether you’re visiting a Spanish-speaking country or simply want to expand your vocabulary, knowing how to properly express the word “debate” is essential. In this guide, we’ll cover both formal and informal ways to say “debate” in Spanish, along with various tips, examples, and regional variations. Let’s dive in!

Formal Ways to Say “Debate” in Spanish

In formal or academic contexts, you may encounter the following terms:

• El Debate: This is the direct translation of “debate” and is frequently used both in Spain and Latin America. It refers to a structured discussion or argument on a particular topic where multiple viewpoints are presented.
• La Discusión: Similar to “el debate,” this term is commonly used in formal settings. It emphasizes a more organized and systematic type of discussion.
• La Controversia: While not directly equivalent to “debate,” “la controversia” refers to a strong disagreement or dispute that may lead to a debate. It is often used when highlighting contentious topics or issues.

Informal Ways to Say “Debate” in Spanish

For everyday conversations, these are the informal alternatives:

• La Discusión: Just like in formal settings, “la discusión” is also commonly used in informal contexts. It can refer to a heated or animated discussion, similar to a debate, but with a more casual connotation.
• La Charla: This term refers to a colloquial conversation or chat which might include debates on various topics. While it is less formal than “el debate,” it implies an exchange of ideas and opinions.
• La Plática: Similarly to “la charla,” “la plática” is an informal term used mainly in Mexico and Central America. It denotes a conversation that may involve elements of debate or discussion among participants.

Regional Variations

While the formal and informal terms above are widely used across Spanish-speaking countries, it’s important to note that there might be some regional variations.

In Argentina, for example, you might encounter the term “El Coloquio” used in formal settings, particularly referring to academic discussions or seminars.

In Colombia, “El Foro” is often used, especially in educational and political contexts. It refers to a public discussion or debate where multiple speakers express their opinions on a specific subject.

Remember, despite these regional variations, the previously mentioned formal and informal terms remain the most widely understood across the Spanish-speaking world.

Examples Using “Debate” in Spanish

Now, let’s explore some examples illustrating the use of the different terms:

• Formal Examples:

El debate sobre el cambio climático fue muy interesante. Expuse mi argumento durante la discusión en clase. La controversia generada por la reforma educativa es muy intensa.

Informal Examples:

Tuvimos una discusión muy animada sobre política. Tenemos que tener una charla seria sobre nuestro futuro. Me encanta participar en pláticas donde debatimos diversos temas.

By using these examples, you can better understand how to incorporate the word “debate” into your Spanish conversations.

Congratulations! You now have a comprehensive understanding of how to say “debate” in Spanish. Knowing the formal and informal terms, as well as potential regional variations, will help you navigate discussions and express your ideas effectively. Remember to adapt your choice of words based on the context and level of formality. ¡Buena suerte!

Related Posts

Guide: How to Say a Debate

Engaging in a debate allows you to express your opinions, persuade others, and gain insights into various topics. Whether it's a formal or informal setting, knowing how to effectively communicate your ideas is essential. In this guide, we will explore different ways to say a debate, including formal and informal phrases, tips, and examples to help you navigate the world of debate. Let's get started!

How to Say a Debate Speech: Tips, Examples, and Regional Variations

If you're looking to ace your next debate and deliver a persuasive speech that leaves a lasting impression on your audience, you've come to the right place. In this comprehensive guide, we will walk you through the process of crafting and conveying a debate speech, covering both formal and informal ways of presenting your arguments. While we will primarily focus on general tips and examples, we will also touch upon regional variations, albeit only if necessary. So, let's dive in!

How to Say "Debate": A Comprehensive Guide

Are you eager to learn how to say "debate" in various contexts? Whether you need to express it formally or casually, we've got you covered! In this guide, we'll explore different ways to convey the concept of "debate" and provide useful tips and examples to enhance your understanding. So, let's dive right in!

Guide on How to Say "Debate" in Chinese

Are you interested in learning how to say "debate" in Chinese? Great! In this guide, we'll explore the formal and informal ways to express this term in Mandarin, as well as provide tips, examples, and some regional variations. Let's get started!

How to Say "Debate" in English

Welcome to the ultimate guide on how to say "debate" in English. Whether you are looking for formal or informal ways to express this concept, this comprehensive guide will provide you with a variety of tips, examples, and even linguistic variations. Before we dive into the specifics, it's important to note that "debate" is inherently an English word. However, we will explore different ways to express this idea based on the level of formality or the context in which it is used. So, let's get started!

Guide on How to Say "Debate" in French

Learning how to say "debate" in different languages is an excellent way to expand your vocabulary and enhance your communication skills. In this guide, we will explore the various ways to express the term "debate" in French, including both formal and informal ways. While regional variations exist, we will focus primarily on standard French. Let's delve into the fascinating world of French vocabulary!

Guide: How to Say "Debate" in Hindi

Gaining the ability to express yourself fluently in various languages opens doors to new opportunities and deepens cultural understanding. If you're looking to expand your Hindi vocabulary, it's important to learn how to say common words like "debate." In this guide, we will explore the formal and informal ways of saying "debate" in Hindi, along with some tips and examples to help you master this word.

How to Say "Debate" in Japanese: A Comprehensive Guide

Are you interested in learning how to say "debate" in Japanese? Whether you're a student of the Japanese language, a traveler, or simply curious, this guide will provide you with various ways to express this concept. In this article, we will cover both the formal and informal ways to say "debate," as well as provide regional variations if applicable. Join us as we dive into the world of Japanese vocabulary and discover how to express this thought-provoking activity!

Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Arabic Cantonese Chinese Dutch English Farsi Filipino French German Greek Hawaiian Hebrew Hindi Irish Italian Japan Japanese Korean Latin Mandarin Mexican Navajo Norwegian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Sanskrit Sign Language Spanish Swahili Swedish Tagalog Tamil Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese

Oh what a useful explanation, thank you so much. Now I know to say "אתמול הייתי רופא עדשים".

The South Indian phrase - “ninnade kaNugalu tuppuko.” is wrong. “tuppuko” is not a word in kannada. Informally, we’d say…

Good luck Gracie Wren on your first London marathon . Your dedication and hard work will pay off.

You wrong Bruh. "While some Jehovah’s Witnesses may choose to celebrate birthdays..." NOPE! They forbid it. https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/birthdays/

I have always pronounced it with the third syllable "e" vul-GA-te. Could this be wrong in the original Latin?

• Privacy Policy

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Translation of debate – English-Spanish dictionary

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• The debate completely changed course after Liz made her speech .
• The debate about food safety has engaged the whole nation .
• She issued a challenge to her rival candidates to take part in a public debate.
• The prison riots have sharpened the debate about how prisons should be run .
• This proposal will almost certainly spark another countrywide debate about how to organize the school system .
• His team won the national high school debate championship .
• The matter was hotly debated in all the towns of the realm .
• There was no seconder for the motion so it could not be debated.
• The ethics of journalism are much debated.
• They were debating the proposition that 'All people are created equal '.
• I'm still debating whether to take the job or not.

(Translation of debate from the Cambridge English-Spanish Dictionary © Cambridge University Press)

Translation of debate | GLOBAL English–Spanish Dictionary

(Translation of debate from the GLOBAL English-Spanish Dictionary © 2020 K Dictionaries Ltd)

Examples of debate

Translations of debate.

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

a long trip or holiday taken by car

Apples and oranges (Talking about differences, Part 2)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• English–Spanish    Noun Verb
• GLOBAL English–Spanish    Noun Verb
• Translations
• All translations

To add debate to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add debate to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

Have we lost the capacity for respect in our politics and public debate?

Patricia Harris

• X (formerly Twitter)

Respect is the cornerstone of democratic life. It is the means by which we articulate and extend our views and values, come to understand the position of others, and work towards common agreements and collective solutions. This quality, always fragile, is currently under severe duress.

Whether in the institutions of parliament or our work-based and local community settings, the pathologies of debate manifest themselves — from partisan point-scoring and ad hominem arguments, to assertions of personal superiority and dismissals of the other. The ubiquity of such discourse can create in us a state of resigned despair, the sense that disrespect is built into the fabric of political and public debate.

Even so, politics has its own internal critics — reformers incessantly appealing to its better angels. So the late Member for Dunkley, Peta Murphy, in her memorable First Speech affirmed that parliament “is the cauldron of Australia's national conversation, and politicians are not just participants in it; we are its custodians, and we must do better”. Acknowledging that politics “is a place where ideas should be contested — contested with a passion, fiercely, robustly and forcefully”, she nevertheless reminded her colleagues of the importance of respect and the costs of its loss:

When the participants in our body politic get so caught up in beating their opposition — in winning the daily argument at all costs — that they stop listening and striving to understand what others are saying, we are not just dumbed down; we are diminished.

Peta died a few short years after her election. On 6 December 2023, in what Rachel Withers describes as “a rare moment of peace” , acknowledgement and civility prevailed across the floor as members paid their respects. Many recalled Peta’s plea for a better politics in their condolence speeches and wept as they spoke. The lull in hostilities was short lived, however. Immediately following recess, the opposition attacked the government on questions of national security, Labor scrambled for a solution short of any proper debate, and accusation and recrimination again took hold — politics as usual, just as Peta so willed it not to be.

So what is it that pushes political debate into conflictual, combative mode, as though it was its default position? Why are respect, truth, and politics at fundamental odds one with another? How might it be possible to speak with respect across political difference? Without a sense of the ethical foundations of respect, we shadow-box in the dark. This is where I want to start, before moving on to truth claims and ideological abstraction. Solutions are a long way off; clarity a first step in that direction.

The ethical foundations of respect

With its etymological basis in the Latin word respicere — to “look back at” or “to look again” — respect signifies acknowledgement of the inherent worth of a particular person, quality or practice. There is a pausing, a reflection, a recognition of merit. To borrow the awkward phraseology of philosophy, respect always has “objects” — that is, matters to which it is directed and to which value is ascribed.

In the case of political debate, respect is due to individual persons, freedoms of opinion and expression, political and cultural difference, and, at an underlying level, the democratic process itself. To offer respect in these instances is not a matter of obligatory deference — “tip your cap”, “respect your elders” — but rather of honouring and preserving, treading carefully and paying close attention to another’s views and values. This is admittedly a tall order given the crossfire of contemporary politics.

Of all the different philosophical renditions of respect, Immanuel Kant’s thesis on the inherent worth of each individual is the most far-reaching. As he argues the case, human worth is grounded dignity, a concept which, spelled out, denotes the capacity for reasoned thought and ethical action. This does not mean that individuals cannot be judged according to their particular behaviours and abilities — as Peta Murphy reminded us, “there will be times when the behaviour, motivations and policies of our opponents should rightly be called out and criticised”. The point, rather, is that there is an inalienable core in relation to which we all stand as moral equals and should be treated as such.

The golden rule also comes into play: in so far as we desire respect for ourselves, so should we extend it to others. Hence Kant’s famous injunction :

Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.

The words have immediate appeal: yes, one thinks, that’s right; that’s how we should treat each other across political divides. A moment’s reflection reveals how easily things can come apart. In his later work, The Metaphysics of Morals , Kant describes the ordinary behaviours that confound respect. Starting with our urge to think well of ourselves at the expense of others, he moves to the belittlements of contempt, arrogance, ridicule, and mockery — each of which is designed to downgrade the other in relation to self.

If we translate the logic of these moves to partisan debate, where the aim is always to defeat the opposing side, we can see how easily, how naturally, disrespect infuses the language of politics. To return to Peta Murphy :

Too often there is machismo about politics which mistakes aggressiveness for advocacy, which demands certainty and rejects reflection as weakness, and which is quick to judge and slow to forgive.

It would be a mistake to leave matters with the pathologies of parliament. Murphy’s descriptor goes to habits of thought and mind deeply ingrained in the Western intellectual tradition. In their well-worn path, the task of the “trained mind” is to dig out weaknesses and expose faults. There is little or no place for generosity of spirit; the cutting edge is all. Admittedly, critique is important: we need to be aware of media hyperbole, careless misinformation, and overblown claims. But when the search for flaws and hidden meanings — what the philosopher Paul Ricoeur calls “the hermeneutics of suspicion” — becomes paramount, democratic conversation is stifled.

So, there is a strong case for eschewing the dynamics of competitive logic in favour of considered dialogue; for starting with the merits of our opponent’s position rather than jumping to its flaws.

Can we handle the truth?

How does truth, that much disputed quality, enter the equation? To ask the question is to promote a host of imponderables. Putting the hazards aside, I surmise that competing claims to truth are core to political debate — claims regarding a nation’s past, present and future, the outcomes of government interventions, the nature of social justice, and much more besides. If this were not the case, the play of partisan logic and media hyperbole would matter a great deal less.

For truth to have a chance, there needs to be respect — respect for the voice of the other, respect for the evidential process, and respect for the weighing of ethical and political claims. This takes considerable effort, time, and patience — qualities cut short by the speed of the news cycle and the dynamics of online interaction. Already compromised by partisan politics, respectful truth-seeking is jeopardised by the scramble for news.

Lenore Taylor explored the implications in her 2023 Brian Johns Lecture . She records how her generation of journalists were initially optimistic , well-attuned to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein’s famous statement that “all good reporting is the same thing — the best obtainable version of the truth”. Achieving this pragmatic ideal, she observes, became “very problematic indeed” as “waves of financial and technological change battered and shifted what we did and the very concept of truth as the foundation of public debate was challenged”. Reflecting on the audacious tactics of Steve Bannon , she observes that:

the news cycle was already moving too fast, already angry and partisan, but “flooding the zone” went further, aiming to deliberately overwhelm people with conflicting information to the point where they gave up on ever finding the truth.

The result is an increasingly polarised world :

Once people identify with a side, once opinions become integrated into an understanding of personal belonging, they are heavily and instinctively motivated not to assess available information but rather to seek out information that supports their team view. And so we spin into a polarised world where there are chunks of the population that can’t tell fact from fiction.

A bleak outlook. To counteract its effects, we need to stand back, forgo speedy judgement, and welcome the measured and deliberate. Woodward and Bernstein’s pragmatic idealism again comes to mind. In addressing the White House Correspondents’ Association some forty years after Watergate, Bernstein said their statement represented:

A simple concept for something very difficult to get right because of the enormous amount of effort, thinking, persistence, pushback, removal of ideological baggage and the sheer luck that is required, not to mention humility.

Welcome to a world of shapes

In the final analysis, the responsibility for respectful dialogue falls to those participating in the act of exchange — which includes our local discussions as well as parliamentary debates. While there is a certain satisfaction in sheeting the blame for discord back to our elected representatives and the media, the onus also lies with us as participants in community, familial and work-based settings.

So what is involved in this act of communication, in political debate exercised person-to-person? The issue is at the core of an episode of The Minefield devoted to the resignation of Stan Grant . At the outset, Scott Stephens sets a high bar for respect:

I think the rigours, the demands of democratic conversation, where a human being is fully, wholly, morally present to another human being — that is the condition of possibility of democratic life. It’s the condition of possibility, I would say, of the moral life generally.

A notable claim, indeed, recalling the essence of Kant’s respect for persons. Haste and partisan logic will tear the ideal apart. Drawing on the work of Albert Camus, Stephens introduces a further dynamic, best described as “ideological abstraction”. Under its sway, opponents no longer see each other as particular individuals with particular cases to make, but rather as avatars of a particular party, policy or worldview. In other words, as ideological identikits:

[Camus] described abstraction as the overweening, dominating presence of ideologies, of huge capital “C” causes that people enlist themselves in, that people become, as he put it, almost religious devotees to. He says one of the problems with abstractions is they come between human beings, so you no longer see human beings as human beings, but you see them instead as bearers of an ideology, as what he described at one point as “representatives” of an ideology.

In developing his case, Stephens draws on a speech of Camus from 1949, focused on the problem of polemic, titled “The Time of the Murderers”. In that speech, Camus describes the difficulty of carrying on conversation at a time when “day and night, thousands of voices, each pursuing from its own corner a noisy monologue, unleash on people a torrent of mystifying words”. The power of polemic, Camus argues, consists in “viewing the opponent as the enemy, consequently simplifying him and refusing to see him” — such that “when I insult a person, I no longer know the colour of his gaze. Thanks to polemic, we no longer live among men but in a world of shapes.”

Camus’s speech, delivered seventy-five years ago, suggests that the origins of “zone flooding” may lie further back than the pressure of online interaction. Be that as it may, his point goes directly to the flavour of much contemporary political debate. The sway of ideological abstraction — “not seeing the colour of another’s gaze” and “living in a world of shapes” — pertains across the political spectrum, equally applicable to the left and the right, to progressives and conservatives alike.

Want the best of Religion & Ethics delivered to your mailbox?

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

As a member of a left-leaning, economically secure elite, I am aware of our easy resort to ideological identikits. The utterly appalling Donald Trump has become something of a fall guy for our kind, the means by which a whole cluster of “wrong” views can be collapsed into a single group, subverting the need for qualification and thoughtful deliberation. In so doing, we engage in just those patterns of thought we decry when confronting the loss of considered dialogue in the broad arenas of media and politics.

All this points to the need for a drawing back in political debate, a willingness to focus on points held in common rather than oppositional differences, and a preparedness to attend carefully to the ethical and political claims of our opponents.

At the cutting edge of things, where it is clear that one is at fundamental odds with one’s adversary, there needs to be a way of holding one’s ground without abusing the other’s claim to respect. There is no ready prescription, no neat formula, for this eventuality. But Kant’s deliberations, now centuries old, still hold us in good stead. As he argues the case, it is the potential for dignity that commands respect, and it is this potential that we hold out for — both in the exchange of political views and in the face of irredeemable difference.

Patricia Harris is professor emerita in sociology and social policy at Murdoch University.

Democracy is precariously poised between what has been and what has yet to be

What’s wrong with a little civility?

Are you galled by the Voice debate? There’s something you can do about it

Seeing the worth of others: Why recognition is indispensable for a just and inclusive society

Reconnecting democratic politics to everyday life

Social distance can be good for democracy

Best of 2023: Recovering the language of lament in a disenchanted age

Is Stan Grant’s decision the result of a broken media?

'Wait until the debates': Biden trolled as White House makes 9 corrections to gaffe-ridden NAACP speech

W ASHINGTON, DC: The NAACP speech delivered by President Joe Biden on Sunday, May 19, had nine corrections made by the White House in its transcript, according to Mediaite .

These included a false claim by Biden about being vice president during the pandemic and a mispronunciation of "insurrectionists" as "irrectionists."

The official transcript of the speech shows that the White House omitted nine words due to both factual and pronunciation errors made by the 81-year-old Commander-in-Chief .

What changes were made to the transcript of President Joe Biden's NAACP speech by the White House?

President Biden 's initial error occurred at the start of his speech when he recounted a tale of former President Barack Obama sending him to Detroit during the "pandemic."

However, Biden actually visited the Motor City to confer with representatives from the auto industry deeply affected by the recession. In the transcript, the White House replaced "pandemic" with "recession."

Shortly after, the POTUS expressed his gratitude to The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), by saying that he was "humbled to receive this organization."

The White House corrected the word "organization" in the transcript with "award."

The incumbent 's witty remark, "We're cracking down on corporate landlords who keep rents down," was also corrected to "We're cracking down on corporate landlords to keep rents down."

Another regrettable gaffe by the Democrat statesman where he called people involved in the Capitol riots "irrectionists" was changed to "insurrectionists."

President Biden misquoted former President Donald Trump by saying there would be "bloodshed" if he loses in November, when the 77-year-old MAGA strongman had said "bloodbath."

Additionally, Biden mistakenly claimed to have saved millions of families "$800,000" per year in premiums but corrected himself during the speech to "$8,000 a year," which was also incorrect. The transcript later corrected his slipup to the accurate number, which is $800 per year.

Other smaller mistakes in the transcript were also corrected, including moments where Biden said "inspiresing" in place of "inspiring," "have" instead of "are," and "NAAC" as opposed to "NAACP."

A gaffe-ridden POTUS

Joe Biden has mispronounced the names of both current and former presidents of other nations on multiple occasions in the last year. In a number of speeches and interviews, the president has mispronounced the names of the heads of state of important US allies, including Mexico, Egypt, France, Germany, and Ukraine.

President Biden mispronounced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as "Vladimir" during a NATO conference in Lithuania in July of last year. This seemed to be a mix-up with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

During a recent speech at a California campaign rally, Biden made an error in condemning his political opponent, former President Donald Trump, for his relationship with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, whom he incorrectly referred to as the President of South Korea.

Biden said, "We'll never forget his love letters for the South Korean President Kim Jong Un or his admiration for Putin - what a great leader Putin is."

Joe Biden trolled after corrections to the transcript of his Sunday NAACP speech

One X user remarked, "They basically have to redact everything he claims nowadays."

Another user said, "Wait until the debate! HAHA."

Another user claimed, "Corrections of lies, not mistakes! You can't correct a lie."

One user wrote, "Half of what he says is a lie, plagiarized, fantasy make believe, or democrat propaganda, the other half is speech that no one has yet to be able to translate."

Another X user remarked, "Lies his entire speech to fool voters to get some document stating corrections that nobody will see.. Nice…"

Finally, this user tweeted, "Why would any thinking person vote for Joe Biden?"

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.

Biden commencement address at Morehouse sparks debate over identity

Some students say Martin Luther King Jr., the school’s most famous alumnus, would be protesting the president’s speech instead of welcoming him.

ATLANTA — Regardless of what happens at Morehouse College’s commencement — whether President Biden’s keynote speech is jeered or cheered, whether students protest raucously or respectfully or not at all — Calvin Bell III will feel conflicted.

Morehouse has opened many doors for the graduating senior. The college helped him become a finalist for the Rhodes scholarship. He interned for Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and is mulling a career in law or perhaps politics. A busload of family members will be in the crowd on May 19, cheering his crowning achievement as a Morehouse man.

But it won’t be all joy. Bell, 22, considers himself a “scholar-activist” and his heart goes out to the people in Gaza, where he is convinced a genocide is occurring, funded in part by American tax dollars. And he feels that his college’s most famous graduate, Martin Luther King Jr., would be speaking out against Biden instead of awarding him an honorary doctorate.

“I’ll be honest, it puts me at a weird place,” Bell said during an interview at a coffee shop a few steps away from a statue of King. He does not plan to disrupt Biden’s speech, but said he will understand if other students protest. “How do we balance the fact that we want our institution to be around and influential for a very long time, while also balancing the fact that we have our own ethical and moral obligations to current issues?”

Bell and other members of this historically Black, all-male college are caught in a crosscurrent during what would otherwise be the undeniable honor of having a sitting president address his graduating class. This moment — their moment — has been complicated by the war in Gaza and Biden’s “ironclad” support of Israel, even as the death toll approaches 35,000.

The United States’ role in the conflict has sparked a volatile debate across the country and on campus. With the presidential election six months away, students, faculty and alumni understand that Biden’s decision to speak at this commencement is more than an occasion for polite jokes and glad tidings — it’s a pitch to Black voters to help him win a second term, with Morehouse as a powerful backdrop in a key swing state.

The event has become a Rorschach test for an institution that has been dedicated to the education and improvement of Black men since it was founded shortly after the Civil War. An almost existential discourse is rippling through campus about whether the “Morehouse men” the university produces should be defined by the powerful people they stand beside — or those they stand against.

For some, the fact that the second sitting president in just over a decade is speaking at Morehouse is evidence of its clout and importance, an opportunity to affect policymaking from the West End of Atlanta to the West Bank of the Jordan. That spotlight is especially important to a college that prides itself as an on-ramp to a life of meaningful service — and happens to be in the middle of a half-billion-dollar fundraising campaign to expand financial aid for its neediest students.

Some at Morehouse argue that the decision to invite Biden prioritizes clout over conscience. It is antithetical to Morehouse’s activist underpinnings, they say, and to the legacy of its most famous graduate. They worry that giving Biden the imprimatur of Morehouse will mar the college, and that a graduation ceremony full of beaming Black faces will be used to whitewash the image of a man who critics say is supporting a slaughter.

“I’m at Morehouse because I’m a student and a scholar of the Black radical tradition,” said Professor Andrew Douglas, who has taught political science since 2011 and was protesting Wednesday with students outside the college’s administrative building. “I wrote a book on Martin Luther King. I believe there are a set of principles and commitments that are enshrined in this institution — against war, against imperialism, against being used by White politicians for ends that we don’t really endorse.”

He added, “My sense is it would have been a much more powerful gesture for the college to say no to the president in this moment.”

Israel’s defenders strongly reject the notion that it is engaged in genocide, saying it has been forced to defend itself against Hamas fighters who intentionally drive up casualties by embedding themselves among civilians. Biden has repeatedly stressed Israel’s right to self-defense, though he has become steadily more critical of its conduct in Gaza, and said he empathizes with Palestinians’ suffering.

Israel launched its war after Hamas militants broke through the Israel-Gaza border on Oct. 7 and killed 1,200 people, many of them civilians, and took about 250 others hostage. In response, Israel commenced a military campaign that has killed more than 35,000 people, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, and devastated much of the enclave while severely restricting humanitarian aid.

Biden on Wednesday threatened to cut off shipments of offensive weapons to Israel if it invades Rafah, the southern Gaza city where many Palestinians have fled.

Morehouse President David Thomas said in an interview that the college put out feelers for Biden and other commencement speakers in September — before the Hamas attack — and that he’d been considering potential speakers for months before that. The White House signaled Biden’s interest in March, and the school officially announced his appearance on April 23.

Thomas recounted some of that timeline in a message to the Morehouse community, but that has not stopped students, faculty and alumni from voicing their dissent, sometimes publicly.

Morehouse has not seen protests as intense as those on some campuses that have led to more than 2,800 arrests across the country, according to a Washington Post tally. A consortium of historically Black institutions has held demonstrations locally, and some from Morehouse participated in a protest at nearby Emory.

Thomas has led town hall discussions with students, alumni and faculty, though he says his opinion about whether Biden should speak has not wavered.

“I just think that Morehouse has both the moral authority and the moral obligation to not run from that challenge. We should be a place that can hold those tensions,” Thomas said. “I just think that Morehouse has the capacity from a moral perspective that we can avoid the worst outcome, which is moving to a place where we have demonization and a lack of respect. You put those two things together and you kill the ability to have open dialogue.”

In that vein, he said, the administration will not punish students who dissent respectfully, even during graduation.

On Wednesday, students from Morehouse, Spelman College and Clark Atlanta University — all historically Black institutions — protested the invitation, holding signs that blasted Biden and chanting at Thomas and “Genocide Joe.”

“While I understand why some of the older alumni might be excited by the amount of opportunity and press that this would bring to the institution, the general feeling on the ground is we don’t want [Biden] here,” said Malik P., a Morehouse sophomore who declined to give his full name. Malik told reporters he had been arrested a week earlier during a protest at Emory.

“It’s very obvious that we are being used to score political points and try to get more Black votes,” he added, comparing Biden’s commencement address to a recent visit to the area by former president Donald Trump . Trump stopped by a Chick-fil-A near Morehouse on April 10 and was photographed with a number of young Black people.

In 2020, Black voters were instrumental in propelling Biden to the White House, and they helped make him the first Democrat in 18 years to win Georgia. But now Biden faces a politically perilous softening of Black support, and Morehouse offers an opportunity to make his pitch at an institution geared toward Black excellence, backdropped by proud Black families.

While some students plan to protest Biden’s appearance, others argue for a more nuanced approach, saying the act of listening is part of the Morehouse way.

Aylon Gipson, 22, an economics major, said that while he believes there should be a cease-fire in Gaza, he worries that the graduation ceremony has already been overshadowed by the controversy.

“The graduation is not about Biden,” he said a few moments after a rehearsal for a step show that his fraternity, Alpha Phi Alpha, is performing on commencement day. “It’s not necessarily about the alumni, either. It’s about the Class of 2024, who have been through a lot.”

Many in that class had their high school graduations canceled or moved online due to the coronavirus pandemic. Four years later, they are celebrating their college degrees amid nationwide protests over the war in the Middle East, some of which have resulted in graduation exercises being canceled.

Gipson said he worries that an unruly protest of Biden could reflect badly on the university and its graduates. His grandmother and several other family members will be in the audience, and he is hoping for a day that is more joyous than raucous.

“As Morehouse men, I think we’ve been taught you always respect the office of the president even if you don’t necessarily respect the person that’s in it,” Gipson said. “A lot of students in my class and our peers will be looking at what Biden has to say to them. Biden has to make a pitch to us … I’ll be willing to listen to what he has to say, and I’ll be willing to be open-minded on that day.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Biden is looking forward to engaging with Morehouse students.

“He’s going to be celebrating that day with them, talking about their future, you know, hoping to deliver remarks that hit home for these graduates and their families,” she said. “I can’t speak to the mood. I can’t speak to [the] security situation. I can’t speak to that. I can’t get into hypotheticals.”

Thomas, the Morehouse president, said some alumni have threatened to cancel donations due to Biden’s appearance. But he said respectful discourse, even on contentious topics, is central for any college, and Morehouse should not flinch from that — rather, he hopes the college’s ability to navigate this moment will add to its legacy. Biden’s only other commencement address this year is to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

“There’s no question that it elevates people’s awareness of the college,” Thomas said. “For a very small liberal arts college … having the president come definitely elevates that stature.”

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Biden’s upcoming graduation speech roils Morehouse College, a center of Black politics and culture

FILE - President Joe Biden speaks in support of changing the Senate filibuster rules that have stalled voting rights legislation, at Atlanta University Center Consortium, on the grounds of Morehouse College and Clark Atlanta University, Jan. 11, 2022, in Atlanta. Biden will have his most direct engagement with college students since the start of the Israel-Hamas war when he speaks at Morehouse College’s commencement. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)

President Joe Biden speaks at a memorial service to honor law enforcement officers who’ve lost their lives in the past year, during National Police Week ceremonies at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, May 15, 2024. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

A large group of faith leaders organized by the Atlanta Multifaith Coalition for Palestine address the media during a press conference at Emory on Tuesday, April 30, 2024. They’re demanding Biden not to speak at Morehouse commencement unless he calls for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza. (Miguel Martinez/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

• Copy Link copied

ATLANTA (AP) — When he gives the commencement address at Morehouse College, President Joe Biden will have his most direct engagement with college students since the start of the Israel-Hamas war at a center of Black politics and culture.

Morehouse is located in Atlanta, the largest city in the swing state of Georgia, which Biden flipped from then-President Donald Trump four years ago. Biden’s speech Sunday will come as the Democrat tries to make inroads with a key and symbolic constituency — young Black men — and repair the diverse coalition that elected him to the White House.

The announcement of the speech last month triggered peaceful protests and calls for the university administration to cancel over Biden’s handling of the war between Israel and Hamas. Some students at Morehouse and other historically Black campuses in Atlanta say they vociferously oppose Biden and the decision to have him speak, mirroring the tension Biden faces in many communities of color and with young voters nationally .

Morehouse President David Thomas said in an interview that the emotions around the speech made it all the more important that Biden speak.

“In many ways, these are the moments Morehouse was born for,” he said. “We need someplace in this country that can hold the tensions that threaten to divide us. If Morehouse can’t hold those tensions, then no place can.”

What to know about the 2024 Election

• Democracy: American democracy has overcome big stress tests since 2020. More challenges lie ahead in 2024.
• AP’s Role: The Associated Press is the most trusted source of information on election night, with a history of accuracy dating to 1848. Learn more.
• Read the latest: Follow AP’s complete coverage of this year’s election.

The speech comes at a critical moment for Biden in his general election rematch against Trump, a Republican. Biden is lagging in support among both Black voters and people under 30, groups that were key to his narrow 2020 victories in several battleground states, including Georgia.

Fifty-five percent of Black adults approved of the way Biden is handling his job as president, according to an AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll in March, a figure far below earlier in his presidency. Overall, 32% of 18- to 29-year-olds approved in the same poll.

“This is a global catastrophe in Gaza, and Joe Biden coming to pander for our votes is political blackface,” said Morehouse sophomore Anwar Karim, who urged Thomas and school trustees to rescind Biden’s invitation.

Recent scenes on American campuses reflect objections among many young voters about Israel’s assaults in Gaza. Biden has backed Israel since Hamas militants killed more than 1,200 Israelis and took hundreds of hostages on Oct. 7. That includes weapons shipments to the longstanding U.S. ally, even as Biden advocates for a cease-fire, criticizes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s tactics and the death toll in Gaza surpasses 35,000 people, many of them women and children.

Many younger Black people have identified with the Palestinian cause and have at times drawn parallels between Israeli rule of the Palestinian territories and South Africa’s now-defunct apartheid system and abolished Jim Crow laws in the U.S. Israel rejects claims that its system of laws for Palestinians constitutes apartheid.

“I think that the president will do himself good if he does not duck that, especially when you think about the audience that he will be speaking to directly and to the nation,” Thomas said.

Sunday’s speech will culminate a four-day span during which Biden will concentrate on reaching Black communities. On Thursday, Biden met privately with plaintiffs from the Brown v. Board of Education case that barred legal segregation of America’s public schools. The following day, Biden will address an NAACP gathering commemorating the 70th anniversary of the landmark decision.

Former U.S. Rep. Cedric Richmond, a longtime Biden ally who helped broker his speech at Morehouse, said he understood students’ concerns but emphasized that Biden has pressured Netanyahu and supports a two-state solution for the Israelis and Palestinians. Trump, meanwhile, has effectively abandoned that long-held U.S. position and said Israel should “finish the problem” in Gaza.

“That’s nowhere in the conversation,” Richmond said.

The debate over Biden’s speech at Morehouse reflected a fundamental tension of historically Black colleges and universities, which are both dedicated to social justice and Black advancement and run by administrators who are committed to keeping order.

“We look like a very conservative institution” sometimes, Thomas said. “On one hand, the institution has to be the stable object where we are today in the world.”

But, he added, the university’s long-term purpose is to “support our students in going out to create a better world.”

Blowback started even before Thomas publicly announced Biden was coming. Faculty sent executives a letter of concern, prompting an online town hall. Alumni gathered several hundred signatures to urge that Thomas rescind Biden’s invitation. The petition called the invitation antithetical to the pacifism Martin Luther King Jr., a Morehouse alumnus, expressed when opposing the Vietnam War.

Some students note that leaders of Morehouse and other HBCUs did not always support King and other Civil Rights activists who are venerated today. Morehouse, for instance, expelled the actor Samuel L. Jackson in 1969 after he and other students held Morehouse trustees, including King’s father, in a campus building as part of demanding curriculum changes and the appointment of more Black trustees.

Students organized two recent protests across the Atlanta University Center (AUC), a consortium of historically Black institutions in Atlanta that includes Morehouse. Chants included “Joe Biden, f— off!” and “Biden, Biden, you can’t hide. We charge you with genocide,” along with expletives directed at Thomas.

“Our institution is supporting genocide, and we turn a blind eye,” said Nyla Broddie, a student at Spelman College, which is part of the AUC. Brodie argued Biden’s Israel policy should be viewed in the broader context of U.S. foreign policy and domestic police violence against Black Americans.

Thomas said he “feels very positive about graduation” and that “not one” Morehouse senior — there are about 500 at the all-male private school — has opted out of participating. “That’s not to say that the sentiments about what’s going on in Gaza don’t resonate with people in our community,” Thomas said.

Thomas met privately with students as did several trustees. The Morehouse alumni association hosted a student town hall, featuring at least one veteran of the Atlanta Student Movement, a Civil Rights-era organization.

But there was a consistent message: Uninviting the president of the United States was not an option. When students raised questions about endowment investments in Israel and U.S. defense contractors, they said they were told the relevant amounts are negligible, a few hundred thousand dollars in mutual funds.

“I think folks are excited” about Biden coming, said Democratic Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, the senior pastor at King’s Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta. Warnock said Biden is in “a great position” to talk about student debt relief , increased federal support for HBCUs and other achievements.

HBCUs have not seen crackdowns from law enforcement like those at Columbia University in New York City and the University of California, Los Angeles. However, Morehouse and the AUC have seen peaceful demonstrations, petitions and private meetings among campus stakeholders. Xavier University, a historically Black university in Louisiana, withdrew its commencement invitation for U.N. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield , citing a desire among students “to enjoy a commencement ceremony free of disruptions.”

Whether Morehouse graduates or other students protest Biden or disrupt the ceremony remains to be seen. Student protest leaders say they are unaware of any plans to demonstrate inside during the commencement.

Thomas, Morehouse’s president, promised that forms of protest at commencement that “do not disrupt ceremonies” will not result in sanctions for any students.

But he also vowed to end the program early if disruptions grow.

“We will not — on Morehouse’s campus — create a national media moment,” he said, “where our inability to manage these tensions leads to people being taken out of a Morehouse ceremony in zip ties by law enforcement.”

trending now in US News

Mom fined $88K after kids collect 72 clams from Calif. beach...

Trump dishes on Biden and NYC migrant crisis as rabid supporters...

Angry Biden complains press ‘never keep the deal,’ calls...

Alleged auction fraud at Elvis' Graceland estate catches eyes of...

NJ deputy mayor resigns after calling Pine Barrens residents...

Biden edges ahead of Trump as nearly 20% of voters say their...

Two NYPD sergeants get into shoving match over salary gap: sources

Footage shows tearful NYPD cops rush to save poodle after it's...

Breaking news, white house makes nine brutal corrections to biden’s naacp detroit speech.

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

They went the whole nine yards with this one.

White House officials went into cleanup mode after President Biden delivered a gaffe-riddled speech to the NAACP in Detroit Sunday — making a whopping nine corrections to the formal transcript.

The changes fixed both trips of Biden’s tongue — such as calling Capitol rioters “irrectionists” — and flagrant retellings of history, like claiming he was still vice president during the COVID-19 pandemic .

The official transcript, released Monday, made no bones about the errors, with strikethroughs of Biden’s mistakes and the corrected comments included in brackets.

The 81-year-old’s address to the 69th annual Fight for  Freedom Fund  Dinner was part of an outreach effort to black Americans as polls show support for him softening in the demographic.

Here are the nine adjustments that were made in the official transcript :

Vice president during the pandemic

During his opening, Biden conveyed his “love” for Detroit, before slipping up and suggesting he was the vice president during the outbreak of COVID-19.

“And when I was vice president, things were kind of bad during the  pandemic  [recession], and what happened was Barack said to me, ‘Go to Detroit and help fix it,'” the transcript said.

Honored to receive this organization

Part of the impetus for Biden’s speech was to accept a lifetime achievement award from the Detroit branch of the NAACP, but he mangled that part during his acceptance.

“Folks, I’m humbled to receive this  organization  [award], which defines the character and consequence of what we do,” Biden said.

‘Truly inspiresing’

Biden’s swing through Detroit came on the heels of his commencement address at Atlanta’s Morehouse College, an all-male historically black institution that bestowed an honorary degree on him.

“It was truly  inspiresing  [inspiring]: over 400 young Black men who will do extraordinary things,” the transcript said.

$800,000 in health care premium savings

Back when Democrats had control of Congress, Biden was able to push through an expansion of subsidies in the Affordable Care Act. The administration estimates that can save families up to $800 annually, but Biden mangled it and said $800,000.

“I protected and expanded the Affordable Care Act, saving millions of families $800,000 in prem- —  $8,000  [$800] in — a year in premiums,” the president said.

Fighting landlords who keep rents down

While touting efforts to lower the cost of living, the president inadvertently claimed to be fighting unscrupulous landlords who are trying to keep rents down.

“We’re cracking down on corporate landlords  who  [to] keep rents down,” Biden said.

Black women ‘have nearly three times more likely to die’

In another verbal flub, Biden swapped in the word “have” when he meant to say “are.”

“He [Trump] not only denies reproductive freedom but worsens the mortality rate for Black moms, who  have  [are] nearly three times more likely to die from pregnancy complications than a white woman,” the president declared.

‘Irrectionists’

Some politicians have mangled the word “insurrection ” (which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer once called an “erection”), but Biden had a unique fumble on that front.

“He [Trump] calls the  irrectionists  [insurrectionists] who stormed Capitol Hill ‘patriots.’ He says, if re-elected, he wants, quote, ‘every’ one of them pardoned,” the transcript noted.

‘Bloodshed’

Back in March, former President Donald Trump warned there would be a “bloodbath” in the auto industry if he loses the 2024 election. Biden misquoted him as saying “bloodshed.”

Get opinions and commentary from our columnists

Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter!

Thanks for signing up!

Please provide a valid email address.

By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

Never miss a story.

“But that’s not Donald Trump. Donald Trump has said, if he loses again in November, there will be, quote,  ‘bloodshed ‘ [‘bloodbath’]. What in God’s name are we talking about here?” Biden said, according to the transcript.

And to cap things off, Biden butchered the very name of the organization to which he was speaking.

“Earlier this month, I posthumously awarded Medgar Evers the Presidential Medal of Freedom, our nation’s highest civilian honor. His spirit endures. The  NAAC  [NAACP] spirit endures,” the transcript said.

The commander-in-chief, who has been open about growing up with a stutter, has been no stranger to rhetorical doozies during some of his public outings.

Between the start of the year and late last month, the White House made at least 148 adjustments to transcripts of his remarks, according to an analysis by the Daily Caller.

Ahead of Biden’s Nov. 5 rematch with Trump, the issue of age has loomed large. Biden is already the oldest president in US history and would be 86 at the end of a second four-year term.

Trump and Biden are slated to square off in a CNN-hosted debate on June 27 in Atlanta.

Share this article:

Advertisement

Anti-fake news or anti-free speech? The debate over Punjab’s new defamation law

On May 20, the Punjab Assembly passed the Defamation Bill, 2024, with the stated aim to provide “protection from false, misleading and defamatory claims via print, electronic and social media against public officials and private citizens”. Critics believe, however, that the law’s real purpose is much more nefarious — that it actually aims to muzzle free speech and inhibit dissenting voices.

As we attempt to pick through the law’s merits and lacunae, let us begin by underscoring this basic principle — strengthening defamation laws must not be a not a tug-of-war between censorship and unfettered free speech. The former should never feature in a democratic society, while the latter can be addressed through appropriate mechanisms.

Unfortunately, in Pakistan, the state often uses the pretext of curbing fake news or online abuse to weaponise defamation laws against critics to intimidate, harass, and silence them. The Punjab defamation law, too, exemplifies this regressive approach.

Hasty regulation

Free speech is not absolute; it operates within a framework of checks and balances. Articles 4(2)(a) and 14(1) of the Constitution of Pakistan protect the reputation and dignity of individuals, while Article 19 guarantees freedom of speech “subject to any reasonable restrictions”.

However, these restrictions must be narrowly construed to avoid undermining the fundamental rights they are supposed to protect. Civil defamation laws in Pakistan often abuse this concept, being drafted in overly expansive terms that make a wide range of statements actionable as defamation.

The hasty manner in which the Punjab defamation bill was steamrolled, and the procedure prescribed in it makes obvious that the intent was never to address the shortcomings of its predecessor law, the Defamation Ordinance 2002 , but to provide the government with toothier legislation to target dissent and free speech.

This is evident in the language of the Statement of Object and Reasons of the bill, which states that it protects “public officials” from defamatory claims as they “damage the reputation and image of public figures or the government by defaming, slandering, and libelling them”.

Further, the new law prescribes preferable treatment for holders of “Constitutional Office”, which has been defined in the law as, including other prominent positions, the Prime Minister, Chief Justice of Pakistan, and the Chief of Army Staff. While a defamation tribunal has been given jurisdiction under the new law, cases against the holders of the Constitutional Office are to be filed in the Lahore High Court. This disparity indicates that the grievances of the state and its citizens are not given equal status before the law. The former has been placed above the latter.

The issue of fake news is complex and has stumped political administrations across the world. It defies reason how the Punjab government can claim to address this issue when it drafted the bill and passed it in mere days without consulting any stakeholders. This omission is particularly glaring given that the mainstream and digital journalists’ community, a group that not only has credible insight on the topic, are the ones most likely to be targeted under the new law.

{try{this.style.height=this.contentWindow.document.body.scrollHeight+'px';}catch{}}, 100)" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="height:400px;position:relative" src="https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1834848" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-popups allow-modals allow-forms">

We have seen in the past how the actual perpetrators of fake news and hate-mongering operate unchecked while those committed to telling the truth are targeted under defamation laws. Hence, civil society organisations labelling the new law as “draconian” and a “curb on free media” is completely justified.

More specifically, the new law falls short of bringing specificity to the concept of ‘defamation’. Case law establishes that the following five factors constitute defamation:

• allegations should be false, baseless, and unfounded;
• allegations on the face of it should be defamatory or derogatory in nature;
• allegations should have been published in widely circulated newspapers or spoken in a large gathering;
• wording used should have been made with malice without reasonable cause and justification; and
• the allegations should have been directly attributed to the plaintiff.

All five factors require evidence to be cited. Therefore, summary procedure as prescribed in Section 11(1) of the new law is not desirable, particularly to prove malicious intent. On top of that Section 23 makes the Law of Evidence inapplicable to proceedings under the new law, Section 10(6) requires the defamation tribunal to decide the case in 180 days, and Section 15(1) allows the tribunal to issue a preliminary decree of a minimum of Rs3 million. Combined, these provisions show that the government is looking for expeditious conclusion of cases in a vengeful manner at the expense of undermining the constitutional guarantees of fair trial and due process.

Reminiscent of Peca

Criminalising defamation deters victims of sexual harassment and abuse from speaking out against their perpetrators, intimidates journalists into silence, and penalises political opponents, critics, activists, and citizens for expressing dissent. In this respect, the new Punjab defamation bill is not too different from the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act introduced by the PML-N in 2016. Peca too had the stated aim of curbing harassment and hate speech, but its intended and actual effect was to crush dissent and free speech.

{try{this.style.height=this.contentWindow.document.body.scrollHeight+'px';}catch{}}, 100)" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="height:400px;position:relative" src="https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1725805" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-popups allow-modals allow-forms">

The PML-N government, during its previous tenure in the centre, used Peca to harass the PTI and its party workers. The law was also used against journalists critical of the military at a time when the national media was dominated by the Dawn leaks inquiry report .

The interior minister at that time, Chaudhry Nisar, had warned that “anti-institution propaganda would not be tolerated” and that defamation laws would be used against the perpetrators. Subsequently, the Federal Investigation Agency claimed that several “anti-army campaigners” had been identified. Members of the PTI social media team were arrested, while its party offices were raided, and equipment seized.

The roles were reversed when the PTI came into power in 2018. Workers and supporters of the PML-N were charged under Peca and the Pakistan Penal Code for allegedly running a smear campaign against state institutions such as the judiciary and the military. The PML-N also claimed that its party’s social media activists were being picked up and disappeared. The roles switched once again when the coalition government was formed in 2022, and politicians, and workers associated with the PTI started getting victimised under Peca.

The case of PTI leader Azam Swati is one such example. He was arrested by the FIA under Section 20 of Peca, as well as Sections 131, 500, 501, 505, and 109 of the PPC for making controversial posts about senior military officers, including the former army chief.

Interestingly, sections 10 (cyber-terrorism), 11 (hate speech), and 20 (offences against the dignity of a natural person) of Peca, which are frequently used by the state to charge individuals, do not cover comments or speech pertaining to public officials or institutions. But this has not stopped sitting governments from using them as a weapon against opponents and journalists alike. A first information report under the aforestated sections of Peca is often paired with sections 499 (defamation) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the PPC.

Previously, the FIA also frequently used to add Section 124A (sedition) of the PPC to the charge sheet, which criminalised criticism of the federal and provincial governments. But this was struck down by the Lahore High Court last year for being inconsistent with the Constitution. This decision came in response to several petitions filed by parties on the grounds that the law was being used by the government against political opponents and had a deleterious effect on free speech and dissent.

It is also time to repeal the criminal defamation laws under both PPC and Peca for being obsolete. This issue requires the immediate attention of the government. The passing of another dangerous law, which repackages the criminal defamation laws in civil garbs, is counterproductive at best and nefarious at worst.

How to actually address fake news

If the government is genuinely serious about addressing the menace of fake news, additional legislation is not the solution. Instead, a whole-of-society approach is needed to address the declining trust in mainstream media and the over-reliance on social media.

Fake news activities are not disorganised or sporadic. Rather, they are highly organised and systemic. So, it makes no sense for our approach to addressing them to be haphazard, untargeted, or ill-informed.

A whole-of-society approach requires the government, technology companies, news and media industry, educational institutions, and individuals to work in tandem and adopt a series of standard operating procedures. Such a multilateral approach is unlike the unilateral approach of the Punjab government in passing the new law.

{try{this.style.height=this.contentWindow.document.body.scrollHeight+'px';}catch{}}, 100)" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="height:400px;position:relative" src="https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1604658" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-popups allow-modals allow-forms">

The government must encourage independent and professional journalism. The world is complex and rapidly changing which creates anger and anxiety amongst people, who have to try and make sense of it. A healthy network of journalists free from external interference serves to alleviate such concerns and establish trust in society.

This also requires the government not to crack down on journalists, or impose censorship, which not only makes it harder for journalists to do their job but also creates space for misinformation to spread unchecked.

Educational institutions must prioritise coaching students in news literacy, which includes the ability to analyse information and be sceptical about what they read and watch. Individuals must ensure they consume their news from a variety of sources.

Technology companies also have a huge role to play. They must identify fake news through algorithms and crowdsourcing, reduce incentives for those who profit from disinformation, and improve online accountability by ensuring bots are eradicated and all users operate under their own name. The news industry must also focus on high-quality investigative journalism and call out fake news and disinformation as an industry practice.

The political leadership must stop fooling the public by using the term ‘fake news’ as a catchphrase to introduce self-serving and anti-free speech legislation. The Punjab government would do well to pay heed to the widespread criticism it has faced over this matter.

The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore with an active interest in climate justice. He is also the Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim fellow at the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.

Over 80 civil society bodies, journalists reject ‘draconian and regressive’ Punjab Defamation Bill

Amid protests, Punjab Assembly passes defamation law

Dangerous law

Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.