No Platforming Persuasive Speech

No platforming has become a topic of hot discussion within universities across the United Kingdom. In a survey done by the BBC of 1001 students from various universities, they found that 63% believed that the National Union of Students of the United Kingdom is right to have a “No Platforming” policy. Platforming itself is the act of having a platform for which to freely discus your beliefs, theories, and ideas. There is no limit to what a person with a platform can talk about. Many believe that platforming persecutes others, specifically minorities, by allowing those with abhorrent and discriminatory ideas to spread them. This has created the concept of no platforming. No platforming supports that those who do not have the same values and morals that their society upholds should be prohibited from having a …show more content…
First of all, they never specifically engaged with their opponents. They seemed to have written their scripts with prepared information about why platforming is bad, and stuck to that instead of adapting and responding to their opposition’s main points. Secondly, they failed to create clear definitions of what no platforming is and how to practice it. For example, the first student to speak on behalf of platforming mentioned that no platforming’s purpose was originally to kybosh racist and fascist rhetoric. There is no longer a clear definition of what should and should not be no platformed, which makes no platforming too undefined to create legislation around. This was a very persuasive argument made by their opponents, and yet the students for no platforming never gave their rebuttal. The students for no platforming provided only theoretical support for their argument. The lack of practicalities made their argument weak and in the end, lost them the