National survey reveals perceptions of freedom of speech and its restrictions in liberal democracies, suggesting complexities in public opinion.
Freedom of speech is an essential pillar of democracy. Despite constitutional protections, citizens in some liberal democracies increasingly feel the “bulwark of liberty” under pressure. While the underlying causes of these developments remain largely ambiguous, a fundamental question persists: What exactly do citizens have in mind when assessing the concept of “freedom of speech” – and who do they believe is restricting it? Clarifying this is essential for interpreting survey data, understanding underlying causes, and developing effective strategies to counter this trend. A quota-representative national survey of German citizens ( N = 1,490) reveals (1) that most respondents perceive free speech in both legal and social terms. Additionally, (2) a notable portion perceives freedom of speech as too restricted, driven by both dimensions, slightly emphasizing the legal aspect. Finally, (3) perceptions of the general status quo and both dimensions are – at least partly – shaped by different actors, underscoring the need to distinguish the social and the legal dimensions of freedom of speech.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sacher et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: