Content Warning: This article contains details readers may find sensitive 

The career of Piers Morgan is astounding: how does one man seem to cause so much destruction and yet manage to maintain his platform as a broadcaster and influencer? After receiving immense criticism for suggesting he ‘doesn’t believe’ that Meghan Markle had suicidal thoughts, Morgan posted a Winston Churchill quote to his Instagram: ‘Some people’s idea of free speech is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back it is an outrage.’ The problematic consequences of this opinion come to a head when we consider it in relation to mental health. Mental health already has a huge stigma attached to it, so when someone with significant influence begins to question its believability, he only furthers the battle that so many have to face. Moreover, since Morgan has such a large online following, the amount of people that he is influencing with these opinions is also of note. Deeming people who disagree with him as too ‘woke,’ he continues to perpetuate the idea that taking hate speech too seriously is a negative thing. 

Following his disagreement with his co-host, Piers Morgan handed in his resignation from Good Morning Britain. He maintains his stance that Meghan Markle is lying about the state of her mental health, and that her claims about suicidal thoughts during her pregnancy were over-exaggerated. These comments understandably created a huge backlash, with over 41,000 Ofcom complaints from viewers of GMB. Morgan stands by these comments, as he does with all of his outlandish declarations, and went on to say that ‘freedom of speech is a hill I’m happy to die on.’ The argument surrounding the grey areas of free speech is very important, however it seems as if some are far too quick to play devil’s advocate for issues that really do not need an opposing opinion.

It is interesting to turn our attention to the handling of free speech in other countries. For example, in 2018, the Swiss government passed a law that specifically protects LGBTQ+ people from discrimination or hate speech. However, an opposition alliance of right-wing parties formed, and a referendum was called to prevent the law being passed. The opposition campaigners tried to frame this law as a ‘gagging clause,’ implying it infringed on rights to free speech. Despite the referendum results favouring the new law, it still brought to light the idea that an astounding number of people believe that hate speech must be allowed, in order to comply with the freedom of speech that they are entitled to.

Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, ‘everyone has the right to freedom of expression’ in the UK. However, the law does state that this said freedom ‘may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society.’ Over the years, the law has been revised to include language that is deemed to incite ‘racial and religious hatred’ as well as ‘hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation’ and language that ‘encourages terrorism.’ So fundamentally, anyone arguing that we do not have the freedom of speech anymore appear to be frustrated that they cannot incite hate anymore. 

Despite being related, there are huge differences between free speech and hate speech. Free speech is the right to say whatever one likes; it does not require factual accuracy, and it does not matter if one’s opinion is unpopular. However, free speech is limited by hate speech. Sometimes difference of opinion just will not cut it, as ‘toleration is not the solution to intolerance.’ It is crucial to remember that there is a difference between what is wrong and what is intolerably wrong. Indeed, there are some views that a free society cannot tolerate and what Morgan is doing by questioning the believability of someone’s legitimate mental health problems is toeing a very dangerous line between free and hate speech. 

The fact of the matter is that in terms of mental health, it is not about believing, it is about listening. Mental health is not a matter of opinion; people do not choose to be mentally ill, and therefore you do not get a choice as to whether to believe them or not. I think it is this aspect, the lack of understanding that Morgan shows in regard to mental health, that is most shocking. It is his assumption that there should be varying opinions on it that amplify this stigma that mental health is not a real issue, and something that someone can make up.

Surely Piers Morgan can understand that if someone is saying they are suicidal, whether he believes their claims or not, it is a serious cry for help, and certainly should not insinuate that it is a publicity stunt or an act. The crux of the matter is that it is not just Piers’ comment that is inherently harmful; we all know that he comes out with these outlandish opinions to ‘wind up’ his co-hosts and the general public. Rather, it is the trickling down of the opinions into conversations with friends both on and offline. If you see your friends liking tweets agreeing with Morgan, or someone commenting an opinion of a similar vein, it creates this idea that voicing these opinions is legitimate. This only further perpetuates the dangerous self-doubt many suffering with mental health issues are facing already. Yes, freedom of speech is important in so many avenues of society, but not when it comes to damaging opinions on mental health that could disastrously affect so many.

For mental health support:

Samaritans Suicide Hotline: 116 123

Shout: Text Shout to 85258

Mind: MindInfoline 0300 123 3393

More from Comment:

Outsourcing the Asylum System: The Cost of the Tories Putting Lives in the Hands of Business

Rishi Sunak Unveils Budget For 2021/2022: What Does It Mean For Our Current Financial Crisis?

Strip Clubs Are Harming Women, But We Shouldn’t Make Them Illegal