Absolutely, the privileging of free speech above all other journalistic values is problematic.  At it's worst, it's taking sides in a culture war instead of reporting on it (hello Jon).   At it's best, it's privileged journalists who have exceptional ability to speak and be heard maintaining their privilege (whatever happened to the journalistic value of comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable?).  

The value of free speech is something entirely different to an indigenous writer -- or anyone else who is not of the journalist elite -- who doesn't have the same access to having their stories published and put into the hands of readers.  Free speech is supposed to create a fair market of competing ideas, but really, how functional is that market if only some people can compete in it?  In my view, shouting down aboriginal concerns about cultural appropriation under the banner of free speech is about as inconsistent as thinking can get.

Great article, Denise, thanks.