Picazo Jaque, Claudia2024-10-102024-10-102022-12-24Picazo, C. Distorted Debates. Topoi 42, 561–571 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09847-50167-7411; eISSN: 1572-8749https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09847-5https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/23984This is the accepted manuscript of the article. The version of record was first published in Topoi 42, 561–571 (2023), is available online on the publisher's website, Springer: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09847-5 Este es el manuscrito aceptado del artículo. La versión registrada fue publicada por primera vez en Topoi 42, 561–571 (2023), está disponible en línea en el sitio web del editor, Springer: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09847-5One way to silence the powerless, Langton has taught us, is to pre-emptively disable their ability to do things with words. In this paper I argue that speakers can be silenced in a different way. You can let them speak, and obscure the meaning of their words afterwards. My aim is to investigate this form of silencing, that I call retroactive distortion. In a retroactive distortion, the meaning of the words of a speaker is distorted by the effect of a subsequent speech act by a different speaker. After introducing this notion, I explore some reasons why retroactive distortions can be difficult to challenge and argue that, besides constituting a communicative injustice, they can eliminate topics from public consideration and therefore erode public debate.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess72 Filosofíaartículoretroactive distortionsilencinghermeneutical injusticepropagandapublic deliberation