Hate Speech In Social Networks

     While a clear and concise definition remains forthcoming, it is easier to establish what hate speech is not. Hate speech is wrong but legal in the United States of America mostly because we have the freedom of speech. But the First Amendment exists precisely to protect the most offensive and controversial speech from government suppression. In this case, people are allowed to use hate speech and not get arrested or any legal actions against them. The best way to counter obnoxious speech such as this is with more speech. Persuasion, not violence, is the solution to this problem (Jouhari).

In order to resolve the issues of hate speech, one should address the necessary balance between personal liberties and public safety. However, some restrictions must be placed on hate speech, including the expression of hateful ideas. It is imperative that hate speech is limited in some cases, such as those where it could pose a serious threat to the surrounding environment. The only way hate speech can be controlled is with strict guidelines and probable hate speech situations left up to a case-by-case basis.

Throughout history, crimes have been committed worldwide. Murder, assault, and other crimes have been dealt with some kind of punishment, but one crime stays unnoticed and not cared about. Hate crimes, a major conflict in communities, have been showing up without anyone noticing. People sometimes commit them unaware of the consequences due to the lack of understanding what a hate crime really is. A hate crime is a motive to hurt or insult a certain group of people. It is more harsh and dangerous than most crimes because it not only affects the victim, but the whole group of that victim’s characteristic. With the underestimation of hate crimes, murder, assault, and other crimes will increase highly.

Hate speech is a term of art in legal and political theory that is used to refer to verbal conduct – and other symbolic, communicative action –which willfully attacks a person or group based on attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender. Hate speech thus includes things like identity-prejudicial abuse and harassment, certain uses of slurs and epithets, some extremist political and religious speech. For example, statements to the effect that all Muslims are terrorists, or that gay people are second -class human beings, and certain displays of hate symbols like swastikas or burning crosses are part of it. Those such activities are classified as hate speech if, and insofar as, they convey the idea that belonging to a particular social group warrants someone’s being held in or treated with contempt. However, Freedom of speech is the most important and basic right that a human in every country deserves. Freedom of speech and hate speech are two opposite things. Therefore, the government needs to draw a line between hate speech and freedom of speech to protect a citizen. Hate speech should be banned and extreme speech regulated because it is one of the reasons for many negative consequences in human lives

Making laws that prohibit hateful digital hate speech need to be carefully crafted in order to not be deemed unconstitutional. In fact in Albany County in New York they ran into this very problem. The county passed a law that was too broad which resulted in it meddling with the First Amendment. The law was meant to ban hateful conversation through electronic communication by making it illegal to “...harass, annoy, threaten...or otherwise inflict significant emotional harm on another person”. In the end, the wording of the law made it legal to penalize someone for an annoying phone call. (Wiessner par. 1-15).

It seems like the issue of race has been the plague of this country for longer than anyone really has wanted with topics that should have been erased from history years prior with the civil rights movements of the 1960's. Race is what has been the main reason for the identification to discriminate towards minorities if it's either black, white or from a different country all together it leads to heated arguments that can spawn hatred on social media towards people from different walks of life. Nevertheless, even in the 21st century more than 50 years since the end of the civil rights movements, the idea of race is still in the spotlight even after all the progressive achievements that's been achieved towards the ignorance of different people

Racism and dissemination based on hatred and racial superiority were pressing social problem prior to the emergence of the information age and digital communications. Long before the internet entered our homes racist groups made use of other communication tools including the telephone networks as far back as the 1970s. However the advancement of the digital communication age has added a new dimension to this problem by providing individuals in organizations modern and powerful means to support racism in xenophobia. The Internet is becoming our main means of communication creating a unique set of challenges and communication barriers particularly when it comes to the proliferation of extremist and racist material. The internet functions as a dangerous facilitator for various racist messages, and the proliferation of racist material will continue with the increased usage of the internet.

To provide a broader understanding of the phenomenon, in their 2016 research, Silva et al. focus on identifying the main targets of online hate in two major social media systems: Whisper and Twitter. Defining hate speech as “any offense motivated, in whole or in a part, by the offender’s bias against an aspect of a group of people,” the authors determine that such a content includes basic hate crimes such as race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability, but also specific behavioral and physical aspects that are not illegal but simply harmful (688). Analyzing one-year data gathered from Whisper and Twitter and cross-referencing their findings with Hatebase, an online repository of hate speech, Silva et al. identify ten main categories of hate targets: race (black or white people); behavior (insecure, sensitive); physical (obese, but also beautiful); sexual orientation (gay, straight); class (ghetto, rich); gender (pregnant,

Eissens, the secretariat for the International Network Against Cyber Hate (INACH), argues that online hate speech should be regulated. He thinks regulation will deter extremist groups from using it to incite racist, religious, or discriminatory violence. His argument is based on the claim that hate groups use the Internet as a platform to spread their hateful messages. “Incitement through electronic means is not different from incitement by traditional means.” Additionally, Eissens states that regulating online hate speech is aimed to deter hate crimes, not to change individual ideologies or restrict the freedom of expression. Eissens also claims that hate disrupts society in all of its facets, including government and commerce. Hate speech

This approach, adopted as criminal punishment, is regarded as unequal to the kind of harms and risks related to hate speech, and conflicting with Australia’s commitment to freedom of expression. Thus, this article assists in comprehending the extent to which freedom of speech is appropriate within Australia and its conflicting position against hate speech. The book identifies the underlying values of hate speech laws and the context within which hate speech occurs. It also explores how regulations of hate speech should be balanced alongside Australia’s political and cultural obligation to freedom of speech. Further, it considers how hate language is changing and the strain concerning freedom of speech and hate speech as a tension between freedom and

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

Society today is overcome with mindless hate and fear. Unfortunately, nowadays a lot of these ideas are expressed online rather than in person, which can be more damaging in the long run. Online users tend to believe they are entitled to their remarks they make on social media websites because of the first amendment. While that is somewhat true, ethically this state of mind can be naïve. Social media should be a place to connect with others and rise from the unnecessary rage our world is filled with today. One can start this movement by using political correctness. Social media promotes ignorance and hate which allows users to post offensive things and hide behind their computer screen. This kind of behavior online can affect your career, and

Imagine walking down the street and then out of nowhere a person shouts obscenities at others based on the way they look or because of what they affiliate with. This person may feel as if they have just been both verbally and emotionally attacked. With the current state of hate speech laws, there is nothing that could be done to punish the instigator of the hate speech. Hate has a strong connection to United States history. Slaves were a result of being hateful to those who were different, and Jim Crow laws were a consequence of a hatred for those who were different also. As much time has passed since then, America has gotten more progressive although there are still people who are hateful of others for they way they are. Hate speech laws are necessary in the United States and should be passed because passing them would create and foster a more tolerant society, help to decrease the negative risk associated with them, and prevent violent acts of hate which tend to be preceded by hate speech.

Social media connects people throughout the whole world. While there is love and support aplenty online, these same platforms target innocent people based on things such as religion or race. A 15 year old girl posted a photograph of herself online, and without her consent, it was posted on a website. Because she was wearing a hijab , she received hateful comments. She was an innocent child subjected to a world of hate for no reason other than she is Muslim (Awan, & Zempi, 2016). As if it weren’t terrible enough people are being targeted online, the public goes after Muslims in the street, too. In Ukrainian, Mohammed Saleem was murdered by a neo-Nazi, Pavlo Lapshyn. Pavlo Lapshyn killed another human being and tried to bomb multiple mosques, attempting to start a new “race war” (Vikram, 2013). Sadly, Pavlo isn’t the only case where people are targeted for being Muslim. Muslim humans are attacked online and offline because they are wrongly afflicted with terrorists.

I believe that we shouldn’t attempt on reaching out on international consensus on how to define hate speech. Every country should have the right to make their own rules and standards. If we don’t follow or let other countries control what we do, we shouldn’t be telling them what to do.