Hate Speech on Social Media: Combating Strategies 3-3
Dolly Asaf
Sociology Professor - Lebanese University
Fifth: Prevention and Confrontation Mechanisms
Confronting hate speech on social media can be achieved through four fundamental mechanisms implemented by (Law - Education - Technological Development - Awareness). All stakeholders in the phenomenon, from the United Nations and the international community, through countries and their institutions, to groups and individuals within local communities, share responsibility. These mechanisms can be classified into two types of strategies: short-term and long-term. The former includes confrontation mechanisms for hate speech when it occurs, while the latter includes preventive measures to hinder its growth and spread in the future.
The states responsibility manifests in:
1. Enhancing deterrent legal frameworks for hate speech and exchanging information globally on initiatives, national laws, and criminal prosecution related to online hate speech. This includes developing countermeasures and best practices to effectively combat this phenomenon. Learning from the experiences of some countries in this field, for example:
- Germany enacted a law imposing fines of up to 50 million euros on social media companies for failing to promptly remove hate speech.
- France implemented a law requiring social media platforms and search engines to remove any content inciting hatred, violence, racism, or religious bigotry within 24 hours, subject to fines up to 25.1 million euros.
- Canada defined hate speech as content expressing hatred or defaming an individual or group online, allowing complainants to file complaints against individuals posting such content. Those refusing to stop expressing hate speech face a fine of 50,000 payable to the victims.
2. Creating applications, platforms, and forums that monitor online hate speech, offering advice on how to confront it, and recommending mechanisms victims should adopt. Creating spaces for discussion and opinion exchange on its implications and consequences is crucial. Supporting efforts of civil society organizations and volunteer activists in this field and providing them with a unified guide containing appropriate strategies and knowledge is vital.
For instance, a Swiss civil organization called the "Womens Alliance" launched the first Swiss application to track and combat online hate speech with the help of volunteer groups. The platform identifies hate-inciting comments, encourages volunteers to participate in discussions to help confront them (United Nations Development Program, 2019). The platform also provides tips to help users identify hate speech, along with the necessary counter-speech strategies.
3. Establishing an Arab Digital Council among all Arab countries as a forum for strategic dialogues on digital and technological policies. It aims to promote successful projects in prevention and confrontation policies, disseminate leading research results, and facilitate comprehensive and coordinated experience exchange and collaboration.
For example, the Commission launched the Radicalization Awareness Network (RAN), which now includes over 3,200 members from academic, governmental, and civil society backgrounds. The networks mission is to enhance cross-border experimental projects and best practices and disseminate new research results. In 2019, an additional advisory council was created to advise member states on their specific prevention policies (European Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies, 2019).
4. Creating a state-sponsored electronic army countering hate with a tolerance discourse using the same methods employed by hate speech groups. This includes spamming, increasing interaction, and widespread dissemination in the digital world. The messages of tolerance should focus on the harms of hate speech and its high costs, reinforcing human values as necessary for humanitarian and existential security, as everyone loses with hatred. Civil society organizations can be supported in these countermeasures, whether directly by the government, local authorities, the United Nations, or relevant international organizations.
5. Enhancing digital education and modifying school curricula for students to include new educational materials that align with the digital world we live in, addressing related phenomena. This involves adding subjects like "Digital Awareness," "Digital Citizenship Education," "Different Religions and Cultures," and "Education on Tolerance and Human Values," etc. This material can build awareness among children and teenagers about the risks of the digital world and its threats, while promoting a positive image of diversity. It aligns with the principles of multiculturalism, shared living, and the new global citizenship.
6. Strengthening ethics in media and its professionals by holding them accountable for their significant role in promoting human security and ensuring community peace. Equipping them with necessary skills and knowledge to deal with and counter hate speech, producing a confrontational discourse without compromising their rights and freedom of expression. Media institutions need to conduct awareness campaigns for the public regarding the threats of hate messages and their dangers, informing people how to legally, socially, and religiously confront them.
7. Working to enhance international and domestic initiatives for intercultural, interreligious, and interethnic dialogue. Boosting efforts of religious authorities in this field, along with civil society organizations and international entities. The focus should be on promoting common human values, respecting others, and accepting diversity. For instance, the "Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together" in 2019 between Pope Francis and Dr. Ahmed Al-Tayeb, emphasizing the need to build open identities against self-isolation and "bigoted tendencies," rejecting violence, and respecting human dignity.
8. Reinforcing the role of religious leaders in individuals moral, religious, and human upbringing. This involves rejecting all forms of hatred that pose a threat to humanity and deviate from the traditions of religions. It also includes raising awareness about the dangers of violent behaviors practiced in the name of religions, a result of misunderstandings of religious texts.
9. Establishing state-affiliated research units to monitor and study the phenomena causing hate speech, its outcomes, and indicators. These units should track its constantly changing paths with the rapid evolution of digital technology. Specialized experts in technology, sociology, psychology, education, law, media, religion, and civil society should collaborate to provide therapeutic and preventive solutions.
10. Strengthening the efforts of civil society organizations aiming to combat hate speech through appropriate mechanisms. This could include awareness campaigns, revealing the identities of perpetrators, producing counter-speech, creating platforms to assist victims, and implementing innovative measures to combat hatred in the media, including the internet. These measures encompass identifying hate trends, tracking and monitoring websites with hate-inciting speech, notifying potentially affected or targeted communities about hate broadcast activities, and closely cooperating with internet service providers and government agencies to report hate-inciting content. Providing educational materials and online training programs is also essential.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the cost of hatred is exceedingly high, and the failure to manage constructive relationships and interests has been the major beneficiary so far. There is a crucial need for a deep-rooted approach to the structures and contexts that produce hatred in any context, avoiding turning it into a governing value for practices. This requires collaborative global, international, and local strategies seeking to contain the phenomenon legally and technologically as much as possible, leading to the adoption of a "Global Citizenship Law Against Hate Speech." Simultaneously, working in cooperation with all stakeholders to build a transcendent awareness for groups, peoples, and cultures, based on the choice of accepting others, rather than fostering enmity away from rational logic.
It is imperative to build a collective awareness that believes in constructing a positive human society locally and globally by excluding hatred as a value and choice. It should internally and humanely align with achieving social security in its various manifestations.
Policy Papers on Security
https://nauss.edu.sa
