3 ms·

The Police of London actively scan and monitor social networks looking for “hate speech” so they can pursue legal action. What’s the difference between that and

The Police of London actively scan and monitor social networks looking for “hate speech” so they can pursue legal action. What’s the difference between that and what China does?

faitswulff 8y ago
Shouldn't hate speech should be punished?
- chrischen 8y ago
  London deemed hate wpeech punishable, China determines certain speech (that it deems bad for society as well) punishable. No difference except for a difference in perspective.
- i_am_nomad 8y ago
  The problem with that is, who defines what “hate” is?
- Karunamon 8y ago
  No. Not because of the usual slippery slope reasons, but because denying someone their freedom for mere words is abhorrent.
- acct1771 8y ago
  Offending someone shouldn't be illegal. Period. Directly inciting actual physical violence, you might have an argument for. But words and ideas must remain free to maintain any semblance of a free society. As other commenters have said: who decides?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
SolaceQuantum 8y ago
The difference is that you can criticize the government and not be thrown in jail. You have a lot more autonomy in your opinions on how you are governed. You can have his conversation at all!
- anontoday0406 8y ago
  > Contrary to previous understandings, posts with negative, even vitriolic, criticism of [China], its leaders, and its policies are not more likely to be censored. Instead, we show that the censorship program is aimed at curtailing collective action by silencing comments that represent, reinforce, or spur social mobilization, regardless of content. https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-censorship-china-allows-government-criticism-silences-collective-expression https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-censorship-china-...
  - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
    Okay, so we can even have the conversation about broad social implications, compare/contrast, what we can do about it, etc. is a drastic difference.

The Police of London actively scan and monitor social networks looking for “hate speech” so they can pursue legal action. What’s the difference between that and what China does?

faitswulff 8y ago

Shouldn't hate speech should be punished?

chrischen 8y ago
London deemed hate wpeech punishable, China determines certain speech (that it deems bad for society as well) punishable. No difference except for a difference in perspective.
i_am_nomad 8y ago
The problem with that is, who defines what “hate” is?
Karunamon 8y ago
No. Not because of the usual slippery slope reasons, but because denying someone their freedom for mere words is abhorrent.
acct1771 8y ago
Offending someone shouldn't be illegal. Period. Directly inciting actual physical violence, you might have an argument for. But words and ideas must remain free to maintain any semblance of a free society. As other commenters have said: who decides?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

SolaceQuantum 8y ago

The difference is that you can criticize the government and not be thrown in jail. You have a lot more autonomy in your opinions on how you are governed. You can have his conversation at all!

anontoday0406 8y ago
> Contrary to previous understandings, posts with negative, even vitriolic, criticism of [China], its leaders, and its policies are not more likely to be censored. Instead, we show that the censorship program is aimed at curtailing collective action by silencing comments that represent, reinforce, or spur social mobilization, regardless of content. https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-censorship-china-allows-government-criticism-silences-collective-expression https://gking.harvard.edu/publications/how-censorship-china-...
- SolaceQuantum 8y ago
  Okay, so we can even have the conversation about broad social implications, compare/contrast, what we can do about it, etc. is a drastic difference.