2 ms·
If you want to get into a semantics argument on the definition of hate speech, then here's Wikipedia's definition: >Hate speech is speech that attacks a person
by bduerst 8y ago
If you want to get into a semantics argument on the definition of hate speech, then here's Wikipedia's definition:
>Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
- AmericanChopper 8y agoWikipedia’s definition is no better. Even if you accept this definition, now you’re faced with the impossible task of defining what constitutes an attack on those grounds. The issue of defining hate speech is at the core of the free speech concerns, because what constitutes hate speech, by necessity, comes down entirely to the whims and personal opinions of whoever is enforcing the censorship.
- bduerst 8y agoAh, but Wikipedia covers that in the very next sentence: >The laws of some countries describe hate speech as speech, gestures, conduct, writing, or displays that incite violence or prejudicial actions against a protected group or individuals on the basis of their membership in the group, or disparages or intimidates a protected group, or individuals on the basis of their membership in the group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
- AmericanChopper 8y agoGreat. Except nobody is using that definition when talking about policing online speech. In fact those categories of speech have never been protected. It’s never been legal to solicit violence or to harass people. None of the big tech firms that have engaged in this type of censorship have done so solely on the basis of policing non-protected speech, so it’s entirely dishonest to say that hate speech starts and ends with with legal statutes.
- bduerst 8y agoGuess what? Wikipedia also has an entire section in that same article regarding the internet and how tech companies interpet hate speech.
- AmericanChopper 8y agoIt has two paragraphs describing that large tech companies review hate speech deemed illegal by the EU. That is not a description of how those companies interpret hate speech at all, and doesn’t come close describing their hate speech policies, which as I said, do not start and end with statutes.