4 ms·
The only way they can define and enforce "hate speech" policies is by torturing the language, the definitions, and hoping no one looks closely at the resulting
by caseysoftware 6y ago
The only way they can define and enforce "hate speech" policies is by torturing the language, the definitions, and hoping no one looks closely at the resulting policies.
In the US, beyond explicit calls for illegal behavior (usually illegal) and kiddie porn (always illegal), we don't have many restrictions or even a legal definition of "hate speech." But even those laws aren't consistently applied. For the most part, it's up to the judgement of the viewer or based on the "reasonable person" rule and "reasonable people" seem to be getting rarer and rarer..
Ref: https://www.thoughtco.com/hate-speech-cases-721215 https://www.thoughtco.com/hate-speech-cases-721215
- frank2 6y ago>>The rationale [Google] gave is that hate speech appears on these apps >The only way they can define and enforce "hate speech" policies is by torturing the language, the definitions, and hoping no one looks closely at the resulting policies The rest of your comment is about the first amendment to the US constitution, which constrains governments (US Federal and state governments), not private parties such as Google. Google would be well within its rights in the US to ban all hate speech from all the platforms it owns.
- caseysoftware 6y agoCool. And the definition of "hate speech" is..? Or at least the general principles that would make it obvious to a "reasonable person" are..?