Supawich Ponpun 6240050124 (week 12)

All sectors of society should be responsible for regulating online hate speech

In the present time, the internet has changed the way of life of the people. It facilitates our

lives in every aspect of life, especially in communication. Thanks to the emerging of the internet,

the most prevalent and popular way of communication is social media. Social media has 3

important traits which help improve our communication, namely decentralized broadcasting,

greater audience access, and immediacy. It allows isolated individuals to produce their own

content, and can access content anywhere in the world, and shorten the time delay.1 Despite making

our communication better, social media still can lead to negative consequence. Due to its

decentralized and easy to access traits, people can use it in wrong way. Social Media is not a face-

to-face communication, so it can make users feel anonymous. They feel that they do not have to

take responsibility for what they say. The anonymity causes people to say whatever they want

without considering to appropriateness. Sometimes, the word that they say online can offend some

people. It can lead to online hate speech problem which can lead to violence. For me, I think that

the effective way to prevent and solve online hate speech is about all sectors of society’s

participation to regulate online hate speech. To support my point of view, this essay is divided into

3 parts. The first part discusses about online hate speech and the present-day solutions used to

prevent online hate speech. In the second part, I will clarify my point why all sectors of society

should be responsible for regulating online hate speech. The last part is a conclusion of this essay.

In the first part, we are going to talk about the definition of hate speech. What is hate

speech? Nowadays, hate speech still do not have definite term. However, there still has the most

relevant definition given by the United Nations. The United Nations defines hate speech as “any

1
Jana Marie Bridwell, “Twitter, Texting, and Street Demonstrations: Assessing Social Media’s Political Relevance
for Citizen Empowerment,” 2013.
 Supawich Ponpun 6240050124 (week 12)

kind of communication in speech, writing or behavior, that attacks or uses pejorative or

discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other

words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, color, descent, gender or other identity

factor and that kind of communication can lead to violence and threaten social peace.”2 As you

can see, hate speech is more harm than good to our society. In the part, there has depressing

example of violence from hate speech known as Rwanda genocide of 1994. During the months of

April to July 1994, Rwanda underwent a planned campaign of mass murder. The genocide was

conceived by extremist elements of Rwanda’s majority Hutu population who planned to kill the

minority Tutsi population.3 The incentive of this event also come from hate speech. One genocide

survivor says that the radio station Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (Radio RTLM)

encouraged people to participate by saying that the enemy is the Tutsi.4 From this example, hate

speech can bring violence to our society despite traditional media. So, can you imagine the

harmfulness of hate speech if it is used in online sphere which anyone can easily access anywhere

and anytime? Online hate speech can be produced and shared easily, at low cost and anonymously.

It has the potential to reach a global and diverse audience in real time. The permanence of hateful

online content is problematic.5 Due to online hate speech problem which can lead to violence and

emerge from the prevalence of the internet, we also have a solution to prevent online hate speech,

namely suspensions and bans on abusive users across social media platforms. However, it is still

not the most effective way to prevent online hate speech. Although account bans are a common

2
United Nations, “What Is Hate Speech?,” United Nations, 2022, https://www.un.org/en/hate-
speech/understanding-hate-speech/what-is-hate-speech.
3
The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, “Rwanda Genocide of 1994,” in Encyclopædia Britannica, August 5, 2016,
https://www.britannica.com/event/Rwanda-genocide-of-1994.
4
“When Does Hate Speech Become Dangerous Speech? Consider Kenya and Rwanda,” Free Speech Debate,
accessed November 9, 2022, https://freespeechdebate.com/discuss/when-does-hate-speech-become-dangerous-
the-link-between-words-and-violence-in-rwanda-and-kenya/.
5
United Nations, “What Is Hate Speech?,”
 Supawich Ponpun 6240050124 (week 12)

measure against hate speech on social media, banning users can have unforeseen consequences

such as the migration of banned users to more radical platforms.6 So, I think that the effective way

to tackle down online hate speech problem is that all sectors of society should collaborate and be

responsible for regulating online hate speech. I will clarify my point in the next part.

In the second part, I will clarify my opinion why all sectors of society should collaborate

and be responsible for regulating online hate speech. I think that one agent can not solve online

hate speech problem alone. Nowadays, the primary role of taking care of online hate speech relies

on social media platforms. I think that the penalty for using hate speech online is not severe

enough. All social media platforms can do about it is just suspensions and bans on abusive users.

For me, it is not the effective way. People who get banned still can create their new account and

can migrate to other platforms for using hate speech again. To make effective solution, we must

bring all sectors of society to collaborate for regulating online hate speech. All sectors of society

include international organizations with international law, states, social media platforms, and civil

society. Online hate speech has no true barriers. It can affect people all around the world. So,

international law should also have responsibility for regulating online hate speech. International

law however comes with its own limits, amongst which include the need to respect sovereignty,

and the absences of a strong legal obligation.7 So, we must use international law as a universal

standard or criteria for regulating online hate speech within state. It is like a concept of human

right that everyone and every state should respect in modern society. To solve the absences of a

strong legal obligation problem of international law, we need to rely on states for regulating online

6
Mustafa Mikdat Yildirim et al., “Short of Suspension: How Suspension Warnings Can Reduce Hate Speech on
Twitter,” Perspectives on Politics, November 22, 2021, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592721002589.
7
Dan Kingori, “Who Is Responsible for Regulating Hate Speech Online?,” #defyhatenow, March 1, 2021,
https://defyhatenow.org/who-is-responsible-for-regulating-hate-speech-online/.
 Supawich Ponpun 6240050124 (week 12)

hate speech laws based on international law. Compared to international law, it is easier for the state

to create and enforce laws around online hate speech. However, online hate speech laws may be

used to silence critics. Governments have used these laws and an abuse of power to shut down the

internet and limit the media.8 To prevent that, we must strengthen the concept of online hate speech

as strong as the concept of human right. States must enact online hate speech laws based on

international law. International organizations and other states must put pressure on states that use

online hate speech laws in a wrong way by condemning or boycotting. To make online hate speech

laws possible and effective in states, social media platforms need to collaborate with states to give

a data about the using of hate speech on their platforms to let states take legal action. As I

mentioned above, social media platforms can not solve online hate speech alone. Last but not least,

civil society should also take action on online hate speech. Civil society can be responsible by

creating a new norm of society and making people to have awareness about the harmfulness of

online hate speech. To tackle down online hate speech problem effectively, all sectors of society

should collaborate and be responsible for regulating online hate speech.

To conclude, the internet makes our way of life easier than before, especially in

communication way. People tend to use social media as a new mean of communication. Although

it facilitates our communication, social media can also bring new problem to our society. Due to

its decentralized and not face-to-face trait, it can make users feel anonymous. People feel that they

can say whatever they want on social media without taking responsibility. So, they tend to use

social media in a wrong way by offending someone through the word that they say online. It is call

online hate speech problem. This problem can lead to real life violence. The available solution

being responsible by social media is not strong enough to tackle down the problem. So, we need

8
Ibid.
 Supawich Ponpun 6240050124 (week 12)

to take this problem seriously by bringing all sectors of society, international organizations with

international law, states, social media platforms, and civil society, to be responsible for regulating

online hate speech. One agent can not solve online hate speech problem alone.

Bibliography

Bridwell, Jana Marie. “Twitter, Texting, and Street Demonstrations: Assessing Social Media’s
Political Relevance for Citizen Empowerment,” 2013.
Kingori, Dan. “Who Is Responsible for Regulating Hate Speech Online?” #defyhatenow, March
1, 2021. https://defyhatenow.org/who-is-responsible-for-regulating-hate-speech-online/.
Nations, United. “What Is Hate Speech?” United Nations, 2022. https://www.un.org/en/hate-
speech/understanding-hate-speech/what-is-hate-speech.
The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. “Rwanda Genocide of 1994.” In Encyclopædia
Britannica, August 5, 2016. https://www.britannica.com/event/Rwanda-genocide-of-
1994.
Free Speech Debate. “When Does Hate Speech Become Dangerous Speech? Consider Kenya
and Rwanda.” Accessed November 9, 2022. https://freespeechdebate.com/discuss/when-
does-hate-speech-become-dangerous-the-link-between-words-and-violence-in-rwanda-
and-kenya/.
Yildirim, Mustafa Mikdat, Jonathan Nagler, Richard Bonneau, and Joshua A. Tucker. “Short of
Suspension: How Suspension Warnings Can Reduce Hate Speech on Twitter.”
Perspectives on Politics, November 22, 2021, 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592721002589.