A powerful medium for communication, the Internet has a dark side; the ease with which information is shared comes with a price. Every day, individuals and organizations use the power of the Internet as a shield to spread vitriol aimed at racial, ethnic and religious minorities, as well as other targets. Calls for violence, bigoted rants, lies, bullying, and conspiracy theories circulate openly on the web, with effects on individuals and society that are profound and dangerous. Is there an antidote to the virus of hate that has infected the Internet or is the problem too big to address?
“In Viral Hate: Containing Its Spread on the Internet,” Abraham H. Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League and Christopher Wolf, one of the leading American practitioners in the fields of privacy and Internet law, examine the epidemic of Internet hate and provide examples of the real harm online hate does to people and to society. As they explain, “Words of hate can easily turn into acts of hate.” Foxman and Wolf expose how individuals and organizations from both the left and right, emboldened by anonymity and without worrying about repercussions, are freely spewing hateful vitriol on the Internet. The authors expose the threat that this unregulated flow of bigotry poses to the world, exploring how social media companies are struggling to reconcile the demands of business with freedom of speech.
Then they look at the options society has for addressing the problem, showing that the principles of free expression and the dangers of censorship make legal action the least viable option.
But that does not mean that society must simply accept Internet hate. Viral Hate is a call for increased action by Internet companies to speak out against hate-filled content and to take active steps toward a more civil Internet. It also provides a clear guide to the roles parents, teachers, and ordinary citizens can play to counteract the presence and effects of online hate.
The specific recommendations for the industry include creating clear policies on hate speech and including them within terms of service; creating mechanisms for enforcing hate speech policies; establishing a clear, user-friendly process for allowing users to report hate speech; increasing transparency about terms of service; and actively encouraging counter-speech and education to address hate speech.
Recommendations for Internet users include flagging offensive content; speaking out and, in a smart and careful way, being prepared to challenge hateful messages with positive ones; promoting counter-speech, applauding positive messages and recommending them to others; talking about what you have seen, and reaching out to watchdog agencies with experience dealing with hate and bigotry.
They suggest that educators work to ensure that schools have appropriate policies in place, and emphasize the importance of critical thinking.
Mr. Foxman, a longtime leader in the fight against anti-Semitism and bigotry, and Mr. Wolf, who has represented ADL in a number of international bodies tasked with fighting Internet hate, cite numerous instances in recent years where individuals like James von Brunn, the white supremacist and US Holocaust Museum shooter, have taken advantage of the power of social networking sites to spread hateful messages and to find likeminded bigots. They identify the various forms of hate speech that have proliferated online, including racism, anti-Semitism, religious bigotry, Holocaust denial, homophobia, misogyny, promotion of terrorism and harassment.
They discuss how the ADL is bringing together Internet industry leaders and others to probe the roots of the problem and develop new solutions to address it head on. The Task Force on Internet Hate, created by the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism, is just one of the approaches the authors suggest can help address the problem of online hate speech.
The authors say it is a national disgrace that schools do not have a requirement for courses instructing children on the appropriate use of electronic communication. “There are only a few school systems in the country that require education in digital literacy. We believe that education for coping with the challenges of digital life ought to be mandated, or at least made available, at the federal level through the Department of Education. It is absolutely fundamental not only to create a more civil society, but also to empower kids to protect themselves online, so that when they grow up they will understand that certain words and behaviors are not acceptable.”
