Hate speech online: the government as regulator and as speaker

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Media Law Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17577632.2022.2085014
Thomas Hochmann
{"title":"Hate speech online: the government as regulator and as speaker","authors":"Thomas Hochmann","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2022.2085014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Acknowledging that the government is a user of social networks may help us to better understand its attempt to regulate them. This paper draws on the French case to show different ways of regulating hate speech online. It then turns to the peculiar case of hate speech expressed by the government. There are good reasons to consider that government hate speech can be restricted in Europe as well as in the United States. Europe and the United States however pull apart when the government regulate the discussion space below its online speech. Here, European governments are under an obligation to fight hate speech, when U.S. government infringes the First Amendment when it attempts to do so.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2022.2085014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Acknowledging that the government is a user of social networks may help us to better understand its attempt to regulate them. This paper draws on the French case to show different ways of regulating hate speech online. It then turns to the peculiar case of hate speech expressed by the government. There are good reasons to consider that government hate speech can be restricted in Europe as well as in the United States. Europe and the United States however pull apart when the government regulate the discussion space below its online speech. Here, European governments are under an obligation to fight hate speech, when U.S. government infringes the First Amendment when it attempts to do so.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
网络仇恨言论:政府既是监管者又是发言人
承认政府是社交网络的用户,可以帮助我们更好地理解政府监管社交网络的企图。本文以法国的案例为例,展示了监管网络仇恨言论的不同方式。接下来是政府发表仇恨言论的特殊案例。我们有充分的理由认为,政府的仇恨言论在欧洲和美国都可以受到限制。然而,当政府对其网络言论下方的讨论空间进行监管时,欧洲和美国就分道扬镳了。在这里,欧洲政府有义务打击仇恨言论,而美国政府试图这样做违反了第一修正案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Media Law
Journal of Media Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?
期刊最新文献
The Bypass Strategy: platforms, the Online Safety Act and future of online speech Freedom of expression after disinformation: Towards a new paradigm for the right to receive information The Digital Services Act’s red line: what the Commission can and cannot do about disinformation The regulation of disinformation: a critical appraisal The EU policy on disinformation: aims and legal basis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1