Angela Deng CS 408 Section 03 Assignment 5

Assignment 5: Hate and the Internet

Send me email at: aza4@wildcats.unh.edu.

Homepage

1. How would you define "hate speech"?

   Hate speech is when offensive speech or writing is used to attack a specific person or group. Usually on the bases of race, gender, and religion related topics.

2. Would you advocate placing limits on free expression (as most European countries do) in order to deal with the problems posed by hate speech? If so, how would you define those limits?

   I do not support placing limits on free expression because we live in a democracy. The Freedom of Speech was in the first amendment because our founding fathers wanted everyone to have the right to share their thoughts and ideas. Having the ability to express your thoughts allows different people to work together and learn together as everyone collaborate different ideas together. By having the chance to express ourselves freely gives the people power rather than the government. Just because there are a few people that take advantage of the freedom doesn't mean we should limit everyone else.

3. Should we attempt to reach an international consensus on how to define hate speech and on the standards (if any) to be applied in dealing with it?

   If its agreed upon and support by everyone, then yes, we should attempt to reach an international consensus because it'll make everything a lot easier. But because everyone is so different, and different countries have such different cultures and lifestyles, it will be a very difficult task to do. One country might think something was offensive, and another country might think that it was completely okay, because their cultures are different. To reach a complete international consensus would be almost nearly impossible to do, so I personality think that we should not define hate speech internationally.

4. Is censorship or filtering of hate group websites ever appropriate? If so, under what circumstances?

   If the website is causing any sort of disturbance or psychological damage of any sort, then yes, I think the hate group should be censored and filtered. If it's connected to anything related to children or childhood education and development, then I think the website should be definitely filtered or shut down or something, because exposing hate speech to children is not okay.

5. Should creators of hate- oriented Web sites be held responsible for actions of people (such as the 'lone wolves,' people who commit crimes of hatred without specific instructions) who view those sites and then commit hate crimes?

   No, I do not think they should be responsible for the criminal actions. The actions are done by the person themselves, so they should be responsible for their own actions. When they realized that things were feeling right, and that there might be some psychological issues behind it causing them to hurt others, they should've knew to seek help or talk to someone about their problems. Hurting others because you've been hurt is never the solution.

6. Would you advocate special restrictions on making hate-related material available to children via the Internet? (if so, what would you propose?)

   Yes, I definitely support importing restrictions on children's website, especially ones that aimed at childhood education and development. Children have not received enough knowledge or experience yet to understand how to deal with hate speech or a related issue. They need to be taught before they are exposed to them so it doesn't affect their development into adulthood. I would recommend something related to filtering or website blocking for places such as schools. For the suspicious websites, there could be a little verification problem of some sort to proof that the one viewing the site is mature enough to handle the content.

7. Should there be any distinctions between what is legal online and what is legal offline?

   There shouldn't be too much of a distinction between what can be seen online or offline, since they can both been seen publicly by everyone either way. But we could try to distinct them by preventing some contents from being published online, and some only in magazine for mature adults and eliminate them in children's magazines and newspapers.

8. Should the standard that apply to hate-related material be different from the standards that apply to other objectionable material such as pornography?

   Hate-related material and pornography are both frowned upon. But they are both very different. Hate-related material is causing pain and suffering to innocent people, while some people in the world may enjoy pornography for entertainment. I do not think that both should be applied to the same type od standard objections, just because they are very different from each other. But I do think that there should be different types of objections, especially for children, because they are both very frowned upon.