You can contact me at email hpr9@wildcats.unh.edu.
How would you define “hate speech?”
Hate speech is a speech, gestures or conduct that may incite violence or prejudicial action against an individual or group because of gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation.
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?
In my opion, I strongly support the government to issue limits or regulations on free expresssion in order protect life and security of individuals online and offline. I think that if government can addresses negative expressions and actions to the public and issues laws to stop bad people from taking advantage of freedom of speech to hurt other people. I think it is better than taking away freedom of speech of everybody
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?
As I have stated above, I completely agree that governments should strictly define what hate speech is and also take more actions to legally ban people from using hate speech to achieve their personal purposes. And I think If we can get to an international agreement between countries, it will be much effective worldwide to stop hate speech.
Is censorship or filtering of hate group websites ever appropriate? If so, under what circumstances?
I think that censorship and filtering is always appropriate when it comes to hate group websites, such as websites that include pornography, violence or speech that may encourage people to take actions on some particular individuals. I think when the government detect some issues that can cause harms to individuals, I think censorship and filtering may be the most effective tool to prevemt it from happening.
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?
In my opinion, both the creators of hate group websites and people who view those website then commit hate crimes responsible for their actions. The creators should be held responsible because they are the ones who incite people to make hate crimes. However, I also think that people who commit crimes after viewing those websites should also be held responsible as they have their own thinking and belief and they need to be resposible for what they did, not only blaming on the creators of the websites.
Would you advocate special restrictions on making hate-related material available to children via the Internet? (If so, what would you propose?)
Yes, I totally agree that there should be special restrictions on making hate group websites available to children via the Internet or may as well ban it completely because children are innocent and they are easily effected by what they see or listen. Special restrictions are needed to protect children.
Should there be any distinction between what is legal online and what is legal offline?
In my opinion, there should not be any distinction between what is legal online and what is legal offline because as long as it cause harms to individuals and the society, they are illegal no matter they are online or offline issues. I strongly think online crimes happen because criminals cannot really take actions in real life due to the laws and with freedom of speech, they utilise the Internet for their purposes. Therefore, I think what is illegal offline is also illegal online.
Should the standards that apply to hate-related material be different from the standards that apply to other objectionable material such as pornography?
Yes, I think we should have different standards between hate-related materials and objectionable materials, such as pornogarphy, because objectionable materials are not necessary harmful to the society or individual safety. Objectionable materials only have bad effects on some particular group of people, such as children. Therefore, the standards should be different.