Question 1: How would you define “hate speech?”
I would describe hate speech as a communication that is very rude and very iappropriate. I would also describe it as a basis of rude communication towards certaint races, ethinicities and other different groups of people.
Question 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 would advocate some laws to oppose hate speech because it is a very offensive form of communication, some of the laws that I would put in place would be to have some freedom of speech, but if anything is said about a group of people, good or bad, then there should be some form of punishment.
Question 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?
Yes I think we should reach an international consensus because it betters the different relationship with different countries which means that we advocate more peace rather than violence. Also if we also use the same laws then it means that different people from different will know how to deal with different people from around the world.
Question 4: Is censorship or filtering of hate group websites ever appropriate? If so, under what circumstances?
Yes censoring hate group websites is very important especially when it can be viewn to a large group of the victims of such speech as this would cause a huge scale riot which could also endager many lives outside of the internet.
Question 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?
Yes these websites are to blame as well because it is a form of inception on their half (like the movie), because it was the website who put these ideas of hate within the crime doers which then harmed an innocent person or peoples lives.
Question 6: Would you advocate special restrictions on making hate-related material available to children via the Internet? (If so, what would you propose?)
Of course I would make such restrictions, and the main one being to not allow child access to such websites, or maybe to enforce a law where the parents have to put a child filter or some software that will not allow the child to access such sites.
Question 7: Should there be any distinction between what is legal online and what is legal offline?
No there should not because it is eventually illegal offline material that is posted on the internet by someone else, and it would be responsible for governments to advocate legal acts rather than illegal.
Question 8: Should the standards that apply to hate-related material be different from the standards that apply to other objectionable material such as pornography?
I believe that this would be a good Idea because this would then help people (mainly children) from learning wrong habits and for them to live better lives.
Assignment 7 Assignment 8