In my point of view, “hate speech” is an expression and a communication that abuses and discriminates some groups of people in society in the aspects of their gender, religion, race or other sensitive things and it may cause some hatred crimes and negative effects on public. All in all, “hate speech” is a communication that submits unmoral discriminatory and unhealthy information to society.
I would support placing limits on free expression in order to resolve the troubles made by hate speech. One of the reasons why I support this regulation is that free expression doesn’t mean that you can use words to hurt people. You can objectively express your opinion, even though some people may disagree with you. But using words hurts people or negatively affects people’s behaviors are not what we want to achieve from free expression, so it should be limited.
I think we should reach a general international consensus about the definition of hate speech because if “A” country’s criminals give hate speech in “B” country and the definition and punishment of hate speech are different between these countries, the final decision will end up with nothing definite. General international consensus means that every country can still keep some special definitions that base on its own culture and religion about hate speech.
The censorship and filtering of hate group websites are appropriate because some hate group would plan some excessive or violent movements that would damage society. It’s best that the government monitors these hate groups in order to protect public. Some hate group encourage extreme activities, like self-burning. These information should be filtered by the government.
Yes, they should. If the creators didn’t create these Web sites and didn’t post such excessive information that influences criminals, these crimes would not happen, so the creators should take responsibilities for these actions.
I would advocate restrictions on making hate-related material available to children via the Internet. First of all, from my point of view, not only children but also everyone should be protected from hate-related materials, therefore hate-related material should be absolutely banned. In addition, parents should create a special account on the computer that includes highly effective filter to prevent children from hate-related material.
In my opinion, there shouldn’t be any distinction between what is legal online and what is legal offline because no matter online or offline, some harmful information should all be regulated. If one thing is that you doing it online is legal but doing it offline is illegal, the criminal definitely would choose to do that online. The law plays not role in this situation, so it shouldn’t be any distinction between online and offline.
No, it should not have different standards toward hate-related materials and objectionable materials. All of these materials would have bad influence on society. For example, hate-related material might cause hatred crimes and the spread of pornography may increase the rate of sexual harassment. Both are harmful and both would provoke various crimes, thus they don’t need different standards.