Will Hate Speech on Twitter Ever Rule the World?

Abstract

Social platforms undoubtedly provide a platform for free speech for everyone. Everyone is free to express their own opinions and ideas, and at the same time, these remarks spread through the network for more people to see.

Freedom of speech is everyone’s right, but it should be everyone’s responsibility to express their ideas rationally. The Internet has brought us into contact with more strangers. Although most of these strangers are kind and respectful, some are prejudiced and discriminatory.

Some kind words can bring warmth to people, but malicious slander can be like an invisible knife to others to bring harm. Have you ever been vilified? What is the best way to deal with these hate speeches?

This blog looks at hate speech on Twitter. It considers Twitter’s responsibility and how to better manage content on the platform.

Keywords

Content Moderation, Platforms, Social Media, Online Hate Speech

---

What is the definition of hate speech?

There is no uniform definition of hate speech.

There is no uniform definition of hate speech. Hate Speech is defined by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) as a range of utterances that advocate, encourage, promote, or excuse hatred, violence, or discrimination against an individual or group of individuals for a number of causes (Council of Europe, 2014).

In its strategy and action plan on hate speech, the United Nations argues that the primary starting point for hate speech is based on differences in religion, race, nationality, ethnicity, colour, ancestry, gender, or other identity factors (Guterres, 2019).

Hate speech on the Internet frequently comes in a variety of ways. It may be expressed in various ways, including words, symbols, photos, emojis, emoticons, and videos (Heller & Magid, 2019).

When we search social media sites for phrases associated with hate speech, we discover that this phenomenon is quite widespread.

However, unexpectedly, hate speech in the context of gender rarely receives the attention it deserves. Dr Elster stated that this is especially true in the circumstances such as rape when victims are frequently vilified. Because they were barely clothed or inebriated, they may have been accused or suspected of being raped (Elster, 2017). This permits rape victims, who are already victims of violence, to continue to be victims.

Why is online hate speech so harmful?

Online hate speech can cause psychological harm.

One study found that victims of online abuse feel increased prejudice and thus have more significant stress. Some people with lower mental capacity also have low stamina, so they are more likely to have emotional outbursts than people with higher mental capacity (Saha et al., 2019).

The mental stress and negative emotions associated with online hatred can have more severe consequences.

Scholars say that emotional factors include lower self-worth, anxiety, fear of life, and severe emotional disorders that can even lead to self-harm or suicide (Heller & Magid, 2019).

In addition, Online hate speech can instigate violence and even lead to death.

The Council of Europe mentions two horrifying incidents in examining anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim internet hate speech (STRASBOURG, 2021).

• In October 2019, the synagogue attack in Halle
• In February 2020, nine individuals, mostly Muslims, were murdered in the town of Hanau.

Online hate speech may quickly grow and be translated into offline violence and deaths.

The murderers in both incidents were motivated by hate of right-wing extremism and bigotry. Far-right extremists utilized them on social media sites to stir racial tensions and transform hate speech into violence and deaths.

Hate speech on Twitter

“Chinese virus”

COVID-19 first appeared in China in early 2020, and the virus subsequently expanded internationally. I was in China at the time, monitoring the news for the number of new cases each day and checking Twitter for public reaction to the epidemic.

Before the virus was formally identified, it was referred to as the “Chinese virus.” Even after the virus was dubbed “Covid-19,” many individuals still referred to it as the “Chinese virus.” Even now, there are many new coronavirus strains and mutations, such as delta and omicron, yet some people still refer to them as the “Chinese virus.”

Until now, there are more than a dozen new tweets with the hashtag #Chinesevirus are uploaded every day on Twitter.

The term “China virus” is not suitable

When the H1N1 flu epidemic first broke out in the United States in 2009, no one referred to it as the “American virus.”

Because the H1N1 virus spreads among pigs, the term “swine flu” was coined. However, this made many people hesitant to consume pigs, resulting in massive losses for the pork-related business.

Clearly, no country wants its name to be connected with the infection.

According to John C. Yang, president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, people used to name viruses after places (for example, “Spanish flu,” West Nile virus, Zika virus, Ebola virus). Still, as education and awareness have increased, they believe these terms have become inaccurate, anachronistic, or inappropriate (Yam, 2020).

“In times of epidemics, such racialized stigmas create an easy blame game with violent consequences,” 

Catherine Seniza Chua, a race studies professor at the University of California, Berkeley, 

Historically, naming diseases by location or race has been accompanied by racial, ethnic, or national stigmas (Yam, 2020).

Trump stated that the United States will provide vital support to other industries hit by the “Chinese Virus,” such as aviation.

The Chinese were enraged by Trump’s plainly impolite and uneducated behaviour as a head of state at the time.

The term “China virus” causes a racist backlash

When reporters questioned Trump about the likelihood of a racial response over the usage of the “China virus”(Fallows, 2020), Trump said

Because it comes from China. That’s why. It’s not racist at all.

However, research directly correlates the hashtag #chinesevirus on Twitter to anti-Asian attitudes.

Moreover, a week following Donald J. Trump’s tweet about the “China virus,” the number of coronavirus-related tweets with the anti-Asian label skyrocketed. In one week, about 700,000 tweets with the phrase “China virus” were added (Kurtzman, 2021).

Users who used the #chinesevirus hashtag were more likely to use the racist hashtag, with around half displaying anti-Asian sentiment.

Users using the hashtag #covid19, on the other hand, were far less likely to have tweeted with the racist hashtag, with about 20% displaying an anti-Asian attitude (Kurtzman, 2021).

CNN covered racial assaults on Asian Americans due to the #chinesevirus discourse.

Trump has already blasted more than a dozen tweets on the “China virus,” which may not directly affect a person’s mentality. But it may aggravate prejudice or even spark hostility in people who are already biased.

According to FBI data, anti-Asian hate crimes climbed by more than 73% in 2020, with 279 hate crimes against Asians (Venkatraman, 2021).

It is discriminatory, xenophobic, and stigmatizing to refer to COVID-19 as the “Wuhan virus” or the “Chinese virus.”

Twitter has very little control over #chinesevirus and related speech

A Twitter search for Chinesevirus reveals that the @chinesevirus account is now restricted.

However, the hashtag #ChineseVirus and many accounts with names and Twitter handles that include hostile sentiments.

I noticed harmful smears against the image of Chinese leaders, hate speech against China, and ethnic prejudice against Chinese people as I scrolled through the latest entries under the hashtag #ChineseVirus.

 

In his tweet, he used a picture processor to sew together a photo of China’s top national leader with an image of a virus, then wore the virus as a hat on Xi Jinping’s head.

First, the scandalous smearing and dissemination of photos of the country’s leaders are disrespectful to the Chinese nation and people. Although this action is forbidden in China, it cannot be considered criminal. China maintains a firewall that prevents Chinese citizens from accessing Twitter. Chinese legislation prohibits it from being utilized on U.S. social networks.

Second, using #ChineseVirus and putting Chinese national leaders and the virus together shows powerful malicious intent towards China. The harm caused by the virus is all associated with China. Along with this comes stigmatization and conspiracy theories, making hate speech and ethnic discrimination against China even more intense.

Not to be overlooked is the fact that this account has the Indian flag in its name, and her account information shows that she is an Indian. The hate speech he posted against China would potentially intensify the conflict between the two countries, China and India.

Twitter’s policy on hate speech

In its hateful conduct policy, Twitter defines hateful behaviour, hateful images, and display names; Twitter encourages users to report anything that they feel violates Twitter’s hateful conduct policy. Twitter takes action against tweets that have been examined and found to be in violation of the rules, principally. These include restricting tweet exposure, demanding tweet deletion, and, in extreme situations, outright suspending accounts.

Numerous investigations and publications have demonstrated that the #chinesevirus is a sort of stigmatization. Several remarks published under this hashtag have been related to racism. They may even lead to significant anti-Asian hatred and racist violence.

And the manifestations all lead to the notion that many tweets bearing the hashtag #chinesevirus constitute hateful conduct.

Twitter claims it is increasing penalties for posting hate speech

The number of accounts identified in the Twitter Transparency Report for breaking Twitter’s Hate Behavior Policy grew by 77%, from 635,415 to 1,126,990.

As we witnessed an uptick in harassment of some protected groups during the COVID-19 epidemic, Twitter began enforcing its Hate Behavior Policy in September 2020. It is against content that incites fear and/or horrible stereotypes of protected classes.

Twitter’s Hate Behavior Policy will be expanded to encompass demeaning content based on race, ethnicity, or nationality in December 2020.

Twitter has stated that social media companies face a “severe trust gap”. It has committed to making its content filtering methods more transparent and giving individuals more choice and control (“Twitter Intends to Make Its Content Moderation Practices More Transparent: Jack Dorsey,” 2021).

But does the existing system of punishment work?

Are Twitter’s sanctions too lenient compared to the damaging impact of hate speech on individuals? When the target of harmful communication feels wounded, they receive no consolation or apology. The only psychological comfort is that the malicious address may have been removed after being reported.

The psychological damage produced by hate speech is difficult to measure and quantify. The volume of malicious speech is also challenging to determine consistently.

The punishment for online abusers, even after posting malicious comments, is simply a ban on interaction or a blocked account. The cost of harmful speech is too low, and the damage done to the target is incalculable.

Combating Hate Speech and Protecting Free Speech

The existing methods and efficiency of Twitter in fighting Hate Speech are far from sufficient for the government, which wants to introduce laws tightening limits on online hate speech.

• France asked Twitter to tighten online hate speech controls related to racism and anti-Semitism. As well as to prevent the spread of racist and discriminatory content on Twitter and other social media platforms.
• The E.U.’s forthcoming regulation, the Digital Services Act (DSA), provides a faster process for removing illegal content such as hate speech.
• The U.K.’s Online Safety Bill will impose penalties of up to 10% of turnover on social media companies that fail to stamp out online abuse such as racist hate crimes.

Unsurprisingly, this legislation will raise concerns about “threats to free expression.”

While Twitter gives a free and open venue for people to discourse, online abuse has resulted in Hate Speech. This nasty side effect cannot be ignored.

Freedom of speech is our right, but we must also fulfil our obligation to respect others and not recklessly use hate speech to cause harm to others.

When Twitter cannot police hate speech on the network, such as abuse, bullying, and violence, it is up to the government to enhance the online platform’s regulations to handle it. 

Otherwise, are we genuinely allowing Twitter to dominate the world’s speech?

(Word count:1951)

 

---