/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

It’s as if the lights are going out one by one. The internet is increasingly becoming over-regulated as more countries are making “hate speech” a criminal offense and cracking down on online activity. I know many of these news stories are old or have already been posted, but I want to post them all here, and ask, is there much hope left?

In the dark wilderness one torch burns bright, as the United States Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that “hate speech” is protected speech.
>Justice Samuel Alito wrote (for four justices) in Matal v. Tam, the “Slants” case: [The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”
>Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote separately, also for four justices: A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content discrimination,” which is “presumptively unconstitutional.” … A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

But America seems to be alone. And it’s not enough.

Canada’s Court forced a worldwide injunction on Google to comply with Canadianism Intellectual Property law. That means they could force websites operating in Canada to comply worldwide with their hate-speech laws in the future
>In the Canadian opinion, Google v. Equustek, a British Columbia technology company was trying to block another company from reselling its stolen intellectual property via websites on servers in unknown locations. To protect the company, a trial court ordered Google to deindex the predator’s website worldwide.
>Canada might balk at a worldwide injunction that blocks what other countries would count as free speech.
>what could happen is something more like a partial jog to the middle -- where platforms comply with reasonable countries’ reasonable speech limitations worldwide. That could mean adopting limits on hate speech
http://archive.is/3DaxI

Canada passed it’s bill making it illegal to misgender trans people
>“Great news,” announced Justin Trudeau. “Bill C-16 has passed the Senate – making it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity or expression. #LoveisLove.”
http://archive.is/HuCvK

Austria has done something similar to Canada, ordering Facebook to delete posts violating its speech laws globally, not just in Austria
>An Austrian court has ordered Facebook to remove hate speech posts from the social network, adding to pressure on the social network to combat online trolls.
>The case has global ramifications, since the court ruled that Facebook must delete the posts globally, not simply in Austria itself.
http://archive.is/Rob0E

Germany passed its law placing extreme fines on social media companies that don’t remove “hate speech” on their own.
>The measure approved is designed to enforce the country's existing limits on speech, including the long-standing ban on Holocaust denial. Among other things, it would fine social networking sites up to 50 million euros ($56 million) if they persistently fail to remove illegal content within a week, including defamatory "fake news."
>"Freedom of speech ends where the criminal law begins," said Justice Minister Heiko Maas
>Chancellor Angela Merkel's Union bloc agreed to give companies more time to check whether posts that are flagged to them are illegal, delegate the vetting process to a third party and ensure that users whose comments are removed can appeal the decision.
>the law also provides for fines of up to 5 million euros for the person each company designates to deal with the complaints procedure if it doesn't meet requirements
>"This law as it stands now will not improve efforts to tackle this important societal problem," Facebook said in a statement
>"Jews are exposed to anti-Semitic hatred in social networks on a daily basis," the Central Council of Jews said. "Since all voluntary agreements with platform operators produced almost no result, this law is the logical consequence to effectively limit hate speech."
>Alternative for Germany party said it is considering challenging the law in Germany's highest court.
http://archive.is/6wXhx

Germany is even raiding the homes of people found to post “hate speech” online
>Germany has raided the homes of 36 people accused of posting hate speech or other illegal content
>German law prohibits hate speech; citizens can be imprisoned for inciting racial hatred for up to five years. This campaign was primarily targeted at right-wing hate speech, but also included those who had posted hateful left-wing content and harassment based on sexual orientation.
http://archive.is/durwT

Britain seems to be going the way of Germany
>After deadly terrorist attacks and a nationwide election, Britain is once again focusing on a controversial plan: to regulate the internet. Lawmakers from across the political spectrum are promoting some of the widest-ranging plans anywhere in the western world to rein in the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter
>British politicians have another target in policing the internet: extremist messages that are circulated on Facebook, YouTube and other social media
>Britain has gone further than almost any western country, often putting the onus on companies to determine when to take down content that while offensive, does not represent illegal — or violent — messaging
http://archive.is/uwp6a

And private enterprises are willingly doing the suppression for the governments

Facebook is setting up automated programs to remove “extremist content”
>Facebook said Thursday that it would begin using artificial intelligence to help remove inappropriate content
>The same system, they wrote, could learn to identify Facebook users who associate with clusters of pages or groups that promote extremist content
>“The problem, as usual, is determining what is extremist, and what isn’t, and it goes further than just jihadists,” he said. “Are they just talking about ISIS and Al Qaeda, or are they going to go further to deal with white nationalism and neo-Nazi movements?”
>Facebook was hopeful that the new artificial intelligence technology could be used to counter any form of extremism that violated the company’s terms of use, although for the time being it will be narrowly focused.
https://archive.is/lo7s8

And in case you were wondering what “hate speech” is for Facebook
>Facebook’s Vice President took the time to explain the definition Facebook holds for hate speech. He said, “Our current definition of hate speech is anything that directly attacks people based on what are known as their ‘protected characteristics’ — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, or serious disability, or disease.”
>there is no clear cut way to identify and remove hate speech. However, the Facebook team admitted they rely heavily on users to find content that has hateful rhetoric and flag it. Facebook can then delete the material and prevent it from offending anyone else
http://archive.is/ZM02o

And Harvard is revoking acceptance letters for mocking Mexicans online
>Harvard has revoked acceptance letters from 10 incoming freshmen after discovering they used offensive speech online.
>After finding the offensive posts on Facebook, Harvard said they will not tolerate racist remarks from their students. The university rescinded their acceptance offers in April, after discovering the students traded messages in a private Facebook group for incoming freshmen. The posts were often sexually explicit, and mocked Mexicans, the Holocaust, and child abuse.
http://archive.is/wRske

Happy Independence Day