Regulation Of Speech Research Articles

The Impact of Hate Speech Regulations on Freedom of Expression an Indonesian Legal Perspective

This paper explores the impact of hate speech regulation on freedom of expression in Indonesia from a juridical perspective. The study focuses on the legal framework, including the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) and the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP), both of which are central to the regulation of hate speech. Through an analysis of key statutes, court rulings, and case studies, this paper highlights the tension between protecting public order and safeguarding free speech. The findings reveal that vague legal definitions and broad enforcement of hate speech laws have led to selective prosecution, often targeting political dissent and criticism. These issues raise concerns about the erosion of democratic rights and the potential misuse of hate speech laws for political purposes. Recommendations are provided to clarify legal definitions, ensure proportionality in enforcement, and prevent the misuse of these laws in a manner that balances the protection of social harmony with the preservation of freedom of expression.

Freedom of speech on campus

Abstract What should be the rules governing campus speech in a liberal democratic society? On one side are those arguing for maximal protections for campus speech analogous to the First Amendment in the United States. On the other are those promoting stricter regulation of speech through formal and informal speech codes. This paper aims to carve a new path in the conversation. Both sides agree that the mission of the university is the discovery and dissemination of knowledge and that achieving this mission requires tolerant and open-minded students, faculty, and administrators. However, neither side has explicitly connected its advocacy for specific speech policies with these shared goals. Our paper advances the conversation by proposing a series of empirically testable mechanisms for connecting speech policies to the desired outcomes. We also argue that focusing on these mechanisms opens the way towards new and more tractable conceptual and normative debates.

Ujaran Kebencian dan Berita Bohong Berdasarkan Perspektif Sosiologi Hukum Ditinjau dari Undang - Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik

The purpose of this study is to examine and analyse the regulation of hate speech from a sociological perspective with a focus on Law Number 1 of 2024 which is the second amendment to Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions. This research uses the normative juridical method. The results show that fake news that is deliberately spread to damage someone's reputation is regulated in Article 28 paragraph 1 of the ITE Law which prohibits the dissemination of electronic information that is untrue or misleading and has an impact on material losses for consumers in electronic transactions. On the other hand, hate speech is regulated in Article 28 paragraph 2 which prohibits the dissemination of electronic information that incites or influences others to cause hatred or hostility towards individuals or groups based on attributes such as race, nationality, religion or gender. This includes insults, defamation, provocation and slander, all of which aim to create hostility among the public.

Свобода слова в военное время: опыт Израиля

The article focuses on freedom of speech in the State of Israel in the context of the ongoing war with Hamas. Throughout its modern history the Jewish state has faced national security threats from some neighboring countries and military groups in the Middle East, that is why freedom of speech regulation has had to reflect these factors. However, parties’ compliance with the rules and customs of war (international humanitarian law) is not within the scope of this article. The first part of the study shows the evolution of the legislation, as well as key precedents of the Supreme Court of Israel, where the highest court of the land consistently considered freedom of speech as a core element of Israeli democracy. Then, the author moves on to current challenges, namely anti-war student protests on campuses and foreign media coverage of the war. Regarding freedom of speech at universities, Israeli legislation is quite ambiguous, leaving wide discretion to the administration of educational institutions and creating legal uncertainty. In contrast, foreign media face the opposite problem, i.e. the rigid regulation and military censorship. Consequently, both situations present equal challenges to freedom of speech in the country that require Israeli legislature and courts to act. In conclusion, the author fully acknowledges that the State of Israel, faced with military aggression, has a legitimate and justified interest in ensuring national security and it may lead to certain restrictions on freedom of speech. Meanwhile, it is important that such restrictions are clearly formulated in the statutes, balanced and proportionate. Today, more than ever, it is important that Israel preserves its democratic values that have always formed the very foundation of the Jewish state.

Should we hate hate speech regulation? The argument from viewpoint discrimination

Abstract According to philosophers like James Weinstein, our democratic values give us a compelling reason to tolerate hate speech. In fact, they argue that even if hate speech causes significant harms, our democratic values nonetheless sometimes call for a hands-off approach. In particular, they evoke the democratic value of citizens being free to criticize and voice dissent towards the laws that bind them. This paper seeks to establish two key points. First, that upon closer examination, the kind of arguments that Weinstein presents against hate speech regulation is less than convincing. Secondly, that by building on Weinstein's discussion of the concept of viewpoint discrimination, we can construct a more convincing objection to hate speech regulation. That said, this more convincing objection falls short of calling for the abolition of all hate speech regulation, instead highlighting the need for transparency and consistency in the way governments regulate harmful speech.

Online anti-immigrant discourse in Germany: ethnographically backed analysis of user comments

This article investigates discourse- and language-specific features of online anti-immigrant extreme speech in Germany. We analyze a context rich dataset collected and annotated through a collaborative effort involving fact-checkers, ethnographers and natural language processing (NLP) researchers. Using a bottom-up annotation scheme, we capture the nuances of the discourse and develop a typology of lexical innovations. The analysis combines thematic and critical discourse analysis with a linguistic perspective, revealing that direct forms of racism intertwine with argumentative forms of antagonism and playful word games within anti-immigrant discourses, in ways that center around narratives of victimhood and perceived threats from migrants. We further show how the specific conditions in Germany, including strict legal regulations of speech, have shaped the emergence of a non-standard language variety in and through anti-immigrant discourse, which helps the discourse community maintain group identity. The ethnographically backed analysis provides a granular understanding of the phenomenon of online extreme speech in the German context, contributing to the broader field of discourse studies and offering insights into the varieties within anti-immigrant discourse.

A Marketplace for Honest Ideas

Abstract The marketplace of ideas is a colourful metaphor with a long history of being used to argue for freedom of speech. This paper draws on its historical antecedents to begin with an orthodox understanding of the metaphor whereby the absence of substantive regulation is taken to be conducive to the good functioning of both economic markets and public discourse. This anti-regulation reading is then challenged by analysing a series of legal cases showcasing prohibitions on misrepresentation and fraud. These speech regulations are explained by the economics literature on information asymmetry, which illustrates how honesty regulations maintain good market functioning by facilitating credible reliance by market participants on one another’s assertions. What is thereby proposed is a re-imagining of the marketplace of ideas metaphor which lends support to honesty regulations in the realm of public speech. One potential analogue for these legal and economic findings is identified in the work of Shiffrin and her arguments for deontological sincerity requirements in the public sphere.

Конституционное право и политический реализм: негативная теория свободы слова

Classic positive theories of freedom of speech explain enhanced constitutional defense of speech in terms of fundamental values served by expression (pursuit of truth, democratic governance or personal autonomy). Negative approach, which is the subject of this article, focuses not on the high social value of speech, but on the unique risks of its suppression. The dangers of repressive censorship mainly stem from personal interests of office-holders (legislators as well as law-enforcement officers) or from intolerance. Psychological reasons and the architecture of censorial decision-making turn speech into an especially fragile object of regulation. The idea underlying the constitutional status of freedom of speech is the distrust of government decision-making in speech regulation. Judicial review should pay close attention to the design of abridging laws and justifications provided for them. These laws should be worded clearly and should not allow for selective viewpoint censorship. The simplicity of negative approach and its political realism make it the most plausible theory for interpreting constitutional article on freedom of speech (expression).

Regulating campus speech: Student ideology and support for free speech in a conservative university system

ABSTRACT What are undergraduate students’ preferences and knowledge regarding free speech on college campuses? Using an original survey of college students in a conservative Upper-Midwestern state, we gather responses across six key areas of speech controversy. Student ideology predictably and significantly divides student support for speech regulation. Compared to liberals, conservative students are more supportive of free expression in the context of potential bias incidents, such as hate speech. Meanwhile, liberal students are more supportive where traditional values are potentially challenged, such as unpatriotic speech. We further find that what students believe about the legal ability to punish or prevent speech on campus mostly aligns with their preferences. However, regardless of ideology, our respondents also show broad support for hate speech regulation, and most believe incorrectly that public institutions are legally empowered to punish or prevent it. The results of this analysis are informative for the growing debate about campus life involving students, faculty, administrators, and spectators alike.

Planting the Republic: State Regulation of the Discourse on Food Shortages in Public Communication in Early Czechoslovakia (1918–21)

Abstract Czechoslovakia as a victorious, yet still fragile post-imperial state, considered censorship and state propaganda to be a necessary tool to secure its legitimacy at home and abroad. From the very beginning, Czechoslovakia defined itself as a democracy with freedom of speech as its basic principle, yet at the same time, it had to deal with inner fragility and outer vulnerabilities. The strategic agenda of people's nutrition, which was closely associated with the perceived competence of state institutions, serves as a litmus test for the state's regulation of press and public speech and the implementation of republican practices and acceptable limits on public discourse. This study analyzes how the new republican state regulated information on food supply shortcomings in the press and at public gatherings. It argues that Czechoslovakia maintained the prewar Habsburg practices of censorship; however, instead of the vaguely defined public interest of the multinational monarchy, it was now used to protect the public interest of “the national state of the Czechoslovaks.” This study analyzes how the government thought about the consistency of its communication during the postwar (supply) crisis, and thus also options of how to shape a clear and positive brand of the state.

Politicization of Hate and Weaponization of Twitter/X in a Polarized Digital Space in Nigeria

Hate speech on social media platforms during electioneering campaign has been institutionalized. The campaign hate-filled rhetoric continues unabated. Some have attributed this phenomenon to access to social media. This study therefore investigates the prevalence of hate speech on Twitter in Nigeria. Twitter API was used to generate data that was later content analyzed. Anchored on the technological determinism theory, the study revealed political periods saw the prevalence of hate speech and political, ethnic, religion and regional-based hate speech are the dominant themes on hate discourse on Twitter. Some regions in Nigeria weaponized Twitter to denigrate others while others used it to promote their agitation but in the process also resort to hate speech. The study argued that Twitter is just a technology in the hand of hate-filled people who used it to promote their bigotry and bile. This study recommends the development of a legal framework for the regulation of hate speech on social media. Also, the utterance of politicians must be guarded, and the electoral acts must be fully implemented.

Regulating speech: harm, norms, and discrimination

ABSTRACT Mary Kate McGowan's Just Words offers an interesting account of exercitives. On McGowan's view, one of the things we do with words is change what's permitted, and we do this ubiquitously, without any special authority or specific intention. McGowan's account of exercitives is meant to identify a mechanism by which ordinary speech is harmful, and which justifies the regulation of such speech. It is here that I part ways. I make three main arguments. First, McGowan's focus on harm is misguided; that ordinary speech is harmful is harder to support, and in turn does not less to support conclusions about whether it is wrong and warrants regulation, than Just Words suggests. Second, if the speech is harmful, McGowan's account of exercitives is ill-suited to explain why; the relevant instances of ordinary speech seem to express speakers' views about moral norms, not change social norms. Third, McGowan's argument for why ordinary speech should be regulated because it is a form of discrimination presupposes a great deal that is controversial about what makes discrimination wrong and legally actionable, and even if it is right it may license the regulation of more speech than many, including McGowan, would deem acceptable.

Negative Downstream Effects of Alarmist Disinformation Discourse: Evidence from the United States

AbstractThe threat of disinformation features strongly in public discourse, but scientific findings remain conflicted about disinformation effects and reach. Accordingly, indiscriminate warnings about disinformation risk overestimating its effects and associated dangers. Balanced accounts that document the presence of digital disinformation while accounting for empirically established limits offer a promising alternative. In a preregistered experiment, U.S. respondents were exposed to two treatments designed to resemble typical journalistic contributions discussing disinformation. The treatment emphasizing the dangers of disinformation indiscriminately (T1) raised the perceived dangers of disinformation among recipients. The balanced treatment (T2) lowered the perceived threat level. T1, but not T2, had negative downstream effects, increasing respondent support for heavily restrictive regulation of speech in digital communication environments. Overall, we see a positive correlation among all respondents between the perceived threat of disinformation to societies and dissatisfaction with the current state of democracy.

Hate Speech and the Deaf Ears of the Kenyan Law: An In-Depth Analysis of Regulation and Enforcement

In this paper, I delve into the landscape of hate speech regulation in Kenya, specifically focusing on the potential collaboration between the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC) and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights. By examining the existing legal frameworks, organisational structures, and the impact of joint oversight on combating hate speech, I aim to provide a thorough analysis of empowering the NCIC in this realm. Through exploring the historical context of the NCIC, evaluating its readiness for expanded responsibilities, and gauging public perceptions of collaboration, I seek to shed light on the feasibility and implications of such a partnership. Drawing insights from South Africa, the United Nations Hate Speech Strategic Plan, and advocating for a human rights approach to countering online ethnic hate speech, this paper endeavours to enhance accountability in the criminalization of hate speech in Kenya.

EQUALITY THROUGH EXCLUSION? TOWARDS A NEW CONCEPTUALIZATION OF DEMOCRATIC EXCLUSION IN THE CONTEXT OF DIGITAL PUBLIC VENUES

In order to hinder attacks on democratic norms and processes in digital public venues, designing strategies of exclusion is a pressing concern. Nevertheless, we lack systematic studies of how digital public venues should be governed to protect – rather than undermine – democratic values through exclusion. The purpose of this contribution is to offer a systematic theorization of the concept of democratic exclusion in the context of digital public venues. I will in particular draw on two strands of literature within democratic theory which have contributed greatly to the normative theorization of democratic exclusion, but have done so in relation to other types of political settings: the works within feminist political theory on exclusion of dominant groups within parliaments (e.g. Dovi 2009; Murray 2014) and the literature on hate speech regulation and democratic self-defence against (primarily) antidemocratic parties (e.g. Müller 2016; Invernizzi Accetti and Zuckerman 2017; Malkopoulou and Kirshner 2019). First, I will analyze if and how these previous contributions can be applied to the specific context of digital public venues, where special conditions of access and visibility apply. I will then assess to what extent the platforms’ existing governing strategies and policies concerning the exclusion of problematic content or accounts are compatible with the relevant exclusion principles formulated in these works. Building on this analysis, in its final parts the study will move on to carve out more specific suggestions for how exclusion on digital venues should be governed, and what principles should guide this governance.

SEM analysis of agreement with regulating online hate speech: influences of victimization, social harm assessment, and regulatory effectiveness assessment.

In an era where digital interactions are increasingly prevalent, the challenge of effectively regulating online hate speech has emerged as a crucial societal concern. Balancing the regulation of such speech with the preservation of online freedom of expression is a delicate task, requiring broad consensus among internet users. This study delves into the various factors shaping public attitudes towards the regulation of online hate speech in South Korea. An online survey of 1,000 Internet users provided the data for a structural equation model. Our findings reveal that experiences of victimization by hate speech, online activity such as content uploading, assessment of social harm caused by online hate speech, and assessment on the effectiveness of regulatory measures all play significant roles in garnering support for regulation. Notably, online activity correlates strongly with increased encounters with hate speech. This, in turn, leads to a more profound understanding of its social harm and, consequently, a heightened inclination to support regulatory measures. These insights underscore the growing urgency to address online hate speech, especially as online activity continue to intensify. This study contributes to the discourse on online hate speech regulation by highlighting the complex interplay of personal experience, perceived harm, and efficacy of regulation in shaping public consensus.

Online gender-based hate speech in South Korea

ABSTRACT This article examines online gender-based hate speech in South Korea. The article first discusses how the phenomenon has evolved and what its main characteristics are. It also examines new developments in the phenomenon in recent years and provides a brief overview of Korean legislation relevant to the regulation of online gender-based hate speech. Against this backdrop, the article then discusses two notable and distinctive trends that have emerged with the rise of backlashes against feminism in Korea. The two trends are 1) a focus on misandry rather than misogyny, and 2) a denunciation of regulatory efforts as an unjust restriction on freedom. The article concludes that it is time to redefine online gender-based hate speech in Korea, for otherwise discussions on how to regulate online gender-based hate speech will be directionless and futile.

The Regulations of The Law Concerning Hate Speech Offenses

Objective: This research aims to examine the legal regulations of hate speech crimes in the ITE Law and the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP), and further explore the resolution of hate speech conflicts. Theoretical Framework: The theoretical foundations include Legal Certainty theory, Law Enforcement theory, and Legal Convergence theory concerning hate speech conflict resolution following the principle of legal certainty. Method: This study employs a qualitative normative approach (doctrinal) utilizing various legal instruments and indirect observation through conceptual, historical, legal, comparative, and case study approaches. Data collection involves literature review and field research through interviews. The data are analyzed qualitatively, generating descriptive data to reveal legal issues. Findings and Conclusion: The main findings indicate that Article 28 paragraph (2) of the ITE Law still leads to multiple interpretations. The absence of the term "incitement" allows subjective interpretation and constitutes a very broad formulation. A comparison of hate speech crimes in Article 28 Paragraph (2) Jo Article 45A Paragraph (2) of the ITE Law with Article 243 Paragraph (1) and Paragraph (2) of the new Indonesian Criminal Code shows significant differences in terms of elements of the crime, general criminal law principles, additional penalties, lower/proportional sanctions, public virtual domain, integrated codification, and expanded meanings. Originality/Value: This paper recommends urging the government to refine hate speech regulations to prevent multiple interpretations and emphasizes the need for guidelines in law enforcement application.

(Not So) Happy Cows: An Autonomy‐Based Argument for Regulating Animal Industry Misleading Commercial Speech

ABSTRACT‘Happy cow messages’ are instances of commercial speech by the animal industry which, by action or by omission, mislead consumers about the harmful effects that the industry has for non‐human animals, the environment, or human health. Despite their ubiquity, happy cow messages have received little philosophical scrutiny. This article aims to call attention to this form of speech, and to make the case for its restriction. To do so we first conceptualize happy cow messages. Second, we argue that they encroach upon individual autonomy in two particularly objectionable ways: by impairing our ability to behave according to our moral convictions, and by thwarting our capacity to identify and reason about our moral duties. This, we hold, grounds a pro tanto case for stricter and more comprehensive regulation of commercial speech by the animal industry. Third, and against the objection that restricting happy cow messages would violate freedom of speech, we contend that none of the most influential arguments for free speech grants them protection. Indeed, we suggest, those rationales seem to call for their restriction. Fourth, and finally, we review some possible ways to defuse the misleading potential of happy cow messages through commercial speech regulations.

Performative censorship: Why some free speech conflicts should be taken seriously but not literally

In some speech-related disputes, censors do not gauge their success by whether the challenged cultural product or practice has been suppressed in accordance with their explicit demands. This article proposes a theory of performative censorship that can help explain this paradox. Building on the concepts of expressive laws and symbolic crusades from legal studies and social movement studies respectively, performative censorship disputes are defined as contentious episodes in which demands for or against speech regulation are expressed partly for the broader objective of gaining recognition for a group’s way of life, dignity or status. Case studies of two highly contentious conflicts are offered: over Confederate statues in the United States and cartoons of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed. The case studies show that movements’ goals and tactics are neither uniform nor static, making them more complex but also presenting opportunities for de-escalation.