User:Racoon dolphin/Hate speech

Editing: Internet
Notes:


 * Picture not very relavent, maybe switch
 * Overall section is very short and doesn't do a great job of doing a wide ranging high level overview of how hate speech is on the internet
 * Section also doesn't have a very good chronological/organized flow

==========================

Old:

On 31 May 2016, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter, jointly agreed to a European Union code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech" posted on their services within 24 hours.

Prior to this in 2013, Facebook, with pressure from over 100 advocacy groups including the Everyday Sexism Project, agreed to change their hate speech policies after data released regarding content that promoted domestic and sexual violence against women led to the withdrawal of advertising by 15 large companies.

Companies that have hate speech policies include Facebook and YouTube. In 2018 a post containing a section of the United States Declaration of Independence that labels Native Americans "merciless Indian savages" was labeled hate speech by Facebook and removed from its site. In 2019, video-sharing platform YouTube demonetized channels, such as U.S. radio host Jesse Lee Peterson, under their hate speech policy.

==================== ====== New:

The rise of the internet and social media has presented a new medium through which hate speech can spread. Hate speech on the internet traces all the way back to its initial years, with a 1983 bulletin board system created by neo-Nazi George Dietz considered the fist instance of hate speech online. As the internet evolved over time hate speech continued to spread and create it's footprint; the first hate speech website Stormfront was published in 1996, and today hate speech has become one of the central challenges for social media platforms.

The structure and nature of the internet contribute to both the creation and persistence of hate speech online. The widespread use and access to the internet gives hate mongers an easy way to spread their message to wide audiences with little cost and effort. According to the International Telecommunication Union, approximately 66% of the world population has access to the internet. Additionally, the pseudo-anonymous nature of the internet imboldens many to make statements constituting hate speech that they otherwise wouldn't for fear of social or real life repercussions. While some governments and companies attempt to combat this type of behavior by leveraging real name systems, difficulties in verifying identities online, public opposition to such policies, and sites that don't enforce these policies leave large spaces for this behavior to persist.

The fact that the internet crosses national borders makes comprehensive government regulations on online hate speech difficult. Governments who want to regulate hate speech contend with issues around lack of jurisdiction and conflicting viewpoints from other countries. In an early example of this, the case of Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'Antisemitisme had a French court hold Yahoo! liable for allowing Nazi memorabilia auctions to be visible to the public. Yahoo! Refused to comply with the ruling and ultimately won relief in a U.S. court which found that the ruling was unenforceable in the U.S. Disagreements like these make national level regulations difficult, and while there are some international efforts and laws that attempt to regulate hate speech and its online presence, as with most as with most international agreements the implementation and interpretation of these treaties varies by country.

Today, much of the regulation regarding online hate speech is performed voluntarily by individual companies. Many major tech companies have adopted terms of service which outline allowed content on their platform, often banning hate speech. In a notable step for this, on 31 May 2016, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter, jointly agreed to a European Union code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech" posted on their services within 24 hours. Techniques employed by these companies to regulate hate speech include user reporting, Artificial Intelligence flagging, and manual review of content by employees. Major search engines like Google Search also tweak their algorithms to try and suppress hateful content from appearing in their results. However, despite these efforts hate speech remains a persistent problem online. According to a 2021 study by the Anti Defamation League 33% of Americans were the target of identity based harassment in the preceding year, a statistic which has not noticeably shifted downwards despite increasing self regulation by companies.



==========================

New section planning:


 * History of hate speech on the internet
 * Current state of hate speech on the internet (annonymoty, real world effects, statistics, social media vs websites)
 * Governmental action on hate speech online and challenges
 * Individual company actions on hate speech

High level Article Analysis:

 * Overall the article is written well. Many sections are well fleshed out (especially the history and commentary sections) and written in a neutral tone and grammatically correct.
 * Article also does a good job of representing a global worldview. Has talks about international laws and differences, though UN sections can be expanded some
 * Needs a bit more material in a few places (see below article draft). Existing stuff is good but some parts are a bit brief (and the state sponsored speech one basically doesn't exist)

Article body Improvements

 * Update reference to Italy's new proposed hate speech law as it was defeated after time of writing
 * Add some sentences around Twitter's hate policy/changes after takeover by Musk
 * Add more context to other companies (possibly) in the same section, maybe put in a paragraph about protests and debate around hate speech regulation by social media companies
 * Expand section on State Sponsored Hate Speech (use existing references and pull more from the main article)

Minor edit assignment:
Original: After WWII, Germany criminalized Volksverhetzung ("incitement of popular hatred") to prevent resurgence of Nazism. Hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity also is banned in Germany. Most other European and WWII combatant countries have done likewise, except for Italy, though a new law is contemplated.

New: After WWII, Germany criminalized Volksverhetzung ("incitement of popular hatred") to prevent resurgence of Nazism. Hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity also is banned in Germany. Today, most European countries have likewise implemented various laws and regulations regarding hate speech, and the European Union's Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA requires member states to criminalize hate crimes and speech (though individual implementation and interpretation of this framework varies by state).