FREEDOM OF SPEECH VS HATE SPEECH: SHOULD THERE BE STRICTER LAWS GOVERNING HATE SPEECH OR DOES THAT INFRINGE ON FREE SPEECH RIGHTS?

1.What role do social media platforms play in regulating hate speech, and how effective are their policies?

2.How do different countries’ laws on hate speech affect the protection of free speech? What can be learned from their approach?

3.Does regulating hate speech infringe upon the core prinziples of free speech, and if so, to what extent? What are the psychological and societal impacts of hate speech?

Feel free to research about more questions as you deem fit according to the topic. 

Please use the following sources along with any other sources that you find useful for the topic:

1. Laub, Zachary. “Hate Speech on Social Media: Global Comparisons”, Council On Foreign Relations,

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/hate-speech-social-media-global-comparisons

2.Klein, David. “Hate Speech Laws: The Best Arguments for Them-and Against Them.” Foundation for Economic Education,

https://fee.org/resources/hate-speech-laws-the-best-arguments-for-them-and-against-them/.

3. Kovács, György, Pedro Alonso, and Rajkumar Saini. “Challenges of Hate Speech Detection in Social Media:

Data Scarcity, and Leveraging External Resources.” SN Computer Science, vol. 2, no. 2, 2021.

4. Kulenovic, Enes. “Should Democracies Ban Hate Speech? Hate Speech Laws and Counter speech.” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 26, no. 4, 2023, pp. 511-532.

5. Regulating hate speech and disinformation online while protecting freedom of speech as an equal and positive right- comparing Germany, Europe and the United States, Mathias Hong

As mentioned above use 5 more peer reviewed academic sources fit for the topic 

Here is the project proposal for the topic to give you a better idea. 

The topic of should there be stricter laws governing hate speech in order to protect vulnerable communities or does that infringe on the right to freedom of speech has become a hotly debated topic in today’s society. As we continue to evolve as a society, we face the challenge of balancing individual rights to express opinions with the need to protect vulnerable communities from hate driven rhetoric. ‘Freedom of speech’ defined as the right to express opinions without censorship, restraint or punishment from the government is often regarded as one of the most basic and fundamental human rights, enshrined in various democratic constitutions around the world. However, the rise of ‘hate speech’, defined as speech intended to offend, threaten, or insult individuals based on race, religion, gender, or other protected characteristics, has sparked a debate about whether certain types of expression should be regulated for the greater good. The explosion of hate speech, further exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, represents an unprecedented challenge for our societies. Although hate speech has always existed, its ever-growing impact fueled by digital communication can be devastating not only for those targeted, but also for societies at large. (United Nations, ” Hate speech versus freedom of speech”, https://www.un.org/en/hate-speech/impact-and-prevention/why-tackle-hate-speech). My research focuses around the debate that exists among eliminating hate speech’s negative effects on our society while simultaneously preserving free expression. The main question is whether stricter laws against hate speech violate people’s fundamental right to free expression or are required to safeguard marginalized communities from harm. As I explored various sources, I found common themes such as the balancing act between protecting civil liberties and promoting social justice. While freedom of speech is crucial, many scholars and legal experts agree that left unchecked, hate speech can lead to real-world violence, division, and the marginalization of vulnerable groups.

On this matter, there are notable differences of opinion. Some scholars and policymakers believe that regulation of hate speech could result in censorship that might endanger people’s right to free speech and expression. In contrast, those who advocate for stricter hate speech laws argue that hateful rhetoric, especially when published online, has the power to incite violence, deepen societal divisions, and marginalize minority communities. This polarization poses critical concerns regarding the ability of societies to maintain a healthy and appropriate equilibrium between the protection of individuals from hate speech and the freedom of speech. In nations like for example the United States of America, The First Amendment provides broad protection of free speech whereas in the United Kingdom, it is a criminal offense to incite racial or religious hatred. (Jeffrey W. Howard, “Free Speech and Hate Speech”,https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051517-012343) 

This topic is significantly relevant in today’s world with the rise of online platforms like Instagram, X (formerly known as ‘Twitter’) and Facebook, it has become easier than ever to rapidly spread hate speech, reaching large audiences and fueling real-world conflicts. For example, a 17-year-old stabbed three children in the United Kingdom during the month of July. The stabbings were used by far-right activists to stoke anger at immigrants and Muslims even though the suspect wasn’t an immigrant nor was his religion disclosed, inciting riots across the nation. (CBS NEWS, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uk-stabbing-murder-charge-17-year-old/ ). The consequences of allowing hate speech to flourish unchecked are severe, often leading to discrimination, violence, and the marginalization of vulnerable groups as history shows us. Therefore, it is crucial to regulate hate speech in order to maintain societal harmony and protect minorities from being victims of hate speech.