ChuckB writes “The AP reports on an international conference held on June 16 in Paris on the question of how to deal with hate speech on the internet. The report notes:
A sticking point was whether the United States, which has championed nearly unfettered free speech, would line up with European countries that have banned racist or anti-Semitic speech in public.
Librarians in the U.S. have traditionally championied free expression of and access to even obnoxious or repellent ideas. Are we right to do so, or should we come into line with European laws? Do such laws infringe upon the mission of libraries? Do any LISNewsters out there know European librarians who have expressed their thoughts on this matter?”
Ridikkulus!
There is a difference between what happens in a library and what happens in your home. Mainly this relates to porn. There is no practical way to police online hate speech unless a patron is looking at a site with big flashing banners saying ‘Kill Jews’ and the sound playing in the background is “Heil Hitler” over and over again. At the very least you can say the patron is out to pick a fight and is intently creating a hostile environment.
By cracking down on internet hate speech it sounds like they are trying to crack down on what a person puts on their site *from their home*.
I’d also like to point out that Europe’s attempt to crack down on public speech has not decreased the amount of anti-semitism, it seems to be on the rise in fact.
There is always controversy whenever a library gets stuck hosting a group of white supremacists or other radical group. Sometimes I feel like I’m against this but having recently seen HP III it sorta reminds me of the bogarts. It tries to be as frightening as it can be, but you call it ridiculous, laugh at it, and it goes away.
Internet Hate
The Internet is a whole new method of spreading hate. A hate monger can gain numerous adherents in a matter of seconds. Unfortunately, traditional legal approaches and professional library approaches need to be revisted through a process. If we go on the strict side we might be depriving people from researching these groups. If we are more lenient then the hate groups gain useof cyberspace to create new dangerous movements. I think we have to make a distinction between availability in a public institution such as a library and private access. I think in the former it is within library responsibility to restrict access under the guide of the librarian. Again this issue needs to be more fully discussed. As far as home access I can’t see how that can be effectively done. The Europeans are under real pressure because the hate in their societies is ever increasing. I think their approach is part playing to the crowd. We as information professionals should have national discussion on this issue sans agenda. One could make a case for hate on the internet as equal to cross burning on a lawn or swastickas on synagogues. There is no simple solution. Maybe groups such as ALA should leave the international political arena and discuss these issues with both conservative and liberal librarians and arrive at an acceptable procedure that both sides can live with.
may depend on recent history
Are librarians in war-torn countries as willing to tolerate hate speech, since they’ve seen the consequences? I think the American emphasis on complete freedom of speech is partly due to our sense of security, since we haven’t been had a serious foreign invasion since the War of 1812 and haven’t suffered under a dictatorship. Even our Civil War was fought humanely compared to those elsewhere in the world.