Umsebenzi Online, Volume 14, No. 1, 15 January 2015



In this Issue:

*         It's time to confront cyber racism and hate speech 

*         Trolls don't have right to online space

 


 

 


Red Alert:

 

It's time to confront cyber racism and hate speech 



 

By SACP General Secretary, Comrade Blade Nzimande

 

The SACP generally welcomes what appears to have been a huge positive
response to its call for an intensified struggle against all forms of
racism, including cyber racism, hate speech on the internet and all other
prejudices that threaten to undermine the non-racial, non-sexist and
inclusive South African society we seek to build. We raised this matter in
the context of celebrating one of the foremost heroes of our national
liberation struggle, Comrade Joe Slovo - the late National Chair of the SACP
and the first minister of housing in a democratic South Africa - who passed
away 20 years ago.

 

Slovo, together with the late Comrade Nelson Mandela, were the founding
commanders of Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) in 1961. Previously, in the 1950s, he
was also a founder member of the Congress of Democrats, an organisation of
those white South Africans who hated apartheid and were committed to fight
against it. Slovo was a communist who volunteered to fight against fascism
in the South African armed forces during the Second World War after Hitler
attacked the Soviet Union.

 

The SACP has raised the matter of cyber-racism against the background of
almost 94 years of a principled fight against colonialism and racism. The
SACP was the first non-racial political party in our country, and was the
first to call for black majority rule in 1929 as a foundation for building a
more equitable and inclusive non-racial society. The SACP has always
understood the deep interconnection between the class exploitation of
capitalism and oppression based on race. As we have fought for the class
interests of the working class, we have also fought against all forms of
narrow prejudice that facilitate exploitation and divide our people,
including racism, tribalism and sexism. 

 

The SACP welcomes the technological advancement made by humanity over the
centuries, including the radical advances that have resulted from the
internet. The internet is a truly revolutionary tool that has the potential
to empower ordinary people and radically change the terrain of
communications. However, this very progressive invention can be captured by
capitalist interests to advance an agenda that is against the interests of
ordinary people. Similarly the Internet can be captured by regressive
agendas that advance sectarian and divisive goals, including the promotion
of racism and other kinds of prejudices.

 

Indeed cyber racism is rife today. Whilst the SACP is of the view that we
must fight cyber-racism wherever it occurs, including in Twitter and
Facebook, we are particularly concerned about the extent of racism, sexism
and hate speech on the internet platforms created by our media institutions.
Most appear to allow direct and unmediated responses to their articles by
Internet users, many of whom hide behind anonymity which is permitted by
online publications. A cursory examination of many of these postings will
reveal racist and sexist commentary as well as a great deal of hate-speech
and character assassination. The internet in South Africa has become the
last refuge of the most blatant racists and purveyors of hatred.

 

Media houses would never allow publication of most of these comments in hard
copy, but somehow they are tolerated in online editions. "Internet
trolling'', as the practice has become known, is not unique to this country.
But South Africa is one of the countries where the media provide very little
protection to individual victims of this venal, derogatory, sometimes even
cruel, type of harassment. 

 

Worse still, they allow unrestricted trampling of the deepest principles for
which thousands have fought and given their lives and on which our
Constitution rests. I was privileged to be one of the SACP negotiating team
led by Slovo at the Codesa talks of the early 1990s, as well as a
participant in negotiations in the Constitutional Assembly. One of the
longest running discussions and debates in those talks was the need to
balance between rights, responsibilities and limitations. And consensus was
reached that all rights demand responsibilities and also have limitations.

 

Section 16 (1) of our Constitution guarantees that everyone has the right to
freedom of expression, including, inter alia, the rights to freedom of the
press and other media as well as academic freedom. However, section 16(2)
expressly states that the above rights do not extend to "propaganda for war;
incitement of imminent violence; or advocacy of hatred (hate speech) that is
based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes
incitement to cause harm". Frankly on the above score virtually all of our
media internet platforms fail dismally! And media must take responsibility
and be held to account on this front.

 

Much as I welcome SANEF's recognition of the problem, their answer cannot be
that they are discussing the matter in boardrooms. The struggle against
racism is not a boardroom one, but a transparent, societal struggle to build
a non-racial and inclusive South Africa.

 

The Constitution is also clear that no-one can hide behind freedoms of
expression and media to pursue racist and hate speech. Nor can this matter
exclude government and legislative intervention where required, especially
when the Constitution is violated. And this matter cannot just be reduced
into a media issue. It is a human rights issue! 

 

The SACP therefore calls for an open debate and discussion on this matter.
But we are also calling upon the South Africa Human Rights Commission to
comprehensively investigate the nature and extent of cyber racism and hate
speech on the Internet in South Africa and come up with comprehensive
proposals on how to deal with this. This matter goes to the heart of human
dignity for all South Africans.

 

The United Kingdom has experienced similar problems to us and now intends
passing legislation to criminalize such activities. People found guilty of
internet trolling in Britain could be jailed for up to two years under
government proposals outlined in October 2014, following a number of
high-profile cases of abuse on Twitter.

 

British Justice Secretary Chris Grayling was recently quoted in the media as
saying that, "This is a law to combat cruelty - and marks our determination
to take a stand against a baying cyber-mob."

 

Let us engage! Such hate-prompting activities must be confronted, as part of
safeguarding the building of a nonracial and non-sexist South Africa.

 

Cde Blade Nzimande is General Secretary of the SACP

 

 

 

Trolls don't have right to online space

"It's time for editors of online platforms to ensure that offensive comments
are weeded out."


By Eusebius McKaiser 

 

A variety of computer cables for broadband, internet, power and linking to
servers. The writer says online comments on news sites shouldn't be allowed
to contain hate speech. 

 

I completely agree with recent remarks made by Minister Blade Nzimande about
the disgrace that is racism on online platforms. I also agree with him that
news website owners and managers, in particular, don't take racism seriously
enough. 

 

If they did take racism seriously, they would stop pretending that there is
nothing they can do about racism on their platforms. 

 

The first point to make is that racism and hate speech are neither legally
nor morally acceptable. If you ask editors, they will tell you that they
monitor their websites, and delete comments that constitute illegal speech,
or unethical remarks that are posted. The mechanisms for achieving this,
they will tell you, vary from human beings monitoring the websites, to fancy
little programs that react when certain words appear on the comment
sections. 

 

But the reality is that for years now, South African websites have failed to
eliminate racism once it appears on websites. This is despite claims that
monitoring systems are in place. I am happy to take an in-house example in
the first instance: iol.co.za is a racism hotbed. My bosses have assured me
that processes are in place at Independent Media to monitor comments on
iol.co.za. 

 

Yet, if you look at comments right now below the online version of this
article that you're reading, you will see plenty of responses, ranging from
legally permissible, but morally unacceptable, comments, to comments that
are illegal in terms of our hate speech laws. 

 

And if you try to post a comment to alert the website manager, see what
happens. Try it. Then come back to the iol website in a few hours. I
guarantee you the illegal and unethical remarks will still be there. South
African editors lie if they claim that effective online monitoring happens.
It doesn't. 

 

And this is true across all the popular news websites in South Africa - the
worst is news24.com, but others aren't free of this menace. A website like
politicsweb.co.za is also a tissue of bigotry and hate speech. Don't believe
me? Go onto those platforms right now and tell me I'm lying. 

 

Would it be a violation of free speech norms for online editors to starve
trolls of space for posting their hatred? Someone said the other day it
would not "feel right" to close comment sections. That's not sufficient. We
need argument why valuing free speech compels us to accept unmonitored
comment sections. 

 

No troll has a right to be allowed to post hatred online. There is no
commercial, legal or social duty on editors to provide the space for illegal
and immoral speech. Editors shouldn't fear they will be labelled opponents
of free speech if they close down comment sections. 

 

I would happily invite a critic to make the argument for why I have a duty
to put up, as online editor, with hate speech. I don't, and I haven't come
across compelling argument yet why the acid test of free speech commitment
is to put up with trolls. 

 

If racists want to express racism, they are allowed to do so. They can set
up their own blogs, they can express themselves freely on social media
platforms, they could try their luck on talk radio platforms, etc. But
newspapers don't have a duty to give them space. Let them create their own
spaces. 

 

The remaining issue, I guess, is whether it is counterproductive to close
comment sections. If we want to eliminate racism, one might think, then
racism should not be driven underground, but dealt with openly. 

 

This is empirically false. Steve Hofmeyr, Dan Roodt and their racist fans
remain racists despite the current freedom they enjoy to express racism on
online comment sections. Their racism hasn't been reduced just because
they've been allowed to show it off on iol or news24. 

 

And you, as a progressive reader who hates racism, don't have the energy to
engage these trolls online on these websites. So there is no instrumental
value in allowing their nonsense to be posted and flaunted. Why must we
enable them to promote hate? 

 

The only solution that doesn't involve closing comment sections is to have a
real person monitoring these sites full-time - someone trained in the
meaning of illegal speech and who can judge the grey area of legal speech
that is still morally odious. 

 

But let's keep it real. Not one South African newsroom will pay for this job
during a time of shrinking media budgets. So we shouldn't pretend effective
monitoring will happen. It won't. It is too costly. The alternative is to
close these comment sections and see if the world comes to an end. 

 

If naked racism and illegal speech would never be allowed into the hard copy
of your newspaper, why on earth do you as editor feel pressured to allow it
online? There's no need. And your liberal credentials won't be taken away. 

 

Eusebius McKaiser is the best-selling author of A Bantu In My Bathroom and
Could I Vote DA? A Voter's Dilemma. He is currently working on his third
book, Searching For Sello Duiker. The views expressed here are not
necessarily those of Independent Media - This piece was published by The
Star in 12 January 2015 and by the Independent Online
http://www.iol.co.za/the-star/trolls-don-t-have-right-to-online-space-1.1803
558#.VLea93t8tng

 

 

 

-- 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Umsebenzi Online" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, just send email to 
[email protected] 
For more options, archives, pages and files, visit the group web site at 
http://groups.google.com/group/umsebenzi-online?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Umsebenzi Online" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to