Moans in Australia about 'Hatebook'
We read:
"Social networking site Facebook has come under pressure to better regulate its content as racist and offensive groups continue to proliferate on the site.
Facebook has a ban on "content that is hateful [and] threatening" and a spokeswoman for the site told brisbanetimes.com.au that there was no place for racism “or any form of hate speech” on Facebook. “We will remove anything of this nature that is reported to us,” she said. “Facebook is highly self-regulating, and users can and do report content that they find questionable or offensive.”
But despite Facebook’s self-regulation, many offensive groups remain on the network. Some vilify Indigenous Australians and Muslims, others suggest glassing people is acceptable, and some deny the Holocaust. One anti-Islamic group alone has over 6000 members and many groups remain on Facebook long enough for opposition groups to be created in response.
Race Discrimination Commissioner Graeme Innes told brisbanetimes.com.au that cyber-racism was an issue that needed to be addressed. “I don’t think we’re a racist country, but Australia does have pockets of racism, and all of us need to challenge these pockets,” he said.
Representatives from Islamic and Jewish peak representative organisations have also called for tighter regulation of online content....
But Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Geordie Guy said groups should have the right to express their views, no matter how abhorrent or controversial they might be. “The ability to say what you want is a critical and important part of democracy and freedom,” he said. Mr Guy said that the open discussion of illegal activities, like abortion and euthanasia was “critical for a healthy democracy”. “The way that we change things is by talking about them. If we’re not allowed to talk about illegal things, how are we going to change anything?" he said.
Previous decisions by the Federal Court of Australia have required Australian sources to remove Holocaust-denying material from the internet.
Source
2 comments:
Why are they worried about people identifying their prejudices and making them public?
Isn't it better we let them gather openly where they can be more easily identified and their actions and motivations more easily traced instead of forcing them underground?
Very good point Anon 2, one that most people don't realize. (or don't care to)
Perhaps we should do away with free speech and replace it with convenient speech. Maybe that will make the professional whiners happy. Of course, there may be a bit of a problem when they get around to things YOU say, that THEY don't like.
Post a Comment