Editing Hate speech (section)

==Internet==
{{Main|Online hate speech}}
The rise of the [[internet]] and [[social media]] has presented a new medium through which hate speech can spread. Hate speech on the internet can be traced all the way back to its initial years, with a 1983 [[bulletin board system]] created by [[Neo-Nazism|neo-Nazi]] [[George P. Dietz|George Dietz]] considered the first instance of hate speech online.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Levin |first=Brian |date=2002 |title=Cyberhate: A Legal and Historical Analysis of Extremists' Use of Computer Networks in America |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764202045006004 |journal=American Behavioral Scientist |language=en |volume=45 |issue=6 |pages=958–988 |doi=10.1177/0002764202045006004 |s2cid=142998931 |issn=0002-7642|url-access=subscription }}</ref> As the internet evolved over time hate speech continued to spread and create its footprint; the first hate speech website [[Stormfront (website)|Stormfront]] was published in 1996, and hate speech has become one of the central challenges for social media platforms.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Meddaugh |first1=Priscilla Marie |last2=Kay |first2=Jack |date=2009-10-30 |title=Hate Speech or "Reasonable Racism?" The Other in Stormfront |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08900520903320936 |journal=Journal of Mass Media Ethics |language=en |volume=24 |issue=4 |pages=251–268 |doi=10.1080/08900520903320936 |s2cid=144527647 |issn=0890-0523|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

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.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Measuring digital development: Facts and Figures 2022 |url=https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx |access-date=2023-10-27 |website=ITU |language=en-US}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Citron|first1=Danielle Keats|last2=Norton|first2=Helen L.|date=2011|title=Intermediaries and Hate Speech: Fostering Digital Citizenship for Our Information Age|url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1764004|journal=Boston University Law Review|location=Rochester, NY|volume=91|ssrn=1764004}}</ref> While some governments and companies attempt to combat this type of behavior by leveraging [[Real-name system|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.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Google reverses 'real names' policy, apologizes |url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-reverses-real-names-policy-apologizes/ |access-date=2023-11-25 |website=ZDNET |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2012-08-23 |title=Online real-name system unconstitutional |url=https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2023/11/113_118115.html |access-date=2023-11-25 |website=koreatimes |language=en}}</ref>

Because the internet crosses national borders, comprehensive government regulations on online hate speech can be difficult to implement and enforce. Governments who want to regulate hate speech contend with issues around lack of jurisdiction and conflicting viewpoints from other countries.<ref name="yahoo_case">{{Cite journal |last=Banks |first=James |date=2010 |title=Regulating hate speech online |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13600869.2010.522323 |journal=International Review of Law, Computers & Technology |language=en |volume=24 |issue=3 |pages=233–239 |doi=10.1080/13600869.2010.522323 |s2cid=61094808 |issn=1360-0869|url-access=subscription }}</ref> 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.<ref name="yahoo_case" /> Disagreements like these make national level regulations difficult, and while there are some [[#Hate speech laws|international efforts and laws]] that attempt to regulate hate speech and its online presence, as with most international agreements the implementation and interpretation of these treaties varies by country.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gagliardone |first1=Iginio |url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000233231/PDF/233231eng.pdf.multi |title=Countering Online Hate Speech |last2=Gal |first2=Danit |last3=Alves |first3=Thiago |last4=Martinez |first4=Gabriela |publisher=[[UNESCO Publishing]] |year=2015 |isbn=978-92-3-100105-5 |location=[[Paris]] |pages=7–15 |format=PDF |access-date=27 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313213251/https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000233231/PDF/233231eng.pdf.multi |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref>

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.<ref name="guardian-euhatespeech">{{Cite news|title=Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Microsoft sign EU hate speech code|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/31/facebook-youtube-twitter-microsoft-eu-hate-speech-code|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=7 June 2016|date=2016-05-31|last1=Hern|first1=Alex}}</ref> Techniques employed by these companies to regulate hate speech include user reporting, [[Artificial intelligence|Artificial Intelligence]] flagging, and manual review of content by employees.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hatano |first=Ayako |date=2023-10-23 |title=Regulating Online Hate Speech through the Prism of Human Rights Law: The Potential of Localised Content Moderation |journal=The Australian Year Book of International Law Online |volume=41 |issue=1 |pages=127–156 |doi=10.1163/26660229-04101017 |issn=2666-0229|doi-access=free }}</ref> Major search engines like [[Google Search]] also tweak their algorithms to try and suppress hateful content from appearing in their results.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Schulze |first=Elizabeth |date=2019-02-04 |title=EU says Facebook, Google and Twitter are getting faster at removing hate speech online |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/04/facebook-google-and-twitter-are-getting-faster-at-removing-hate-speech-online-eu-finds--.html |access-date=2023-11-25 |website=CNBC |language=en}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Online Hate and Harassment: The American Experience 2021 |url=https://www.adl.org/resources/report/online-hate-and-harassment-american-experience-2021 |access-date=2023-11-25 |website=ADL |language=en}}</ref>