In the last decade, social networks have changed the way people communicate. Before to the emergence of the Internet, communication was more personal, and people had face-to-face contact. Moreover, communicating with friends or relatives who lived abroad was more complicated than today. In many cases, people used to use handwritten letters to communicate with their relatives abroad. Furthermore, in the past it was very difficult to find out about the daily events of distant countries. The newscasts presented what was happening in other countries until hours after the end of the event. That is to say, in the past there were communication barriers between people from different countries. However, social networks have removed all the communication
…show more content…
That is to say, that many people around the world have found in social networking an effective means of transmitting their hate message. Today the spread of hate speech is much simpler than in previous decades. According to HateBase (2017), a web-based application that provides data about hate speech online worldwide, the majority of cases of hate speech target individuals based on ethnicity and nationality. Social networks facilitate pseudonymous discourse, which can just as easily accelerate destructive behaviors such as the promotion of human rights violations. In other words, the proliferation of hate speech in social networks has incited violations to local and international law. Even though the article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” hate speech deprives people of their dignity by saying that they are not equal citizens of society. In 2011, Anders Behring Breivik murdered 77 people in Norway. He “claimed that through their political commitment to a multicultural, egalitarian society, they constituted a threat to Norway. He spread the attitudes and ideas that formed the basis for his actions on the internet (…) [through] countless posts on various sites” (LDO, 2015, p.14). The Breivik case is just one example of why social networking companies should restrict the proliferation of hate speech on their
That is to say, that many people around the world have found in social networking an effective means of transmitting their hate message. Today the spread of hate speech is much simpler than in previous decades. According to HateBase (2017), a web-based application that provides data about hate speech online worldwide, the majority of cases of hate speech target individuals based on ethnicity and nationality. Social networks facilitate pseudonymous discourse, which can just as easily accelerate destructive behaviors such as the promotion of human rights violations. In other words, the proliferation of hate speech in social networks has incited violations to local and international law. Even though the article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,” hate speech deprives people of their dignity by saying that they are not equal citizens of society. In 2011, Anders Behring Breivik murdered 77 people in Norway. He “claimed that through their political commitment to a multicultural, egalitarian society, they constituted a threat to Norway. He spread the attitudes and ideas that formed the basis for his actions on the internet (…) [through] countless posts on various sites” (LDO, 2015, p.14). The Breivik case is just one example of why social networking companies should restrict the proliferation of hate speech on their