Online Hate Speech

an Analysis of Digital Platforms Policies for Content Moderation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30962/ec.2709

Keywords:

Hate speech, Digital platforms, Content moderation, Freedom of expression, Documental research

Abstract

The aim of this article is to understand the moderation of hate speech on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, Twitter and YouTube by analyzing their terms of use and community guidelines. In the discussion, four factors are analyzed: conceptualization of hate speech; protected categories; criteria for evaluating complaints; and sanctions. Finally, we discuss three points in common with the community guidelines: the platforms’ values; contextual and linguistic challenges; and interlocutions and moderation practices. The conclusion is that these points support the governance of hate speech on the platforms analyzed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Luiza Carolina dos Santos, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, Brasil

PhD in Communication and Information (UFRGS) and substitute professor at the State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG). She coordinates Intercom's Research Group on Digital Technologies and Cultures.

Renata Tomaz, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

Journalist with a doctorate and master's degree in Communication and Culture (ECO/UFRJ). He holds a postdoctoral degree in the Postgraduate Program in Media and Daily Life (PPGMC/UFF). Professor at the School of Communication, Media and Information at Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV ECMI).

Dalby Dienstbach, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

PhD in Language Studies from the Fluminense Federal University and professor at the School of Communication, Media and Information at Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV ECMI).

Eurico Matos, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

PhD and masters in Contemporary Communication and Culture from the Federal University of Bahia. Professor at the School of Communication, Media and Informalization at Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV ECMI) and at the National Institute of Science and Technology in Digital Democracy (INCT.DD).

Danielle Sanches, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

PhD in History of Sciences from EHESS/Paris in Cotutela with COC-Fiocruz and professor at the School of Communication, Media and Information at Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV ECMI).

References

BEN-DAVID, A.; MATAMOROS-FERNÁNDEZ, A. Hate Speech and Covert Discrimination on Social Media: Monitoring the Facebook Pages of Extreme-Right Political Parties in Spain. International Journal of Communication, v. 10, p. 1167-1163, 2016.

BENESCH, S. Defining and Diminishing Hate Speech. In: MINORITY RIGHTS GROUP International. State of the World’s Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. Londres, 2014. p. 18-25.

BHATIA, V. Worlds of Written Discourse: a Genre-Based View. Londres: Continuum, 2004.

BOWMAN-GRIEVE, L. Exploring Stormfront: a Virtual Community of the Radical Right. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, v. 11, n. 31, p. 989-1007, 2009.

BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Brasília, 1988. Disponível em: <http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicaocompilado.htm>. Acesso em: 25 fev. 2021.

______. Lei n. 7.716, de 5 de janeiro de 1989. Define os crimes resultantes de preconceito de raça ou de cor. Disponível em: <http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l7716.htm>. Acesso em: 26 fev. 2021.

______. Lei n. 12.965, de 23 de abril de 2014. Estabelece princípios, garantias, direitos e deveres para o uso da Internet no Brasil. Disponível em: <http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2014/lei/l12965.htm>. Acesso em: 26 fev. 2021.

BROWN, A. What is So Special About Online (as Compared to Offline) Hate Speech? Ethnicities, v. 18, n. 3, p. 297-326, 2018.

BRUGGER, W. Proibição ou proteção do discurso de ódio? Algumas observações sobre o Direito Alemão e o Americano. Revista Direito Público, v. 15, p. 117-63, 2007.

BUYSE, A. Words of Violence: Fear Speech, or How Violent Conflict Escalation Relates to the Freedom of Expression. Human Rights Quarterly, v. 36, p. 779-797, 2014.

CANÇADO, M. Manual de semântica: noções básicas e exercícios. 2. ed. São Paulo: Contexto, 2012.

COLLEONI, E.; ROZZA, A.; ARVIDSSON, A. Echo Chamber or Public Sphere? Predicting Political Orientation and Measuring Political Homophily in Twitter Using Big Data. Journal of Communication, n. 64, v. 2, p. 317-332, 2014.

CRAWFORD, K.; GILLESPIE, T. What is a Flag For? Social Media Reporting Tools and the Vocabulary of Complaint. New Media & Society, v. 18, n. 3, p. 410-428, 2016.

D’ANDRÉA, C. Pesquisando plataformas online: conceitos e métodos. Salvador: EDUFBA, 2020.

FARIS, R. et al. Understanding Harmful Speech Online. Berkman Klein Center Research Publication, n. 2016-21, p. 1-19, 2016. Disponível em: <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract%5Fid=2882824>. Acesso em: 1 mar. 2021.

GAGLIARDONE, I. et al. Countering Online Hate Speech. Paris: Unesco Publishing, 2015.

GAGLIARDONE, I. Extreme Speech | Defining Online Hate and Its “Public Lives”: What is the Place for “Extreme Speech”?. International Journal of Communication, v. 13, p. 3068-3087, 2019.

GILLESPIE, T. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 2018.

______. Content Moderation, AI, and the Question of Scale. Big Data & Society, p. 1-5, jul.-dez. 2020.

GONTIJO, A. Governança e moderação de conteúdo: uma análise da plataforma Twitter entre 2018 e 2021. Dissertação (Mestrado em Comunicação Social) – Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2021.

JIANG, J. A. et al. Characterizing Community Guidelines on Social Media Platforms. In: CONFERENCE COMPANION PUBLICATION of the 2020 on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. CSCW’20 Companion, Estados Unidos, p. 287-291, out. 2020. Disponível em: <https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3406865.3418312>. Acesso em: 4 fev. 2022.

JURNO, A. C.; D’ANDRÉA, C. (In)visibilidade algorítmica no “feed de notícias” do Facebook. Revista Contemporânea, v. 15, n. 2, p. 463-484, 2017.

KONIKOFF, D. Gatekeepers of Toxicity: Reconceptualizing Twitter’s Abuse and Hate Speech Policies. Policy Studies Organization, v. 13, p. 502-521, 2021.

LAVI, M. Do Platforms Kill?. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, v. 43, p. 477-573, 2020. Disponível em: <https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/hjlpp43&i=492>. Acesso em: 18 maio 2022.

LUCCAS, V. N.; GOMES, F. V.; SALVADOR, J. P. F. Guia de análise de discurso de ódio. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getulio Vargas, 2020. Disponível em: <https://www.conib.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Guia-de-An%C3%A1lise-de-Discurso-de-%C3%93dio.pdf>. Acesso em: 26 fev. 2021.

OBAR, J.; OELDORF-HIRSCH, A. The Biggest Lie on the Internet: Ignoring the Privacy Policies and Terms of Service Policies of Social Networking Services. Information, Communication & Society, v. 23, n. 1, p. 128-147, 2020.

ONU – Organização das Nações Unidas. Carta das Nações Unidas. São Francisco: ONU, 1945. Disponível em: <https://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/index.html>. Acesso em: 26 fev. 2021.

ONU – Organização das Nações Unidas. Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos. Paris: ONU, 1948. Disponível em: <https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/>. Acesso em: 26 fev. 2021

ORLANDI, E. Análise de discurso: princípios e procedimentos. 5. ed. Campinas: Pontes, 2005.

ROBERTS, S. Behind the Screen: Content Moderation in the Shadows of Social Media. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019.

RUEDIGER, M. A.; GRASSI, A. (coord.). Discurso de ódio em ambientes digitais: definições, especificidades e contexto da discriminação on-line no Brasil a partir do Twitter e do Facebook. Rio de Janeiro: FGV DAPP, 2021.

SÁ-SILVA, J.; ALMEIDA, C.; GUINDANI, J. Pesquisa documental: pistas teóricas e metodológicas. Revista Brasileira de História & Ciências Sociais, v. 1, n. 1, p. 1-15, jul. 2009.

SALEEM, H. M. et al. A Web of Hate: Tackling Hateful Speech in Online Social Spaces. arXiv, preprint arXiv:1709.10159, 2017.

SIEGEL, A. Online Hate Speech. In: PERSILY, N.; TUCKER, J. (Orgs.). Social Media and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. p. 56-88.

SILVA, L. et al. Analyzing the Targets of Hate in Online Social Media. In: PROCEEDINGS OF THE TENTH International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 2016. Disponível em: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.07709v1>. Acesso em: 8 out. 2023.

______; BOTELHO-FRANCISCO, R.; OLIVEIRA, A.; PONTES, V. A gestão do discurso de ódio nas plataformas de redes sociais digitais: um comparativo entre Facebook, Twitter e YouTube. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciência da Informação, v. 12, n.2, p. 470-492, 2019. Disponível em: <https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/RICI/article/view/22025/21351>. Acesso em: 2 nov 2023.

______; BOTELHO-FRANCISCO, R. E. Gestão de conteúdo de ódio no Facebook: um estudo sobre haters, trolls e naysayers. P2P e Inovação, [S. l.], v. 6, n. 2, p. 38-56, 2020. Disponível em: <https://revista.ibict.br/p2p/article/view/5114>. Acesso em: 18 maio 2022.

VIVERITO, C. V.; BERTUCCI, P. Inclusão de pessoas transgêneras e não binárias no local de trabalho brasileiro. Califórnia: Out & Equal Workplace Advocates, 2020.

WEAVER, S. A Rhetorical Discourse Analysis of Online Anti-Muslim and Anti-Semitic Jokes. Ethnic and Radical Studies, v. 3, n. 36, p. 483-499, 2013.

Downloads

Published

04-09-2023

How to Cite

dos Santos, L. C., Tomaz, R., Dienstbach, D., Matos, E., & Sanches, D. (2023). Online Hate Speech: an Analysis of Digital Platforms Policies for Content Moderation. E-Compós, 26. https://doi.org/10.30962/ec.2709

Issue

Vol. 26 (2023): E-Compós 2023

Section

Artigos Originais

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Luiza Carolina dos Santos, Renata Tomaz, Dalby Dienstbach, Eurico Matos, Danielle Sanches

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The submission of originals to this journal implies the transfer, by the authors, of the printed and digital publication rights. The copyrights for the published articles belong to the author, with the rights of the journal over the first publication. The authors can only use the same results in other publications, clearly indicating this journal as the source of the original publication. Because we are an open-access journal, the free-of-charge,educational, scientific, and non-commercial use of the papers is allowed, as long as the source is cited.

Authorship

Any person who has effectively participated in the conception of the study, the development of the experimental part, the analysis and interpretation of data and the final wording, is considered as an author. By submitting an article for publication in E-Compós Journal, the author agrees with the following terms: 1. The author keeps the rights on the article, but its publication in the journal automatically implies the full and exclusive disposal of the copyright rights for the first edition, without payment. 2. The ideas and opinions expressed in the article are the sole responsibility of the author, not necessarily reflecting the views of the journal. 3. After the first publication, the author is authorized to take additional contracts, independent of the journal, for the dissemination of the paper by other means (e.g. when publishing in the institutional repository or as a book chapter), provided that the complete citation of the original publication. 4. The author of a published article is allowed and is stimulated to distribute his work online, always with the proper citation of the first edition.

Conflicts of interest and research ethics

If the developed research or the publication of the article may raise doubts as to potential conflicts of interest, the author should declare, in a final note, that no links to funding bodies have been omitted, as well as to commercial or political institutions. Similarly, the institution to which the author is bound should be mentioned, as well as others that may have collaborated in the execution of the study, evidencing that there are no conflicts of interest with the result already presented. It is also necessary to inform that the interviews and experiences involving human beings have obeyed the established ethical procedures for scientific research. The names and addresses informed in this journal will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication, not made available for other purposes or to third parties. The copyrights belong exclusively to the authors. The licensing rights used by the journal consist in the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license: sharing (copying and distribution of the material in any media or format) and adaptation (remix, transformation and creation of material from licensed content for any purposes, including commercial) are permitted.