Hate Speech - Key Concept Paper

“Hate speech is a type of discriminatory speech that arises when people from different social, ethnic, or religious groups interact with one another, or when one such group asserts its power over others”.

This key concept paper explores the concept of hate speech, both theoretically and within the context of the Media, Conflict and Democratisation (MeCoDEM) project’s four country case studies: Egypt, Kenya, Serbia, and South Africa. Instead of seeking to provide an objective definition of hate speech, the paper’s empirical approach highlights that context matters. More specifically, analysis of the political and socio-economic context in which the speech act occurs and consideration of the nature of the speaker and audience - including their impact and transmission - allows for a nuanced and informed approach to evaluate hate speech, and how this impacts democratisation processes.

The paper has been published as part of the MeCoDEM project, which investigates the role of traditional media and information and communication technologies (ICTs) in conflicts that accompany and follow transitions from authoritarian rule to more democratic forms of government. The project seeks to investigate the interplay between media and democratisation conflicts, which it defines as “conflicts that are either triggered by the transition process or caused by incomplete consolidation” Research is focused on four countries: Serbia, Egypt, Kenya, and South Africa, which were chosen because they reflect different experiences of democratisation conflicts and because they differ widely in terms of their political, social, economic, and cultural makeup. As explained in the report, “The concept of hate speech is central to debates over the role of the media in fostering democratic processes and outcomes, and is unique to the specific media landscape, journalistic practices of a country, and the degree of government control of the media”.

The paper offers a brief background of hate speech in the context of freedom of speech and international legislation. It makes the point that when considering hate speech, different human rights laws (related to, for example, human dignity, defamation, and discrimination) will ensure that freedom of expression is not an unconditional right. In particular, “tensions between hate speech and freedom of speech become apparent with speech acts that intentionally seek to violate or denigrate an individual’s membership to a particular socio-economic, demographic or political group.”

The document then explores the events and debates in the four countries of the MeCoDEM project in order to further shed light on the complex issue of negotiating and understanding language and conflicts that involve discriminatory speech and hate speech. It looks at the issue of hate speech and freedom of expression in Egypt after the uprisings in January 2011. In Kenya, it looks at the hate speech and incitement towards certain ethic groups during the 2007 elections. In the Serbian context, it explores what happened with freedom of speech and hate speech following the dissolution of Yugoslavia and the establishment of the new government, and in South Africa, it discusses the challenges presented following the transition from the Apartheid government (which supported racial segregation and racial repression) to a more democratic system.

These case studies highlight that considerations of the context in which debates over hate speech occur are extremely important, particularly in those countries that are transitioning to democracy and with a history of conflict. “The central threads that can be seen between these cases are the roles of ethnicity, religious affiliation and/or identity in politics, and how conflicts arise in cultures and societies that already suffer from profound divisions. These divisions are the result of a volatile history and sensitive issues to do with collective and cultural memory. They are also consequences of divisions brought on by democracies that are in flux due to an ever present struggle between political powers and an increasingly challenging civil society.”

A comparative analysis highlights a number of themes that allows one to better understand the nature, as well as transmission and impact, of hate speech. These are only discussed in brief here:

Firstly, all four case studies highlight that the issue of hate speech becomes more salient and prevalent during periods of political and/or economic upheaval. For example, experiences in Serbia and South Africa show that the problem of hate speech becomes particularly contentious during periods of economic downturn, contributing to xenophobic speech. Overall, the precarious economic and political situation of transitional societies exacerbates the risks of practices such as hate speech to be allowed by parties motivated by the desire for political power.

Secondly, the case studies highlight the relationship between hate speech and the media. In most cases, the media is far from being an independent facilitator of democratic outcomes. Instead, government control of mainstream media channels has led to high levels of censorship as well as hostility towards certain political or socioeconomic groups. For instance, the tight grip of Milošević over the Serbian media led to propaganda that was centred on the fear of Islam and on internal or external political enemies. In Kenya, the media even served as the direct transmitter of dangerous speech acts, where radio stations presented overt, albeit coded, messages to attack and kill certain ethnic groups following the results of the 2007 elections. The report also makes the point that hate speech is linked to memory and that the historical context in which the hate speech act occurs needs to be considered. In South Africa, the widespread effects of Apartheid not only shape legislation on hate speech today, but also have led to grave socio-economic imbalances. In Serbia, the impact of the Milošević regime has led to severe divisions between groups, and therefore widespread impact on democratisation processes, as well as the forms that hate speech takes.