• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

NORDICOM-INFORMATION 37 (2015) 3-4: 29-37 James Hawdon, Atte Oksanen & Pekka Räsänen Online Extremism and Online Hate Exposure among Adolescents and Young Adults in Four Nations Many studies in the social sciences acknowledge that there is an overlap between real and virtual world experiences. While the Internet has opened many new opportu- nities to expand our minds, knowledge and friendship networks, it has also created new types of risks and threats. This notion is especially noteworthy when considering children and young adults. Probably the most distinct negative online behavior that has recently received scholarly attention is online extremism and hate. This article combines earlier research findings with unique comparative data to add new per- spectives to the understanding of how extremist and hate materials are seen online among young people aged 15 to 30 years old. We examined the rates and the forms of exposure in four countries: Finland, the United States of America, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Our findings show that exposure to hate material is common in all four nations. Our findings should raise a red flag in the sense that hate appears to be a part of the online experience. The Internet is used for business, politics, recently garnered scholarly attention is online recreation, education, and scores of other extremism and hate. Numerous researchers pro-social activities; it is also used for crimes document the content, goals, targets, and con- ranging from identity theft and cyberfraud to sequences of these messages; however, few cyberbullying and terrorism. A growing body studies analyse the extent to which people are of research investigates a variety of criminal exposed to these messages. Even fewer studies behaviours and types of cyber-victimisations, investigate if exposure to online hate and ex- and many scholars note that there is conside- tremism varies by country; in this research we rable overlap between the crimes of the “real attempt to address this gap in the literature. world” and those of the “virtual world”. One We begin with a brief discussion of what form of malevolent online behaviour that has online extremist and hate materials are. We then review recent efforts to account for va- riation in exposure to these materials. Next, James Hawdon, Ph.D., is Professor of so- we report results from surveys of adolescents ciology of Virginia Tech and Director at the and young adults in four nations: Finland, Center for Peace Studies and Violence Pre- the United States, Germany, and the United vention, Blacksburg, VA. Kingdom. We then report statistics on expo- Atte Oksanen, D.Soc Sc., is Professor of so- cial psychology, School of Social Sciences sure rates among young people and the social and Humanities, University of Tampere. media sites where hate materials were seen Pekka Räsänen, D.Soc.Sc.is Professor of and the groups materials were targeted by. We economic sociology at the Department of conclude the article with a discussion of theo- Social Research, University of Turku. retical and practical implications. 29 NORDICOM-INFORMATION 37 (2015) 3-4 Online extremist and ideology and hate materials has been linked hate materials to terrorist organisations such as al-Qaeda Online extremist and hate materials are a form and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant of cyberviolence.1 At its core, cyberviolence (ISIL) as they attempt to recruit youth to their includes online materials that express extreme violent causes. views of hatred toward some group. More spe- cifically, it is the use of information commu- Correlates of exposure nication technology (ICT) to “advocate vio- lence against, separation from, defamation of, The limited number of studies analysing expo- 13 deception about or hostility towards others”.2 sure to online extremists and hate materials Thus, anyone using ICT to devalue others be- have found that exposure typically increases cause of their religion, race, ethnicity, gender, as users enter dangerous places on the Internet sexual orientation, national origin, or some or virtually interact with dangerous people. It other group-defining characteristic is disse- should be noted that this contact with dange- minating online hate or extremist ideas.3 It is rous people does not need to be direct. Unlike similar to cyberbullying, but online extremist offline predatory crimes, which require direct 14 and hate material aim the abuse at a collective interaction between the victim and offender, 15 identity rather than a specific individual. cybercrimes do not require direct contact. Online extremist and hate materials are Rather, the asynchronous nature of the In- disseminated by individuals and organised ternet allows those posting these materials to groups through all of the mechanisms used offend people without direct contact; all that on the Internet: websites, blogs, chat rooms, is needed is to go into the virtual space where file archives, listservers, news groups, internet an offender once posted. communities, online video games, and web Visiting sites that advocate dangerous be- rings.4 Although organised hate groups have haviours increases the likelihood of being ex- used the web since its inception,5 their online posed to these materials. In a study of Finnish presence decreased after 2011.6 Individuals are Facebook users, those who visited websites now the primary sources of these materials, promoting suicide or self-mutilation were largely because groups are more easily detec- more likely to be exposed to online hate mate- 16 ted than are individuals who can easily hide rials than those who did not visit such sites. behind the anonymous nature of the Internet.7 In addition, just as leaving one’s home brings Most online extremist and hate materials individuals into contact with dangerous pe- 17 do not directly advocate violence,8 and ex- ople, using certain websites and services can posure does not necessarily cause trauma or increase exposure. For example, in a study of other ill effects. It is important to note that American youth and young adults, those using many people who post extremist and hate ma- six or more Internet services were nearly twice terials do not consider the material offensive. as likely to view online hate material as were 18 The individuals who post such materials often those who used fewer services. view these materials as “educational” rather Visiting certain sites likely leads to expo- than “criminal.” Indeed, the main reason they sure to extremist and hate materials indirectly post materials is to educate others about their simply because the more websites one visits, group or ideology, recruit like-minded people the greater the likelihood that one of these to their cause, and criticise others for defa- sites will include offensive materials. In cont- ming their group.9 Nevertheless, researchers rast, some behaviours likely bring one into find that exposure to these materials correlates contact with offensive materials more directly. with several negative outcomes. These nega- One’s online associates, for example, would tive effects include diminished levels of trust,10 influence the likelihood of coming into virtual mood swings and anger,11 and, on occasion, proximity with potential offenders since offen- violence.12 Recently, exposure to extremist ding and being a victim are highly correlated 30 James Hawdon, Atte Oksanen & Pekka Räsänen for both offline and online victimisation.19 In hate speech laws, language barriers, or other a study of young Facebook users, those who cultural factors. It is therefore necessary to produced hate materials were over four times consider if the exposure varies cross-natio- as likely to be exposed to hate materials as nally and, if it does, how. compared to those who did not produce hate To address this gap in the literature, we materials.20 consider exposure in four nations: Finland, In addition, it is well documented that the United States of America (US), Germany, those who are victimised once are more li- and the United Kingdom (UK). These na- kely to be victimised again.21 Moreover, those tions were selected because they are similar victimised offline are at a heightened risk for in a number of respects, but also differ in experiencing online victimisation.22 These important ways. First, they are all relatively correlations are in part because victims parti- wealthy liberal democracies with per capita cipate in activities that occur in the company gross domestic products ranging between of offenders.23 These correlations could also be the 10th highest (US.) and 27th highest (UK)30 a result of target gratifiability.24 That is, some Next, they all rank among the world’s leading victims have characteristics that increase risk nations in ICT use, with the Internet user pe- because they appeal to the wants or desires of netration rates ranging between 84.0 per cent an offender, either tangibly or symbolically.25 in Germany to 91.5 per cent in Finland.31 Interestingly, previous studies of exposure Yet, these nations, while similar in some did not find consistent demographic charac- critical respects, are different in many aspects. teristics related to exposure. For example, For example, they have three distinct types of gender was unrelated to exposure in both a welfare regimes.32 The United Kingdom and study of Finnish Facebook users26 and a study United States are Liberal welfare states; Ger- of young American Internet users.27 Age, ho- many is a Corporatist welfare state; Finland wever, was inversely related to exposure in the is a Social-Democratic welfare state. These American study, but unrelated to exposure in nations also vary in the extent to which they the Finnish study.28 legally protect hate speech. While all of these nations constitutionally guarantee free speech, Germany restricts speech more than the other Exposure in a nations, and the US. restricts it the least.33 cross-national context Finally, these nations have varying levels Although a few studies investigating exposure of tolerance toward diversity, at least as mea- exist, none of these compare exposure rates sured by the Inglehart-Welzel self-expression across nations.

Load more

  9

Copy Link