Anti-migrant hate speech

HUMAN RIGHTS PROGRAMME REPORT Contents

The Quaker Council for European Affairs FOREWORD 2 (QCEA) brings a vision based on the INTRODUCTION 3 Quaker commitment to peace, justice and WHAT IS HATE SPEECH? 4 equality to Europe and its institutions. WHY TACKLE HATE SPEECH? 5 The harm inflicted by hate speech 5 International human rights law 7

HOW SIGNIFICANT IS HATE SPEECH IN EUROPE? 8

WHAT IS BEING DONE? 10 The Council of Europe 10 The European Union 13 The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe 14 Internet companies 14

INITIATIVES COUNTERING HATE SPEECH 16 Campaigning 16 Monitoring and reporting 17 Education and training 18

RECOMMENDATIONS 19

CONCLUSION 20 Authors Sylvain Mossou, Andrew Lane Research Laura Straus, Martin Leng, Olga Oliynyk, Charles Castillo ANNEX: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 22 Editorial support Kate McNally, Martin Leng REFERENCES 24 Design Martin Leng

First published June 2018

Square Ambiorix 50 1000 Brussels Belgium

www.qcea.org

AISBL - MONITEUR BELGE NO. 11 732/80 NO. D’ENTREPRISE 0420.346.728 TRANSPARENCY REGISTER 3960234639-24 Foreword Introduction

Invading, flooding, swamping… this is how This report is a call to action against the tide of the media in many parts of Europe has been anti-migrant hate speech in Europe today. portraying humans – people just like us seeking safety in Europe. It is a hurtful generalisation, Differences of opinion are the keystone of a an exaggeration of the greatest proportions and healthy democracy, but dehumanising language incredibly inflammatory language. When the corrodes public discourse and inflames the hate press demonises our neighbours, it gives a green which can lead to violence. light to hate speech and enables it to catch hold of our daily discourse. I can’t stress enough how As the far right advances in parts of Europe, important it is to address anti-migrant and all anti-migrant rhetoric is becoming normalised, other forms of hate speech. Hopefully, one day particularly on the internet where anonymity eradicate it. trumps accountability.

As an MEP for the North East of England, I have Successfully tackling hate speech will require the heard of horrific verbal abuse towards my own common effort of governments, political parties, constituents, fuelled by a toxic political narrative, the media and internet companies. but have also been at the receiving end of it. Europe must have zero tolerance to hate speech. However, this objective will ony be achieved if We know from our collective past that it has we can work together to build truly inclusive been a precursor to violence – we must learn and resilient societies, overcoming the politics from our history and avoid it happening again at of division in the process. Any responsible all costs. government or media organisation will relish this challenge.

Jude Kirton-Darling MEP

2 3 Why tackle hate speech?

The harm inflicted by hate speech Hate speech signals to the intended target that they , 1933-45 could expect hostility, discrimination or exclusion. What is As reported in the European Union Agency for One of the most prominent examples of hate Fundamental Rights (FRA) Second Minorities and speech being a precursor to violence was the Discrimination Survey (December 2017), immigrants, Nazi Party and the spreading of antisemitic hate speech? descendants of immigrants and minority ethnic propaganda. The leaders of the Nazi Party spread groups who have experienced discrimination their ideologies of hatred in order to gain power. show significantly lower levels of trust and feel The Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and less attached to the country in which they live. Propaganda ensured that the Nazi message Therefore, hate speech potentially impedes was communicated through art, music, books, integration and social inclusion policies, thus radio, and educational material. For example, Despite the term being widely used in legal, undermining social cohesion. propaganda books were published with the policy-making and academic circles, there is titles The Poisonous Mushroom and Trust No Fox. no single definition of hate speech. There are Moreover, a climate in which hate speech is Books like these portrayed Jews as an ‘alien race’ varying standards for defining and limiting hate tolerated creates an environment conducive to that poisoned the German culture, and needed to speech in international and regional human violence. While the extent of the relationship be exterminated. It was impossible to escape the rights instruments. Those variations are therefore between hate speech and physical violence is not propaganda and it quickly influenced the actions reflected in national legislation. This explains commonly understood, it is worth restating that of those living in Germany at the time. much of the confusion around the term. Beyond Hate speech: a definition there are examples, notably in European history, the question of finding a basic definition, what that point to a relationship between them. Rwanda, 1994 exactly constitutes hate speech and when it can be Europe’s pre-eminent human rights body is prohibited are subject to debate. the Council of Europe, encompassing almost was of such horrific proportions Another example of the relationship between all European countries. It defines hate speech that it should be our first point of reference in any hate speech and violence is the Rwandan as “covering all forms of expression which consideration of hate speech and violence. It alone . In 1994, Hutu nationalists in Rwanda Balancing rights: freedom of expression, spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, justifies the existence of all international human spread violence and hate speech throughout the equality and non-discrimination xenophobia, antisemitism or other forms of hatred rights institutions and mechanisms. However, it country, which then led to a genocide against based on intolerance, including: intolerance has not been enough of a wake-up call to end mass Tutsis and others who opposed the violence. The Working in human rights very often involves expressed by aggressive nationalism and human rights violations, as seen in the in genocide took the lives of more than 800,000 balancing different rights (except freedom from ethnocentrism, discrimination and hostility against Rwanda and Bosnia in the 1990s. people. Through the use of government and torture and right to life which are absolute rights). minorities, migrants and people of immigrant non-government sponsored radio broadcasts, The way human rights law understands hate origin”. (Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers, hate speech spread throughout the country to speech also involves balancing rights: On the Recommendation No. (97) 20). hundreds of thousands of people and promoted one hand, there is freedom of expression, which violence towards people with Tutsi identity. One includes information and ideas that are favourably Using the above definition, this report will focus of the major radio stations, Radio Television Libre accepted as well as those that may offend, shock on hate speech that expresses hostility toward or des Milles Collines (Radio RTLM) called for “a 2 or disturb. On the other hand, there is the right about migrants and refugees. This type of hate final war” to “exterminate the cockroaches”. to equality and to freedom from discrimination, speech is often framed within broader nationalist for which international law requires states to or racist expression. continued g prohibit, by law, “any advocacy of national, racial Quaker approaches to hate speech or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.1 It is crucial to address hate speech because it infringes on people’s dignity, Quakers have a long record of working to promote Hate speech (alongside fake news, stereotypes and For some, anti-hate speech legislation is not only has a negative impact on societies and human rights and protect minorities. For example, lies in general) is an offence to this Quaker concept difficult to interpret, and therefore to enforce, it in 1933 Quakers established the Kindertransport, of truth, as well to most other people’s concept is a potential precursor to violence. which alongside other groups, was responsible for of honesty and truth. However, freedom of is also not effective and poses a risk to freedom Europe is experiencing a worrying of expression by abusing restrictions or even helping Jewish children escape Nazi persecution in expression is also important to Quakers. In 1917 the silencing critics. For others, limiting speech is upward spiral of hatred, likely stirred by Germany, Czechoslovakia, Austria and Poland, and wartime government in Britain imposed censorship necessary to avoid discrimination and violence. some political trends and facilitated by supporting them in their new country. on publications. Quakers did not comply, saying, The real challenge is then to identify the tipping the rapid development and strength of “Christianity requires the toleration of opinions point at which legitimate expression transforms media, especially social media networks. Since the movement’s birth in the 17th Century, not our own, lest we should unwittingly hinder the into hate speech. In the context of increased migration Quakers have valued truth as one of their main workings of the Spirit of God.” (Recorded in Britain into Europe, migrants – and people principles. Early Quakers used the word truth as Yearly Meeting’s Quaker Faith and Practice, 23.90). perceived to be migrants – have been a way of describing their belief in the way that targeted. God can work deeply within people, and they Despite this tendency to free expression, Quakers were sometimes known as Friends of Truth and recognise the particular danger of hate speech. Publishers of Truth. Quakers believed in speaking truth at all times, even avoiding flattery and 4 indirect language. 5 g Hate crime today A study by David Yanagizawa-Drott of Harvard University uses datasets on genocidal violence in A CORRELATION BETWEEN International human rights law one thousand Rwandan villages to understand the FAR-RIGHT SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS AND requires States to address hate speech impact that radio broadcasts had on participation HATE CRIME FOUND IN GERMANY in violence. In his study, he found that the The most widely cited international human rights instruments Any advocacy of national, racial communities which had full radio coverage and In December 2017 Karsten Müller and related to hate speech are the International Covenant on Civil or religious hatred that constitutes access to the broadcasts containing hate speech Carlo Schwarz of the University of Warwick and Political Rights and the International Convention on the incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law. experienced more violence than those which did published the results of a research project Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (see right examining the relationship between social not. The study estimates that approximately 9% of column). Article 20.2 of the International genocidal deaths (45,000 Tutsis) could be attributed media and hate crime. Their paper, ‘Fanning Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to hate speech that was broadcasted on radio the Flames of Hate: Social Media and Hate Pursuant to those two articles, states have an obligation to stations.3 Crime’ provides extensive evidence that the prohibit cases of “advocacy of national, racial, or religious level of anti-migrant sentiment on Facebook hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility States Parties condemn all propaganda Bosnia, 1990s has a relationship with the number of violent or violence” by law. This obligation to address hate speech and all organisations which are based crimes against migrants and refugees. extends to the mass media and the internet. on ideas or theories of superiority During the Bosnian war of 1992-1995, nationalist of one race or group of persons of The research examined 3334 recorded hate one colour or ethnic origin, or which controlled media such as Radio Television of Serbia In 2011, the United Nations tried to create spaces for attempt to justify or promote racial portrayed non-Serbians as a subhuman ‘other’. crimes across the 4466 municipalities in promoting a shared and better understanding of what hate hatred and discrimination in any form, Vojislav Šešelj, a Serb political leader in the 1990s, Germany from January 2015 to February 2017. speech is, where to distinguish it from freedom of expression, and undertake to adopt immediate was known for his hateful speeches against non- The research focused on the Facebook page and positive measures designed to and how it should be addressed according to national, eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. In of the German political party Alternative für regional and local sensitivities. The Rabat Plan of Action on Deutschland (AfD). The relationship was so such discrimination and, to this end, with April 2018, the Mechanism for International Criminal the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial or religious due regard to the principles embodied Tribunals, which replaced the International Criminal close that levels of hate crime were lower hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility in the Universal Declaration of Human Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), judged when a municipality suffered a power cut. or violence6 is a result of such a process. Rights and the rights expressly set forth in Šešelj guilty of three counts of crimes against article 5 of this Convention, inter alia: humanity, involving acts of hate speech. The Regardless of debates and complexities around the term ‘hate (a) Shall declare an offence punishable by judgement leads to the conclusion that there is little speech’, the phenomenon has negative impacts on people’s law all dissemination of ideas based on doubt that Šešelj’s speeches encouraged and led rights and on societies. As expressed in international human racial superiority or hatred, incitement to other Serbs to commit crimes against non-Serbs.4 rights law, states have an obligation to prohibit it by law racial discrimination, as well as all acts whether it manifests itself offline or online. of violence or incitement to such acts A study conducted by Richard Ashby Wilson and against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also Christine Lillie from the Institute for Advanced the provision of any assistance to racist Study analysed 242 of Šešelj’s speeches. The activities, including the financing thereof; research established positive correlations BETWEEN FREE SPEECH AND HATE SPEECH: between the themes of speeches, notably revenge THE RABAT PLAN OF ACTION (b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit propaganda, and the likelihood of the commitment organisations, and also organised and 5 Adopted in Rabat, Morocco, in October 2012, the Rabat all other propaganda activities, which of atrocities. promote and incite racial discrimination, Plan of Action contains a six-part threshold test for forms and shall recognise participation in such of speech that are prohibited under criminal law. The test organisations or activities as an offence While causal links between hate takes into consideration: the context of incitement to punishable by law; hatred, the speaker, intent, content, extent of the speech, speech and violence are difficult to and likelihood of causing harm. (c) Shall not permit public authorities or establish, there are clear indications public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination. of a correlation between them, It further recommends the adoption of comprehensive which should raise concerns over a national anti-discrimination legislation with preventive Article 4 of the International and punitive action to effectively combat incitement to Convention on the Elimination banalisation of hate speech. of All Forms of Racial Discrimination hatred, as well as the empowerment of minorities and vulnerable groups. h

From words to deeds: some of the 20th century’s most brutal atrocities were made possible by the normalisation of divisive hate speech which preceded them. From top: a Nazi boycott of Jewish shops, the remains of victims of the , and the reburial of Bosniak men and boys who were killed in the massacre at Srebrenica. PHOTOS: BUNDESARCHIV / CONFIGMANAGER / 6 ROSA MENKMAN 7 How significant is hate speech in Europe?

Growing patterns of hatred The role of the media QCEA research Victor Young According to the European Union Agency for The media plays a central role in informing the Encouraging readers to post online comments Fundamental Rights’ director, Michael O’Flaherty, public about what happens in the world. An allows news media to connect with audiences. “FRA studies, research and surveys offer increasing number of studies provide evidence Send them back where However, such comments are often filled with compelling evidence of unacceptable and growing that media affects political attitudes.12 Therefore, vitriol. QCEA undertook a piece of research patterns of extreme hatred and vilification targeted messages communicated by the media in all its they come from. Bunch assessing the prevalence of hate in the online against groups including migrants – especially forms can have a discernible impact on judgement comment sections of several leading European Muslim migrants”.7 formation, particularly in those areas in which of cockroaches trying newspapers. audiences do not possess direct knowledge or In 2016, the project An overview of hate crime and experience. to invade. The comments shown on these pages represent hate speech in 9 EU countries examined people’s only a fraction of the reality (see Annex, page Comment from the website of experiences of crime and other offences motivated On migration-related issues, studies have found ] 45 ; 9 the British newspaper The Sun 22). In some countries, there have been efforts by hate and prejudice. The results show that the that there has been a negative effect of media undertaken to moderate comment sections. general perception registered among the surveys’ coverage on attitudes towards migrants and Be that as it may, these examples illustrate respondents, with few exceptions, is that the refugees. By portraying them as threats to the the unfortunate assessment that hateful and situation with regard to discrimination and hate economy, culture, or security, news articles dehumanising language against migrants is all too incidents is getting worse across Europe.8 have been creating a situation conducive to the The challenges posed common and not systematically removed online. formation of negative attitudes.13 It has also been by online hate speech observed that press coverage promoting hate Anti-migrant political discourse speech and hostility was systematic and persistent Conclusions 14 • The internet gives people the possibility in part of the press. to remain anonymous and use The past few years of economic and social policies • Migrants and refugees have increasingly been pseudonyms. This could potentially 15 driven by an austerity agenda have left many facilitate destructive behaviour as people the targets of hate speech. This trend is European citizens with a feeling of fear and anxiety feroo338 feel much more comfortable saying things likely to be correlated with media coverage of concerning their own future, as well as the future knowing that they will not have to deal increased migration, recent violent extremism of their communities and countries. and anxieties stemming from economic and with the consequences of what they say. 16 Put them against the This anonymity creates challenges for social difficulties in some European countries. Nationalistic and xenophobic movements victims of hate speech. across Europe have captured citizen’s fears and wall and shoot them – • Politicians, notably from nationalist and uncertainty. By generating and fuelling xenophobic • Like any content, hate speech can xenophobic movements, have contributed to discourse—where foreigners are portrayed as a no exceptions. stay online for a long time in different an atmosphere where hostility, hate speech, threat to national identity, culture and economic formats on different platforms and can and even violence towards migrants and prosperity—an atmosphere has been created in Comment from the website of be shared repeatedly. The longer it stays refugees are able to thrive. which hate speech, and often violence, are able to ] 66 ; 4 the Slovak newspaper Novy Cas online, the more exposure it gets and the thrive. higher the likelihood of inflicting damage. • Online hate speech has grown with the advent of social media and it poses a new set of Moreover, in an effort to avoid further erosion of Online hate • The transnational reach and challenges, notably assessing the extent of this their electoral base, traditional political parties decentralised architecture of the phenomenon. often take up certain elements of this rhetoric and With the advent of digital information and internet raises issues which potentially associated ideas, thus enabling these elements to communication technologies, the possibilities of 9 render existing legislation inappropriate enter the political mainstream. This has further human interactions have dramatically increased. and/or ineffective. Hatemongers Myuller contributed to a “normalisation” of hate speech. The internet has opened up new ways to say therefore enjoy a significant level of more things to more people. Moreover, social mobility as content could be spread across In such context, migrants and refugees have media companies hold considerable power over countries with different laws regarding Didn’t you try shooting become more and more the targets of racist the flow of information and ideas online. As a combating hate speech. Moreover, within violence and hate speech across European consequence, hate speech can be disseminated the same country, private actors, such as 10 11 them? Or running a countries. more easily on comment sections of news portals Internet Service Providers, might have or using social media platforms such as Facebook, different policies (terms of use, community few gas chambers with Twitter or YouTube. Even if hate speech online is guidelines) regarding hate speech. As not intrinsically different from similar expressions many actors might be involved in the Zyklon B, together with found offline, the proliferation of this phenomenon dissemination of hate speech (creation, with an online dimension poses a new set of publication, hosting etc.) the question several ovens? challenges in Europe and beyond, particularly is raised at to who is responsible, and to in an internet world which is increasingly user- what extent. Comment from the website of the Russian generated, interconnected, and consisting of ] 29 ; 11 newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda 8 multiple forms of content. 9 ECHR RULINGS ON FREEDOM OF Moreover, regarding the diffusion of hate speech online through What is being done? EXPRESSION AND HATE SPEECH platforms or portals, the Court considered that: Freedom of expression is applicable not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that “Internet news portals which, for commercial and professional are favourably received or regarded as purposes, provide a platform for user-generated comments At the European level, laws and policies have inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, assume the ‘duties and responsibilities’ associated with freedom been adopted in order to counter hate speech. but also to those that offend, shock or of expression in accordance with Article 10 § 2 of the Convention disturb the State or any sector of the where users disseminate hate speech or comments amounting to In this section, we will give an overview of the population. 18 main existing legal frameworks and policies direct incitement to violence.” Handyside v. the United Kingdom aimed at addressing hate speech offline and judgment of 7 December 1976, § 49 Aside from the European Convention on Human Rights, other online. This section also looks at the policies of relevant legal frameworks19 include: internet companies such as Twitter, Facebook However, tolerance and respect for the equal dignity of all human and Microsoft, given their significant role in beings constitute the foundations of • The Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime online communications. a democratic, pluralistic society. That criminalising acts of a racist and xenophobic nature,20 and being so, as a matter of principle it may be considered necessary in certain 21 democratic societies to sanction or even • The European Convention on Transfrontier Television. The Council of Europe prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred The former requires states to adopt (and enforce) legislation The Council of Europe’s different bodies have regularly worked based on intolerance. and/or other effective measures to make various types of racist to improve legal standards for the member states to support conduct committed via computer systems criminal offences them in dealing with hate speech. Essentially, they have used Erbakan v. Turkey judgment of 6 July 2006, § 56 under domestic law. The latter calls for broadcasts to respect the following instruments: human dignity and the fundamental rights of others, and to avoid incitement to racial hatred. • Legal instruments (the European Convention on Human Rights, the judgements of the Court, the Additional Protocol “Racist and xenophobic material” to the Convention on Cybercrime criminalising acts of a means any written material, any image or any other representation of ideas or Policy instruments racist and xenophobic nature, and the European Convention theories, which advocates, promotes on Transfrontier Television. or incites hatred, discrimination or Beyond legal frameworks, the Council of Europe’s political violence, against any individual or group bodies have all adopted resolutions and recommendations • Policy instruments (Recommendations providing guidelines of individuals, based on race, colour, providing guidelines for the member states with regards to hate for the member states). 1. Everyone has the right to freedom descent or national or ethnic origin, as of expression. This right shall include well as religion if used as a pretext for speech. freedom to hold opinions and to receive any of these factors. • Monitoring instrument (the European Commission against and impart information and ideas without Recommendation No. R (97) 20 on hate speech,22 and Racism and Intolerance). interference by public authority and Additional Protocol to the Convention Recommendation No. R (97) 21 on the media and the regardless of frontiers. This Article shall on Cybercrime, Article 2.1 23 not prevent States from requiring the promotion of a culture of tolerance licensing of broadcasting, television or In 1997, the Committee of Ministers adopted a Legal instruments cinema enterprises. 1 All items of programme services, as recommendation on hate speech and condemns all forms While there are no specific articles prohibiting hate speech 2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it concerns their presentation and content, of expression inciting racism, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance. It also lays down guidelines for the Member in the European Convention on Human Rights, the European carries with it duties and responsibilities, shall respect the dignity of the human may be subject to such formalities, being and the fundamental rights of States’ governments on how to address these forms of Court of Human Rights, which enforces the Convention, has conditions, restrictions or penalties as others. In particular, they shall not: used two approaches when dealing with cases concerning expression. On the same day, the Council of Europe also are prescribed by law and are necessary adopted another recommendation on the role of the media incitement to hatred and freedom of expression: in a democratic society, in the interests a. be indecent and in particular contain of national security, territorial integrity pornography; and the promotion of a culture of peace. It noted that the media can make a positive contribution to the fight • Article 10, which sets out the right to freedom of expression or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of b. give undue prominence to violence or against intolerance, especially where they foster a culture and the possible restrictions to it, the Court assesses health or morals, for the protection of be likely to incite to racial hatred. whether the expressions used spread, incite, promote or of understanding between different ethnic, cultural and the reputation or rights of others, for religious groups in society. justify hatred based on intolerance. preventing the disclosure of information The European Convention received in confidence, or for maintaining on Transfrontier Television, the authority and impartiality of the Article 7 – Responsibilities The Committee of Ministers‘ Declaration on freedom of • Article 17, by which the Court assesses whether the of the broadcaster 24 comments in question amount to hate speech and negate judiciary. political debate in the media from 2004 the fundamental values of the Convention. ECHR Article 10, Freedom of expression The Declaration emphasises that freedom of political debate does not include freedom to express racist opinions or Put simply, all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote opinions which incite hatred, xenophobia, antisemitism and or justify hatred based on intolerance can be sanctioned by the all forms of intolerance. Court, as indicated by some of its judgements.17 Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, The Parliamentary Assembly’s resolution on a strategy to group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed prevent racism and intolerance in Europe at the destruction of any of the rights In 2014, the Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution and freedoms set forth herein or at their on a strategy to prevent racism and intolerance in Europe limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention. in which it calls on the Council of Europe member states to better respect and implement the relevant legal frameworks ECHR Article 17, Prohibition of related to hate speech and hate crime.25 continued g 10 abuse of rights 11 g The European Union Monitoring instrument 1. Everyone has the right to freedom At the level of the European Union, there is the Charter of of expression. This right shall include Fundamental Rights.26 Article 11 establishes Freedom of The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance freedom to hold opinions and to receive Expression and allows restrictions to it. While there are also (ECRI) is a Council of Europe human rights body. It is composed and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and no specific provisions on hate speech, the meaning and scope of independent experts who issue monitoring reports. These regardless of frontiers. of this right is similar to those guaranteed by the ECHR. This include guidelines that policy-makers are invited to use when means that freedom of expression can be restricted if it is used drawing up national strategies and policies in a variety of fields. 2. The freedom and pluralism of the to spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance. media shall be respected.

On hate speech, ECRI published a recommendation in 2015 in Article 11, Charter of Fundamental Rights Beyond the Charter, there are other sources of EU law which which it emphasises that: provide for a set of rules aimed at tackling different forms and manifestations of racism and intolerance (such as the Race “Hate speech poses grave dangers for the cohesion of a Equality Directive27 prohibiting discrimination on grounds democratic society, the protection of human rights and the rule Nothing in this Charter shall be interpreted as restricting or adversely of racial or ethnic origin in several walks of life; and the of law. Action against the use of hate speech should serve to affecting human rights and fundamental Employment Equality Directive28 prohibiting discrimination on protect individuals and groups of persons rather than particular freedoms as recognised, in their several grounds in the field of employment). beliefs, ideologies or religions. Restrictions on hate speech respective fields of application, by should not be misused to silence minorities and to suppress Union law and international law and by On hate speech, an important regulation is the Framework criticism of official policies, political opposition or religious international agreements to which the Union, the Community or all the Member Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of beliefs.” (ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 15.) States are party, including the European racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.29 In the Convention for the Protection of Human Framework Decision, hate speech is defined as the public In the recommendation, ECRI also found that immigrants, Jews, The Internet has become an important Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and incitement to violence and hatred based on race, colour, Muslims and Roma have been particularly affected by the use of vehicle for promoting racism and by the Member States’ constitutions. religion, descent or national or ethnic origin as well as hate hate speech – even if it has not been restricted to them. intolerance. Hate speech through social crimes that have a racist or xenophobic motivation. Under the media is rapidly increasing and has the Article 53, Charter of Fundamental Rights potential to reach a much larger audience Decision, hate speech is a criminal offence and EU member The recommendation further adds that any effective action than extremist print media were able to states must penalise it. The framework is applicable both to the would also apply to the online environment as governments are reach previously. online as well as to the offline world. to use “regulatory powers with respect to the media (including internet providers, online intermediaries and social media), 2014 ECRI Annual Report Aside from this legal framework, other relevant EU laws include: to promote action to combat the use of hate speech and to challenge its acceptability.” • The Audiovisual Media Services Directive,30 which obliges Member States to ensure the audiovisual media services provided under their jurisdiction do not contain incitement to hatred based on race, sex, religion or nationality.

• The e-Commerce Directive,31 which foresees that, when illegal content is identified, internet service providers should take effective action to remove it.

At a policy level, the European Union has taken the following actions with regards to hate speech over the past few years:

In 2016, a new High Level Group on combating racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance was set up by the What is the Council of Europe? European Commission. The High Level Group is intended as a platform to support EU and national efforts in ensuring effective implementation of relevant rules and in setting up effective In the aftermath of the Second World War, and Shortly after the CoE’s establishment – at which policies to prevent and combat hate crime and hate speech. in particular the vast and unprecedented crimes time it consisted of twelve member states – its This is done through thematic discussions on gaps, challenges against humanity which took place during the Parliamentary Assembly gathered to draft what and responses, promoting best practice exchange, developing conflict, European leaders resolved to create would become known as the European Convention guidance and strengthening cooperation and synergies between common institutions which would ensure that a on Human Rights (ECHR). Every European country key stakeholders. repeat of the horrors of 1939-45 would not just be except Belarus is now a member of the Council undesirable but impossible in practical terms. of Europe, and therefore bound by the ECHR as a One of the key priorities is countering hate speech online, condition of their membership. including through the implementation of a Code of Conduct on The Council of Europe (CoE) was founded in 1949 countering illegal hate speech online, agreed by Facebook, as the pan-European organisation for democracy, The Convention contains 18 articles which outline Twitter, Microsoft and YouTube with the European Commission human rights and the rule of law. From its the rights of every European citizen, from the in May 2016 (see page 15). headquarters in Strasbourg, its role is to oversee prohibition of torture to the freedom of assembly. and report on the status of fundamental freedoms Its implementation is overseen by the European continued g across Europe. In addition to an executive branch, Court of Human Rights, which is the supreme the CoE includes a Parliamentary Assembly judicial arbiter as regards human rights law in (shown above) which brings together elected Europe. representatives12 from national parliaments. 13 g The European Commission’s In September 2017, the EU Commission released Internet companies: how do Microsoft’s Services Agreement Code of Conduct on countering a communication on Tackling Illegal Content illegal hate speech online Online: Towards an enhanced responsibility of they address hate speech? In its Services Agreement, Microsoft has a Code of online platforms, in which it reiterates that online Conduct containing a rule which requires users not The European Commission and four major IT platforms which mediate access to content for Internet intermediaries, such as social networking to engage in activity that is harmful to themselves, companies (Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and most internet users carry a significant societal platforms or search engines, have terms of service the Services, or others (e.g. transmitting viruses, YouTube) presented a Code of conduct to address responsibility in terms of protecting users and in which they stipulate how they may intervene in stalking, posting terrorist content, communicating online hate speech in May 2016. society at large and preventing criminals and other allowing, restricting, or channelling the creation hate speech, or advocating violence against persons involved in infringing activities online from of, and access to, specific content. Given the others).36 In addition to this, Microsoft has As per the regulations of the Code of Conduct, a exploiting their services.32 global reach of many internet companies, an developed a new dedicated web form for reporting request to remove specific content must be dealt increased awareness of their policy on hate speech hate speech on its hosted consumer services.37 with as quickly as possible, ideally less than twenty- More recently, on March 1 2018, the EU is relevant for understanding what is being, and four hours. The social media companies are said to Commission published a recommendation on could be, done in Europe. Here are a few examples have removed 70% of hate speech of which they measures to effectively tackle illegal content of hate speech-related policies from some of the To conclude this section, we observe that there were notified. online.33 The recommendation outlines types of most used internet companies. are legal frameworks and policies at European processes online platforms should put in place, level which provide for rules restricting the 34 The Code of Conduct is evaluated through a in order to speed up the detection and removal Twitter’s Hateful Conduct Policy use of freedom of expression for spreading, monitoring exercise set up with the help of civil of illegal content, and thus curb the spread of inciting, promoting or justifying hatred based on society organisations in various EU countries. such material, while also offering a set of robust In its policy, Twitter urges users not to promote intolerance, and they are applicable both online Civil society organisations monitoring the Code of safeguards. violence against or directly attack or threaten and offline. Internet companies also have rules by Conduct use a mutually-agreed-upon methodology other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, which one must agree to abide in order to use their to test how the social media companies applied the national origin, sexual orientation, gender, services. gender identity, religious affiliation, age, Code of Conduct in practice, by regularly sending Organisation for Security and requests to remove contents from the social media disability, or serious disease. Twitter also does However, in spite of laws, policies and rules, hate Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) companies’ websites. The civil society organisations not allow accounts whose primary purpose is speech still very much exists. The debates over taking part in the monitoring exercise will then inciting harm towards others on the basis of the delicate balance with freedom of expression, As a regional organisation for cooperation and record how the requests are handled – how long it these categories. on what exactly constitutes hate speech and on security in Europe, the OSCE has also played a takes to assess and respond to the requests as well the challenges posed by online hate speech, make role in preventing hate speech. This has mainly as look at the feedback they receive from the social The consequences for violating its rules vary addressing the issue difficult. been done through commitments, declarations, depending on the severity of the violation, media platforms. resolutions on the need to combat hate speech the context and the person’s previous record While legal and policy responses to hate speech which is addressed through: While the Code of Conduct is noble in and of of violations. For example, Twitter may ask are important, they are not enough. Social and itself, it is not without its criticisms. The European someone to remove the offending Tweet before non-regulatory responses to counter hate speech • Awareness-raising projects, education and Commission has anticipated this in its press release they can Tweet again. In other cases, they may merit similar attention. regular meetings with media outlets, editors suspend an account. from 19 January 2018: “The Code of Conduct will and journalists; not lead to censorship of hate speech. The Code of Facebook’s Community Standards35 Conduct only aims to get rid of hate speech that is • The Office of the OSCE Representative on already illegal, both online and offline.” Freedom of the Media, whose role includes In its community standards, Facebook says combating hate speech while preserving that it does not allow hate speech because it Y Another issue that the European Commission has freedom of expression, and creates an environment of intimidation and U taken into account is the role that national courts exclusion and in some cases may promote play in policing hate speech. Only national courts • The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions real-world violence. I can decide what is illegal, and social media platforms and Human Rights (ODIHR), issues an must follow national laws, especially the ones annual report on the status of hate crimes in Facebook defines hate speech as a direct H relating to the Framework Decision on combatting member states. Sometimes the report includes attack on people based on ‘protected racism and xenophobia, as well as the e-commerce information on hate speech in member states characteristics’ (a term used in the 2010 UK A Directive of 2000. When the social media companies where hate speech is penalised in national Equality Act) – race, ethnicity, national origin, receive a valid alert about content that may have legislation. religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, T hate speech, the social media companies must assess gender, gender identity and serious disability E it according to national (and EU) law, in addition to or disease. B their own rules and community guidelines. Similar to Twitter, the consequences for It is important to note that the Code of Conduct violating the rules vary depending on the N is a voluntary agreement that Facebook, Twitter, severity of the violation, the context and YouTube, and Microsoft have made with the the person’s previous record of violations. M European Commission. The Code of Conduct is not Facebook may therefore remove posts and a legal document, therefore governments do not comments containing hate speech. have a right to take down content as they wish. The Code of Conduct cannot be used to force the social media companies to take down content that does not count as illegal hate speech, or any type of speech protected by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. 14 15 Monitoring and reporting Initiatives countering The eMORE Project Stand up to Hate: Reporting UK Internet Hate Crime and Abuse hate speech The eMORE project aims to contribute to developing, testing and transferring a knowledge The organisation’s goal is to inform people of hate model on online hate speech and offline hate speech perpetrators across social networking crime. It does so using a joint monitoring- internet sites. It also aims to be a focal point reporting system in order to better understand for people to access information and resources the phenomenon and its trends over the Internet to report such perpetrators to appropriate More awareness-raising and offline. This allows comparative analysis at website staff, government departments and law initiatives, better national/EU level.41 enforcement agencies around the world. monitoring and more effective reporting In March 2018, the eMORE mobile application #jagärhär (“I’m here”) mechanisms, and a was released.42 It allows users to flag hate speech strong emphasis on wherever they might come across it and by The Swedish grassroots initiative #jagärhär was education and training, reporting it, they also get to contribute to a pan- created in May 2016 in order to mobilise social will contribute to limit European research project on online hate speech. media users to respond to hate speech. Rather the spread of hate than moderate in the traditional sense, #jagärhär speech. In this section, The MANDOLA project coordinates its supporters so that they can we have grouped ‘drown out’ hate speech en masse with positive The project aims to empower ordinary citizens to comments – from simple messages of love to different initiatives and monitor and report hate speech, and to develop a detailed counter-arguments in cases where so- projects addressing wider understanding of the challenges posed by called fake news is cited in support of violent or hate speech in different online hate speech. The objectives of the project discriminatory statements. categories according to are: their objectives. The objectives of the campaign are to: • To monitor the spread and penetration of The movement, which is itself run from a private Facebook group, describes itself as apolitical and • Improve media coverage related to migration, online hate speech across the EU using so- called ‘big data’ approaches, with the aim has strict standards about which comments can refugees, religion, and marginalised groups in be targeted. From humble beginnings, #jagärhär general; of being able to quickly identify illegal hate speech. now has almost 75,000 volunteers as of March • Improve capacity of journalists, media, civil 2018; they won the 2017 Anna Lindh Prize for their Campaigning society organisations, and community media to • To provide policymakers with actionable contribution to a “human and just” public life.44 The No Hate Speech Movement38 counter hate speech, intolerance, racism, and information that can be used to promote discrimination; policies that mitigate the spread of online hate continued g speech. This Council of Europe youth campaign for human • Improve implementation of legal frameworks rights online is composed of national initiatives in regulating hate speech and freedom of speech; • To provide ordinary citizens with useful tools over 40 countries. Together with online activists that can help them deal with online hate and partners at the European level, it works to • Raise awareness about various types of speech as bystanders or even as victims. reduce the levels of acceptance of hate speech discrimination through better reporting on the above issues; • To transfer best practices among member and to develop online youth participation and states. citizenship, including in internet governance • Provide support to journalists exposing hate processes. The campaign mainly operates on the speech who have become targets and victims • To set up a reporting infrastructure that will online platform nohatespeechmovement.org. of hatred and harassment for speaking out. connect concerned citizens with police forces and which will enable the reporting of illegal The No Hate speech movement also developed hate speech. “Hate Speech Watch”, an online tool for reporting, The European Radio Broadcast Campaign by the 43 monitoring and education on hate speech. It RESPECT WORDS Project40 Get the Trolls Out also provides information on national reporting mechanisms. The RESPECT WORDS project has brought Led by the Media Diversity Institute (MDI) with the together more than 150 European media and about support of six partners spread throughout Europe, #MediaAgainstHate39 1300 journalists from eight countries (Germany, the Get the Trolls Out project aims to reduce Austria, Slovenia, Spain, Greece, Hungary, Ireland discrimination and intolerance based on religious #MediaAgainstHate is a Europe-wide campaign and Italy). grounds in Europe. led by the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and a coalition of civil society organisations. One axis of the project is the development of a The project monitors traditional and new media to The campaign aims to “counter hate speech and radio broadcasting campaign which is underway uncover antisemitic acts and speech by journalists discrimination in the media (online and offline) by in more than 150 broadcasting radio stations and and public figures. When content is detected, it is promoting ethical standards while maintaining seven countries. The objective is to counter hate exposed and complaint mechanisms are activated. respect for freedom of expression”. As a campaign speech in the media and raise awareness among Content online is also created to contribute to created by journalists, it recognises the crucial role European citizens on issues related to migration a wider awareness and understanding of hate they play in informing public opinion and policy processes, human rights and the situation of ethnic speech and its impact. regarding migration and refugees. and religious minorities in our society. 16 17 Education and training 48 Recommendations We CAN! Taking action against hate speech Positive Messengers through counter and alternative narratives The Coalition of Positive Messengers to Counter Online Hate Speech engages local communities In order to support its campaign, the Council of Governments Europe has developed a manual: “We CAN! Taking in creating and sharing powerful counter- The media action against hate speech through counter and narratives against xenophobia. It is implemented alternative narratives” so as to offer guidance to by a consortium of eight organisations from seven • Adopt and effectively implement relevant • Design and promote guidelines and ethical develop counter and alternative narratives to combat countries (Bulgaria, United Kingdom, Croatia, Czech legislation that includes preventive and standards in the media for journalists and hate speech and promote human rights, especially in Republic, Romania, Italy, Greece). punitive action to combat incitement to hatred, media managers. On all issues, notably online environments.45 while making sure that restricitions to freedom migration, the media need to report in a Look Beyond Borders experiment and video: of expression are legal, proportional and contextual, factual and sensitive manner, 49 Facing Facts “4 Minutes of Eye Contact” necessary. while ensuring that acts of discrimination are brought to the attention of the public. This Facing Facts is a programme which has offered Filmed in Berlin in April 2016, this social experiment • Adopt policies and better enhance includes: and video was made by Amnesty International training to identify, monitor and counter hate engagement in broad efforts to combat −− Raising awareness of the harm caused by Poland and the Polish ad agency DDB&Tribal. It is crime and hate speech. With its new project, the negative stereotypes of, and discrimination discrimination and negative stereotyping. organisation looks to reach a broader audience, based on a theory developed by psychologist Arthur against, individuals and communities on the specifically targeting law enforcement and Aron in 1997, who observed that four minutes of basis of their nationality, ethnicity, religion or −− Giving mebers of different groups or government bodies to achieve institutional change in uninterrupted eye contact increases intimacy. They belief. This includes: communities the opportunity to speak and applied it to to the refugee crisis, seating refugees to be heard in a way that promotes a better hate crime perception. −− Promoting intercultural understanding. from Syria and Somalia opposite people from understanding of them, while at the same Debunking Myths About Jews46 Belgium, Italy, Germany, Poland and the UK, with −− Training police and other criminal/ time reflecting their perspectives. positive results. community justice agency staff. Developed by the European Network Against Racism −− Creating and/or properly funding equality • Apply the five-point test of speech for (ENAR), the leaflet quotes the most common myths Counter-Narrative Toolkit bodies. journalism, developed by Ethical Journalism Network, which is based upon international about Jews in Europe, and provides historical facts −− Investing in better data collection as The Counter-Narrative Toolkit is a simple and standards. It highlights some questions to and insights from a variety of sources discrediting regards monitoring/logging hate crime. and deconstructing these persistent yet incorrect freely-available toolkit which was created to offer be asked in the gathering, preparation and beliefs about Jews. individuals and organisations the skills to produce −− Providing clear mechanisms that encourage dissemination of news and information that credible counter-narrative messages. victims and witnesses to report hate will help journalists and editors place what is 51 An ethical code on journalistic treatment of speech, including through third-party said and who is saying it in an ethical context. 50 migratory processes and minorities in Europe47 YouTube Creators for Change reporting systems. −− Providing support to, and investing more in, • In moderating an online community, content Also developed by The RESPECT WORDS project, YouTube Creators for Change is a new initiative civil society organisations’ initiatives, like publishers could use the following strategies: Reporting on Migration and Minorities: Approaches dedicated to amplifying the voices of role models those highlighted in the previous section of −− Provide clear and transparent terms and and Guidelines is an ethical code on the journalistic who are tackling difficult social issues with this report. conditions and community guidelines, treatment of the aspects related to migratory their channels. From combating hate speech, to together with user-friendly reporting processes as well as ethnic and religious minorities. countering xenophobia and extremism, to simply mechanisms. making the case for greater tolerance and empathy −− Pre-moderate or actively moderate toward others, these creators are helping generate The PRISM Project Political parties comments, in order to remove hate speech positive social change with their global fan bases. as and when it is identified. Implemented in five countries (Italy, France, Spain, • Adopt and enforce ethical guidelines Romania and UK), the project is based on an La Stampa – visual netiquette −− Limit user-led discussion to a dedicated in relation to the conduct of their ‘debate’ section which can be the focus of interdisciplinary strategy. It combines research, best representatives, particularly with respect to La Stampa, an Italian newspaper that allows moderation activity. practice and training activities addressed to law public speech. enforcement officers, lawyers, journalists, bloggers, comments only on Facebook created a visual −− Use a content management system that netiquette – a term commonly used in reference to social network administrators, young people, • Seek to engage migrants and refugees in allows the detection of hate speech-related popular forms of online communication, including teachers and youth workers. political life. words (“forbidden words”) and flags such The objectives of the project are: email, forums and chat. When they identify a comments for moderation. discriminatory comment, they do not delete it −− Showcase good practice by users. • To raise awareness on hate speech with national nor hide it but they post what they call in Italian a and European studies. “galateo” (etiquette) under the comment, an image −− Close problematic comments sections. • To identify, investigate and fight hate speech and reminding users of the rules of online participation. Internet companies hate crimes through mapping the incidence of @ hate speech in websites and social media. • Include international standards on freedom • To monitor online hate speech through a constant of expression and due process in terms and data collection on the phenomenon. conditions and community guidelines. • To develop effective tools, national legislation and redressing mechanisms for contrasting • Provide transparency and clarity on the online discrimination, hostility and violence. decision-making processes on content removals on platforms. 18 19 Conclusion

Throughout history, the ‘fear of the other’ has been exploited by those who can benefit from doing so. Old prejudices and current tensions are manipulated in order inflame suspicions and reinforce a sense of division between people. With time, such feelings can spill over into discriminatory language in conversation, in the media or on the internet. When these words become particularly violent or Quakers and human rights: a history dehumanising, we often refer to them as hate speech. One of the founding principles of the Religious Society of Friends Hate speech against ethnic, religious or social minorities is a (Quakers) was the recognition that every person is unique and their phenomenon as old as humanity itself, and today Europe finds life must be valued. This quickly led Quakers to take radical positions itself gripped by a fear of the other once again. An unprecedented based on their spiritual experience, such as opposition to war and the flow of refugees, the ongoing threat of violent extremism and death penalty. continued economic disarray have created the anxiety and political disillusionment in which prejudice flourishes. These ideas led to a wide range of practical projects undertaken by members of the Society, such as the first attempt at mental health Violent speech, left unchecked, can lead to violent acts. In the past, care, in the house of John Goodson in 1673, and later the first mental Europe learned this lesson the hard way, and created rules and health hospital, the Retreat, which was established in 1796 and institutions designed to protect against a repeat of past mistakes. continues its work today. Nowadays, however, the anonymity and immediacy of the internet have created new and incredibly efficient ways for hate speech to Another well known example is Elizabeth Fry who led campaigns for spread. This is particularly true in the case of hate speech against improved detention conditions in Britain in the 19th Century. She later migrants and refugees. Europe’s policymakers and institutions are only also advised on prison regimes in France, Germany, Italy and Russia. just beginning to grapple with the scale of this challenge, but legal and In recognition of the impact of her work, her image could be found on political responses have – so far – proved insufficient. British £5 notes for many years. Today, Quakers continue to be active as prison chaplains, prison visitors and campaigners for reform of Regulation of the internet is famously difficult, and arguably immigration detention. undesirable; there is also a risk that a purely political solution to this problem will be seen as censorship. Instead, we propose that civil Michael Bartlet, former Parliamentary Liaison Secretary for Quakers in society can respond to violent and dehumanising speech online with Britain, has written, “An early conception of human rights is implicit in more efficacy than the authorities acting alone. As such, this report has the seventeenth century political and religious experience of Friends. not only given an overview of the relevant laws and policies adopted Such rights are inherent in the ‘neighbour principle’ as a source of at the European level, but has also outlined existing initiatives which social responsibility, common to world faiths.” Some Quakers have seek to tackle anti-migrant narratives in the hope that they will receive also been influenced by the writings of Thich Nhat Hahn who has greater attention and support. argued that Buddhism’s focus on personal liberation through the cycle of life should today be understood as a requirement for work to bring Tackling online hate speech will involve a combination of policy, about social liberation for all people. legislation, media regulation, civil society initiatives and the work of international organisations such as the Council of Europe (CoE) and the Around the world, Quaker organisations are working to promote and Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). However, protect human rights. This includes peacebuilding efforts by Kenyan our capacity to overcome the fear of the other ultimately depends Friends, and the Sanctuary Everywhere programme led by American on our collective will to build truly inclusive and resilient societies, in Friends Service Committee in the US. The work of the Quaker United which the politics of division can no longer find a home. Nations Office in Geneva has also included a human rights programme for many decades, positively influencing global discussions on child soldiers, conscientious objectors to military service and the children of prisoners.

20 21 Annex

Methodology of QCEA’s hate speech research

For a better understanding of how prevalent online hate speech is, QCEA undertook a research project before writing this report.

The aim of the project was to collate a record of In total, 78 comments meeting our criteria were Dnes Komsomolskaya Pravda anti-migrant hate speech in the comment sections identified, the majority of which are still online of various European newspaper websites, namely: at the time of going to print. Some of these were “a beast from a jungle does not belong to a “I’ll be slaughtering both [migrants and those who featured earlier in the report, and additional peaceful society” support them]” • The Sun (United Kingdom) samples from each newspaper are shown here. 20/06/2017 04/06/2017 • Dnes (Czech Republic) Comments have been translated into English http://zpravy.idnes.cz/diskuse. https://www.kp.ru/online/news/2765909/ • Le Figaro (France) where necessary. aspx?iddiskuse=A170620_125007_zahranicni_aha • Novy Cas (Slovakia) “Didn’t you try shooting them? Or running a • Komsomolskaya Pravda (Russia) “Can`t we spray the Quran with some sterilisation few gas chambers with Zyklon-B, together with The Sun substance while printing it? The problem would several ovens?” These publications are some the biggest-selling be solved instantly” 18/07/2017 daily newspapers in their respective countries, and “Put them down like the rabid animals they are. 11/06/2017 all enjoy significant web traffic. Their websites are It’ll be doing a favour for the whole world.” https://www.kp.ru/daily/26706/3731265/ http://zpravy.idnes.cz/diskuse. free to access and comment upon. They were not 05/09/2017 aspx?iddiskuse=A170611_171040_zahranicni_aha selected for their political stance. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4396053/asylum-seeker- 20-and-three-teens-arrested-for-gang-raping-polish- tourist-on-italian-beach-as-her-badly- HYPERLINK “https:// Articles published between 1 June and 1 www.thesun.co.uk/news/4396053/asylum-seeker-20-and- Le Figaro September 2017 were selected. They were found three-teens-arrested-for-gang-raping-polish-tourist-on- italian-beach-as-her-badly-beaten-husband-was-forced-to- by searching the keywords ‘migrant’, ‘refugee’ and watch/”beaten-husband-was-forced-to-watch/ “Just imagine for a second that the Charles de ‘asylum’ on the sites’ internal search engines. Gaulle (a war ship) would be positioned along the “shoot them dead and they will soon learn” Libyan borders with a misison to sink NGOs and What we were looking for 03/09/2017 illegals’ boats. The problem will be dealt with in a https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4381353/ week.” We were looking for comments which clearly fall gang-of-migrants-clash-with-french-riot-police- 12/07/2017 into one, or both, of the following categories. leaving-three-officers-injured-as-they-try-to- board-uk-bound-lorries-stuck-in-calais-traffic-jams-full-of- http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2017/07/12/97001- Remarks which are simply unpleasant, offensive or shocked-british-holidaymakers/#comments 20170712FILWWW00164-3500-migrants-secourus-en- anti-migration were not taken into consideration. mediterranee.php#fig-comments “Just shoot them” Incitement to violence 06/07/2017 Comments which suggest, encourage or hint at Novy Cas https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3956957/brussels- a violent response to migrants. This can include officials-warn-eu-migrant-crisis-could-rage-for-decades- references to genocide or the Holocaust, as-tensions-mount-at-the-italian- HYPERLINK “https:// “shoot the dirty fu*****” www.thesun.co.uk/news/3956957/brussels-officials-warn- 31/08/2017 “blowing up boats” or “letting them drown,” eu-migrant-crisis-could-rage-for-decades-as-tensions- or any other such violent remark. It does not mount-at-the-italian-austrian-border/#comments”austrian- https://www.cas.sk/diskusia/589679/podozrivi-utecenci- include comments about scuttling boats so as border/#comments sa-vratili-do-nemecka-boli-clenmi-islamistickej-skupiny/2/ to prevent migration. “Napalm the place with all the illegal inhabitants” “drown them and problem solved” Dehumanisation 06/08/2017 29/06/2017 Comments which compare migrants to animals https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4184575/new-calais- https://www.cas.sk/diskusia/566841/taliansko-ziada-o- or use animal-related terminology to describe migrant-camp-jungle-refugees-welcome/#comments pomoc-dalsie-krajiny-uz-to-nezvlada/2/ migration. Examples include calling migrants “cockroaches,” “rats” or a “plague,” references “Should employ helicopter gun ships to strafe “We should be quick… put them to the wall and to “swarms” etc. It also includes calls for these boats filled with illegals as they are not shoot. No exceptions.” migrants to be enslaved or suffer cruel and coming to Europe to benefit Europe but to rape 02/09/2017 and pillage for whatever they can get” unusual punishment. It does not include the https://www.cas.sk/diskusia/589679/podozrivi-utecenci- words “flux,” “flow” or “wave” - only words with 12/08/2017 sa-vratili-do-nemecka-boli-clenmi-islamistickej-skupiny/2/ purely negative connotations. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4227347/migrants-are- being-trafficked-into-europe-on-high-speed-jet-skis-for- 3000/#comments All relevant comments were collected with the date and time, and screenshots of each them were recorded as proof they were present.

22 23 References

1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 12. Boomgaarden, H. G., & Vliegenthart, R. (2009). How 22. Recommendation No. R (97) 20 of the Committee 35. Facebook Community Standards, available at: available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ news content influences antiimmigration attitudes: of Ministers to member states on “hate speech”, https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/ unts/volume%20999/volume-999-i-14668-english. Germany, 1993-2005. European Journal of Political available at: https://bit.ly/2y4zeAY objectionable_content/hate_speech pdf Research, 48(4), 516–542. available at: https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01831.x ; Iyengar, S., & 23. Recommendation No. R (97) 21 of the Committee of 36. Microsoft Services Agreement, available at: https:// 2. The Impact of Hate Media in Rwanda, BBC News, Simon, A. F. (2000). New perspectives and evidence Ministers to member states on the media and the www.microsoft.com/en-us/servicesagreement/ 3 December 2003, available at: http://news.bbc. on political communication and campaign effects. promotion of a culture of tolerance, available at: default.aspx co.uk/2/hi/africa/3257748.stm Annual review of psychology, 51, 149–169. available https://bit.ly/2l2IbkX at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.149 ; 37. Report Hate Speech Content Posted to a Microsoft 3. Propaganda and Conflict: Evidence from the Kinder, D. R. (1998). Communication and opinion. 24. Media: Council of Europe reaffirms the fundamental Hosted Consumer Service, available at: https:// Rwandan Genocide, Yanagizawa-Drott, The Annual Review of Political Science, 1(1), 167–197. right to freedom of expression and information, www.microsoft.com/en-us/concern/hatespeech Quarterly Journal of Economics, Harvard University, available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. Press release, Council of Europe Spokesperson November 2014, available at: https://dash.harvard. polisci.1.1.167 and Press Division, 12 February 2004, available at: 38. http://www.nohatespeechmovement.org./ edu/bitstream/handle/1/13457754/RwandaDYD. https://bit.ly/2JETNFy pdf?sequence=1 13. Christine E. Meltzer Christian Schemer Hajo G. 39. Media Against Hate: Uphold our ethical standards, Boomgaarden Jesper Strömbäck Jakob-Moritz 25. Resolution of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary website available at: http://europeanjournalists.org/ 4. United Nations International Residual Mechanism Eberl Nora Theorin Tobias Heidenreich, Media Assembly, “A strategy to prevent racism and mediaagainsthate/ for Criminal Tribunals, Appeal Chamber reverse Effects on Attitudes toward Migration and intolerance in Europe, 2014, available at: https://bit. Seselj’s acquittal , in part, and convicts him of Mobility in the EU: A Comprehensive Literature ly/2JK32Ht 40. The European Broadcasting Campaign, website crimes against humanity, April 2018, available at: Review, March 2017, available at: https://www. available at: https://www.respectwords.org/en/ http://www.unmict.org/en/news/appeals-chamber- reminder-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ 26. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European campaign/ reverses-%C5%A1e%C5%A1elj%E2%80%99s- REMINDER_D9_1_Media_effects_migration_ Union, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ acquittal-part-and-convicts-him-crimes-against- mobility_web.pdf legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012P/ 41. eMore Project, website available at: https://www. humanity TXT&from=EN emoreproject.eu/ 14. Council of Europe report, Media coverage of the 5. Lillie, Christine and Knapp, Brock and Harris, ‘refugee crisis’: A cross-European perspective, Dr 27. Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 42. eMore: a mobile app to monitor hate speech, Lasana T. and Wilson, Richard Ashby, This Is the Myria Georgiou Dr Rafal Zaborowsk, available at: 2000 implementing the principle of equal available at: https://www.youtube.com/ Hour of Revenge: The Psychology of Propaganda https://rm.coe.int/1680706b00 treatment between persons irrespective of watch?v=xyDVk6hWq5w and Mass Atrocities, March 2015, available at: racial or ethnic origin, available at: http:// http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2580521 15. Report of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues, eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. 43. Get the Trolls out Project, website available at: Rita Izsák, January 2015, available at: https://bit. do?uri=CELEX:32000L0043:en:HTML http://www.getthetrollsout.org/ 6. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner ly/2sJVWcv ; Council of Europe, Mapping study for Human Rights on the expert workshops on on projects against hate speech online, April 2012, 28. Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 44. Jagarhar, website available at: https://www. the prohibition of incitement to national, racial available at: https://rm.coe.int/16807023b4 2000 establishing a general framework for equal jagarhar.se/om-oss/ or religious hatred, January 2013, available at: treatment in employment and occupation, available http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/ 16. International Network Against Cyber Hate (INACH), at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. 45. Council of Europe, WE CAN! Taking Action against SeminarRabat/Rabat_draft_outcome.pdf Manifestations of Online Hate Speech :Reports on do?uri=CELEX:32000L0078:en:HTML Hate Speech through Counter and Alternative antisemitic, antiziganistic, homophobic and anti- Narratives (2017), available at: https://book.coe.int/ 7. Freedom of expression and the combat of hate Muslim Hate Speech, 2017, available at: http://www. 29. 2008 Framework Decision on combating eur/en/human-rights-democratic-citizenship-and- speech in Europe, 1 December 2017, available at: inach.net/fileadmin/user_upload/Manifestations_ certain forms and expressions of racism and interculturalism/7267-we-can-taking-action-against- http://fra.europa.eu/en/speech/2017/freedom- of_online_hate_speech.pdf xenophobia by means of criminal law, available hate-speech-through-counter-and-alternative- expression-and-combat-hate-speech-europe at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ narratives.html 17. Press Unit, European Court of Human Rights, TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l33178 8. An overview of hate crime and hate speech in Hate speech by the leader of a radical Salafist 46. European Network against Racism, Debunking 9 EU countries, eMORE project, 2016, available organisation was not protected by freedom of 30. Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), myths about Jews, available at: http://www.enar- at: https://www.emoreproject.eu/wp-content/ expression, 20 July 2017, available at: https://bit. available at: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single- eu.org/IMG/pdf/debunkingmyths_lr.pdf uploads/2017/11/Emore_CountryReport_Nov17web. ly/2sMbwo4 market/audiovisual-media-services-directive-avmsd pdf 47. Respect Words Project, The European Ethical 18. Press Unit, European Court of Human Rights, 31. The e-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC, available Code for the Media, available at: https://www. 9. European Commission against Racism and Factsheet – Hate Speech, March 2018, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/e- respectwords.org/en/ethical-code/ Intolerance, Strong surge of nationalistic populism, at: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Hate_ commerce-directive xenophobic hate speech were key challenges speech_ENG.pdf 48. Positive Messengers, website available at: https:// in Europe in 2016, Press release, 22 June 2017, 32. European Commission, COMMUNICATION positivemessengers.net/en/project.html available at: https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ 19. Council of Europe, Additional Protocol to the FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN ecri/Library/PressReleases/AR-2017-250-EN.asp Convention on Cybercrime, concerning the PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN 49. Amnesty International, Look refugees in the eye: criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND Powerful video experiment breaks down barriers, 10. European Network against Racism, Racism plays nature committed through computer systems, THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS: Tackling available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/ a key role in migrants’ exclusion and violations January 2003, available at: https://rm.coe. Illegal Content Online : Towards an enhanced news/2016/05/look-refugees-in-the-eye/ of rights in the European Union, Press release, 2 int/168008160f responsibility of online platforms, 28 September May 2017, available at: http://www.enar-eu.org/ 2017, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- 50. Creators for Change, YouTube, website available at: Racism-plays-a-key-role-in-migrants-exclusion-and- 20. Council of Europe, Additional Protocol to the content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0555 https://www.youtube.com/yt/creators-for-change/ violations-of-rights-in-the Convention on Cybercrime, concerning the criminalisation of acts of a racist and xenophobic 33. European Commission, Commission 51. Ethical Journalism Network, Hate Speech: 11. European Network against Racism, Map of anti- nature committed through computer systems, Recommendation on measures to effectively tackle A five point test for journalists, available at: migrant violence, hatred and sentiment in Europe, January 2003, available at: https://www.coe. illegal content online, 1 March 2018, available at: https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/resources/ Press release, September 2016, available at: http:// int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/ http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document. publications/hate-speech www.enar-eu.org/Map-of-anti-migrant-violence- rms/090000168008160f cfm?doc_id=50095 hatred-and-sentiment-in-Europe 21. Council of Europe, European Convention on 34. Twitter’s Hateful Conduct Policy, available at: Transfrontier Television, January 2003, available at: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/ https://rm.coe.int/168007b0d8 hateful-conduct-policy 24 25 www.qcea.org