DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecrime Research Report N. 06

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecrime Research Report N. 06 Andrea Di Nicola Daniela Andreatta Elisa Martini 06 With: Georgios A. Antonopoulos Gabriele Baratto eCRIME RESEARCH REPORTS Stefano Bonino Serena Bressan Shani Burke Francesca Cesarotti Parisa Diba Jérôme Ferret Marco Guerini Bill Howe Isis Koral Mario Laurent Giulia Pirozzi Jen Schradie Sara Tonelli HATEMETER Hate speech tool for monitoring, analysing and tackling Anti-Muslim hatred online Beneficiaries University of Trento, eCrime – Department ‘Faculty of Law’ and Department of Sociology and Social Research (Coordinator) Fondazione Bruno Kessler (Co-beneficiary) Universite Toulose 1 Capitole (Co-beneficiary) Teesside University (Co-beneficiary) Amnesty International Italy (Co-beneficiary) Collectif contre l’Islamophobie en France (Co-beneficiary) Stop Hate UK (Co-beneficiary) Project Hatemeter was funded by the European Union’s Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme (2014-2020) eCrime Research Reports No. 06 HATEMETER Hate speech tool for monitoring, analysing and tackling Anti-Muslim hatred online Andrea Di Nicola Daniela Andreatta Elisa Martini With: Georgios A. Antonopoulos Gabriele Baratto Stefano Bonino Serena Bressan Shani Burke Francesca Cesarotti Parisa Diba Jérôme Ferret Marco Guerini Bill Howe Isis Koral Mario Laurent Giulia Pirozzi Jen Schradie Sara Tonelli Graphic design and layout by Damiano Salvetti ISSN 2284-3302 ISBN 978-88-8443-886-7 eCrime – ICT, Law & Criminology Department ‘Faculty of Law’ University of Trento Via G. Verdi 53, 38122 Trento, Italy +39 0461 282336 www.ecrime.unitn.it The information and views set out in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. Trento, January 2020 © 2020 eCrime – Università di Trento Table of contents Acknowledgements 03 Assessment 57 of the Hatemeter Platform The project 05 5.1. Validation strategy and evaluation 57 methodology 5.2. Evaluation of the Hatemeter Platform 58 Background of Hatemeter project 07 2.1 Italy 07 Suggestions and insights 63 2.2 France 12 on the use of the Platform 2.3 United Kingdom 17 Bibliography 67 Development 27 of the Hatemeter platform 3.1. Explanation of method and data 27 necessary for the realization of the Platform 3.2. How does the Platform work 28 Using the Hatemeter Platform 37 to increase knowledge of online Islamophobia and support effective counter-strategies 4.1 Italy 37 4.2 France 43 4.3 United Kingdom 49 Acknowledgements Authors Under the supervision of Andrea Di Nicola, Daniela Andreatta, and Elisa Martini, authorship is as follows: Daniela Andreatta (2, 2.1.2, 4, 4.1, 5, 6), Georgios A. Antonopoulos (2.3, 4.3), Gabriele Baratto (4.1), Stefano Bonino (2.1.1), Serena Bressan (3), Shani Burke (2.3, 4.3), Francesca Cesarotti (4.1), Parisa Diba (2.3, 4.3), Andrea Di Nicola (1), Jérôme Ferret (2.2, 4.2), Marco Guerini (3.2, 5.2.1), Bill Howe (3.3), Isis Koral (3.2), Mario Laurent (2.2, 4.2), Elisa Martini (2.1.3, 4.1, 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.2), Giulia Pirozzi (4.1), Jen Schradie (2.2), Sara Tonelli (3.1, 5.2.3). 2 This report presents the results of project “Hatemeter - Teesside University team would like to thank Nigel Hate speech tool for monitoring, analysing and tackling Copsey, Shahda Khan and David Temple as well as the anti-Muslim hatred online” (hereinafter also referred participants to the study for their time and valuable to as “Hatemeter”, project reference: 764583). The insights. project has been coordinated by the University of Trento (Italy) and especially by eCrime, the research group Amnesty International – Sezione Italiana team included on ICT, law and criminology of the Department ‘Fac- Francesca Cesarotti, Mariangela Pantaleo, and Giulia ulty of Law’, with the cooperation of the Department Pirozzi, as well as all the volunteers of the Italian Hate of Sociology and Social Research, in partnership with Speech Task Force. Fondazione Bruno Kessler (Italy), University Toulouse 1 Capitole (France), Teesside University (United King- StophHate UK team included Rose Simpkins, Kylie dom), Amnesty International – Sezione Italiana (Italy), Read, Bill Howe, Joseph Sankar, Rebecca Parker, Erika StophHate UK (United Kingdom), and Collectif Contre Samenaite, and Catherine El Ashkar. l’Islamophobie en France (France). The project was funded by the European Commission - Directorate-Gen- Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France (CCIF) team eral Justice and Consumers under the Rights, Equality included Isis Koral, Chafika Attalai, and all the volu- and Citizenship Programme (2014-2020) and lasted 24 teers. months: from February 2018 to January 2020. We would like to acknowledge the 22nd edition of the The research project was coordinated by Andrea festival “Voci per la Libertà – Una canzone per Amnes- ty” held in Rosolina Mare (Rovigo, Italy) from the 18th Di Nicola, associate professor of criminology at the st Department ‘Faculty of Law’ of the University of Trento to the 21 of July 2019, which host Hatemeter project as partner of the event. Mostly, sincere thanks go to and scientific coordinator of eCrime, Department Roy Paci, Hatemeter Testimonial and Amnesty Interna- ‘Faculty of Law’, University of Trento. The eCrime team tional Italy Award 2019, who as a musician and artist included Daniela Andreatta, Gabriele Baratto, and is committed in preventing and combating any adverse Stefano Bonino. The Department of Sociology and human rights impacts. Social Research (University of Trento) team included Mario Diani, head of the Department, and Elisa Martini. We would like to address a special thanks to all the University of Trento would like to especially thank the academics, researchers and professionals members of Video Director Matteo Scotton for the realisation of vid- the Hatemeter Lab, who participated in the seminars eo of the Hatemeter awareness raising campaign, and held in Toulouse on the 17th and 18th of December the students Giulia Zantonello and Mohamad Baalbaki 2019. for the translations of the subtitles of the video. This research work would not have been feasible with- The Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK) team included out the help and assistance of a number of persons. Sara Tonelli, Stefano Menini, Alessio Palmero Aprosio, Especially, we would like to express our gratitude to the Rachele Sprugnoli and Elisa Leonardelli from the Digital administrative staff of the University of Trento and of all Humanities research group; Marco Guerini and Serra the Hatemeter partners, together with all the many oth- Sinem Tekiroglu from the Natural Language Processing er persons impossible to list here. Last but not least, research group; and Serena Bressan from the Project we would like to thank the Directorate-General Justice Management Group. Sara Tonelli was the technical and Consumers of the European Commission and the coordinator of Hatemeter. The FBK team would like Hatemeter Project Officers which, under the Rights, to express its gratitude to Giovanni Moretti and the Equality and Citizenship Programme, have supported students Mohamad Baalbaki and Y-Ling Chung, who both the project and the realisation of this publication. provided unevaluable support throughout the Platform development. University Toulouse 1 Capitole (UT1-C) team included Jérôme Ferret, professor of sociology, Mario Laurent, and for the first part of the project, Jen Schradie (currently professor assistant at the Observatoire du Changement of Sciences Po, Paris). Teesside University (TU) team included Georgios A. Antonopoulos, professor of criminology, Parisa Diba and, during the final stage of the project, Shani Burke. HATEMETER 3 The project 4 Project “Hatemeter - Hate speech tool for monitoring, building of the “EU laboratory on Internet and social analysing and tackling anti-Muslim hatred online” aims media for countering online anti-Muslim hate speech” at systematising, augmenting and sharing knowledge (i.e., Hatemeter Lab). of anti-Muslim hatred online, and at increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of NGOs in preventing and This document is the Final Report of Hatemeter Project tackling Islamophobia at the EU level, by developing and presents the results, standards and guidelines to and testing an ICT tool (i.e., Hatemeter Platform) that favour the transferability of the Hatemeter Platform automatically monitors and analyses Internet and among other non-governmental/civil society organisa- social media data on the phenomenon, and produces tions (NGO/CSOs) and stakeholders across the EU, and computer-assisted responses and hints to support for other forms of hate speech and intolerance, as to counter-narratives and awareness raising campaigns. augment the medium/long-term impact and sustaina- bility of the project. The Hatemeter Partnership con- More specifically, backed by a strong interdisciplinary siders sustainability and transferability of its results as effort (criminology, social sciences, computer scienc- crucial elements of its activities towards a successful es, statistics, and law), the Hatemeter Platform uses a project implementation. combination of natural language processing (NLP), ma- The first chapter gives an outline of the project and its chine learning, and big data analytics/visualization to: aims. A. identify and systematise in real-time actual “red The second chapter presents the background of the flags” of anti-Muslim hate speech and/or possible Hatemeter Project according to a subdivision
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tell MAMA Reporting 2013/14 Anti-Muslim Overview, Analysis and ‘Cumulative Extremism’ Dr Matthew Feldman Mark Littler Teesside University, July 2014
    Inspiring success Centre for Fascist, Anti-Fascist and Post-Fascist Studies Tell MAMA Reporting 2013/14 Anti-Muslim Overview, Analysis and ‘Cumulative Extremism’ Dr Matthew Feldman Mark Littler Teesside University, July 2014 Tell MAMA Reporting 2013/14: Anti-Muslim Overview, Analysis and ‘Cumulative Extremism’ Dr Matthew Feldman Mark Littler Centre for Fascist, Anti-fascist and Post-fascist Studies Teesside University July 2014 Executive Summary 1. Introduction 2. Tell MAMA: Methodology and Data Collection 3. Hate Crimes: National Trends and Police Data 4. Tell MAMA reporting 1 May 2013 – 28 February 2014 5. ‘Cumulative extremism’ and the ‘spike’ in post-Woolwich incidents 6. Conclusions Appendices Executive Summary • The Centre for Fascist, Anti-fascist and Post-fascist Studies at Teesside University analysed anti-Muslim incidents recorded by Faith Matters’ Tell MAMA project over 2013/14. • There were 734 self-reported cases between 1 May 2013 and 28 February 2014; of these, there were 599 incidents of online abuse and 135 offline attacks, combining for an average of more than 2 cases per day. • Of the 18% of offline anti-Muslim attacks recorded by Tell MAMA; 23 cases involved assault and another 13 cases involved extreme violence. • Estimated age of perpetrators was between 10 and 30 in 60% of offline attacks. • Two-fifths of all anti-Muslim incidents recorded by Tell MAMA reported a link to far-right groups (e.g. BNP, EDL, etc.); including 45% of online abuse. • In the wake of Drummer Lee Rigby’s brutal murder, reported incidents to Tell MAMA skyrocketed – there were nearly four times more online and offline reports (373%) in the week after 22 May 2013 than in the week beforehand.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities
    Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Published by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Ul. Miodowa 10 00-251 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr © OSCE/ODIHR 2020 All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such reproduction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of the OSCE/ ODIHR as the source. ISBN 978-83-66089-93-8 Designed by Homework Printed in Poland by Centrum Poligrafii Contents Foreword v Executive Summary vii Introduction 1 PART ONE: Understanding the challenge 7 I. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: context 8 II. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: key features 12 III. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: impact 21 PART TWO: International standards on intolerance against Muslims 29 I. Commitments and other international obligations 30 II. Key principles 37 1. Rights based 37 2. Victim focused 38 3. Non-discriminatory 41 4. Participatory 41 5. Shared 42 6. Collaborative 43 7. Empathetic 43 8. Gender sensitive 43 9. Transparent 44 10. Holistic 45 PART THREE: Responding to anti-Muslim hate crimes and the security challenges of Muslim communities 47 Practical steps 48 1. Acknowledging the problem 48 2. Raising awareness 51 3. Recognizing and recording the anti-Muslim bias motivation of hate crimes 53 4. Providing evidence of the security needs of Muslim communities by working with them to collect hate crime data 58 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Far-Right Extremism in the Populist Age
    Far-Right Extremism in the Populist Age Briefing Paper Sophie Gaston 2017 ABOUT THIS PAPER This paper was prepared to facilitate discussion at the International Summit on Far-Right Extremism, held in central London in partnership between Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and Demos on 23 May 2017. The event was held against a backdrop of ‘shifting sands’ across Europe and the United States, with fundamental realignments in national political contexts, a broadly spread hardening of attitudes towards cultural and ethnic diversity, and a sense that the far-right – both through attitudes and expressions of violent extremism and populist political movements – has assumed a visible and influential role of historic proportions. Introduction and Definitions In tandem with, and partially as a result of national political and social differences, there is no clear definition of far-right extremism. In a fundamental sense, it refers to the opposition of the primary foundations of liberal democracy, which offers safeguards for minority groups, a civic-based conception of national identity and citizenship, and political pluralism1. Norris (2005) acknowledges the multitude of labels for far right political parties and social groups – ‘far’, ‘extreme’, ‘radical’, ‘new right’, ‘ultra- nationalist’ among many others – and consequently argues that these groups are best thought of a cluster or family of parties rather than a single category2. Similarly, Mudde (1995) notes the difficulty of producing a clear conceptual criteria of extreme right wing parties because of the varying ideological commitments of different parties. For instance, a contemporary contrast can be made between anti-federal groups in the US and authoritarian and strong-state parties in Central and Eastern Europe3.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right
    Maik Fielitz, Nick Thurston (eds.) Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right Political Science | Volume 71 Maik Fielitz, Nick Thurston (eds.) Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right Online Actions and Offline Consequences in Europe and the US With kind support of Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Na- tionalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No- Derivatives 4.0 (BY-NC-ND) which means that the text may be used for non-commer- cial purposes, provided credit is given to the author. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ To create an adaptation, translation, or derivative of the original work and for com- mercial use, further permission is required and can be obtained by contacting [email protected] Creative Commons license terms for re-use do not apply to any content (such as graphs, figures, photos, excerpts, etc.) not original to the Open Access publication and further permission may be required from the rights holder. The obligation to research and clear permission lies solely with the party re-using the material. © 2019 transcript Verlag, Bielefeld Cover layout: Kordula Röckenhaus, Bielefeld Typeset by Alexander Masch, Bielefeld Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar Print-ISBN 978-3-8376-4670-2 PDF-ISBN 978-3-8394-4670-6 https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839446706 Contents Introduction | 7 Stephen Albrecht, Maik Fielitz and Nick Thurston ANALYZING Understanding the Alt-Right.
    [Show full text]
  • Extreme Right Transnationalism: International Networking and Cross-Border Exchanges
    Gale Primary Sources Start at the source. Extreme Right Transnationalism: International Networking and Cross-Border Exchanges Paul Jackson Senior Lecturer in History, University of Northampton Various source media, Political Extremism and Radicalism in the Twentieth Century EMPOWER™ RESEARCH While many historians have devoted themselves to forms of anti-fascism: divisions within the left. The examining the dynamics of fascist movements and Italian Communist Party was also formed at this time, regimes, the topic of ‘anti-fascism’ has traditionally and while initially supportive of the Arditi del Popolo, been neglected. However, historians and other later it instructed its members to withdraw their academics are now starting to take greater interest in engagement. The Arditi del Popolo was shut down by the study of those who opposed nationalist and racist the Italian state by 1924, while the Italian Communist extremists, and are developing new approaches to Party was itself banned from 1926. Splits within the understanding these complex cultures. Some, such as left have often been a characteristic of anti-fascist Nigel Copsey, have been concerned with developing politics, and in Italy during the 1920s such anti- sober, empirical accounts, exploring left-wing, centre fascists were driven by competing ideas on how to and even right-wing forms of anti-fascism, presenting develop an anti-capitalist revolution. In this case, the it as a heterogeneous politicised identity. Others, such issue helped to foster discord between a more as Mark Bray, have been more concerned with eclectic and anarchist variant of anti-fascism and a developing unapologetically partisan readings of the more centralised Communist version.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Philosemitism: Exploring a Changing Relationship Between Jews and the Far-Right
    The New Philosemitism: Exploring a Changing Relationship Between Jews and the Far-Right Hannah Rose CONTACT DETAILS For questions, queries and additional copies of this report, please contact: ICSR King’s College London Strand London WC2R 2LS United Kingdom T. +44 20 7848 2098 E. [email protected] Twitter: @icsr_centre Like all other ICSR publications, this report can be downloaded free of charge from the ICSR website at www.icsr.info. © ICSR 2020 The New Philosemitism: Exploring a Changing Relationship Between Jews and the Far-Right Executive Summary About this Report • This report views emerging cooperation and changing attitudes of the populist radical right towards Jews as a new wave of Philosemitism. • This new wave of Philosemitism is not a genuine and sincere positioning, but a strategic tool used by the far‑right in order to present itself as liberal and mainstream, gain support and engage in a ‘divide and conquer’ tactic among minority communities. Far-right Reframings of Jewishness • A shift from antisemitism to philosemitism has originated from a fundamental re‑imagining of Jewishness, where Jews and Judaism are understood through far‑right framings in order to legitimise existing ideologies. For example, by seeing Jews as European, pro‑Israel and anti‑Muslim, the far‑right allows itself to align philosemitism to its own interests. • In this way, deliberately positive sentiments of Jews based on stereotypes are rooted in the same processes as antisemitism, whereby the two phenomena are two sides of the same coin. • Strategies of ‘Collective Action Framing’ are used to impose a Christian‑derived framing of Jewishness onto Jewish people • ‘Frame Extension’, in the case of the radical right’s understanding of Israel as a European frontier against the Arab world, is used to expand far‑right ideology beyond its primary interests in order to appeal to a wider audience.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
    Response of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the call by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief for submissions for his Report on Anti-Muslim hatred/ “Islamophobia” and the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief for the 46th Human Rights Council Session Muslims within the State; Equality and Non-Discrimination; and the Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion or Belief. The United Kingdom has a long history of promoting freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) and proudly has legal provisions to protect this fundamental human right. A 2015 survey1 showed 94% of Muslims feel able to practise their religion freely in Britain, and most believe that Islam is compatible with the British way of life. The United Kingdom is also a home to the thriving Muslims traditions of philanthropy, entrepreneurship, education, respect and tolerance. The United Kingdom is one of the most tolerant countries in the world. There are over 3 million Muslims in the UK - 5.1% of the overall population2. We are clear that discrimination and intolerance of any kind has no place in society, and we treat all forms of intolerance with equal seriousness. In the UK, it is against the law to discriminate against someone because of their protected characteristics (as set out in the Equalities Act 2010), which include race, religion, belief, age, disability, and gender3. It is therefore unlawful to discriminate against someone on the basis of them identifying as Muslim, or because of any intersecting characteristic such as gender.
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Observer Monthly | 1
    Fair Observer Monthly | 1 Fair Observer Monthly March 2019 Fair Observer Monthly | 2 Atul Singh (Founder, CEO & Editor-in-Chief) Abul-Hasanat Siddique (Co-Founder, COO & Managing Editor) Anna Pivovarchuk (Co-Founder & Deputy Managing Editor) Fair Observer | 237 Hamilton Ave ǀ Mountain View ǀ CA 94043 ǀ USA www.fairobserver.com | [email protected] The views expressed in this publication are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. Copyright © 2019 Fair Observer Photo Credit: Aisylu Ahmadieva / Shutterstock All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior written permission of the publisher. International Standard Serial Number (ISSN): 2372-9112 Fair Observer Monthly | 3 CONTENTS About Fair Observer 5 Share Your Perspective 6 Should Sport Let Go of the Idea of Binary Sexes? 7 Ellis Cashmore With Climate Change Comes Extreme Weather 10 Arek Sinanian India and Pakistan Have a Choice to Make 13 Priyanka Pandey How Human Collaboration Can Beat Screen Addiction 16 William Softky Unless UK Is Better Informed, a Referendum Will Make Things Worse 20 Jack Riddick The New Zealand “Gunman” Is a Terrorist 23 S. Suresh Meet the “Moderates” the EU Is Trying to Empower in Iran 25 Alejo Vidal-Quadras Will Evo Morales Win Again in Bolivia? 27 Javiera Alarcon What Makes a Christchurch-Style Attack Feel So Likely in Britain? 30 Bethan Johnson Anti-Muslim Hate Crime Is a New Form of Racism 37 Imran Awan Fair Observer Monthly | 4 ABOUT FAIR OBSERVER Fair Observer is a US-based nonprofit media organization that aims to inform and educate global citizens of today and tomorrow.
    [Show full text]
  • Radicalisation and Resilience Case Study the United Kingdom
    Radicalisation and Resilience Case Study The United Kingdom Thomas Sealy and Tariq Modood University of Bristol September 2020 This case study is part of a series of in-depth reports on religiously motivated violent radicalisation - and resilience to it - in 12 countries. The series examines periods in which religious radicalisation and violence has escalated and analyses relevant policy and political discourses surrounding them. While seeking to identify factors that drove radicalisation and violence in each country, the case studies also critically assess programmes of prevention and resilience-building, identifying good practices. This series was produced by GREASE, an EU-funded research project investigating religious diversity, secularism and religiously inspired radicalisation. Countries covered in this series: Australia, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Egypt, France, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Russia, Tunisia and the United Kingdom. http://grease.eui.eu The GREASE project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 770640 UK Radicalisation and Resilience Case Study GREASE The EU-Funded GREASE project looks to Asia for insights on governing religious diversity and preventing radicalisation. Involving researchers from Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Oceania, GREASE is investigating how religious diversity is governed in over 20 countries. Our work focuses on comparing norms, laws and practices that may (or may not) prove useful in preventing religious radicalisation. Our research also sheds light on how different societies cope with the challenge of integrating religious minorities and migrants. The aim is to deepen our understanding of how religious diversity can be governed successfully, with an emphasis on countering radicalisation trends.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Monday Volume 656 18 March 2019 No. 271 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday 18 March 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 751 18 MARCH 2019 752 languishing on benefits for a decade with no interventions. House of Commons Now, under universal credit, she is being helped and supported to become job-ready. Will my right hon. Monday 18 March 2019 Friend ensure that we continue this approach, and that we reach out and support the work coaches in jobcentres? The House met at half-past Two o’clock Amber Rudd: I thank my hon. Friend and near parliamentary neighbour for pointing out the excellent work done by work coaches. The defining difference PRAYERS between universal credit and the legacy benefits that it replaces is that tailored, personal approach, which really [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] helps individuals to get back into work. Luke Graham: What support is being given, through not only universal credit but schemes such as Access to Oral Answers to Questions Work, to those who experience mental ill health? Amber Rudd: I thank my hon. Friend for pointing out this important element of universal credit. We are WORK AND PENSIONS determined to make sure that universal credit really supports the most vulnerable. We are piloting a new The Secretary of State was asked— scheme in Milton Keynes in which people with mental health difficulties are given an early referral to make Welfare Support sure that their needs are dealt with early on, so that they can be given the appropriate, personal, supportive care 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Training Module a for Academics and Research Organisations Hatemeter \ Deliverable D18 Training Module a for Academics and Research Organisations
    Deliverable Hate speech tool for monitoring, analysing and tackling Anti-Muslim hatred online D18 REC Action Grant (REC-DISC-AG-2016-04) 24 months (01.02.2018 - 31.01.2020) This document was funded by the European Union’s Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme (2014-2020) November 2019 Training module A for academics and research organisations Hatemeter \ Deliverable D18 Training Module A for academics and research organisations D18 – Training Module A for academics and research organisations WP5 Training, dissemination and sustainability events Due Date: 30/11/2019 Submission Date: 30/11/2019 Responsible Partner: UT1-Capitole Version: 1.0 Status: Final Jérôme Ferret and Mario Laurent (UT1-Capitole), Andrea Di Nicola, Daniela Andreatta, Author(s): Gabriele Baratto and Elisa Martini (UNITRENTO), Marco Guerini and Sara Tonelli (FBK), Georgios A. Antonopoulos and Parisa Diba (TEES) Jérôme Ferret and Mario Laurent (UT1-Capitole), Andrea Di Nicola, Daniela Andreatta, Gabriele Baratto and Elisa Martini (UNITRENTO), Serena Bressan, Marco Guerini and Reviewer(s): Sara Tonelli (FBK), Georgios Antonopoulos and Parisa Diba (TEES), Isis Koral (CCIF), Francesca Cesarotti (Amnesty Italy), Bill Howe (Stop Hate UK) Deliverable Type: R Dissemination Level: CO Statement of originality This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both. The content of this document represents
    [Show full text]
  • Islamofobi - En Begreppsutredande Studie Av Begreppet Islamofobi
    Kandidatuppsats Att ’begreppa’ islamofobi - En begreppsutredande studie av begreppet islamofobi Författare: Johan Lind Handledare: Torsten Löfstedt Examinator: Jonas Svensson Termin: HT16 Ämne: Religionsvetenskap Nivå: Kandidat Kurskod: 2RKÄ06 Abstract Islamophobia as a concept has grown in popularity but is still controversial. This essay categorizes and analyses 153 scientific articles’ definition of the concept Islamophobia. It proposes two different categories which the definitions can be put in. First there is micro- islamophobia which includes definitions that defines islamophobia as an emotional or cognitive phenomenon. The focus here is on an individual level. The second category is macro- islamophobia, which focuses more on a structural level, and includes definitions of islamophobia as an ideology/discourse or islamophobia as racism. The essay concludes that these two different ways of defining islamophobia are complementary rather than competing. Negative emotions or cognitions do not appear from nowhere and an ideology needs a foundation in individuals. Nyckelord islamofobi, begreppsanalys Innehåll 1. Inledning ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduktion ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Syfte & frågeställning ...................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Tidigare forskning
    [Show full text]