Transcript Hate speech and free expression

Ethical Journalism Network
Turning the
Page
of Hate
Aidan White
[email protected]
Who we are
A coalition of media professional groups from
Europe and around the world committed to
building trust in media and promoting principles
of ethical journalism, good governance and selfregulation in the digital age
www.ethicaljournalismnetwork.org
Turning the Page of Hate:
A New Campaign to Promote
Tolerance in Journalism
Launched April 18th 2014 in Rwanda to
mark 20 anniversary of Genocide
Aims to mobilise journalism at all
levels against manipulation of media
and journalism as weapons of hatred
and incitement to violence
Case Study: Rwanda
1994: 800,000 Killed. Hate media helped
organise slaughter
Hate Speech
in the
Media Focus
Islamaphobia
Anti-Semitism
Genocide
Religion
Race relations
Migration
Gender equality
Homosexuality
Why Campaign? To defend
Journalism and Human Rights
Society is based on respect for rights. These rights are set out
in international conventions and standards. Humanity’s code
of conduct:
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• International Convention on Civil and Political
Rights
• Other international conventions – labour rights,
torture, genocide, acts of war
• Journalism also has its own codes. There are more
than 400 codes at national and global level.
http://rjionline.org/AS-Codes-of-Ethics
Hate speech and free
expression
Hate speech can be a way of mobilising public
support for actions that threaten the lives of
others.
Propaganda has always been an important
strategic aspect of making war.
But people are entitled to free speech, even if
they hold offensive and hurtful opinions.
But what are the limits? And who draws the red
lines which define the frontiers of tolerance?
Challenge of Combating
Hate in Media
• Hate speech matter of international
concern since 1945
• International legal prohibition over
hate speech related to race and
ethnicity
• Lack of clear definition
• Need for informed, careful and
inclusive journalism
Case Study: Islamaphobia
2006: Mohammed Cartoons. Global row over free
speech rights after cartoons caused offence to
Muslims. Politically-inspired violence. At least 150
killed.
2010: United States pastor Terry Jones becomes
global media story for wanting to burn the Koran.
Unknown number of deaths.
2012: Inaccurate media story of anti-Muslim film,
Innocence of Muslims. At least 73 killed.
Islamophobia on the March
Example of stereotype in context of global
“war on terror”: a mob of wild-eyed men
yelling, during anti-US protests over the
infamous Innocence of Muslims Film in
2012. Was this an accurate picture?
Alternative Images
of Arab Men….
…women…
… and Children
But these are also
out of context:
how do we find
the balance between image
and reality?
Combating Hatred is about
Telling the Story in Context
According to ethical obligations:
•
•
•
•
•
Truth
Independence
Impartiality
Humanity
Accountability
5-Point Test for Hate
Speech
One:
The content and form of speech.
Judging whether the words,
gestures and manner of the
speech are likely to generate
intense hatred and incite violence.
5-Point Test for Hate Speech
Two:
The economic, social and
political climate
Inflammatory speech can be particularly
dangerous when made at times of social
tension, the threat of war, and when there
is public anxiety over political and
economic conditions.
5-Point Test for Hate Speech
Three:
The position or status of the speaker
Media-savvy and unscrupulous politicians
can be skilful users of media to stir up
disputes. Are they representative and
influential or are they obscure, such as
Pastor Terry Jones of Florida?
5-Point Test for Hate Speech
Four: The reach of the speech
A private conversation in a public place
may include unspeakable ideas and do
relatively little harm. But speech to big
public audiences and dissemination
through the Internet has the potential for
widespread impact.
5-Point Test for Hate Speech
Five: The Intention of the speech
Is the objective to incite violence and
intense hatred? If speech is deliberately
targeting individuals and groups (in
particular, marginalised communities or
vulnerable minorities) journalists’ must
consider the impact of publication.
Ethical Questions
It is vital not to sensationalise and avoid a rush
to publish. Ethical journalists will ask:
• Is there a danger of inflaming passions and
incitement to violence?
• Is the speech fact-based and have the claims
been tested?
• Have we avoided cliché and stereotypes?
• Have we been temperate in use of language?
• Do the pictures tell the story without violence
and voyeurism?
• Are there diverse sources and minority voices?
Remember: Ethical Journalism
is not Free Expression
• Journalism is not free speech, it is
constrained expression.
• It works in a framework of values.
• It has purpose.
• It is a public good.
• When we understand this we are better
equipped to identify and deal with hate
speech
Trust
Journalism