Sasha Borissenko: Is enough being done to combat ‘hate speech’?

Little data exists around reporting abuse that falls short of criminal activity. Photo / 123rf

OPINION:

Since Jacinda Ardern resigned as prime minister there’s been increasing debate as to whether she receives more online abuse than male politicians. The same could be said for any vulnerable group. To clarify, Ardern didn’t expressly say the abuse was a reason for her resignation.

One of the issues is there’s little data around reporting abuse that falls short of criminal activity - particularly when it concerns groups over individuals.

By comparison, David Anthony Ruck of Christchurch was sentenced in July 2021 on a charge of threatening to kill or do grievous bodily harm. The man claimed he had “the right to shoot the prime minister” for treason and treachery in a social media video.

Research at Hate & Extremism Insights Aotearoa at the University of Auckland conducted research on posts online mentioning Ardern and six unnamed opticians and bureaucrats. Analysis looked at New Zealand-based posts on Gab, 4chan, Reddit, 8kun et al between 2019 and 2022. It found Ardern faced online vitriol at a rate between 50 and 90 times higher than any other high-profile figures.

Natural language tools classified strongly negative, angry, sexually explicit, or toxic rhetoric.

For groups or individuals receiving abuse that falls short of the Crimes Act, the only way of reporting is via social media platforms, and international corporations have no obligation to do anything about it, Green Party MP Golriz Ghahraman told me.

Ghahraman says on top of the reporting issue, the hate speech legislation falls short. Having passed its first reading last year, the hate speech legislation fails to include women, rainbow, and disability communities.

For context, the Government pledged a review of hate speech legislation following the March 15 terror attack. The review took into account the findings of the Royal Commission into the terror attacks and recommended sweeping changes, including incorporating hate speech offences into the Crimes Act.

The discussion document in June 2021 included protecting groups from hate speech on the basis of sex, gender, marital status or political opinion. It also boosted the maximum offence from three months to three years’ imprisonment or a $50,000 fine.

Backlash from people citing ‘free speech’ ensued, there was a change of guard, and new justice minister Kiri Allan announced the Government’s final hate speech proposal of extending provisions to cover religious beliefs only. The remaining reforms were referred to the Law Commission for further review.

That work started this month.

As it currently stands, the Human Rights Act 1993 creates civil remedies and criminal offences in cases that incite racial disharmony by way of threats, abuse, or insults. In a criminal context, a person could be imprisoned for up to three months, or be subject to a $7000 fine.

“We know that online abuse translates to violence but there’s no way of currently measuring potential targets or perpetrators. It’s about keeping communities safe and it’s hugely a missed opportunity,” Ghahraman said.

For context, Amnesty International released a survey that showed a third of female respondents in New Zealand said they experienced online abuse and harassment. Of those women that experienced abuse, 75 per cent said they couldn’t sleep well, and 49 per cent feared for their physical safety.

Anecdotally, Ghahraman has received a spike in negative comments about her MS diagnosis as a result of the pandemic. Listening to disability groups, this spike is consistent across the board, she says.

“I never bore the brunt of anything prior to Covid-19 but now I’m getting, ‘you should die’ - that sort of thing. I suspect it’s because immuno-compromised people were brought into public consciousness then, which was important but they’ve since become a target.”

As an MP, Ghahraman is cognisant of the people that follow her on social media. While she’s told she should never look at the comments or hide or block those comments, it’s not so simple.

“We are told to pretend that these things don’t happen or shy away from it, but there are almost three generations that exist in these online communities and you’re saying something if you don’t stand up for yourself or condemn such behaviour.

“It’s not really an answer to say don’t go or engage online because it means there’s no real democracy. It means only people who aren’t in these vulnerable groups engage online. I would argue hate speech is fundamentally a threat to freedom of speech because it silences and shuts down communities.”

Justice minister Kiri Allen was asked for comment and whether in light of the debate surrounding hate speech and Ardern’s resignation, there were moves to include other vulnerable groups in the hate speech reforms.

Unfortunately, it was a tight deadline and the minister was on the road and would not be able to provide a comment, her press secretary said.