A Student Looks at Hate Speech and Hate Web Sites :: Sell Websites Buy Web Sites

A Student Looks at Hate Speech and Hate Web Sites Before delving into the ethics of hate sites, a definition of hate speech is required because it is the foundation of these 'hate sites.' Hate speech disparages someone because of an immutable characteristic of that person - such as his or her race, gender, or ethnicity. It's been around for many years, and was primarily confined to pamphlets, books, magazines, and flyers. These media channels were prohibitive. Publishing a single pamphlet could cost hundreds of dollars, assuming that some printer would agree to handle the job. The Internet revolutionized the propagation of hate propaganda. Slick websites could be created for very little money. People can join from across the country using chat groups, making the cost of organizing considerably less. Once organized, a hate group can use the Internet to disseminate its message or to destabilize the messages of opponents. More and more hate groups have been adopting the Internet as its tool. "Hate sites on the Internet increased by 56 percent, from 163 in 1997 to 254 in 1998."1 Banning hate speech from the Internet was discussed in the Supreme Court case Reno v. ACLU, decided in 1997. This case arose after the Congress passed the Communications Decency Act (CDA) as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. CDA was passed because of the concerns regarding the easily accessible pornography on the Internet. The CDA was created to restrain accessibility to minors, but it was challenged because it had the potential consequence of limiting adult access to protected speech. In the decision, Justice Stevens rejected CDA, saying it "threatens to torch a large segment of the Internet community."4 In addition, he recognized that the Internet deserved full First Amendment protection. In the early 1990s, the pro-life group known as the American Coalition of Life Advocates (ACLA) distributed WANTED-style posters listing the names, addresses, and phone numbers of 12 people, labeled "THE DEADLY DOZEN." The posters offer $5000 reward for information leading to arrest, conviction, and revocation of license to practice medicine. The listed doctors were advised to take caution, wear bulletproof vests, and were offered 24/7 marshal protection once the FBI was alerted about these posters in 1995. Some of the group's intended audience took these posters seriously and began shooting at and sometimes killing the listed doctors. On October 26, 1996, Planned Parenthood sued ACLA in the U.