Sean Mcelwee: The Case For Censoring Hate Speech Summary

Sean McElwee overall claim in "The Case for Censoring Hate Speech" , is showing how people are easily influenced by the media, websites known as Reddit, Facebook, and twitter. Which allow bigot comments, #hashtags, and remarks to certain touchy topics. The article also talks about the two targets of hate speech, one being a way to target a minority and uplift sectarians of the world. The author uses words in the text to show a serious, concerned and progressive tone for the audience .In the article the author shows how he is progressive, by mentioning how we need to all blame ourselves and put forth effort to fix it. In the phrase, “he map’s existence draws into question the notion that the “twittersphere” can organically combat hate
speech; hate speech is not going to disappear from twitter on its own. he map’s existence draws into question the notion that the “twittersphere” can organically combat hate speech; hate speech is not going to disappear from twitter on its own.” The quote is showing you that not only twitter needs to help ban hate speech, but it's worldwide and need to be stop by the individuals who come on.
The author shows the concerned tone by question the future of what will happen, and always talking about the future of still having hate speeches. In the second quote it says, “Consider the number of rapes that go unreported. Could this trend possibly be impacted by Reddit threads like /r/rapingwomen or /r/mensrights?” This quote is showing how the author is concern if the need of hate speeches are coming from reddit. Another quote , “The rape culture that permeates Facebook, Twitter and the public dialogue must be held at least partially responsible for our larger rape
culture.
Reddit, for instance, has become a veritable potpourri of hate speech; consider Reddit threads like /r/nazi, /r/killawoman, /r/misogyny, /r/killingwomen. My argument is not that these should be taken down because they are offensive, but rather because they amount to the degradation of a class that has been historically oppressed. Imagine a Reddit thread for /r/lynching blacks or /r/assassinating the president. We would not argue that we should sit back and wait for this kind of speech be “outspoken” by positive speech, but that it should be entirely banned.” The author's tone is serious, because he is bringing up real hashtags and hate speeches about women. And he is enforcing they should be taken down and how their targeting people who are oppressed.
The author's tone is was very serious and concerned, but as the article goes on he becomes confirming.
When he starts to talk about Free speech he makes statements that question the original idea of someone. In the phrase he says, “ “There are a lot of other nice people out there.”Those who claim to “defend free speech” when they defend the right to post hate speech online, are in truth backwards. Free speech isn’t an absolute right; no right is weighed in a vacuum. The court has imposed numerous restrictions on speech. “ The phrase is showing how defending free speech can also be bad, since it's not a right. It also showing how some people can use freedom of speech as a way to defend hate speeches. The tone of the author is confirming the idea of freedom of speech of being a way to encourage hate
speech.
Both tones of the stories tie into each other to create a central idea of the story, by showing its bad or concerning to use hate speech and the methods to controlling and banning it should be blamed on both parties and should be concerned of the actions of the people defending . The word choice relates are related to the context of the story, because it's about a important topic which is controversial and has many opinions about whether it's bad or a good idea and who should be blamed. The author is specifically using alot of questions which would suggest the topic was questionable and well talked about especially in the article.