The proliferation of digital technologies has transformed the way we communicate and interact with each other. In fact, numerous social media platforms have enabled individuals to connect with others from different parts of the world, share their views and opinions, and engage in public debates.
However, the same technology has also provided a fertile ground for the spread of hate speech, bigotry, and intolerance. The menace of digital hate has become a significant issue in today’s fast-changing digital age, affecting all human beings in one way or the other.
Digital hate refers to any form of hate speech or discriminatory behaviour that takes place on online platforms, including social media, messaging apps, and online forums. Digital technologies are purported to propagate hate speech, bigotry, and intolerance for some specific purposes. It takes different forms, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, religious intolerance, and xenophobia. Digital hate can be expressed in various ways, such as text, images, videos, and memes.
Social media platforms are the most common venues for digital hate. The anonymity and the lack of accountability that social media platforms provide make it easier for people to express their prejudices without fear of reprisal. Digital hate speech can also incite violence and create a toxic online environment that can have real-life consequences.
Racism is the belief that one race is superior to others. Racism can take various forms, such as hate speech, harassment, and discrimination. Digital racism can manifest in memes, posts, comments, and messages that promote negative stereotypes and prejudice against individuals based on their race.
Sexism is the belief that one gender is superior to the other. Digital sexism can take different forms, such as sexual harassment, objectification, and discrimination. Women are the primary targets of digital sexism, and they face a wide range of online abuse, including sexual harassment and revenge porn.
Homophobia is the irrational fear and hatred of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT). Digital homophobia can take different forms, such as hate speech, harassment, and discrimination. Homophobic content can have real-life consequences, as it can incite violence against LGBT individuals.
Transphobia is the irrational fear and hatred of individuals who identify as transgender. Digital transphobia can take different forms, such as hate speech, harassment, and discrimination. Transphobic content can have real-life consequences, as it can incite violence against transgender individuals.
Religious intolerance is the refusal to accept the beliefs and practices of individuals from different religions. Digital religious intolerance can take different forms, such as hate speech, harassment, and discrimination. Religious intolerance can incite violence and create a toxic online environment that can have real-life consequences.
Xenophobia is the irrational fear and hatred of individuals from different countries and cultures. Digital xenophobia can take different forms, such as hate speech, harassment, and discrimination. Xenophobic content can incite violence and create a toxic online environment that can have real-life consequences.
Governments around the world have enacted laws to deal with digital hate speech. The laws aim to protect individuals from online abuse and hold perpetrators accountable for their actions. However, the laws vary from country to country, and some countries have more robust laws than others. The UK has enacted the Communications Act 2003, which criminalizes the sending of grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, or menacing messages over the internet. The law carries a maximum sentence. The First Amendment protects free speech in the US, but there are limitations to this right, such as when speech incites violence or threatens someone’s safety. The Communications Decency Act also provides immunity to social media platforms for the content posted by their users. The EU has several laws in place to combat hate speech and online harassment, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which regulates the collection and use of personal data, and the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which regulates hate speech on online platforms.
Several counter-measures can be taken to combat digital hate, including educating individuals about the harmful effects of digital hate and promoting tolerance and respect for diversity, which can help reduce the prevalence of digital hate speech. Encouraging individuals to report incidents of digital hate can help identify the perpetrators and hold them accountable for their actions. Regulating social media platforms to prevent the spread of hate speech and online harassment can also help reduce the prevalence of digital hate.
In recent years, India has been accused of using digital hate against Pakistan, particularly in the wake of the 2019 Pulwama attack. Social media platforms were flooded with hate-filled posts and tweets that blamed Pakistan for the attack and called for retaliation. These posts often used derogatory language and stereotypes to demonize Pakistanis.
In December 2020, the EU DisinfoLab, a UK-based organization that investigates online disinformation campaigns, published a mind-boggling report titled ‘Indian Chronicles,’ which exposed an extensive disinformation campaign against Pakistan that had been running since at least 2005. The report evidenced that the extensive worldwide disinformation campaign was orchestrated by an Indian company called Srivastava Group, which had created more than 750 fake media outlets and NGOs to spread disinformation against Pakistan to defame its international image.
The report asserted that the disinformation campaign targeted multiple audiences, including decision-makers, journalists, and the general public, in several countries around the world. It included a range of tactics, such as creating fake news portals, impersonating reputable news organizations, and publishing opinion pieces and letters to the editor under fake identities.
The report also proved that the campaign was designed to create a false international narrative against Pakistan by amplifying negative stories and discrediting the country’s image. The campaign was particularly active in the United Nations, where it aimed to influence decisions on issues such as Kashmir and terrorism.
It generated significant interest and controversy, with media outlets and governments highlighting the disinformation campaign against Pakistan by India. Pakistan’s then-foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi called for an international investigation into the campaign. In fact, digital media has become an integral part of every country’s foreign policy and Indians are ahead of Pakistan in this field.
Pakistan is facing a new wave of digital hate after the removal of former prime minister Iman Khan. State institutions are the main target of this organised phenomenon, repeating the saga of 1971. However, Pakistan lacks an institutional mechanism to watch, study and counter this digital onslaught, disinformation and polarisation endeavours by centrifugal forces within the country, mostly espoused by India. It seems that the abrupt ouster of Khan has paved the way for the aghast Arab Spring that could balkanise Pakistan. However, the fragile PDM alliance, ISPR or press information departments have no counter-strategy to explain the state’s standpoint at digital fora. This has disgruntled the jobless youth and moulded public opinion in favour of the PTI.
If Pakistan wants to counter this organised digital hate wave, it must develop and promote a national communication policy to control the centrifugal forces while ensuring that institutions work according to their constitutional mandate. But who will bell the cat?
