This month, we delve into a special type of dangerous speech – one that doesn’t attack anyone. Instead, this speech valorizes violence, characterizing it as something honorable and connected to the identity of the in-group.
Read MoreIn pro-Trump forums, when someone “pushes the norm of what is considered acceptable speech” by posting a call to execute judges or other public officials, “and no one questions it, then the norm of what is acceptable may shift,” said Cathy Buerger, who studies inflammatory rhetoric at the nonpartisan Dangerous Speech Project in Washington. Buerger reviewed the violent posts identified by Reuters.
Read MoreThis brief cites “The Insidious Creep of Violent Rhetoric”, Executive Director Susan Benesch’s essay for Noema, in which she illustrates that it’s possible to incite violence very effectively without directly calling for it. Her work supports the amicus brief, which explores how the events surrounding the 2020 U.S. election and the violence on January 6, 2021 relate to events that have caused democratic erosion and collapse in other countries.
Read MoreTrump‘s recent xenophobic rhetoric is more brazen and explicit. What can be done about it?
Read More“Is it actually guarding the election against fraud, or is it guarding the election against a result in which Trump is not declared the winner?”
Read MoreTrump’s remarks exhibit familiar patterns or “hallmarks” of dangerous speech, including ‘threat to group integrity or purity’ which is rhetoric suggesting that the presence of other people is poisonous and must be removed. With the term “vermin” Trump also, of course, dehumanized his political opponents.
Read MoreThe former president has used expressions in recent speeches that are specifically and unmistakably redolent of Nazi rhetoric.
Read MoreThe language of the Trump tweet is inflammatory to his followers but ambiguous enough that he can claim it’s harmless. It isn’t. In the four words of his tweet he repeated his false claim that the election was stolen from him, and framed his cause as a righteous war.
Read MoreIt’s vital for influential Americans to publicly correct those dangerous lies and others circulating in our body politic. The deliberate gap left by our national law imposes a civic obligation to practice the only peaceful alternative to criminalizing speech that leads to violence: publicly repudiating it.
Read MoreWe’re disappointed that Meta is restoring Trump’s accounts, but its new approach to content by public figures in times of civil unrest is an improvement.
Read MoreOver and over at political rallies, Donald Trump read the lyrics of a song which he turned into dangerous speech by giving it an entirely new meaning. “The Snake” describes a woman who rescues a half-frozen serpent, only to have it betray her kindness with a lethal bite. Trump frames it as a warning that foreigners pose a mortal threat to Americans.
Read MoreJudging posts exclusively by their content is like studying cigarettes to understand their toxicity. It’s one useful form of data, but to understand what smoking can do to people’s lungs, study the lungs, not just the smoke.
Read MoreFacebook was correct to prohibit Donald Trump from posting on Facebook and Instagram, and should make that ban permanent. In the future, when considering whether to take action on content posted by political candidates, office holders, and former office holders, Facebook should test the content’s capacity to lead to real-world violence, by evaluating whether the content has been understood by an account’s followers as incitement, rather than trying to divine the intent of the account holder.
Read MoreAlthough Trump remains banned from Facebook and Twitter, Trump-ism is far from gone. The greatest, lasting damage his rhetoric did was not the January 6 riot –- awful as it was — but rather the impression he has left upon so many well-intentioned Americans that he remains a necessary, even God-ordained defender of their faith and values.
Read MoreIt was a watershed when Donald Trump lost his social media megaphone on Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms right after…
Read MoreTwitter and Facebook have set a precedent in removing Trump from their platforms—but can they apply the same principle globally? Salil Tripathi explores this question, using the dangerous speech framework.
Read MoreThe 2020 U.S. election was like nothing we’d seen before for many reasons, including disinformation, dangerous speech, and unprecedented fears of election-related violence. Now it’s time to start thinking about the future.
Read MoreFor the first time, Twitter marked one of Donald Trump’s posts as a rules violation. It was the right decision– but Twitter should provide more detail about why posts violate its rules.
Read MoreWe’re seeing a worrisome pattern—that of authority figures capitalizing on the public’s need for guidance and security to spread disinformation, including dangerous speech.
Read MoreIntentionally associating COVID-19 with Asian communities encourages cruel and ignorant stigmatizing, and distracts people from reliable information about the disease.
Read MoreGovernments, internet companies, and civil society organizations attempting to prevent the spread of violent white supremacist ideas – and killings – must consider the radicalizing capacity of fear and threat, instead of focusing exclusively on hate speech.
Read MoreThe Alt-Right’s recent stumbles may look bad for their activists – but their ideas are making headway in the US’ most prominent platforms.
Read MorePresident Donald Trump has routinely used dehumanizing rhetoric, like “dog” and “animal,” to describe people – especially people of color. These words must not be brushed off; they bear the weight of centuries of racist horror.
Read MoreBy referring to immigrants who “pour into and infest our Country,” President Trump has invoked a malevolent vocabulary – one which has striking similarities to rhetoric which has preceded episodes of intergroup violence.
Read MorePresident Trump’s hateful and increasingly dangerous rhetoric has now targeted legal immigrants, describing diversity visa recipients as “the worst of the worst.”
Read MoreSadly, it’s not new that Donald Trump vilified a group of people with spurious claims from a terrible source: today,…
Read MoreUpdate 2/27/2017: Another incident of vandalism at a Jewish cemetery occurred yesterday, this time at a Jewish cemetery in Philadelphia. Clean-up…
Read MoreNow that Donald Trump is president, he has an even greater responsibility to denounce hateful speech and violence: some of…
Read MoreAt the Dangerous Speech Project, we are often asked whether President-elect Donald Trump’s remarks constitute Dangerous Speech. Since the United…
Read MoreThis Washington Post article profiles Susan Benesch, director of the Dangerous Speech Project, and explains our work.
Read MoreMuch of the world is transfixed at present by Donald Trump’s often insulting and provocative language. But like any speech, it can only be fully understood in context – which now includes remarks more belligerent and shocking than Trump’s, from his supporters who have shouted “Kill her” and “Build the wall – kill them all” at recent Trump rallies, and from other elected officials such as governors of U.S. states.
Read More