PewDiePie, racism and Youtube’s neoliberalist interpretation of freedom of speech

Hokka, Jenni

doi:10.1177/1354856520938602

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One potential avenue would involve YouTube itself, ideally by linking the inoculation material into the recommender system such that it is recommended to people who are deemed likely to watch potentially radicalizing content. Although YouTube’s practices have been said to normalize racism on social media (Hokka, 2021 ), this seems to arise from a neoliberal interpretation of the “marketplace-of-ideas” notion (Hokka, 2021 ) rather than a deliberate effort to support or sustain racism. YouTube has a clear policy against hate speech (Google, n.d.) and has recently revised the recommender system to avoid problematic content including conspiracy theories (YouTube, 2019 , 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Citing her long-standing racist record, Twitter permanently banned her account in June 2020 (Robertson, 2020 ), but her YouTube channel remains active as of the date of this writing (July 2021). This search result is unlikely to be an isolated incident: A recent analysis of racist content on YouTube by Hokka ( 2021 ) concluded that “YouTube’s policies and practices as ideological choices contribute to the normalisation of racism on social media” (p. 142).…”

Section: Significance Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inoculating against the spread of Islamophobic and radical-Islamist disinformation

Lewandowsky

Yesilada

2021

Cogn. Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the results of a preregistered study that tested the effectiveness of inoculating participants against Islamophobic and radical-Islamist disinformation. Participants in the experimental (inoculation) condition watched a video that explained common rhetorical markers of radical-Islamist and Islamophobic disinformation that had been identified in an analysis of YouTube content. The information was presented in a neutral context not involving Islam and focused on analysis of the misleading argumentation. The control group watched a video about an unrelated topic. Participants were then exposed to target videos with “gateway” content that constituted an entry point to potential Islamist or Islamophobic radicalization. Both videos contained numerous items of disinformation. Participants then answered a variety of questions such as how likely they were to share the video, their level of agreement, and their perceived accuracy of the video. Participants who had received the inoculation displayed less agreement with the video content, perceived the video as less reliable, and were less likely to share it in comparison with participants in the control group. The study provides support for the use of argument-based inoculation in combatting extremist messages.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Significance Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inoculating against the spread of Islamophobic and radical-Islamist disinformation

Lewandowsky

Yesilada

2021

Cogn. Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Governance by platforms entails gendered, racialized, and even sexualized lenses that often harm the very people that these policies are meant to protect (Gerrard & Thornham, 2020). Hiding behind the "free speech" justification and democratic "platform values," platforms often engage in neoliberal interpretations of freedom of speech (Hokka, 2021) and claim to practice "neutrality" in their decisions (Hallinan et al, 2021). In addition, investigative reports and leaked memos from employees of major platforms point to all of these "free expression" values being at best hypocritical and at worst manipulative and negligent.…”

Section: Platform Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Safe from “harm”: The governance of violence by platforms

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of issues have emerged related to how platforms moderate and mitigate “harm.” Although platforms have recently developed more explicit policies in regard to what constitutes “hate speech” and “harmful content,” it appears that platforms often use subjective judgments of harm that specifically pertains to spectacular, physical violence—but harm takes on many shapes and complex forms. The politics of defining “harm” and “violence” within these platforms are complex and dynamic, and represent entrenched histories of how control over these definitions extends to people's perceptions of them. Via a critical discourse analysis of policy documents from three major platforms (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube), we argue that platforms' narrow definitions of harm and violence are not just insufficient but result in these platforms engaging in a form of symbolic violence. Moreover, the platforms position harm as a floating signifier, imposing conceptions of not just what violence is and how it manifests, but who it impacts. Rather than changing the mechanisms of their design that enable harm, the platforms reconfigure intentionality and causality to try to stop users from being “harmful,” which, ironically, perpetuates harm. We provide a number of suggestions, namely a restorative justice‐focused approach, in addressing platform harm.

show abstract

“…In the context of the above, to reduce cross-cultural conflicts online, some researchers [41] highlight the need to develop security strategies on the Internet, such as the creation of inclusive learning online platforms or advisory programs about the correct use of social networks [42]. The inexistence of strategies of this type is reflected in greater cyberbullying situations in the educational contexts towards minority cultural groups [43].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyberbullying Analysis in Intercultural Educational Environments Using Binary Logistic Regressions

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study is to analyze how religion, ethnic group, and race influence the likelihood of becoming either a cybervictim or cyberbully in intercultural educational environments. In the research, 755 students in secondary education were analyzed in the south of Spain through the Cyberbullying Scale for students with Cultural and Religious Diversity (CSCRD). The analyses were carried out using the Statistical Package SPSS and the STATA software. The results obtained from the Kruskal–Wallis H test showed significant differences according to these aspects, for both the cybervictim and cyberbully parameters. The results stemming from binary logistic regressions confirmed such differences and regarded those students who belong to the Muslim religion, the gypsy ethnic group and the Asian race as being more likely to become cybervictims. Furthermore, these analyses showed that Gypsy and Asian students were also more likely to be cyberbullies than other groups. The main conclusions state that minority groups are more likely to suffer cyberbullying in intercultural educational environments, and that students from these groups are also more likely to become cyberbullies.

show abstract

PewDiePie, racism and Youtube’s neoliberalist interpretation of freedom of speech

Cited by 26 publications

References 39 publications

Inoculating against the spread of Islamophobic and radical-Islamist disinformation

Inoculating against the spread of Islamophobic and radical-Islamist disinformation

Safe from “harm”: The governance of violence by platforms

Cyberbullying Analysis in Intercultural Educational Environments Using Binary Logistic Regressions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About