Extreme speech online: an anthropological critique of hate speech debates

TLDR

The article develops the concept of “extreme speech” to critically examine vitriolic online exchange in India and Ethiopia and challenges the prevailing framing of such abuse as hate speech. Using comparative practice, the authors contextualize online debate by attending to user practices, speech histories, and the ambiguity of vitriol, thereby providing a nuanced analysis of extreme speech. The study demonstrates that comparative practice complicates the discourse of Internet risk that is increasingly invoked to legitimize online speech restrictions.

Abstract

Exploring the cases of India and Ethiopia, this article develops the concept of “extreme speech” to critically analyze the cultures of vitriolic exchange on Internet-enabled media. While online abuse is largely understood as “hate speech,” we make two interventions to problematize the presuppositions of this widely invoked concept. First, extreme speech emphasizes the need to contextualize online debate with an attention to user practices and particular histories of speech cultures. Second, related to context, is the ambiguity of online vitriol, which defies a simple antonymous conception of hate speech versus acceptable speech. The article advances this analysis using the approach of “comparative practice,” which, we suggest, complicates the discourse of Internet “risk” increasingly invoked to legitimate online speech restrictions.