Techdirt is off for the long weekend! We'll be back with our regular posts tomorrow.
Politicians Queue Up To Make France's Proposed Law Against 'Hateful Content' Far, Far Worse
from the gag-that-ag-gag dept
The intent behind “ag-gag” laws is pretty evident. The aim is to prevent the general public learning about unsatisfactory or downright cruel conditions in which animals are kept by some farmers. Techdirt has been reporting on them for a number of years. Fortunately, US courts are increasingly throwing them out as unconstitutional. So far, ag-gag laws seems to be a US specialty, but that may be about to change. A new law under discussion in France would force online companies to remove “hateful content” from their networks within 24 hours. The journalist Marc Rees spotted a proposed amendment to the law that would define the following content as “hateful” (via Google Translate):
stigmatizing agricultural activities, breeding or sale of products from agriculture and livestock breeding and inciting acts of intrusion or violence vis-à-vis professionals of agriculture, livestock breeding and the processing and sale of products from these sectors
As an article in Numerama (original in French) points out:
All these criminal acts are already repressed by the law. For example, death threats are handled in the penal code, with several years in prison and a fine of up to tens of thousands of euros. Ditto for the night intrusions, which can be assimilated to a violation of domicile
The only thing that this proposed amendment adds to the current law in France is the requirement for online services to take down posts that “stigmatize” farmers in some vague way — an ag-gag law, in other words.
Trying to turn proposed legislation against “hateful content” into an ag-gag law is just one example of how a bad idea is being made into a worse one. Other amendments have been put forward that would force online companies to remove within 24 hours “hateful” posts about physical appearance, disabilities, political opinions, mother tongue, cultural practices, and many other areas where feelings often run high (original in French, behind paywall). One amendment even wants an open list of “hateful” things that have to be taken down within 24 hours, so that new categories can be added in the future without needing to amend the legislation. It will be fun watching how French politicians fight among themselves over what should or shouldn’t be included from the long list of proposed additions. The danger is clearly that whatever the outcome, the harm to freedom of speech in France — and maybe beyond — will be even worse than critics of the new law feared.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter, Diaspora, or Mastodon.
Filed Under: ag gag, censorship, france, free speech, hate speech, hateful content
Comments on “Politicians Queue Up To Make France's Proposed Law Against 'Hateful Content' Far, Far Worse”
Hmmm if political content makes the list(and the bill passes), then does that that certain politicians who’s every word seems like a ligitimate reason to hate them, will have all/most of their speech taken down?
Light-speed would have nothing on them
The danger is clearly that whatever the outcome, the harm to freedom of speech in France — and maybe beyond — will be even worse than critics of the new law feared.
Given France has argued in the past that right-to-rewrite history orders should apply globally that is not at all an unlikely hypothetical. If they cram that legal trainwreck through the question would not be ‘would they try to enforce it globally?’, but rather ‘how quickly would they try to enforce it globally?’
Here we go again
In a country with such a vivid history of bloody civil uprising predicated on political overreach, you’d think they’d know better by now…
Re: Here we go again
… how do people anywhere accurately learn history?
every human anywhere is born totally ignorant of history
that’s why every government everywhere seeks to control the education system and instill the ‘proper’ spin on history (and politics)
Re: Here we go again
The four most deadly words in the English language "This time is different.". Usually followed by more rationalizations.
Will they try and enforce this law in the eu,not just france
if so free speech will be severely limited, if sites like youtube,
only allowed french videos to be seen in france It would send a message,
bad laws limiting free speech effect users and the public more than
anyone else.
many websites may choose to block all user comments and uploads
from france in order to reduce legal costs .
It seems every month someone proposes a new law which limits free speech on the web.
The printing press led to imprimatur, that is a license to print to protect the power of church and state, for all the good that actually achieved. It now seems like those in power are going down the same road with respect to publishing on the Internet. I just hope the result is not another period of violence to establish a new world order accommodating the power shift that the Internet enables.
Hateful Content
Politicians are making the law against hateful content much more hateful.
More whack-a-mole with statements some people dont like
"Some animal farming treats their animals in ways which could easily be seen as torture".
Factual "hate speech"?
Re: More whack-a-mole with statements some people dont like
It’s been labeled "hate speech" because a major issue for animal-rights activists has been Kosher and Halal slaughter, which would have been under any normal circumstance banned as a cruel and inhumane practice in 21st century Europe, except that it’s a required religious ritual by two prominent minority {non-Christian] religious communities.
So if you’re against animal cruelty, then you’re a Nazi.
Yeah because a similar law worked Sooo well in Germany.
Vichy:man all we needed was an image change.
This is why “hate speech” laws are such a bad idea, as “hate speech is undefinable. Your free speech may be someone else’s “hate speech” and vice versa. “Hate speech” should really just be called “thoughtcrime” and be done with it.
The end
Why don’t they just skip to the end and require all speech to be pre-approved by the government?
animals deserve protection from cruelty
farmers want to commit animal abuse in secret and never be found out to be the sick bas….. that they are.ag gag bills permit them to do that. there is no reason that those who are so sick as to be cruel to animals are not exposed for the sickos that they are.