On line hate monitor seeks funding
The Online Hate Prevention Institute (OHPI), an Australian charity whose work many of you will have seen over the past 18 months, has launched its first appeal with a new video highlighting the nature and risks of online hate.
Dr Andre Oboler
The appeal is based on the crowd funding platform Indiegogo and the ROI Community are backing the campaign, matching donations dollar for dollar in real time. The appeal democratizes giving, allowing all members of the public to support OHPI’s important work. The funds raised will further democratize the fight against online hate with the bulk of the fund earmarked to support the development of advanced online tools to empower the public and hold social media companies accountable when they fail to properly respond to users reports of online hate.
OHPI’s CEO, Dr Andre Oboler, explained “we’ve waited 18 months before launching this appeal. In that time we’ve building our track record including responses to antisemitism, Holocaust denial, racism against Indigenous Australians, religious vilification against Muslim, hate directed against military veterans and reports documenting online content mocking the death of children and no doubt compounding the grief of their parents, family and friends. Now we’re going to the public, with a video highlighting the issues we deal with, explaining the danger such hate poses, and we’re asking people to help us build the tools to take the fight against this hate to the next level.”
The appeal is scheduled to run for 60 days, but on day one had already reach 13% of its total fundraising target. “People know OHPI and its work. They know we’re doers and that we have an impact, and they want to be part of helping us grow and enabling us to empower a generation of online activists”, Dr Oboler explained.
The appeal target aims to cover just the first stage of the development of online tools. This will empower users and will enable data to be gathered, but the tools will initially lack the functionality to empower other civil rights organisations and researchers to work with the data. If the appeal target is exceeded, the extra funds will enable phase two of the tool development to begin as soon as phase one is completed.
“We believe this work will revolutionize the fight against online hate, and we’re incredibly pleased to see so many people getting behind the appeal, not only with their donations but also in sharing the appeal page and its video with others. The awareness being raised has its own impact in stopping hate. We’re just the facilitators; the online community is now making this happen. With this support behind us, once the tools are built and start to be used, the impact will be huge.”
Progress on the campaign will be regularly reported on the OHPI Facebook page over the coming weeks.
Dr Obeler was interviewed by Manfred Gerstenfeld:
“The rise of social media has caused multiple problems for Jews and Israel. Many of them manifest themselves in ways that concern society at large. Jews and Israel however, often seem to be the first ones negatively impacted. My own work over almost a decade has focused mainly on identifying and recommending changes which can eliminate or mitigate these problems.
“The first issue we face is ideological. The internet grew out of a lawless environment. This tradition of ‘internet exceptionalism’ continues, even if it is increasingly challenged. A clash of cultures exists between the Americans who operate many of the global service providers, and the rest of the world. The Americans want complete freedom in their operations. Outside America however, the common position is that hate speech is highly undesirable. The public there has a legitimate expectation that the state will take steps to prevent and perhaps even criminalize it. This is in light of how hate speech played a significant role in enabling the Holocaust.”
Dr. Andre Oboler is Chief Executive Officer of the Online Hate Prevention Institute in Australia. He is co-Chair of the Working Group on Anti-Semitism on the Internet and in the Media of the Global Forum to Combat Anti-Semitism.
“Another major issue concerns flaws in the systems of service providers such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. They can relate to the software, processes and sometimes also the people involved. Twitter does not have a mechanism for flagging problem content. It thus keeps no genuine check on antisemitism. This issue is currently before the French courts after a complaint by the French Union of Jewish Students.
“Many examples from Facebook involve antisemitism in various forms. For instance, promotion of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the classic demonization of the Jews, the comparison of the State of Israel with Nazi Germany as well as conspiracy theories. It is a flaw in Facebook’s practices that complaints regarding such content are often rejected. Data from a group of Israeli students working against online antisemitism, suggest that this occurs with over 85% of valid complaints. As Facebook has no quality control system, it becomes even harder to remove the content afterwards.
“With some providers, one sometimes gets the impression that those in charge of dealing with complaints wish to avoid discussing it. In some companies it is difficult to find a specific person to liaise with about severe and ongoing problems concerning antisemitism. One often receives a generic response signed by ‘the company’s team’ or a fictitious person.
For years, Facebook has refused to acknowledge the antisemitic nature of Holocaust Denial, which is one of the most extreme forms of antisemitism.
“Yet another major concern is the companies’ lack of understanding about antisemitism’s nature. This oldest form of hate which has existed for millennia, has been studied well. In most forms, it is easily and consistently identified by scholars and experts. The providers however, want to create their own definitions and understanding of antisemitism. They clearly lack the expertise, skill or even a desire to do so properly. This has led for example, to a situation where for years, Facebook has refused to acknowledge the antisemitic nature of Holocaust Denial, which is one of the most extreme forms of antisemitism.
“In civil society, similar problems are increasing against other communities, such as indigenous groups, homosexuals, religious and cultural minorities and immigrants. One public divergence between Facebook’s position and public opinion was over pages making light of rape. Facebook initially considered this humorous content and sought to protect and excuse it. This led to accusations of sexism and major public backlash. Facebook then quickly reversed direction.
“Jews should use the expertise gained from the fight against antisemitism to assist other communities under attack. Governments need to be in greater control within their own borders, as well as – when their citizens are under attack – extra-territorially through international treaties. Law enforcement outside of the United States often struggles to get either a suitable or a timely response from U.S. based service providers.
The internet should not be America’s playground. The mere passage of information through the United States, or use of the services of a U.S. based company, should not create difficulties when both the perpetrator and victim reside in some other country.
“There is also a constant propaganda war waged against the Jewish state in social media. Misinformation goes viral rapidly. Staged videos and doctored photographs are rife, particularly during times of conflict. Truth plays no role in this particular arena. Content is king, and the more sensational the better. There is also a constant stream of support for big lies such as ‘Israeli Apartheid.’
“Israel also faces coordinated use of social media as a tool of war by Iran. Networks of Israel activists are compromised. Groups like ‘Anonymous’ are infiltrated and become Iranian puppets. Social media thus becomes a megaphone for state-sponsored hate propaganda, dehumanization and of course, antisemitism. Yet social media companies stand idly by, watching their advertising profits roll in.”
