Al Jazeera Journalism Review

Bassil
BAGHDAD, IRAQ - Lebanon's Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil (C) arrives at Baghdad airport on August 18, 2014. Bassil has recently been criticised for tweets in which he spoke against Syrian refugees, however he was not 'deplatformed' for his views, while others have been [Ali Abbas-Pool/Getty Images]

Journalism needs clear standards when it comes to ‘deplatforming’ 

Currently, deplatforming of people with views considered hateful is applied in a haphazard way. This just adds to the problem of hate speech

 

 

When a sexual harassment scandal hit the headlines in Jordan featuring a male teacher at the Jordan University of Science & Technology (JUST), many of the media organisations reporting the case chose to give a platform to the teacher rather than the women who had accused him.

This case raises important questions about when we, as journalists, should choose not to platform people with controversial views that might violate human rights or ethics. 

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees freedom of opinion and expression for everyone, and this right includes the freedom of the individual to “hold opinions, seek and receive news and ideas, and to spread them to others”. With the rise of free (in all meanings of free) social media platforms, therefore, people have become able to express their thoughts freely and widely. 

But when it comes to newsy opinions and statements, journalists find themselves with a difficult choice: They either need to include opinions deemed hateful or harmful, or exclude them for ethical reasons. The choice to exclude people with specific statements and opinions that violate human rights or ethics is widely referred to as “deplatforming”. 

What is deplatforming?

The Oxford Dictionary is one of the few to include “deplatform” as a word, meaning to “prevent (a person holding views regarded as unacceptable or offensive) from contributing to a forum or debate, especially by blocking them on a particular website”. 

This term is mostly used in a journalistic context, however it occurs in an academic one too and has done for some time. For example, it occurred  at the London School of Economics (LSE) in 1973 when the British National Union of Students objected to a lecture by the British-German psychologist Hans Eysenck. The lecture wasn’t cancelled but the protest against it inspired another incident in the same month; a lecture by the American academic Samuel P Huntington, who had previously advised the US government on Vietnam, was cancelled when the students occupied the lecture theatre. 

Many media outlets and social media companies now use deplatforming for the same reason - usually with good intentions. But this policy can be misused by media outlets and journalists to deliberately deny some people or organisations the right of speech.

When is it right to deplatform someone? 

The ongoing - and valid - discussion regarding the thin line between deplatforming as an ethical policy or a violation of freedom of expression, is no different to the discussion around whether it is even possible to have a completely impartial journalism. 

While many believe that the media cannot be completely neutral, due to the different political backgrounds that media institutions may exist within, others believe that ethical and professional standards are capable of creating a neutral and balanced media. 

Despite the different points of view in this regard, there remain clear lines for journalistic ethics that guarantee the public the right to know without being manipulated or misled. Some of these lines make it totally unethical for a journalist or a media outlet to host someone or a group with statements that violate human rights or ethical standards. For example, if we know that someone has previously expressed racist ideas towards someone or some ethnic groups, a journalist might have to consider deplatforming him/her as his/her ideas could harm the vulnerable audience or cause them to be harmed. 

Furthermore, granting a platform to people who spread hate speech is one way to enable these ideas to spread to a wider range of people, when they should not. 

Who gets to decide what is ‘hate speech’?

But this raises the thorny question of who gets to determine what is hate speech in the first place.

For example, the British feminist journalist and activist Julie Bindel was barred from entering a library last week to speak about male violence against women and girls because of her belief in the retention of female-only spaces (such as prisons and domestic violence shelters) which exclude transwomen, for example. Some believe that is “hate speech” but in fact her “gender critical” belief that human beings cannot change sex are protected by law in England and Wales.

Furthermore, shouldn’t everyone have the right to express his or her thoughts freely as guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Yes, everyone can express thoughts “without annoying” others. But receiving a platform on which to air your views is not a right for every person or institution, it’s a privilege. Also, not giving media space to a particular person or institution does not necessarily mean silencing them. 

In a world where cyberspace has become available to everyone, people can express their thoughts on any social media platform they choose, such as their account on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking. 

Deleting Palestinian Facebook pages

But even these platforms impose their own policies for publishing; they can simply remove any content that violates their ethical and legal policies. In June 2021, for example, Facebook removed the page of the Palestinian Quds Press Agency, and in the following month it also removed the page of the Palestinian Shehab News Agency, which had more than 7 million followers at the time. 

Facebook justified the decision by arguing that the two agencies were violating its standards for using the site by “supporting violence”. In 2018, the Israeli Ministry of Justice announced that Facebook had agreed to shut down pages containing pro-Palestinian content on its site. If Facebook's criteria were clear, we would have heard, for example, about Facebook also deleting extremist Israeli pages inciting violence against Palestinians. Why were pages showing Ukrainians how to make Molotov Cocktail bombs to resist Russian invaders not deleted?

Choosing not to cover news about the activities of holders of opinions deemed hateful by wider society at all might fall under a media blackout. For example, neo-Nazis can be deplatformed in order not to spread more of their racist views, but news about their activities can be addressed in general without the need for holding interviews with them. 

Another example is that while media outlets must report terrorist attacks by ISIS, the terrorist fighters themselves should never be given the chance to talk or justify their terrorism, because this can lead to more radicalisation among audiences. 

Deplatforming doesn't apply only to political coverage. In the Arab world, there are many talk shows that discuss taboos in the Middle East, which is a great thing to have. But for instance, if a talk show is discussing violence against women, should we also give a platform to men who commit these crimes to justify them? That is effectively what happened at the Jordan University of Science & Technology. 

What if hate speech comes from officially elected figures ? 

In January 2021, Twitter banned former US President Donald Trump from posting after he lost the presidential election. Facebook also followed Twitter's step, blocking Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts temporarily for two weeks because "allowing the president to continue using [our services] during this period is very risky”. 

In June 2019, the former Lebanese Minister of Foreign Affairs, Gebran Bassil, published 43 tweets in which he spoke against refugees in Lebanon, especially Syrians. His words were criticised as being racist. Although Bassil represented the Lebanese government at the time, giving him media space could have meant stirring up racism and sectarianism in Lebanon. But Bassil was never deplatformed, and he kept posting such content, and showing up on TV screens.

Conversely, in 2021, Facebook removed the page of the Lebanese armed group, Hezbollah, and the page of its Al-Manar TV channel.  But this decision had political background, as the US government had already banned all institutions operating on its lands from dealing with organisations that had been designated by the US State Department as terrorist organisations. 

In 2019, Twitter temporarily banned the account of the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Republic, Ali Khomeini, after he published a tweet in which he wished harm to the British writer Salman Rushdi.

Deplatforming as a media blackout tool 

Every journalist knows that delivering news impartially and professionally requires ethics, in order to prevent one's personal ideas and opinions from affecting coverage. 

The same thing applies to deplatforming; journalists should not choose to deplatfrom an opinion or a statement just because they personally do not agree with it. Accordingly, media outlets need to set their own clear standards for deplatforming, so that these standards are clear, ethical and legal.

Earlier last month, The German state-run Goethe Institute disinvited Palestinian activist Muhammad Al-Kurd from speaking at one of its conferences in Hamburg, Germany because, it said, Al-Kurd “had made several comments about Israel in a way the Goethe-Institut does not find acceptable”.

Earlier in November 2021, Al-Kurd have given a speech to the UN General Assembly, in which he stated that the Israeli state had been established over Palestinian land after ethnically cleansing its Palestinian original inhabitants. Is this hate speech? And who gets to determine that?

Deplatforming is a hugely grey area. We need to set clear standards for mass media and social networks with audience-generated content. 

Abeer Ayyoub is a freelance journalist based in Istanbul

 

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera Journalism Review’s editorial stance

 

 

More Articles

How Latin American media echoes Israeli discourse in reporting Gaza news

Heavily influenced by US and Israeli diplomatic efforts, Latin American media predominantly aligns with and amplifies the Israeli perspective. This divergence between political actions and media representation highlights the complex dynamics shaping Latin American coverage of the Gaza conflict.

Rita Freire Published on: 23 Nov, 2023
Critique of German media's handling of Gaza Conflict: Biased reporting and controversial journalistic stances

The German media's coverage of the Gaza conflict has been criticized for being biased, presenting a distorted view of the conflict, focusing only on the Israeli perspective, and downplaying the suffering of Palestinians. This biased reporting undermines the media's role as an objective source of information and fails to provide a balanced view of the conflict.

AJR Contributor Published on: 16 Nov, 2023
Colonial legacy of surveillance: hidden world of surveillance technology in the African continent

African nations’ expenditure on surveillance technology from China, Europe and the US is a direct threat to the media, democracy and freedom of speech, and an enduring legacy of colonial surveillance practices.

Derick M
Derick Matsengarwodzi Published on: 14 Nov, 2023
How the New York Times fuelled a crackdown on journalists in India

Vague reporting and a piece ‘laden with innuendo’ by the New York Times gave Indian authorities the excuse they needed to crack down on news website Newsclick

Meer Faisal
Meer Faisal Published on: 31 Oct, 2023
Journalists feel the pain, but the story of Gaza must be told  

People don’t always want to hear the historical context behind horrifying events, resorting even to censorship, but the media must be free to provide it

Aidan
Aidan White Published on: 30 Oct, 2023
Queen Rania is absolutely right - Western media’s double standards on Gaza

Why does international media use loaded and dehumanising language about the Palestinians when reporting on the Israeli bombardment of 2.2 million people in Gaza?

Abeer Ayyoub
Abeer Ayyoub Published on: 27 Oct, 2023
'War propaganda' - Brazil’s media has abandoned journalistic standards over Gaza

Brazil’s mainstream media, in its unwavering support for Israel, is out of step with public and social media responses to the bombardment of Gaza

Bruno
Bruno Lima Rocha Beaklini Published on: 25 Oct, 2023
‘Emotional truth’ is not a cover for fabricating stories

Comedians who engage with the news should not be free to ignore the rules of ethical journalism

Akanksha
Akanksha Singh Published on: 16 Oct, 2023
Get this straight, Western media: Palestinians aren’t sub-human

Dehumanisation of Palestinians is as central to Israel’s war strategy as the deadly missiles it wields

Mitrovica
Andrew Mitrovica Published on: 10 Oct, 2023
Victims of the Mediterranean: ‘Migrants’ or ‘Refugees’?

The term ‘migrant’ insufficient to describe victims of the horror unfolding in the Mediterranean Sea; it dehumanises these people and is a failure of journalism

A picture of the author, Mohammad Ahdad.
Mohammad Ahdad Published on: 2 Oct, 2023
Why is a Western news organisation funding propaganda in India?

ANI, the world’s largest source of Indian news, receives funding from Thomson-Reuters, despite widespread condemnation for its misinformation about Muslims

MM
Morley Musick Published on: 18 Sep, 2023
How do we determine 'newsworthiness' in the digital age?

The relentless flow of news in the digital age has re-shaped the parameters by which we decide what is 'news' and what is not

Muhammad Khamaiseh Published on: 11 Sep, 2023
‘Focus on the story, not the storyteller’ - the dilemma of a diaspora journalist

When reporting on their homelands, diaspora journalists walk a fine line between emotional connection and objective storytelling

Anam Hussain
Anam Hussain Published on: 4 Sep, 2023
Why does Arab media fail so badly at covering refugee issues?

Arabic media discourse on refugees and migrants frequently aligns too closely with the Western narrative, often spreading fear of migrants while emphasising the burdens of asylum

A picture of the author, Ahmad Abu Hamad
Ahmad Abu Hamad Published on: 28 Aug, 2023
What does Zimbabwe’s new ‘Patriot Bill’ mean for journalists?  

As Zimbabwe heads into elections this week, a new law dubbed the ‘Patriot Bill’ will further criminalise journalism

Derick M
Derick Matsengarwodzi Published on: 21 Aug, 2023
Verify everything: What I learned from covering the Qatar World Cup 

Last year’s FIFA World Cup in Qatar was not the flop so many in the Western media predicted it would be. It taught me one thing - verify everything!

Noe
Noe Zavaleta Published on: 8 Aug, 2023
How do we determine ‘newsworthiness’?

Digital media and the algorithms used by platforms to determine the news they send out to their audiences have fundamentally changed the face of news planning

MS
Mohammed Shazly Published on: 24 Jul, 2023
What Zimbabwe’s news rooms must learn from global media closures

A flourishing media needs more than just capital and a few good ideas - it needs innovation  

Derick M
Derick Matsengarwodzi Published on: 13 Jul, 2023
Journalists beware! The silly season is upon us

With parliaments on recess and all the movers and shakers off on their holidays, journalists can find themselves scrabbling about for any old news to report. But be careful what you resort to

Ilya
Ilya U Topper Published on: 3 Jul, 2023
Guatemalan media needs to talk about the consequences of corruption

The media in Guatemala has a responsibility to demonstrate how corruption affects people’s human rights

Jorge
Jorge Sagastume Published on: 26 Jun, 2023
Donald Lu is dangerously wrong - India does not have a ‘free press’

The US must stop whitewashing Prime Minister Modi’s crackdown on Indian journalists

Safa
Safa Ahmed Published on: 20 Jun, 2023
Sudan shows us why Africans must tell their own conflict stories

Africa lacks freedom of expression because its stories are told by others

Philip Obaji Jr
Philip Obaji Jr Published on: 1 Jun, 2023
What happened when I asked ChatGPT to write my article

It got quite a lot right, and quite a lot very, very wrong

Anam Hussain
Anam Hussain Published on: 22 May, 2023
Shireen Abu Akleh’s forgotten murder

Over the past year, many in the media profession in the US have deliberately chosen to forget the assassination of their colleague

Mitrovica
Andrew Mitrovica Published on: 11 May, 2023