Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-10-Speech-2-460"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090310.35.2-460"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"− The question the honourable Member has asked is not new, which shows that it is something that is very dear to the heart of MEPs.
So we already have a whole series of mechanisms, a whole series of laws and a whole series of measures implementing these laws. But as always with negative content – be it in the traditional media or on the Internet – it pops up more quickly than you can fight it.
I would recall the answer I gave to the questions by Mr Moraes on the Internet and hate crimes, by Luca Romagnoli on content and the use of blogs, and by Robert Kilroy-Silk on racism and violence on social websites. I can tell you not only that those questions have been asked but also that the Commission has taken action in this area.
Speaking only about the social websites, some weeks ago, all the social networking site providers sat around a table and signed a code of conduct to help young children and adolescents to fight against negative content on these websites.
As you know, the Commission strongly rejects all racist and xenophobic views conveyed on the Internet, together with the types of hate speech cited by the honourable Member in his question. As is often the case with the web, the picture is one of stark contrasts. On the web, the best rubs shoulders with the worst: on the one hand, there are tremendous opportunities to diffuse and receive valuable, targeted information, for better social cohesion; on the other, it is an ideal forum for stereotypes, prejudices, derogatory views and even dangerous content, as was mentioned in the question.
Here lies the danger: should the State go and block access to websites or filter search-engine results? This is already being done by authoritarian states. In democratic countries, such as the EU Member States, restrictions on the freedom of speech are exceptional and governed by the rule of law.
It is worth noting that the Council of Europe has developed a series of international, legally binding instruments, directly and indirectly concerning the Internet. These uphold the belief that cyberspace is not a lawless area, but is subject to the rule of law. I would recall the Convention on Cybercrime and its additional protocol.
The Commission has also adopted policies aimed at reducing racist content online, notably the recommendation on the protection of minors and human dignity and the right of reply, which calls for action against discrimination in all media.
I would also like to draw attention to the Framework Decision on combating certain forms of expression of racism and xenophobia, which aims at criminalising intentional conduct, such as incitement to violence or hatred towards a group of people or against a person belonging to that group. This is a criminal offence if committed by public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material, and here, Member States have the obligation to comply with the provisions of the Framework Decision by 28 November 2010.
I could also underline that the European law already prohibits incitement to hatred on grounds of sex, race, religion or nationality in TV broadcasts and in TV online."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples