Social Media and the Kurdish Issue in Turkey: Hate Speech, Free Speech and Human Security

Abstract

Parallel to two intertwined processes of the politicization of ethnicity, religion and sexuality on the one hand, and the rise of the internet, on the other hand, hate speech has become one of the most topical issues of political debates. Academic interest on this topic has so far focused largely on the questions of (im)possibility of defining hate speech, on the hate speech/free speech dichotomy, and, thus on the possible ways of dealing with this big challenge of our times. This study tries to open a new window by resorting to the concept of human security. It argues that rival understandings of security (traditional or critical) lead to differences in perceptions of threats/harms which in turn lead to different conceptions of hate speech. This argument is illustrated through an analysis of the way the Kurdish issue in Turkey has been tackled in Ekşi Sözlük, one of the most popular web sites in the country.

Notes on contributor

Funda Gençoğlu Onbaşı received her BA and MA degrees from Bilkent University, Department of Political Science and Public Administration. After a five-year work experience in private sector, she started her doctoral study at Middle Eastern Technical University and received her PhD in political science in 2008. She currently teaches at Başkent University, Department of Political Science and International Relations. She has published articles, books and book chapters on civil society in Turkey, women's rights movement in Turkey, Turkish political parties, early republican period in Turkey, 11 September and its effects, democracy theory, constitution making and conscientious objection.

ORCID

Funda Gençoğlu Onbaşi http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8211-8624

Notes

1 Each text published by the Ekşi Sözlük is called as “entry.” Though this is not a Turkish word, the term is used as it is by the Ekşi Sözlük users writing in Turkish.

2 For the full text of the news, see http://www.bianet.org/bianet/azinliklar/130874-eksi-sozlukun-nefret-soylemiyle-imtihani.

3 Weber, Manual on Hate Speech.

4 Haupt, “Regulating Hate Speech,” 303–4.

5 Articles 19 and 20 of the UDHR provide:

19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

20. 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 19 of the ICCPR provides:

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Article 10 of ECHR provides:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

6 Wimmer, “Toward a World Rule of Law,” 203.

7 Ibid.

8 Cammaerts, “Radical Pluralism and Free Speech in Online Public Spaces,” 559.

9 Haupt, “Regulating Hate Speech,” 311–12.

10 Grayling, “New Labour: Tolerating Intolerance,” 125.

11 Cammaerts, “Radical Pluralism and Free Speech in Online Public Spaces,” 559.

12 Habermas, “Reconciliation Through the Public Use of Reason,” 117.

13 Leets, “Explaining Perceptions of Racist Speech,” 700.

14 Quoted in Haupt, “Regulating Hate Speech,” 309.

15 Ibid.

16 Lederer and Delgado quoted in Leets, “Explaining Perceptions of Racist Speech,” 700.

17 Index on Censorship, 167.

18 Wimmer, “Toward a World Rule of Law,” 202.

19 Hatt, “Subject of Hate Speech,” 141.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid., 139.

22 Ibid., 140.

23 Ibid.

24 Boromisza-Habashi, “Cultural Foundations of Denials of Hate Speech,” 4.

25 Ibid., 3–4.

26 Ibid.

27 It is a rule of Ekşi Sözlük not to use capital letters. All words, including the proper nouns are, as a rule, to be written in lower case. Hence, the translations of these quotations in this article appear as they originally do on the web site. In parentheses are the nicknames of the writers of Ekşi Sözlük, which are again given in the same format as they appear on the web.

28 Hull, “Poststructuralism, Behaviorism and the Problem of Hate Speech,” 531.

29 Ibid.

30 Leets, “Explaining Perceptions of Racist Speech,” 700.

31 Ibid., 702.

32 Thérien, “Human Security,” 199.

33 Ibid.

34 Sfeir-Younis, “Violation of Human Rights,” 395.

35 Thérien, “Human Security,” 199.

36 Bilgin, “Making Turkey's Transformation Possible,” 561.

37 Ibid., 562.

38 Ibid.

39 Ibid.