Freedom of speech is entrenched in the constitution and we have the right to say what we want to say. But how we say it and to who is very important.
Freedom of speech is entrenched in the constitution and we have the right to say what we want to say. But how we say it and to who is very important.
In most newspaper websites, there is a comments section where members of the public are given space to air their views about the topics at hand, but sometimes, the comments tend to veer from topic and become personal or racial.
An example of a racist comment I came across was on Times Live, where there was an article on the Springbok doping issues, where two players have failed drugs tests. Both players were players of colour, bringing the race card into play, which is still a contentious issue in South African sport and society.
While going through the article, I came to read this comment by Sechaba-is-not-a-fake-communist. It read as follows: "Both were just painted. Why was this done on black players considering that Boks are the most racist team in the world with more than 95% white players. Clear racism".
A person by the name of MMitten responded along these lines: "Squad consists of 30 players, 20 whiteys, 10 darkies. According to my rocket science percentage ratio 66% white, 33% black. Get your facts straight before making an ****hole of yourself".
That is just one example of many comments that become vulgar and border on the derogatory, but Lwanga Mwilu, a Journalism Masters Student at Rhodes University says that such comments could be an indication of how people feel about personal issues.
She further said that part where comments become personal and derogatory attests to the lack of understanding of why the platform is there in the first place, which is further exacerbated by the anonymity provision.
"There is a provision to be anonymous, but people use this space as a channel to vent out their emotions, no matter how unreasonable they are," said Mwilu.
Jude Mathurine, a New Media lecturer at Rhodes University, also agrees that the nature of hateful comments reflects particular schisms and mindsets in South African society, but says that the use of anonymity and pseudonyms are necessary requirements of online reqiurements.
"Not everyone is comfortable having their identity and opinions known for whatever reasons. For example a student commenting on a story about a teacher's sexual abuse might have legitimate reasons to keep his or her identity under wraps. Anonymity is one tool that to prevent "spirals of silence" that sometimes occur in other social settings where people are afraid to speak out on particular issues for fear of victimisation or because their perspectives are not part of the dominant set," said Mathurine.
There would also be the argument that the deleting of comments, whether they would offensive or not, would be infringing on the commenter's right to freedom of speech. Mwilu says that deleting of comments infringes on an individual's freedom of speech but Arthur Goldstuck, head of internet research company World Wide Worx, maintains that freedom of speech is not the issue when it comes to crude commentary."
Journalists' content goes through a peer review process to ensure it meets certain standards of quality or conduct, as determined by the editor. Reader comment should be no less subject to review," said Goldstuck. As one commenter put it while commenting on an article on News24: "Jeezman, the only downside to these public forums is that every knob gets to have their say".
