European Union: EU Steps For Fighting Online Hate Speech – Possible Censorship Of Social Media?

Last Updated: 26 January 2018
Article by Roxana Pana

1. Why is the EU calling for policy measures (including censorship) against social media?

As of April 2017, fighting online hate speech has been prioritised at EU level further to several terrorist attacks (e.g., in London, Paris, Berlin and Brussels). Critics have argued that such attacks were to a great extent assisted by the intensive use of social media by terrorist groups to instigate violence and radicalise people, especially youngsters.

In this context, heated debates have taken place at EU level on the prevention and removal of online hate speech and the enactment of legislation that would define a common approach thereto. Furthermore, a number of views expressed in the European Parliament favoured censorship and public control of social media outlets.1 These views are shared by the British Prime Minister Theresa May, who recently called for new EU regulations and international agreements intended to "deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online".2

2. What is hate speech?

There is no universally agreed-upon definition of what constitutes hate speech. Nevertheless, specific guidance for defining the concept has been provided by certain competent EU bodies.3 As such, "hate speech" is meant to cover all forms of expressions that spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, including by reference to a non-exhaustive list of personal characteristics or statuses (e.g., race, colour, language, religion or beliefs, nationality or national or ethnic origin, descent, age, disability, sex, gender, gender identity and sexual orientation). Consequently, when grounded on these personal characteristics, hate speech may also target data that can easily qualify as "personal data" (e.g. age).

3. The EU's tentative steps towards fighting the growing hate speech challenge

The official plenary debate in the European Parliament on April 2017 hosted a robust discussion between its members on how best to tackle the proliferation of online hate speech, with a host of proposals being put forward, including:

  • Censorship or public control of social media;
  • Imposing significant fines on media providers; or
  • Fostering "media literacy" (i.e., the ability to access, analyse, evaluate, and create media)4.

In contrast, the members of the European Commission seem to favour a more peaceful approach, by cooperating with the IT industry and developing media literacy so that young people know how to critically assess information.5

In response to the terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels in 2016, the European Commission intensified its work on fighting hate speech – a campaign initiated several years ago with the adoption of the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA. Following consultations with the leading social media companies (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft), it published a Code of Conduct aimed at fighting online hate speech.6 This Code of Conduct includes a series of public commitments, voluntarily accepted by these four companies, as follows: (i) review of valid removal notifications for hate speech in less than 24 hours; (ii) removal or disabling access to such content, if necessary; (iii) continuous development of internal procedures; and (iv) staff training. A recent evaluation of the Code of Conduct, carried out by NGOs and public bodies in 24 EU countries (including Romania), revealed significant progress by the four companies on the commitments in the Code of Conduct.7 However, critics and some EU officials argue that these results are not yet satisfactory.

Further to these actions, the European Commission launched a High-Level Group on combating Racism, Xenophobia and other forms of Intolerance to step up EU cooperation and coordination regarding hate speech and monitor the implementation of the Code of Conduct. This group brings together Member States' authorities, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, civil society organisations, community representatives and other relevant international bodies.8 The European Commission has also launched several calls for project proposals that will be funded from EU grants.

The Council of Europe is also actively involved in fighting online hate speech. To this end, it has set up a dedicated body for human rights, i.e., the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), which has devised a number of different policy responses, including legislative, self-regulatory and structural measures.9

As reported by the media, following the terrorist attack in Manchester, the ministers of the Council of Europe issued proposals on 23 May 2017 that require media providers to block videos containing hate speech, excluding live streaming from their platforms.10 If these proposals are agreed upon by the European Parliament, we will have the first legislation at EU level to hold social media companies accountable for hate speech published on their platforms. At this stage, it is not clear whether an enactment will be passed. However, censorship is a possibility, taking into consideration: (i) the opinions expressed in the plenary debate of April 2017; and (ii) the censorship enactment passed by the European Parliament on February 2017 for cutting down live broadcasts of parliamentary debates targeting hate speech and removing records video/audio traces of offensive remarks.

The opinions expressed by the EU Member States on censorship are divergent. German lawmakers approved a controversial law imposing steep fines of up to 50 million euros on social media providers for failing to swiftly delete posts deemed to contain hate speech.11 Such a restrictive measure was highly criticised by worldwide media, for the following reasons:

  • The law places a heavy burden on media providers for swift censorship in the absence of clear criteria defining hate speech;
  • Freedom of speech will be affected as providers are likely to delete many posts just to be on the safe side and avoid fines;
  • Courts, rather than social media, may determine what online speech contravenes German law; nevertheless, this approach is problematic due to the issue of determining which courts hold jurisdiction over companies such as Facebook. For instance, in 2016, a court in Hamburg denied a complaint filed against Facebook because the company's European operations were headquartered in Ireland.

Digital, advocacy groups and other critics in Europe have raised serious concerns about the new German law, which could be seen as a precedent to be followed by other EU countries – the more so with certain states having tried in the past to enact similar regulations (e.g., France)12 and recently UK officials having proposed similar fines for media providers if they fail to remove hate speech content13. Indeed, such an approach will deepen the conflict between the freedom of expression and the fight against hate speech.

4. Censorship / Public control of social media – Is this the right approach?

Could media freedom be subject to legal restrictions?

The restrictive measures regarding censorship and public control have raised many concerns about protecting, or not, "freedom of expression", while also protecting the victims of hate speech and other core EU values (e.g., tolerance, non-discrimination, dignity).

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) had already expressed, by 1976, its opinion on what the term "right to freedom of expression" indicated and its significant role in a democratic society14. According to its repeated rulings, grounded on the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the ECHR holds that freedom of expression:

  • Constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, a basic condition for its progress and for the development of every individual;
  • It necessarily covers not only "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also expression that may "offend, shock or disturb" the State or certain groups in society [o.n., which is not the same thing as a right to offend];
  • May be subject to any restriction (i.e., "condition", "restriction" or "penalty") which is "proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued"; such an approach is meant to protect other core European values (e.g., "tolerance" and "respect for equal dignity") affected by hate speech.15 Furthermore, the restriction must be construed strictly, and the need for any restrictions must be established convincingly, EU Member States having a certain margin of appreciation in assessing it.16

Along the same line of reasoning, the ECHR has argued for the importance of media freedom. To this end, it emphasises that the Internet has become one of the main means for individuals to exercise their right to freedom of expression today, as it offers essential tools for participation in activities and debates concerning politics or matters of general public interest.17 The ECHR ruled against the blanket blocking of access to an entire Google Sites website (Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey) and to the whole of YouTube (Cengiz and Others v. Turkey), on account of other illicit contents uploaded by third parties on these sites.

Is censorship / public control of media a practical approach?

It is debatable whether the competent EU bodies and national authorities should impose censorship and public control, as long as:

  • The EU's broad concept of "hate speech" covers many forms of expression which are varied and complex; therefore, the approaches must also be appropriately differentiated;
  • Most EU states have adopted legislation banning expression amounting to hate speech, but the definitions differ when determining what is being banned; therefore, different national approaches to hate speech may easily give rise to discriminatory solutions;
  • Particular limitations of media freedom by censorship should be applied in a non-arbitrary matter and subject to ex post judicial control;
  • There is no sound and comprehensive common legal framework by which all the EU should abide; such a legal framework should be a prerequisite before imposing radical measures such as blanket censorship;
  • There are many measures which may prove successful, e.g., the development of web tools fighting online hate speech (such as reporting systems), awareness-raising activities, the exchange and monitoring of good practice (including with the help of the above-mentioned High-Level Group), the use of artificial intelligence to automatically remove potentially extremist material and banned news sites;
  • The major media providers have strengthened their efforts along with the European Commission by implementing the Code of Conduct and applying many worldwide training programmes and internal methods (web tools and artificial intelligence) for fighting hate speech;
  • Cooperation between media and public authorities may bring better results than censorship, a point of view that seems to be shared by the most important EU commissioners18;
  • Restrictive measures regarding censorship / public control may be subject to abuse from state authorities, increasing the power of the present European order (as many critics have noted in the media).

At this stage, the blanket censorship of media exercised by public authorities seems to be a common approach for states with a democracy in development. In 2016, five African countries, including Ethiopia and Uganda, disrupted the Internet during elections, while Kenya announced that it would act similarly in August 2017. Critics have strongly argued that such an approach is highhanded and open to abuse. One recent notable assertion was that "the free and open Internet becomes its own medicine because people are also using it to counter hate speech and rumours. But if we switch it off, the rumours will find other darker avenues and not be able to be counteracted."19

Although social media is an important tool used by terrorist groups to promote hate speech, it is not the only one they use to spread their messages. In such a context, many critics have argued that restricting the media (as certain EU officials have proposed) may not necessarily be the best solution. On the contrary, the focus should be primarily placed on other areas, such as raising public awareness around hate speech (especially among youngsters targeted by terrorist groups) and implementing a uniform EU regulation on "hate speech" – by defining this concept, determining appropriate measures for preventing and sanctioning hate speech, both by the public and media providers.


1.; speech-and-fake-news-remove-content-impose-fines-foster-media-literacy


3. Recommendation No. R (97) 20 of the Committee of Ministers of the European Council to EU Member States on "hate speech" (;
General Policy Recommendation No. 15: Combating hate speech from March 2016 of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) (

4. The concept of "media literacy" is detailed by the Council of Europe within the "Media Regulatory authorities and hate speech, July 2017 edition, pages 86-87 (

5. EC Communication outlining actions in seven specific areas where cooperation at EU level could effectively support Member States (









14. Handyside v. the United Kingdom judgment of the ECHR, para 49

15. Erbakan v. Turkey judgment of the ECHR, para 56; Gunduz v Turkey judgment of the ECHR, para 40

16. Surek v. Turkey judgment of the ECHR, para 58

17. Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey judgment of the ECHR, para. 54



The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions