MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404558508 · doi:10.1515/ijdlg-2024-0013

Tackling Hate Speech in the Digital Space: Germany’s Plans on an Act Against Digital Violence and its Impact on Ethno-Cultural Minorities

2024· article· en· W4404558508 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyriaki Topidi, Moritz Malkmus

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Digital Law and Governance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSafeguardingPolitical scienceHuman rightsLegislatureGovernment (linguistics)ObligationPublic relationsLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The increasing significance of online communication services is not yet matched by adequate protections for particularly vulnerable groups, such as minorities, who are disproportionately affected by various forms of digital violence. This article examines a legislative initiative introduced by the German government in 2023, which aims to supplement the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and address certain enforcement gaps in safeguarding individual rights. The analysis reveals that the initiative still faces substantial legal challenges, especially given the harmonizing nature of the DSA, which may require a more refined approach to its ambitious goals. However, a review of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law concerning the state’s obligation to protect individuals from hate speech suggests that the primary issues outlined in the draft should continue to be pursued. The article contextualizes the initiative within the socio-technical environment where ethno-cultural minorities are targeted online, particularly through hate speech. By situating the initiative within the current socio-legal framework and incorporating a comparative perspective – drawing on regulatory models from Canada, the UK, and Australia – it highlights key challenges that lie ahead.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Digital Law and GovernanceSame topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207