| Chapter 2: | Background |
|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
In an even more ambitious study, Bostdorff (2004) rhetorically analyzed 23 Ku Klux Klan (KKK) hate sites. She found that KKK Web sites attempt to build a community that is united by its opposition to minority groups, in particular Jews, by making appeals to white masculinity, and in some cases, segmented appeals to women, youth, and children. Bostdorff’s study is one of the most in-depth and recent analyses of hate site content to appear in the communication literature. It should be noted, however, that while Bostdorff’s essay was published in 2004, the hate site content she analyzed in her study was collected between November 1999 and October 2000, several months prior to 9/11.
Leets (2001), the communication scholar that has written most extensively about hate speech, also conducted an analysis of hate site content. Unlike the aforementioned content analyses, however, Leets’ study was done for the express purpose of determining the constitutional protections that should be afforded to hate sites. Indeed, Leets’ study stands as the first comprehensive effort to combine First Amendment analysis with an analysis of hate site content.
In her study, Leets quantitatively analyzed 266 persons’ responses to hate sites. After creating a representative sample of 11 white supremacist hate sites, Leets instructed each of the volunteers in the study to select one of the sites, read it, and evaluate its content. Then, each volunteer completed a questionnaire that included a series of closed-ended questions adapted from court-adopted First Amendment formulas for determining when speech can be restricted. Results indicated that respondents felt that hate sites were low in communication value and contained indirect, insidious threats, but not advocacy for “imminent lawless action,” which many believe is the current legal standard for restricting hate speech.
Based on her findings and established First Amendment guidelines, Leets drew two conclusions regarding the constitutionality of hate sites. She concluded that white supremacist sites are protected expression when viewed on the basis of short-term effects, but that the Web sites may exist only on the periphery of free speech protection if indirect or long-term effects are considered. Leets’ research continues to inform the debate concerning Internet hate speech regulation and informed this study to a great degree.