I have just shared a number of articles about how online disinformation and hate speech is handled in some of the best democracies around the world. I have read extensively about the subject & given it serious thought over the last year or so.
For those of you who were alarmed that the DA would somehow support the curtailing of freedom of speech is not something grounded in fact nor in the DA's record of protection of free speech. Like I said, we are "considering options" and made it clear WHILE PROTECTING FREE SPEECH
An opportunity has now presented itself in the requirement that Parliament tighten the definition of hate speech. Hate Speech is wrong, there cannot be debate there. HOW it is defined is important. It must be clearly categorised and what is free speech similarly made clear.
We live in a digital world, hate speech is now online. To prevent the abuse of hate speech legislation, it is important that online hate speech is tightly defined. There is now way we'd support curtailment of free speech online. We have fought this repeatedly in Parliament.
Glynis Breytenbach (one of the best legal minds in SA) & I will be carefully considering options. We will be consulting widely. So please, rest assured. We have fought against curtailment of free speech online & otherwise. But that must be separated from hate speech.
I hope I have made it clear & your fears are allayed? Shoot if you have any questions or suggestions. Again, this refers to conduct in the online space & keen to "hear" your opinions. Please let's be constructive and meaningful in this discussion. A tall ask on here, but y'know
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.