When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart was asked to describe his test for obscenity in 1964, he became famous for his response: “I know it when I see it.
” Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart was asked to describe his test for obscenity in 1964, he became famous for his response: “I know it when I see it.
” Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart was asked to describe his test for obscenity in 1964, he became famous for his response: “I know it when I see it.
” Could a similar test be true for hate speech? That’s the question some are asking over the federal government’s proposed Online Harms Act. The act, which was introduced in Parliament in February, will hold online platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) accountable for the content that foments hatred, incites violence or promotes extremism or terrorism. It will also require them to actively reduce the risk of exposure to harmful content.
Valentin Flauraud / Keystone via The Associated Press files Deborah Lyons, Canada’s special envoy for combating antisemitism, says she is ‘very interested’ in exploring the idea of removing religion as a possible defence against hate speech charges — even if it could put a chill on religious expression. But just as people have long debated Stewart’s view about what constitu.
