Formen deutscher und finnischer zivilgesellschaftlicher Gegenredeinitiativen in sozialen Medien

Abstract

As the fifth estate, social media creates new opportunities for participation in civil society which are considered to have great potential for democratisation. On the other hand, they also pose risks to democratic societies, as the spread of hate speech and disinformation has shown. As social media rapidly develops, legislation and the expansion of law enforcement resources inevitably lag behind. Moreover, not all hate speech and democracy-threatening discourses are punishable nor do they always contradict the community standards of the platforms. Counterspeech from civil society can improve the tone in the comment sections of social media and help educate readers about scientifically recognised facts. In this contrastive study, I examined whether there are cultural-bound differences in attitudes towards counterspeech. In addition to semi-ethnographic participatory observations from two German and two Finnish counterspeech initiatives, over a thousand of their postings were collected for a systematic analysis of their communicative strategies. Culture-bound differences in attitudes towards counterspeech can be assumed, among other things, due to different motives for the founding of the initiatives (systematically planned vs. spontaneous), their management (hierarchical or heterarchical), and their social esteem (granted or missing awards and media presence). Counterspeech was defined as a reactive or proactive response from civil society to the normalisation of brutalised language and discourses that threaten democracy. This study also demonstrates that counterspeech initiatives can be action-oriented or discussion-oriented. In any case, they offer peer support and collaborative learning opportunities. Humour serves as a valve, and humorous counterspeech initiatives attract followers and members in both countries.