网络谩骂泛滥必须遏制，但谁来决定这界限在哪里？ [英国媒体]

-------------译者：*慢活族*-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



Few would deny the importance of tackling online hatred or child abuse content. The internet after all has become a key weapon for those who disseminate and incite hatred and violence against minorities and for those who pose a horrifying threat to children. It is difficult though not to feel discomfort about three rightwing newspapers – the Sun the Daily Mail and the Times – all leading on the perils of social media.

很少有人会否认处理网络上仇恨或虐待儿童的相关内容的重要性。毕竟，互联网已成为了传播和煽动对少数群体仇恨和暴力的人，以及对儿童造成可怕威胁的那些人的主要武器。尽管如此，人们对于这三份右翼报纸，即《太阳报》、《每日邮报》和《泰晤士报》，都很难不会感到不适，且这些报纸都引领了社交媒体上的危机。

The Daily Mail’s dramatic headline reads: FACEBOOK ‘RIPPING SOCIETY APART’: this from the newspaper that routinely whips up hatred against minorities and denounces those deemed opponents as “Enemies of the people” “saboteurs” and “collaborators”. There is another fear though. Where will the crescendo for online regulation end?

《每日邮报》有个戏剧性的标题这样写道：脸书“撕裂社会”，这来自一份惯于激起读者对少数群体的憎恶，并公开谴责那些他们自以为的对手们是“人民的敌人”、“蓄意破坏者”和“通敌份子”的报纸。话说回来，现在还有另一种恐惧：网络监管的高潮将在哪里结束?

As the Times reports the government’s independent ethics watchdog is recommending fines or prosecution if social media companies fail to remove racist child abuse or “extremist” content. Many have noted the double standards of Facebook’s policy on removing content: deleting for example the famous Vietnam war image of a child burned by napalm while permitting all manner of misogynistic antisemitic and racist posts. Some form of action is clearly needed. But where is the line drawn?

据《泰晤士报》报道，如果社交媒体公司未能删除涉及种族主义、儿童虐待或“极端主义”的内容，政府的独立道德监督机构将建议（检察署）罚款或起诉。而很多人都注意到了脸书在删除内容上的双重标准，例如：脸书删除了着名的越南战争中一个孩子遭遇凝固汽油弹袭击后燃烧的照片，同时又允许形形色色的歧视女性、反犹太主义和种族主义的帖子存在。显然我们需要采取某种形式的行动。但是底线要划在哪里?

-------------译者：*慢活族*-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

It’s worth noting precedents from the past. In the aftermath of the Battle of Cable Street – when anti-fascists confronted Oswald Mosley’s fascist Blackshirt mobs under the banner of “They Shall Not Pass” – the Tories passed the Public Order Act. It introduced for example the need to get police consent before demonstrations and banned “political uniforms” from being worn in public. And yet this legislation ended up being deployed against the left including during the miners’ strike nearly 50 years later. Similarly we’ve seen sweeping anti-terrorism legislation enacted in the face of opposition from critics who raised concerns about civil liberties only to be dismissed as namby-pamby sandal-wearing terror-appeasing liberals. And yet such legislation has repeatedly been deployed against peaceful activists my own twin sister among them.

过去发生的先例值得我们警惕。在Cable街骚乱（注1）的余波中——当反法西斯者们在“他们不得通过”的标语下对抗由奥斯瓦尔德·莫斯利领导的法西斯黑衫党暴徒时——（当时执政的）保守党却通过了《公共秩序法案》。举例来说，它提出了在示威前须征得警察同意，并禁止在公共场合穿戴“政治制服”。然而，这项法案最终被用来针对左翼人士，包括过了近50年后，矿工们发动的罢工在内（注2）。同样地，我们也见证了，在面对批评人士出于担忧公民的自由而发出的一片反对声中，《全面反恐法案》成功通过，反对声只被视作出于矫揉做作、不负责任、姑息恐怖主义的自由主义者之口而被驳回。可是，这种法案一再被用来针对非暴力的政治活动人士，我的孪生姐妹就是其中的一份子。

Another example: when the Tories were hit with a lobbying scandal in 2013 David Cameron introduced the so-called lobbying bill. It became known instead as the gagging bill: rather than targeting the wealthy individuals and corporations which the Tory party relies on it instead went after non-government organisations and trade unxs.

另一个例子是：2013年，当保守党饱受“游说丑闻”（注3）的打击时，时任首相戴维·卡梅伦提出了所谓的《游说法案》。这个法案更为人所知的名字是“闭嘴法案”，该法案针对的不是保守党依赖的富人和公司，而是用来压迫非政府组织和工会。

注1：英国法西斯于1936年10月在伦敦发起的一次游行示威活动，于Cable街被反法西斯者群体阻止，两方发生冲突。
注2：指撒切尔夫人任内发生的1984-1985年英国矿工大罢工。
注3：2013年，英国广播公司（BBC）的《全景》节目和《每日电讯报》的记者讹称来自安德鲁斯公关公司（Alistair Andrews Communications），代表斐济对时任保守党党鞭默瑟进行游说工作，希望以4000英镑报酬，要求默瑟在国会代为发问，为斐济商业利益和重返英联邦一事进行游说。《全景》节目指出，默瑟总共收了为期两个月、每月工作两天、共4000英镑的费用。他事后在下议院提出了5次与斐济相关的质询和一项动议草案，但没有申报相关利益。默瑟事后发表声明辞去保守党党鞭，而且不再参加下次国会大选。

-------------译者：*慢活族*-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

All of these crackdowns were sold with laudable intentions. But note what happened in practice. We already have rightwing commentator Toby Young – a poundshop Katie Hopkins though repeatedly wheeled out on television – who disgracefully compared democratic socialist movement Momentum to a far-right thuggish organisation like Britain First whose leading members have convictions for their criminality. A press that routinely whips up hatred and bigotry repeatedly portrays the left as the perpetrators of online abuse ignoring the open sewer of rightwing hatred online. You don’t have to wear a tinfoil hat to see how this could all end.

所有的这些压迫行为都粉饰上了值得称颂的初衷，被推销了出去。但是，请注意实际发生了什么事。我们已经注意到右翼时事评论员托比·杨——一个低配版的凯蒂·霍普金斯，虽然常常在电视里亮相——无耻地把民主社会主义运动势力与“不列颠第一”这样一个主要成员已因犯罪行为而获罪的极右翼暴徒组织相提并论。不愧是一个惯于激起仇恨和偏见，屡次将左派抹黑为网络暴力的罪犯，无视网络上右翼的仇恨言论已成为露天污水沟的媒体。你没必要带上锡箔帽子（注4），好好看看这一切怎么收场。

Yes we need action to deal with online hatred and abuse. But let’s make sure there are clear safeguards or history will repeat itself and peaceful opponents of an unjust status quo will suffer the consequences.

是的，我们需要采取行动来应对网络上的仇恨和谩骂。 但是，务必让我们看到清晰的保障措施，否则历史将会重演，已经承受着不公正现状的和平反对者们将遭遇更严重的后果。

The writer Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist

本文作者欧文·琼斯为《英国卫报》专栏作家

注4：锡箔帽(Tin foil hat)：出自英国生物学家朱利安·赫胥黎于1926年所着的短篇小说“The Tissue-Culture King”。在这篇小说中，主角发现“金属箔盖”可以阻止心灵感应的效果。后来有人贩卖这种帽子，声称它可以抵挡电磁场对大脑的影响，或抵挡思想控制和读脑。该词现在等价于迫害妄想症，并常常用来形容阴谋论者。


-------------译者：*慢活族*-审核者：a_2_z------------

hris135 15h ago
"A press that routinely whips up hatred and bigotry repeatedly portrays the left as the perpetrators of online abuse ignoring the open sewer of rightwing hatred online."
Let's face it though - a quick look at leftie twitter shows it is filled with hatred and bile no better than the right

“不愧是一个惯于激起仇恨和偏见，屡次将左派抹黑为网络暴力的罪犯，无视网络上右翼的仇恨言论已成为露天污水沟的媒体。”
让我们面对现实吧——快速浏览下左翼分子那些充斥着仇恨和愤懑的推文，一点也不比右翼的强。

spensmo  Chris135 15h ago
And that's exactly the false equivalence the gutter press exploits. Well done they need people like you to keep them in print and out of court.

这正是对“污水沟般的媒体”的一个不正确的类比运用。做得好，他们需要像你这样的人帮助他们出版并游离与法庭之外。
（注：gutter press：直译为“污水沟般的媒体”，引申义为黄色的、低俗的报刊）

Emptyskies  spensmo 15h ago
"ignoring the open sewer of rightwing hatred online."
I would suggest you look at some of the threads on Brexit Tony Blair or Trump. Pointing out that some of both the Right and the Left indulge in hate speech is not a false equivalence it is just an honest observation.

“无视网络上右翼的仇恨言论已成为露天污水沟。”
我建议你关注下与英国脱欧、托尼·布莱尔或特朗普有关的这些话题。指出左翼和右翼中都有一些人酷爱发表仇恨言论不是一个不公正的等价命题，只是一个诚实的观察结果。

Bangorstu  Gary Cross 15h ago
Except it's all over this website BTL. And this is a worldwide platform.

除了这个网站，线下也到处都是。且这是个遍及全球的平台。

Physician heal thyself.

“医生”，先把你自己治愈吧。

Oh and then there's the Canary spreading lies about Laura Keunsberg on Facebook complete with comments along the lines of "well whereas I don't think she should be murdered like Jo Cox she's only got herself to blame if she is"....

噢，接下来卡纳里就会在脸书上散播有关劳拉·金斯贝格尔（英国记者，BBC新闻的政治编辑）的谣言，包括“我认为她不应该像乔·考克斯（英国工党议员，2016年6月受到枪击和刀刺后不治身亡）那样被谋杀，如果她……，她只能怪自己。”

randombloke  Chris135 15h ago
The left doesn't consider their own as abusers because they consider their hate to be "punching up" usually on the basis of some fixed trait of their victims such as gender or race.

左派并不认为他们自己是施害者，因为他们认为他们的仇恨言论是“反抗”，通常只基于受害者的某些固定特征，例如性别或种族。

Gary Cross  Chris135 15h ago
I have had no experience of this "leftie twitter" but I suspect what's said on "leftie twitter" stays on "leftie twitter". 
It's hardly disseminated by the most powerful news and media platforms in the country as right wing bile so often is.

我没有亲身体会过这种“左翼分子的推文”，但我怀疑我们讨论“左翼推文”时有没有只针对那些“左翼推文”呢。在这个国家，最强大的新闻和媒体平台几乎不会像经常对右翼的愤怒言论那样去传播它。

-------------译者：xingxingjie-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

EternallyUnimpressed  Gary Cross 13h ago
"I have had no experience of this "leftie twitter" but I suspect what's said on "leftie twitter" stays on "leftie twitter"."

“我没有亲身体会过这种“左翼分子的推文”，但我怀疑我们讨论“左翼推文”时有没有只针对那些“左翼推文”呢。”

I'm afraid you're wrong. Left wing pressure groups use twitter as a platform to get their message across and stir up trouble. They do it fairly effectively and often with the help of journalists too. Then you have the fact that ideas which have their origins on the left but which are by no means held by everyone hold sway in the workplace. Falling foul of them can cost you your job often with raucous approval from twitter and the left wing press 

恐怕你是错的，左翼势力把推特当做他们传播讯息并挑起矛盾的平台。他们做得相当有效而且时时有记者推波助澜。 然后你面对的事实是，这些源于左翼、不被所有人所信奉的想法在工作场合占据了统治地位，和这些想法产生冲突将让你丢掉工作，而这些想法在推特和左翼媒体上获得了强烈的支持。

There's the case of Tim Hunt 
Dr Matt Taylor
These three are all related
Sexist memo
A recent incident in Canada involving a teaching assitant
Then you have the fairly famous case of a University of Toronto professor nearly losing his job

好比蒂姆·亨特的例子。
马特·泰勒博士案例。
这三个全是与此相互关联的。
性别歧视的备忘录事件。
加拿大最近发生的一起涉及助教的事件。
还有一个更加有名的案例，多伦多大学教授的几乎为此失去了他的工作。

（译者注：Tim Hunt——英国皇家学会知名科学家、诺贝尔奖得主蒂姆·亨特博士因发表“科研歧视”言论遭到“炮轰”被迫辞职；他在韩国召开的世界科学记者大会上，表示他支持实验室“异性隔离”制度：“我来告诉你和女孩混在一起会发生的麻烦：当你们同处一间实验室时，往往会发生三件事：你爱上了她们；或者她们爱上了你；如果你批评她们，她们会哭。”http://reason.com/archives/2015/07/23/sexist-scientist-tim-hunt-the-real-story

Dr Matt Taylor：因在采访时穿着一件印有卡通女人用射线枪射击图案的衬衫，被IMOM说这件衬衫是在“贬低女性”而遭到恶意抨击（Internet Manufactured Outrage Machine网络愤怒制造机）http://www.lixedin.com/pulse/20141114211828-18702-i-will-take-this-opportunity-to-thank-dr-matt-taylor

Sexist memo：一名谷歌员工詹姆斯·达莫尔（James Damore）因发表一篇涉嫌性别歧视的备忘录而被谷歌解雇。在备忘录中其抨击了谷歌的性别平等政策，认为在编程这项工作上男女有别，而显然男性的效率比女性更高，公司不应该那么积极提升员工多样性。

Canada involving a teaching assitant：助教琳赛·谢泼德(Lindsay Shepherd)因给学生播放了一段有争议的视频而受到指导教授的处罚。那个视频是安大略省公共电视台播放的一个讨论性节目，讨论的内容是有关使用中性的性别代词代替特指男性或女性的代词。http://www.bcbay.com/news/2017/11/23/539454.html

case of a University of Toronto professor：多伦多大学教授约旦·彼得森（Jordan Peterson）曾上传视频公开批评中性代词的使用和高校中滥用的“政治正确”而陷争议。）

I think that these are all reasonably good examples of how the press employers and those on twitter have gone on witch hunts or even after the livelihoods of those whose views were considered improper. As has been pointed out above and below the line restricting freedoms of expression can have unintended consequences. Most who advocate it have honourable intentions but the consequence are often anything but. This kind of thing is concerning isn't it? 

我认为这些都是新闻媒体和推特上的某些人做的政治迫害的事情，甚至为了生计故意迫害别人的合理例子。 正如我上下文中所指出的，限制言论自由的措辞可能会产生意想不到的后果。 大多数提倡（限制言论自由）的人本意是好的正直的，但结果却往往背道而驰。 这种事情才是我们应该担心的不是吗？

Anyway Owen is right about restrictions being best avoided but it seems that he is wrong about them tending to impact more on the left.
 
无论如何，欧文所说的限制是最好的避免方式这点是对的，他认为这些限制更会影响左翼的想法是错误的。 
（PS：马特博士当时身穿如下：）



Eternally Unimpressed  Gary Cross 13h ago
Correction in the case of Hunt and Taylor they weren't even expressing views they were the victims of twitter's mobs for their jokes and choices of clothing. That is deeply deeply sinister stuff.

修正一下亨特和泰勒的例子，他们甚至没有被给予辩解他们的笑话和服装选择的机会，他们是推特暴徒疯狂抨击下的受害者。 这其中有非常非常邪恶的东西存在。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

OttoMaddox 15h ago
It pains me to say this as someone who agrees with most left-wing political positions but so many of these articles just seem to be progressives who believe people on their side should be able to engage in inflammatory comments and even outright abuse while targeting even relatively harmless speech on the other side. As he has pointed out organisations are already deciding what is and isn't suitable he just disagrees with the outcome. The unspoken answer to the question in this piece is that people like him should be able to decide

这实在让我这个基本上赞同大多数左翼政治立场的人难以承认，但是很多这类文章都是些进步人士写的，他们相信站在他们这边的人们在针对那些相对温和无害的对立方的演讲时应该能够参与进这些煽动性评论中，甚至是公开彻底的折磨。正如他所指出的那样，组织已经在决定哪些是适当的哪些不是，他只是不同意决定的结果。在这篇文章中所提问题的隐含答案是像他这样的人应该有该决定权。

Owen himself should know how vicious some of the speech on his side is but I don't remember him ever taking a stand to condemn it. He doesn't have to lump it in with the worst excesses of the right to do so just give a sign he believes it's unambiguously wrong.

欧文自己应该要知道他那一派的有些演讲很是恶毒，而我从不记得他曾站出来谴责过这一现象。他不需要借最烂的借口将这与右翼混为一谈，只需要示意我们他认为这明显是错误的。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

BlackberryBlossom  Humza 14h ago 
“look at what's happening to Thornberry and Rayner. ”

“看看索恩伯利和雷纳的下场。”

Thornberry was forced to resign from Labour's shadow cabinet in 2014 after the papers decided she was an enemy of the people. She is currently shadow foreign minister; and is widely admired.

索恩伯利（Emily Thornberry）在报纸报道她是人民的敌人后，于2014年被迫从工党影子内阁中辞职。她目前是影子（内阁）外交部长，广受赞誉。

Rayner was criticised for misrepresenting the issues affecting Haringey council. Which seems fair enough.

雷纳（Angela Rayner）因误报问题影响妨碍到哈林盖区议会而受批评。这结果很公平。

If those are the worst examples of Momentum-supporters' behaviour then it would leave you without a point.

如果这些是讲明（左翼草根运动） Momentum支持者行径最糟糕的例子，那你就没什么好说的了。

Also Owen has been highly critical of Corbyn - not entirely with justification; and had even called for him to resign. I don't recall there being any major furore - people disagreed although some were probably disappointed. Either way their judgment was subsequently proven correct - as Owen acknowledged.

而且，欧文对工党领袖科尔宾（Jeremy Corbyn）很是挑剔——且不是全都有理由；甚至还号召让科尔宾辞职。我不记得有过因人们不满——而引起的大轰动，虽然有些人可能会很失望。不管怎样，他们的判断随后被证实是正确的——正如欧文所承认的那般。

swinklbauer 15h ago
Sadly it is Momentum and left wing Labour MPs who are the champions of Online abuse. Again since you agree with them you only complain about the other side. Hypocrite.

很悲哀的是，左翼草根运动和左翼工党议员们正是网上谩骂的拥护者。既然你认同他们的观点，那你就只会抱怨对立方了。真是虚伪。

-------------译者：龙腾翻译总管-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Billy Gerant 15h ago
Dangerous ground Owen!
Picking on one person to illustrate your point when so many left wing politicos have been found guilty of anti-semitism and hate inspiring rhetoric.
All this does it illustrate how dirty politics has become and how desperate people are to score the cheap points.

岌岌可危啊欧文你！专挑一个人（的麻烦）来阐述你的观点，然而很多左翼政客都被证实是反犹太主义者且厌恶鼓舞人心的言论。这些都清晰阐明了政客如今变得有多龌龊肮脏，以及人们为了那廉价的分数有多不顾一切。

LordMorganofGlossop  DT48 14h ago
I've seen posts on the Guardian comments section wishing death on old people in the UK because of the way they (tended to) vote on Brexit. Not good and not helpful!

我在《卫报》的评论区里看到很多帖子说希望英国的老人死掉，因为他们（倾向于）投票支持脱欧。这一点也不好完全没用！

What happened to old-fashioned liberalism free speech civility and respect for opposing views in this country? It's probably related to subjectivised politics of where the political is personal and vice versa at least on social media.

以前这个国家里存有的老式经典的自由主义、言论自由、文明礼仪和尊重对立方意见的做法去哪儿了啊？这可能与政治是个人的这种主观政治思想有关吧，且反之亦然，至少在社交媒体上是如此。