The difference between ‘hate speech' and ‘freedom of speech'

Independent

16-04-2025

Recent trade negotiations between the US and the UK require the government to make a tough decision. At a time when the British economy is in crisis – and its citizens in dire need of a boost – will Sir Keir Starmer choose to put economic value over and above the protection of British values such as truth, tolerance and diversity?
As reported by The Independent, sources close to vice president JD Vance have indicated that the British government will have to repeal its hate speech laws and protections for LGBT+ people in order to get a trade deal over the line – in the name of the Trump administration's quest for 'freedom of speech'.
To my mind, this begs the bigger question of whether we are now in a position of accepting 'hate speech' as 'freedom of speech' – and whether this is really the only path to economic sustainability.
I hold big tech's greed and exploitation of people accountable. We are not really living under the laws of our countries, but the directly imposed laws and control of big tech – who control the daily lives of more than 2bn people. They – deliberately or not – have conveniently disguised the perpetuation of the former in the name of the latter.
Why? Because they know that when people are angry, they stay on their platforms longer – and this enables them to serve more ads in people's feeds. They can make more money, no matter the cost to our relationships and mental health. It's that simple. 'We the people' have become the largest unpaid workforce in human history – and we've sacrificed some of our humanity and freedom in the process.
Freedom of speech and hate speech are not the same things. One is the right to express opinions and ideas freely, without censorship or fear, as long as it doesn't violate the law. The other is abusive or threatening language that expresses prejudice directed at another person. Tech platforms may have brainwashed us by telling us all that hate speech is free speech, but it doesn't have to be this way. Sadly, the online safety act is a toothless tiger in the face of big social media control – and I believe the answer is not pointlessly lobbying social platforms to change, but giving people an alternative that supports them.
Eradicating hate speech on social media can be done at scale. I know, because at WeAre8 we have built the social platform and the AI engine that does just this. We have spent the last four years building and training AI models to detect and block directed hate while amplifying freedom of speech. And one of our most fascinating discoveries was that blocking directed hate actually amplifies freedom of expression, fuels conversation between people – and creates a safe environment for people to express themselves, ask questions and have challenging conversations without the fear of being abused or 'cancelled.'
People are tired of being judged, of not being heard – and above all, of fighting. We've forgotten how we should be treating each other – and have mistakenly replaced curiosity and learning with fear and judgment. Somewhere along the way, we surrendered our freedom and values to those who have the ability to control, amplify or silence our voices online – and now we see governments following their lead and calling for the removal of citizen protections in trade agreements.
We are weak when we are divided and disconnected. The big question for us now is: Do we choose a better way for ourselves, our families and our communities – or surrender to the laws and economic control of big tech?