This is incorrect. This is the opposite of what was held in Lilliendahl.

The ECtHR held in that case that the appellant was not entitled to relief, and that the €800 fine imposed on him was necessary and proportionate to his hate speech.

What was held was that the hate speech didn't fall within the scope of Article 17 (not Article 10, as Breslow claims in this blog).

the handwriting says:

Dear Mr. Robblee<br /> I personally<br /> hate you and you weird.<br /> No cap, man bun!.<br /> So I switched.<br /> Telling a teacher<br /> I don’t appreciate you : )

Garland, J., Ghazi-Zahedi, K., Young, J.-G., Hébert-Dufresne, L., & Galesic, M. (2022). Impact and dynamics of hate and counter speech online. EPJ Data Science, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-021-00314-6

This seems shocking to me.

Gallacher, J., & Bright, J. (2021). Hate Contagion: Measuring the spread and trajectory of hate on social media. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/b9qhd

Restrictions of free speech on the internet occur in the US and are not limited to the examples provided here. Have you encountered, experienced or read about restrictions on internet based speech lately? Examples

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘RT @factmata: We are excited to launch of a side project we worked on this summer—Https://t.co/2yGSgkqzTG. We scan Twitter profiles with…’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 6 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1323664538777124867

This is the story of how Facebook tried and failed at moderating content. The article cites many sources (employees) that were tasked with flagging posts according to platform policies. Things started to be complicated when high-profile people (such as Trump) started posting hate speech on his profile.

Moderators have no way of getting honest remarks from Facebook. Moreover, they are badly treated and exploited.

The article cites examples from different countries, not only the US, including extreme right groups in the UK, Bolsonaro in Brazil, the massacre in Myanmar, and more.

In the end, the only thing that changes Facebook behavior is bad press.

Chinese Canadians share their experiences of racism during COVID-19—Macleans.ca. (n.d.). Retrieved 1 September 2020, from https://www.macleans.ca/society/chinese-canadians-share-their-experiences-of-racism-during-covid-19/#gallery/covid-racism/slide-1

Velásquez, N., Leahy, R., Restrepo, N. J., Lupu, Y., Sear, R., Gabriel, N., Jha, O., Goldberg, B., & Johnson, N. F. (2020). Hate multiverse spreads malicious COVID-19 content online beyond individual platform control. ArXiv:2004.00673 [Nlin, Physics:Physics]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00673

Kwon, J. and Hollingsworth, J. (2020 May 13). Virus outbreak linked to Seoul clubs stokes homophobia. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/12/asia/south-korea-club-outbreak-intl-hnk/index.html

The Associated Press (2020, May 8). UN Chief Says Pandemic Is Unleashing a “Tsunami of Hate.” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/05/08/world/ap-un-virus-outbreak-hate-speech.html

Try telling that to the censor-happy neolibs.

uh, yes it does for the person who the hate speech is directed against.

The belief that sexism is at the root of fascism, although well founded, causes hyperactivists to censor scientists.