Untangling the web of hate: Are online 'hate sites' deserving of First Amendment protection

This dissertation extends the developing communication research literature about Internet hate speech by juxtaposing legal analysis with qualitative content analysis. In particular, the author identifies the various federal-court approved First Amendment tests for assessing the constitutionality of both publicly-communicated (non-mass-mediated) hateful speech and Internet content, then examines a sample of U.S.-based online "hate sites" to ascertain whether they contain constitutionally proscribable content under those standards.; The population of hate sites was acquired from the Spring 2004 edition of the "Intelligence Report" published by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). A multi-part sampling procedure was applied to this large list of websites to create a manageable, but representative, sample for content analysis. The final sample consisted of at least one representative site from each of the "hate website" categories identified by the SPLC: "Ku Klux Klan" (2); "Neo-Nazi" (1); "Racist Skinhead" (1); "Neo-Confederate" (1); "Christian Identity" (1); "Black Separatist" (2); and "Other" (2). The two websites from the "Other" hate group category included a site maintained by a White conservative organization and one of the few American hate sites operated by a Jewish group. The process of collecting content from the ten sites in the final sample began on November 18, 2004 and ended on December 25, 2004.; Analysis was conducted on all hate-group-maintained, publicly-accessible content posted on the sampled websites. In conducting this analysis, the author identified the thematic and non-textual content of, as well as the persons that were the targets of hatred on, these hate sites. However, the study failed to uncover any content on the sampled websites that would likely be deemed constitutionally proscribable under the Supreme Court's "Miller," "true threats," "clear and present danger," or "bad tendency" tests, the First Amendment standards that the author determined could be used to evaluate the constitutionality of hate sites.; Based on his findings, the author argues it appears that alternatives to governmental speech regulation, particularly the use of user-based Internet filtering technologies, need to be considered for regulating content posted on the publicly-accessible areas of U.S.-based hate websites.