Hate Groups in Cyberspace

I was dismayed, though not shocked, to learn that the Simon Wiesenthal Center called on Prodigy and other on-line services to censor the content of their users’ bulletin board posts because of alleged incidents of hate speech (“Bigots’ Growing use of Computer Networks Assailed,” Dec. 14). Though the views of organizations like the National Alliance and the American Renaissance are abhorrent, the Simon Wiesenthal Center should counter their efforts with bulletin board posts of its own, not blatant attempts to quash free speech.

Cyberspace should be open to all views. The Simon Wiesenthal Center’s attempt to destroy freedom in cyberspace should not be applauded, it should be resisted.

KENNETH D. DeGIORGIO

Long Beach

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) shares the concerns of many computer users over the exploitation of this technology by groups and individuals promoting racism, anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial and other extremist views. The proper approach to this complex problem, however, is not as simple as asking the federal government to place a traffic cop on the information superhighway.

Considerations of how to combat computerized hate must take into account competing concerns over the protection of free speech and over the spread of hateful messages, particularly to young people. Some on-line services have sought to promote wide-ranging discussion while fostering, through implementation of guidelines for members’ behavior, an environment in which parents can feel comfortable allowing their children to learn and explore in cyberspace. Where such guidelines exist, it is appropriate to urge administrators of those systems to ensure that they are followed.

In addition to using commercial services, bigots have surfaced on the Internet, an unregulated global web of computer networks. They have created their own separate computer bulletin boards, which ADL first exposed in our report, “Computerized Networks of Hate,” in 1985. Experience has taught us that, over the long term, exposing the extremists’ agenda and educating as to the harm it can cause are, jointly, the most effective response. When confronted with the views of a bigot or an extremist, computer users should seek out assistance that will help them to blunt the messages of hate, from agencies such as the ADL.

ABRAHAM H. FOXMAN

National Director, ADL

New York

Citing the Institute for Historical Review in an article about “hate groups” is outrageous. The suggestion that historical revisionism and the IHR are motivated by hate is a cheap smear. We are proud of the backing we have earned from people of the most diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, including Jewish. In fact, Jewish supporters of the IHR have recently come under particularly intense criticism, and even physical violence, for their dissident views about the Holocaust.

Since its founding in 1978, the IHR has steadfastly opposed bigotry of all kinds in its efforts to promote greater public understanding of key chapters of history. Contributors to our journal have included respected scholars.

MARK WEBER, Editor

The Journal of Historical Review

IHR, Newport Beach