Speech by the president of the Government of Spain at the inauguration of the First Forum against Hate

Gallery of the Royal Collections, Madrid

SPEECH BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SPAIN, PEDRO SÁNCHEZ

Thank you very much, and I too would like to join in congratulating this great singer-songwriter who we have grown up with and had a great time listening to his music - like all the Spanish music we have - Ismael Serrano. Of course, to the ministers, to the president of Patrimonio Nacional, who welcomes us to this marvellous museum. Ladies and gentlemen.

I would obviously like to begin this speech on 11 March with a remembrance of the 193 victims whose lives were taken from us exactly 22 years ago, in the worst terrorist attack in Spain's history. I believe that there is no better way to honour their memory than to be here today fighting the seed of the disease that killed them, fighting, in short, hatred.

Let me ask you a question that, with the team, when we were preparing this speech, we were asking ourselves. It is as follows: How many people have you hated in your life? Think about it, one, two, none? I think that, if we think about it calmly, hating a person is not so easy. Obviously, we may not like someone, we may disagree with them, we may even reject them, we may not be able to stand them, but hating them..., hating is something else.

In order to hate, one must first take a very specific step, and that is to stop seeing the other as a human being. And we know this process well, because the starting point is obviously stereotypes; labels that reduce a person to a cliché, for example, a migrant turned into a criminal, a free woman presented as a threat, a trans person reduced to a mockery. That is where dehumanisation begins, you stop seeing someone as a person and so it is obviously much easier to insult, discriminate, threaten, exclude. And this happens in real life as well as on social networks, until the last step, which is, of course, physical violence.

That is why I think it is worth remembering that hatred is not born of a kind of spontaneous generation; it is cultivated and promoted. Hatred, therefore, is manufactured, it is not inherent to human beings. It is like a virus in a laboratory that is experimented with, simplifying reality until it becomes 'them against us' - and I say 'them against us', because this hatred is usually masculine - thereby placing the blame and stigma on entire groups, which is what is done when the adversary is not debated or refuted, but simply dehumanised.

Hate, of course, is also spread in a cold and calculated way, with strategies that serve certain interests. Because hatred has unfortunately become - or has once again become - a political weapon. A weapon that not only serves to attack or harass the person who is different, but above all to silence voices, as Ismael Serrano sang so well; to expel people, also to expel and corner collectives from public debate, to the point that, in effect, it is difficult to go out into the street to feel that security and that space of freedom that is the street.

In this way, the hate industry imposes a kind of law of silence that, in a way, also has a lot to do with the psychological effects that sex-based violence has on the victims of sex-based violence. Hatred, therefore, exists and I believe that we must also be aware that it is not the exclusive heritage of any one ideology, because history clearly shows that it can be exploited from different positions.

But it is also true that, in today's Spain, at least that is the experience I can share with all of you, is that this use is totally asymmetrical, because for some it is their main electoral trump card. They use hatred, not to crush ideas, but to crush those who defend those ideas with which they disagree. And believe me, I am also speaking from experience.

Therefore, what is not acceptable is that this hatred is extended to black people because of the colour of their skin, or to North Africans because of their origin, or to women for wanting to be free, or to trans people for the simple fact of being trans. Because they are different realities, but the mechanism in the end is identical: They are not attacked for what they do, they are attacked for what they represent, and what they represent is much more than the person (no doubt already important, fundamental), what they represent is a free society and a consequently diverse society. A society in which everyone can live as they are, without having to ask for permission, and that is what the propagators of hatred cannot stand.

So, if hate is already dangerous, social networks have unfortunately turned it into a weapon of mass polarisation. A weapon that is easy to find and much easier to use, and extremely lucrative for some, it must also be recognised and put on the table. First, because they have reduced the cost of hating, because all it takes is one click, almost always from the cowardly anonymity that reinforces impunity and aggressiveness. Second, because networks allow hate to be channelled. There are groups that are absolutely irrelevant, that can amplify hatred through false profiles, through coordinated actions, by harassing individuals and entire collectives. Often you don't know whether it's bots or people who are behind these hate-mongers. They are usually bots. They are not usually people. They are irrelevant collectives, but they do have the capacity to amplify the message of hate.

And finally, hate generates business. Hate polarises, it generates interaction and the algorithm designers know this, and they are the ones who keep people hooked on this hate speech and conversation. Hate, therefore, is no longer an emotion, but we could say that hate is a product, a product that is marketed, a product from which there are people who make a business out of it.

The data is there. Many of you know them much better than I do. Three out of four young Spaniards come across hate speech on social media. Three out of four. OBERAXE, the Spanish Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia, identified more than 845,000 hate contents on digital platforms. I repeat the figure: 845,000 hate messages on digital platforms. In the last quarter, more than 1,300 messages per day. I repeat 1,300 messages per day.

And, by the way, we are not talking - for those who say that we are trying to censor - about uncomfortable opinions. On the contrary. We are talking about messages that, for example, compare people to pests. Again, dehumanisation; justifying violence against women or celebrating assaults on women. Again, dehumanisation. This is what many people, especially young people, suffer today, endure every day, every time they look at social networks.

And we know that what starts on a screen does not always stay there. In the last decade, hate crimes have grown 41%. Because when hate is normalised on the internet, it ends up seeping into our daily lives. In street harassment, in job discrimination, in doors that close when looking for housing.

For years, I believe that many platforms invested resources in content moderation, and we have seen it, insufficiently. There is also the balance that we could take stock of this content moderation, but at least they existed because there was a consensus that toxic speech was not freedom of expression, but a threat to the coexistence of societies. But that consensus began to break down when the techno-oligarchs decided to impose their political agenda on social networks. Perhaps we have been too naïve. Technology is politics, technology is power and the techno-oligarchs know it well. So these techno-oligarchs decided to impose their political agenda, reduced moderation teams, relaxed rules and the impact was absolutely immediate.

After Elon Musk's purchase, for example, of X, hate speech on that platform increased by 50%. That's 50%. And so we have gone from freedom of expression, to giving freedom to verbal (and, later, obviously physical) aggression, to a space where insult is presented as an opinion and harassment as a debate. We see this in many examples in the macho attacks against women on social media, as we recalled, by the way, last week, minister. We also see it in the bullying of many teenagers who no longer stay in the school playground because they are still on their mobile phones. In short, we see it in too many places, in too many places.

And today I would like to recall what happened in Torre Pacheco. Because in Torre Pacheco I think we all saw what this dynamic is and how far this dynamic can go. A terrible assault, let's remember, on a 68-year-old neighbour became in a matter of hours a call for a hunt against people of North African origin. An attempt was made to transform an individual crime into an excuse for racial hatred. And the significant thing about those days is that hatred did not win on the physical terrain. Very few people responded to the irresponsible call made by some political groupings and some extreme right-wing groups. But it did find an echo in the digital space. There it multiplied, there it was amplified. There, an attempt was made to construct a narrative of confrontation, a narrative that did not represent Spanish society at all, nor did it represent the people of Torre Pacheco itself. Because it is worth remembering, hate makes a lot of noise on social media, but it never represents the majority. This I think is very important to preserve. This awareness and this reality.

That is why I believe, ladies and gentlemen, that we must act, that is why we are acting. And since then, the Ministry of Inclusion - led by Minister Elma Saiz - has maintained a coordination table with the main digital platforms to: one, evaluate content; two, response times; and three, the removal of hate messages from these platforms, when detected. The pressure is insufficient. Well, we do what we can from the administrations. We are talking about digital platforms that operate globally. But it is beginning to have some effect, because when you act decisively, impunity begins to recede, or at least begins to suffer the consequences. A few months ago, platforms removed around 22% of the content detected. Today that figure, fortunately, is not 22%; it is around 51%. It is insufficient, but it is clear that, from 22% to 51%, we are taking important steps.

As you know, a few weeks ago, at a Government forum, I announced five measures to regain control of the digital space, where Spain is ready to lead together with other European countries. The first, which we have already set in motion, is now in the hands of the Crown Prosecutor of the State, and is to urge this institution to investigate crimes committed through artificial intelligence and deepfakes, especially the dissemination of child pornography on social networks and digital platforms. A week ago, the Crown Prosecutor of the State announced the opening of the criminal investigation to determine the possible responsibility of the digital platforms in this content, in its propagation and in its non-removal.

And today, in this context and in this framework, I would like to announce the implementation of the second measure. We are going to implement the tool we have called HODIO -h, o, d, i, o. In short, the imprint of hatred and polarisation. An instrument that, through the Observatory against Racism and Xenophobia, will make it possible to systematically measure the presence, evolution and scope of hate speech on digital platforms. Because that is what we need. We need transparency, we need to understand, we need data that allow us to assess the dynamics, the orientation, the response in terms of effectiveness, and also the political commitment that the Government of Spain is showing as an expression of the social will of the Spanish people. It will therefore allow us to systematically measure the presence, evolution, amplification and impact of hate speech on digital platforms.

The aim of this footprint, therefore, is to calculate the level of presence, the amplification of these discourses on social networks in Spain. A transparent, rigorous tool, based on recognised academic criteria. I think this marriage between public action, ultimately public policy, and academia and science, which will combine quantitative analysis and also expert review to ensure accuracy and representativeness, is very important.

And this measurement will have consequences, because not only will we try to measure, we will try to act on these measurements. The idea is therefore very simple. If we go, for example, to the case of the climate emergency, what do we do? Well, today we talk about the carbon footprint and we do it to measure what? The environmental impact of an activity such as the emission of greenhouse gases. We also want to start talking about the footprint of hatred. What for? To prevent the social and democratic impact that this hate speech is having on the coexistence of our country.

And when something is measured, it is no longer invisible. And I think this is the substance of this tool that we are launching today, because it starts to generate accountability. Not only to digital platforms, but also to public administrations in order to implement the necessary measures to reduce hate speech.

That is why it is also important to tell you that we are going to expose the results publicly, so that everyone knows who stops hatred, who looks the other way and who does business with hatred. I think it is very important to know and share all this information, so that people who operate on social networks are very aware of the role they play on those social networks.

The objective is therefore very clear. It is to bring hatred out of the shadows, to make it visible, to demand accountability from those who fail to act. If you will allow me, as Gisèle Pelicot would say, let's make shame change sides here too. Let's make shame change sides here too.

The digital environment cannot be a space without rules. I have said it on many occasions: today social networks are a failed state, there are no rules, there are no laws, impunity is rewarded. Why? Because of what I said before, because technology is power. Technology is politics and there, right now, politics is being made in a bad way, the kind that is not wanted, but the law of the strongest and not the force of the law. Therefore, the digital environment cannot be a space without rules. And from there, I believe that social networks will be held publicly accountable for every piece of hateful content they allow. And society as a whole will be able to be aware of the environments in which we interact, in which our children and young people move.

As you know, the Government is also already working to materialise - it is now in parliamentary procedure - the ban on social networks for minors under 16 years of age, and also the creation of an offence of algorithmic amplification. In short, that those digital platforms that design algorithms that propagate these messages of hate take responsibility, because technological platforms - or digital platforms, rather - are not neutral; technology is clearly not neutral, it is political. This is why I believe that the creation of an offence of algorithmic amplification and, particularly relevant to the fight against hate, the criminal liability of those legally responsible for the platforms when they fail to remove illegal content.

I believe that there are some aspects of the regulation that we propose and that we have consolidated in our acquis in the offline world that we should also incorporate into the online world. Nothing and no one, no matter how powerful, is above or outside the law. I believe that, for a long time - and this has been a mistake by society as a whole, including the public administrations, as I said before - for a long time the platforms have wanted to maximise profits and minimise responsibilities. And that time is over. That time is over, because we no longer surrender to them. It is they who will be accountable to the societies in which they operate.

That is why, ladies and gentlemen, I conclude with a message of hope, because I believe that we have enough tools to stop hatred. Let's stop the hate on social media, in our streets and also in our school playgrounds. I know that in this struggle Spanish society will eventually prevail, I am convinced. Because there are many people who are aware of the risks and the effects of all this expansion of hate, to put it in a politically correct way, which unfortunately we experience on social networks and which spreads to our daily lives in the offline world.

Because the social majority is made up of good people, people who may have different opinions, but who are not driven by hatred in their daily lives. They are driven by something much more powerful, which is love. Love for our partners, love for our sons and daughters, for our parents and our siblings, for our neighbours, for our friends. And yes, love also for those who are different, for those who come from abroad and for those who live thousands of kilometres away, but who suffer pain and injustice, whether in Gaza, Sudan, Beirut, Kyiv or Tehran. That is our mission, ladies and gentlemen, that we talk more about love and less about hate.

Thank you very much.

(Transcript edited by the State Secretariat for Communication)

Original speech in Spanish

Non official translation