Is humour effective in combating hate speech? Maybe not so clearly

This article presents the main findings of a study focusing on two elements concerning the fight against the circulation of hate speech on the Web: 1) the challenge posed by the need to conceptualize the notion of counter-discourse 2) the experimentation of humour as a strategic tool to combat the circulation of hate speech on the Internet and its negative effects on online social attitudes. As a first step, we conducted eleven semi-structured interviews with six academic researchers and five experts in the field, in order to understand how the common aspects of the counter-discourse concept found in the literature can be interpreted and mobilized in practice. In doing so, we analyzed their responses in order to identify the types of counter-discourse we felt were most effective in combating hate speech, and to determine whether humour was a relevant strategy. Secondly, we conducted an online experiment with two short videos, one conveying counter-speech in a humorous form, the other in a more serious manner. In some respects, the results of the experiment went in the opposite direction to that expected. Indeed, the data show that a message conveyed in a humorous way may be less effective than one presented in a more serious manner. In addition, it seems that variables such as age and perception of the limits of freedom of expression play a significant role in the appreciation and willingness to share this type of material online.