Improving Public Literacy in Hate Speech Cases on Social Media as an Effort to Mitigate Legal and Social Impacts

Hate speech does not receive serious attention from the community, so hate speech cases often recur. This research seeks to explain the forms and types of potentially criminal speech, especially insults on social media, as well as the mindset developed by insult perpetrators. This research uses a qualitative method that focuses on one issue of defamation. The data source is a copy of the final decision of a defamation case. The data was collected from the Supreme Court website using the observation method. The data was analyzed using pragmatics to interpret the intention of the offender's speech. This study found that the form of insults can be in the form of accusations, curses, a combination of accusations and curses, and ridicule. Furthermore, insults contain violations of maxims in pragmatics, namely violations of the maxim of quality, maxim of wisdom, and maxim of agreement. From a legal perspective, such speech can be prosecuted if it is done intentionally, contains accusations, is disseminated to the public, contains swear words, and defames the victim. Therefore, social media users need to know the dangers of insults, one of which is through insult case literacy. The pattern of behavior shows that speakers focus on Emphasizing their bad things, eliminating their good things, emphasizing their good things, and eliminating our bad things.