America Online Hate-Filled Member Profiles

AOL Hate-Filled Member Profiles

Hate Against Blacks, Christians, Gays, Jews, Latinos & Asians
Is AOL Doing Enough to Police Online Hate?

Sample AOL Member Profiles:
(see more profiles below)

Update: AOL Reneges on Half-Promise of Meeting
Wednesday, November 3, 1999

MSNBC reported yesterday (11/2) that America Online (AOL) is now "downplaying expectations that a previously scheduled meeting with a gay rights group will address the controversy over its policies regarding hate speech. AOL is declining to commit to an agenda for the meeting and won’t say who has been invited."  It's troublesome enough that AOL decided to add the hate speech/censorship controversy onto an already-scheduled meeting with people not even involved in the issue (most of the groups working on this issue weren't even invited to the meeting), but now AOL is telling the media that the meeting won't really address the issue at all.  Again we must ask whether America Online truly values the concerns of its gay and lesbian subscribers, not to mention Christians, Jews, African-Americans, Asians and others who were viciously attacked in member profiles.  Read on for more details.
  

Update: AOL To Meet Gays - Maybe...
Tuesday, November 2, 1999

America Online (AOL) announced yesterday (Nov. 1) that the issue of the hate-filled AOL profiles, and maybe the issue of the overall adequacy and fairness of AOL's Terms of Service (TOS), would be discussed at a meeting on November 9.  While we welcome the principle of AOL meeting to discuss the controversy, things get a bit odd when you look at the details.  AOL  admits that the November 9th meeting was scheduled before this controversy even occurred - it had nothing to do with the hate speech issue, and the invitees were not even selected to address this issue (since the issue didn't even exist when the invitations went out).   In addition, it seems that practically no one involved in this controversy has been invited to attend the AOL meeting that is supposedly addressing this issue.  Who is invited to the meeting remains a mystery - AOL won't release the invite list - but we do know who has not yet been invited.  HateWatch.org has not been invited. PlanetOut has not been invited. The ACLU has not been invited. Wired Strategies has not been invited.   National Gay Lobby has not been invited. If AOL wants this to be a meeting to discuss their recent problems with hate speech and AOL's terms of service, it's going to be a rather unproductive meeting if the key players aren't even there. In spite of this, we still have confidence that this meeting won't be a meaningless publicity stunt to fool and appease the gay community, but rather that AOL is planning on inviting all the key players.

As for the substance of a legitimate meeting with AOL, the longer AOL drags this out, the larger the issues become.  What we've found in the last few weeks is that there a lot of issues that need to be addressed. While this controversy began with the question of whether AOL censored gay member profiles while ignoring anti-gay ones, it has now become a much larger issue of whether AOL's entire terms of service needs to be revised. There are issues surrounding the censoring of gay profiles. Whether AOL treats gays equal to other minorities. Whether AOL is doing the right thing, or enough, about violent hate speech against gays, blacks, Jews and Christians. Whether AOL is consistently punishing gay members seeking safe-sex information online. How seriously AOL is taking on gay-bashers in chat rooms. And finally, is AOL willing to establish a process whereby concerns like these can be addresses in a serious manner rather than simply treated as a public relations problem that can be fixed by the right 'spin'. This controversy showed us that there are a number of community concerns with America Online - growing by the day - and that we need to have a long and extended dialogue with AOL about how to revamp their entire terms of service in order to meet the community's unique needs.
  

Overview:

Civil rights and hate monitoring groups have discovered a trove of violently anti -gay, -Jewish, -black, -Christian, -Latino and -Asian hate on America Online.   When asked what the world's largest online service planned to do about this clear violation of their own terms of service, AOL responded that rather than launch an investigation and pro-actively enforce their strong anti-hate policy, they will stick with their now-questionable policy of doing nothing until a member contacts them about each and every incident of hate.

*  AOL has a strong anti-hate policy, at least on paper.
*  Does this mean that AOL has any responsibility at all to pro-actively enforce its own anti-hate policies, or does the responsibility rest solely with AOL's subscribers to enforce AOL's own policies, as AOL suggests?
*  How does AOL expect subscribers to police their own when AOL's member profile search engine, the subscribers' main tool for doing this policing, disallows searches for key hateful speech against blacks and Jews?  Doesn't this make the anti-hate policy meaningless?
*  Does AOL have different standards towards anti-gay vs. anti-Jewish, anti-Black and other hate speech on its service?
*  How can AOL's only response to this controversy be to stand by its existing policy, when on its face the existing policy has not been effective in reigning in violently hateful content?
*  On the one-year anniversary of the death of gay student Matthew Shepard, and with hate crimes on the rise against evangelical Christians, Jews, African-Americans and other Americans, what is corporate America's responsibility towards helping eliminate a climate of hate in our country?

Check out the actual profiles below, then read the following stories about this controversy:

MSNBC story #2, 11/2/99 Wired story #3, 11/2/99 Bay Area Reporter, 10/29/99 ZDNet article, 10/26/99 ZDNet video, KRON - San Fran (video of protest), 10/25/99

Wired story #1, 10/25/99 Wired story #2, 10/25/99 MSNBC story #1, 10/22/99 San Francisco Examiner story, 10/22/99 San Francisco Chronicle story, 10/21/99 CNet story, 10/21/99 Newsbytes story, 10/21/99

 
1. Update: Did AOL Lie?

A journalist contact of mine tried to create an AOL member profile with the word "nigger", and got the following message: "Profiles containing the string 'nigger' cannot be created. Please try again." The same thing happened when she tried the word "kike." (I just tried it myself, and she's right.) Yet you get no such message when you create a profile with the anti-gay epithets.

What's interesting about this is not just that AOL seems to have a double-standard with regards to anti-minority hate words, but that AOL said in the CNet article today that "AOL does not actively filter speech on its service".

In addition, the San Francisco Chronicle reported today that: "AOL spokesman Rich D'Amato said the company does not proactively police member profiles, but instead relies on members to alert it to objectionable material."

They say they don't proactively police member profiles and certainly don't actively filter speech, they rely only on members to find objectionable material in profiles. But if you try to CREATE a profile with the word "nigger" or "kike", AOL's filter catches it and says don't you dare create that profile. And if you try to SEARCH for the words "nigger" or "kike" in a profile, AOL's filter catches it and says don't you dare search for that profile.

Am I misreading these quotes, or is someone not telling the whole story here?
 

2. Update: Some of the Above Profiles Still Remain, Why?

AOL claimed today in a CNet article to have taken "appropriate action" on the 34 hateful anti-Black, anti-gay, anti-Christian and anti-Jewish member profiles that I posted on my Web site at http://www.wiredstrategies.com/profile.htm (I found hundreds, but posted 34). According to to CNet:

"[AOL spokesman Richard] D'Amato said the company reviewed the profiles unearthed by Wired Strategies and took 'appropriate action,' although he refused to provide more details, citing the company's privacy policy."

So I looked up the 34 profiles again on AOL and found that 3 are still there:

- Aldolf Hitler, whose hobbies include "Killing Jews"
- Jamalplo, whose personal quote is "Kill a jew save a tree", and
- KISoAvCeS, whose personal quote is "STOP AIDS...KILL A QUEER!!!"

I have no way to know if AOL thought it was "appropriate" to leave these three profiles in tact, whether they simply missed them (kind of hard to understand how they could miss "Aldolf Hitler's" profile - and heck, they only had 34 to review), or whether they deleted them and the members put them up again. No matter what, there were only 34 measly profiles that they had to take care of, yet 10% are still standing. How hard can this be?

 
3. 'THAT Community' -  How About 'Gay'?

[AOL spokesman Richard] D'Amato says his company is communicating.

"We are in regular dialog with that community," he said, pointing to AOL's
ties with partner Websites such as Planet Out. "We have partners that are
part of the community and help us keep in touch with needs of that
community."  -

Gay Groups Accuse AOL Of Unfair Treatment
By Steven Bonisteel, Newsbytes
21 Oct 1999, 1:24 PM CST
http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/99/138168.html
 

4. The Story:

America Online (AOL) again faces accusations that its service is not gay friendly.  A representative of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas issued a public letter today on gay journalist Rex Wockner's email network questioning whether AOL is selectively targeting gay members' user profiles.  According to the ACLU, a gay subscriber to AOL received a terms of service violation in his AOL record (a record which can be subpoenaed in a court of law) because the online service found "objectionable" language he used to describe himself. 

The ACLU noted that the "man's self-written user profile is far far more tame than many that AOL allows for heterosexuals."   The ACLU has apparently tried to get AOL to clarify its policies regarding member profiles, but said that to date "AOL has not responded to our inquiries of clarification of their policy."

Interestingly, a cursory check of AOL turned up scores of presumably heterosexual member profiles that disparaged "fags," and even several that seem to advocate the murder of gays.  As today marks the opening day in the Matthew Shepard murder trial, and tonight the one-year anniversary of Matt's death, it only seemed appropriate to reiterate the ACLU's concern that America Online publicly state its policy with regards to member profiles, particularly those that seem to disparage, and advocate violence against, gays.

AOL has a policy of not permitting anti-Jewish and anti-black epithets in their user profiles - and if you do a search for "kike" or "nigger" in AOL's profiles, or try to create a profile including those words, you will even receive a notice from AOL that those terms are banned.  Yet there is no such warning applying to the word "fag".  An AOL message board adviser told a member that "fag" is not banned because: "Some members of the gay community use 'fag' as a means of self-identification. To ban it completely from profiles would mean that gay people would be denied from using it too."  Another AOL member responded that "the same is true of Blacks calling each other 'nigger' but AOL excludes this word," suggesting an inconsistency in AOL's treatment of minorities.  And while many in the gay community do use the words "fag" and "dyke" as badges of honor, that begs the question of why so many violently anti-gay profiles exist on the online service.

In actuality, a review of the first one hundred AOL profiles produced by a search for the word "fag" showed that 83 of the 100 (or 83%) used "fag" in a disparaging way, including one that spoke of the need to remove gay men's testicles.  A further review turned up a disturbing number of anti-Jewish profiles as well, including member names such as "Aldolf Hitler" and "Fry the Hebes", and quotes such as "Hobbies: killing blacks, Jews, and Asians."  (see examples above)

 
5.  BREAKING NEWS: AOL Stymies Enforcement of Own Anti-Hate Policy - 10/20/99

1. AOL said today, in response to the growing hate-profile controversy, that they don't pro-actively police member profiles. Instead, they say they rely on members to alert them to objectionable material.

2. But AOL members can't police objectionable profiles, because the only tool they can use, the member search engine, is censored by AOL! When a member tries to search for AOL profiles containing the words "nigger" or "kike", the system automatically gives you a pop-up warning that you have searched for words that violate AOL's terms of service, and the search is canceled. How can AOL claim that it is the members' responsibility for finding and reporting hate speech, yet at the same time take away the only tool members have for finding this speech?

3. Why is it that the AOL member-profile-search-engine disallows searches for "nigger" and "kike" - even providing a pop-up warning that such words violate AOL's terms of service - when similar searches for "faggot" and "dyke" produce no such warnings? What message does this send to AOL's 20 million members? That denigrating gays isn't as bad as denigrating Jews and Blacks? How is this not a double-standard on hate speech?

4. AOL's own Terms of Service specifically states that "Hate speech is never allowed....Community standards may vary, but there is no place on the service where hate speech is tolerated." AOL has now been informed that there is a serious problem with anti-gay and anti-semitic hate speech on their system. While it's nice for them to respond that their "policy" is not to pro-actively filter member profiles, the fact remains that their policy has clearly failed to live up to their own Terms of Service. A simple reiteration of their now-failed policy in the face of such abundant hate-filled speech is not a sufficient response. Are they saying that after learning of the extensive hate that remains on their system, in violation of their own Terms of Service, they will do nothing?
 

6. AOL Accused Before of Lax Enforcment of Anti-hate Policy.

 
7. Leading Web Hate Monitor Criticizes AOL

October 20, 1999
Shooting Fags, Killing Jews and AOL:
Hate speech policies on AOL membership profiles

CAMBRIDGE, MA: On October 18 1999, HateWatch was alerted to America Online's (AOL) inconsistent enforcement of their own Terms of Service (TOS) policy regarding hate material found in their members' public profiles.

AOL member profiles are written by individual subscribers to publicly describe themselves and their interests. Examples of the hateful rhetoric recently found in AOL member profiles include: "The only good faggot is a dead faggot ", "Like my beer cold and fags dead!", "Stop AIDS...Kill a queer", "Shoot all the fags and let God sort them out", and one member describes his hobby as, "killing queers ". In addition, a number of member profiles included violently anti-Semitic speech, including member names such as "Aldolf Hitler" and "Fry the Hebes", and quotes such as: "Hobbies: killing Blacks, Jews, and Asians", "Kill a Jew save a tree", and "Occupation: killings Jews". (For more examples and actual screen shots of the some of the AOL member profiles in question, please see http://www.wiredstrategies.com/profile.htm).

AOL explicitly states in their TOS contract that such profiles are in violation of the organization's terms of service: "community standards may vary, but there is no place on the service where hate speech is tolerated....AOL doesn't endorse or oppose opinions expressed by our members, but we do sometimes take issue with the manner in which the opinion is expressed. Hate speech is never allowed."

As reported by online-watchdog Wired Strategies, "AOL has a policy of not permitting anti-Jewish and anti-black epithets in their user profiles. If you do a search for 'kike' or 'nigger' in AOL's profiles, you will even receive a notice that those terms are banned. Yet there is no such warning applying to the word 'fag', 'faggot' or 'dyke'. An AOL message board adviser told a member that 'fag' is not banned because: 'Some members of the gay community use 'fag' as a means of self identification. To ban it completely from profiles would mean that gay people would be denied from using it too.' "

AOL's inconsistent view of what constitutes hate material is of serious concern. If one searches for words denigrating Blacks or Jews on AOL, the user is automatically warned that this language is a violation of AOL's terms of service. But when it comes to anti-gay rhetoric, no such warning appears. This double-standard sends a bad message to AOL's 20 million members, and suggests a reluctance on the part of AOL to enforce their own policies and procedures with regards to online hate.

Yet this issue is not unknown to AOL. In 1997, AOL continued to host the Realm of Texas Ku Klux Klan web site on their service even after HateWatch and other civil rights organizations alerted them to this problem. Wendy Goldberg, spokesperson for AOL, stated that the KKK web page was not, in AOL's opinion, a hate site and therefore did not violate the online provider's terms of service. AOL's unfortunate decision gave tacit approval to the perverse notion that the Klan was merely a "white civil rights organization" and not a hate group. HateWatch and other civil rights groups strongly disagreed with their decision, and finally AOL agreed to remove the offending site. Similar to the KKK situation, and because of their lack of consistency in enforcing their own community standards, AOL now gives the appearance that they consider anti-gay and anti-Semitic bigotry acceptable.

In response to this controversy, AOL has said that they will not initiate an investigation of hate speech on their system, but rather will wait for members to alert them to specific member profiles advocating violence against Jews and gays. There are several problems with this policy. First, AOL members are not responsible for enforcing the organization's terms of service with regards to hate material. That responsibility rests solely with America Online.

Second, it is impossible for AOL members to police objectionable profiles, because the only tool they can use, the member search engine, is censored by AOL. When a member tries to search for AOL profiles containing the anti-Black and anti-Jewish epithets, the system produces a warning that those words violate AOL's terms of service, and the search is canceled. It is the height of hypocrisy for AOL to claim that it is the members' responsibility to find and report hate material, yet at the same time take away the only tool members have for finding this speech. Under such a scenario, AOL's terms of service are meaningless.

America Online has a serious problem with violently anti-gay and anti-semitic speech on its system. Rather than reiterate the failed policies that led to this situation, HateWatch strongly urges AOL to review their terms of service contract, develop a consistent policy regarding hate material in their users' membership profiles, and enforce that policy fairly, quickly, effectively.

For more information please contact HateWatch at info@hatewatch.org or Wired Strategies at info@wiredstrategies.com

DAVID GOLDMAN
FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR, HATEWATCH

HateWatch, ( http://hatewatch.org ) is a web based educational resource and non-profit organization that combats the growing and evolving threat of online bigotry.  In 1996, HateWatch incorporated in Massachusetts and began to actively monitor hate groups on the web. Among other resources, HateWatch now keeps the most up to date catalog of hate groups using the web to recruit and organize. HateWatch is considered an innovator in the use of web based outreach and is a leader in the fight for civil rights and social justice.
------------------------

David Goldman                                        Phone: 617-876-3796
Founder and Director of HateWatch       
Cambridge, MA 02139-3180       

 
8. Gay Financial Network's (GFN.com) Writes About AOL Profile Controversy, click here.

9. AOL Responds to Profile Controversy - Activist fires back!

10. Additional Problems AOL Has Had With the Gay Community.

• Timothy McVeigh AOL Privacy Case

• AOL Anti-gay Thesaurus

• Mugged by AOL, Losing Your Good Name Online

• AOL Bans Safe Sex Question in Gay Chat Room
  

Wired Strategies
Political Internet Consulting
Washington, DC
www.wiredstrategies.com
info@wiredstrategies.com