Hamilton racially abused on social media over British GP win

I think we are starting to redefine terms like 'abuse' a little too much. A rich and succesful athlete getting insulting tweets doesn't quite get there to me. Blow it off, ignore the idiots who write this kind of drivel. When they see that they aren't getting any attention, they will go away.

Absolutely despicable racism.

Lets call it as it is - these people despise Lewis because he is Black. Simple as that. How dare a Black kid from a poor background be given a drive in F1, and go on to become the GOAT in the sport?

These are the same white supremacists who endlessly attack Naomi Osaka online, as well as the Black England soccer players.

Hunt them down and jail them.

Lots of people here seem to be defending or at least downplaying online racist abuse.

I'm not sure what it will take to make people understand that it makes no difference whether abuse takes place online or off. It has the exact same effect.

People spend time online working, browsing, shopping, reading, getting news, socializing, and commenting, among other things. We increasingly spend a good portion of our day online. What we see and read has an effect on how we think and the opinions we form.

This means that the abuse doesn't just stay online. Participating in such abuse without sanction, and seeing others participate, makes the perpetrators feel they have support. This emboldens them, and the online abuse then makes its way into people's everyday speech and actions. We've seen that with the physical attacks on Asians in the US, as well as attacks against immigrants in the UK. I myself witnessed such an attack while I was in London.

Online platforms therfore have a moral responsibility to stop abuse and hate speech in its tracks through strict moderation. That includes the large corporations such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, but also small platforms like Japan Today.

Any kind of abuse, whether it is racist abuse, homophobic abuse, transphobic abuse, or abuse against women, simply cannot be tolerated either online or off.

Girl In Tokyo.. I agree that people spend a lot of time online, perhaps too much (guilty...). But one can gather news and information without social media and the like. If you put your real identity out there, you risk being the target of idiots. Especially a person who is a celebrity. It is all part of the package that comes with wealth and fame.

Just think of the 'abuse' that the former President took even here- orange babboon, cheetoh, fat..., moron-in-chief, it was/is impossible to read any discussion without the invective pouring out. This is no different.

The people arrested so far, five of them, are all white English people. Some have already been fired from their jobs.

Well stated, Zichi.

But the white supremacists will continue to try and deflect from this fact ..."oh, the racist abuse was actually from India...Africa... Bangladesh...definitely not from white people"

Racism ius NEVER OK, whether its online from gutless scum cowards, face to face - or whether the victims are poor or mega rich like Lewis.

Fighto: what would you call someone who wants men with guns to hunt down and throw people in cages for the 'crime' of being rude? I know what I would call such a person...

Zichi, your point is well taken. Care to explain the difference between insulting and abuse? Just so we can agree to the terms of the discussion. Again, being a public figure leaves one open to the public in all their glory and also their idiocy. Unless an actual crime is committed, the police should have no place in monitoring private speech.

AttilathehungryToday  09:22 am JST

I think we are starting to redefine terms like 'abuse' a little too much. A rich and succesful athlete getting insulting tweets doesn't quite get there to me. Blow it off, ignore the idiots who write this kind of drivel. When they see that they aren't getting any attention, they will go away.

Part of the problem is that the media loves this kind of story, and are quick to fan the flames if they so much as sense a spark.

Top-notch sports stars like Hamilton, Naomi Osaka and the like have got where they are through hard work and a tough mental attitude. Granted that all people have their weaknesses, are they really that vulnerable to a pack of morons insulting them due to their skin colour, or are they milking it for sympathy and support? I'm just asking the question.

I agree, maybe they should just tell the taunters to get a life and brush them off. And tell the media to grow up.

So again, what is the difference between insults and abuse? Important question for discussions like this.

AttilathehungryToday 10:50 am JST

If you put your real identity out there, you risk being the target of idiots. Especially a person who is a celebrity. It is all part of the package that comes with wealth and fame.

It's not only famous and wealthy people who face abuse online.

Racism, sexism, trans- and homophobia have real life consequences for those groups - the people abusing them online are also abusing them offline.

what is the difference between insults and abuse?

These are two separate problems, and yes - both need to be addressed.

But in short, if someone calls you an idiot online, you don't need to worry that others reading that will feel empowered, will out out and look for someone who looks like you, single them out, and then physically attack them.

But this happens all the time to racial and sexual minorities, as well as to women.

girl_in_tokyoToday  11:24 am JST

AttilathehungryToday 10:50 am JST

If you put your real identity out there, you risk being the target of idiots. Especially a person who is a celebrity. It is all part of the package that comes with wealth and fame.

It's not only famous and wealthy people who face abuse online. 

Racism, sexism, trans- and homophobia have real life consequences for those groups - the people abusing them online are also abusing them offline.

what is the difference between insults and abuse?

These are two separate problems, and yes - both need to be addressed. 

But in short, if someone calls you an idiot online, you don't need to worry that others reading that will feel empowered, will out out and look for someone who looks like you, single them out, and then physically attack them.

But this happens all the time to racial and sexual minorities, as well as to women.

All you're doing is perpetuating victimhood. But that's the currency of the Left, because the Left has nothing else to offer. Just victimhood and violence. Shouldn't you instead be encouraging people to smile and tell these morons where to go? Not smiling in a turn-the-other-cheek fashion, but in a your-pathetic-insults-don't-affect-me way. As someone who got bullied a lot at school, I learned this the hard way but it works.

Lewis Hamilton and other successful people really should let their success speak for itself and give their abusers the figurative finger. They'll win a lot more fans and respect that way instead of pandering to victimhood.

I just read on Mother Beeb that the UK actually has a "Football Policing Unit"... my god. George Orwell would be pleased. Are there so few actual crimes in the UK that they can waste manpower on this?

Is there any evidence that people who read insults and vile language online are actuallly influenced by it to take action? I would suggest that the vast majority who read it are rightfully disgusted by it. Trying to root out that miniscule minority verges on Thought Crime.

Maybe just my opinion, but to me the difference between insult and abuse is power. Abuse requries a power relationship between the parties, and that the more powerful can abuse the less powerful. For example, child abuse, spousal abuse, etc. These are power dynamic related situations. Insults don't wield any actual power, other than the power to shock or offend. Some online troglodyte calling Hamilton a bad word for black people isn't abusing him because the troglodyte has no actual power over Hamilton.

Girl in Tokyo, direct incitement to violence (empowering others to paraphrase your term) is already a crime, regardless the nature of the incitement. Simple rude and racist words and slurs have no such power.

Zichi, yes they have, and it is tragic. But is there any connection between those crimes and online insults? I don't think so. Ditto the anti-Asian attacks due to Covid. But were those attacks attributed to social media postings? I don't think so. Trying to connect words and actions is, not sure how to put this well, a dangerous slippery slope to put a foot upon. Which is why the law, at least in free countries, tries very hard not to limit free speech, except in very specific instances. And amorphous terms like 'hate crime', 'abuse', and the like just don't cut it.

If the police want to stamp out hooliganism and violence, good for them. But when they start monitoring social media.... sorry, that is a bridge too far.

As I wrote before, I don'T think abuse can happen without power. What are your thoughts on that?

oochToday 11:50 am JST

All you're doing is perpetuating victimhood. But that's the currency of the Left, because the Left has nothing else to offer. Just victimhood and violence. Shouldn't you instead be encouraging people to smile and tell these morons where to go?

This has nothing to do with politics.

I also don't know where the word "victimhood" even comes from. By definition, a victim is someone who has been a victim of a crime.

People are being harassed, beaten, and murdered, and you are speaking as though there is no real harm being done to them.

Not smiling in a turn-the-other-cheek fashion, but in a your-pathetic-insults-don't-affect-me way. As someone who got bullied a lot at school, I learned this the hard way but it works.

We are talking about real violence perpetuated by people who were emboldened into that action by online racist rhetoric.

There have been a number of very serious and deadly attacks on Asian-Americans in the past few months, all because of talk online where people have been blaming Asians for corona. That talk directly instigated these attacks.

Likewise, transpeople, Black people, and gay people have all experienced attacks that were fueled by bigoted online commentary. It is a regular occurrence.

Lewis Hamilton and other successful people really should let their success speak for itself and give their abusers the figurative finger. They'll win a lot more fans and respect that way instead of pandering to victimhood.

This isn't only about soccer stars. This is also about ordinary people. In fact, I'd say Hamilton is less likely to experience an actual violence because, being rich, he is also well-protected. But that is not the case for most people.

Online bigoted rhetoric has direct and serious real life consequences. This is a fact.

AttilathehungryToday 11:52 am JST

Some online troglodyte calling Hamilton a bad word for black people isn't abusing him because the troglodyte has no actual power over Hamilton.

Girl in Tokyo, direct incitement to violence (empowering others to paraphrase your term) is already a crime, regardless the nature of the incitement. Simple rude and racist words and slurs have no such power.

It is a proven fact that online abuse spills over into real life violence.

Yes, there already are laws against directly inciting violence. The problem is that most of the violent incidents are not instigated by the people who are making these direct threats. The violence is coming from people who either read or participate directly in online bigoted commentary that are not considered direct threats.

For example, there has been a lot of racist online rhetoric that Asians are responsible for corona, that Asians are spreading the disease, that Asians spread the disease because they want the US to suffer, and further that Asians should all be kicked out of the US or put in jail, as well as generalized threats about harming Asians.

This has lead to Asians being harassed, beaten, and murdered.

You cannot pretend that there is no such thing as indirect incitement to violence. It happens all the time.

So, once again, online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and even small platforms like Japan Today have a moral imperative to stop bigoted rhetoric via moderation.

Let the bigots talk all they want among themselves face to face or in dark corners of the internet. But don't let them spread their hate so widely and easily.

Hamilton is a class act.

The only good that can come out of this is if the UK starts accepting and correcting its long-term racist problems that is a part of its society.

Statues of slave traders and other racists are all over the UK.

The countries of the UK have a long history of racism stemming from its long history of slavery.

People of the UK need to stand up and acknowledge this ugly aspect of their society.

If private businesses and websites want to have policies about insults and abuse, that is their perogative. I have no problem with that, as long as the rules are enforced fairly.

However, having the government deploy men with guns hunt for people and put them in steel cages is another level entirely, and it needs another level of proof. If there is no causal link there is no crime. Otherwise any peripherally related remark could be construed as "indirectly" responsible.

The "rise in anti-Asian crime" is an interesting case. According to the FBI, the number of such crimes is actually 60% less than 25 years ago. Yes, less. So an argument could be made that letting people vent their spleen on social media contributes to FEWER such crimes occuring. In 2020 in NYC, only 2 white people (out of 20 arrested in total) were arrested for anti-Asian crimes. So I guess racism similarly isn't a factor as well.

At risk of drifting too far off topic Zichi, I don't think making "denial of history" a crime is a good idea. Only serves to drive the idiots underground and fuel their claims of persecution. It is better to expose them, and let them be mocked, and then be forgotten.

Same can be said for online keyboard warriors who post rude things about athletes like Hamilton and Osaka. Ignore them, let their words speak (shamefully) about them, and they will go away. Giving them the attention they obviously crave will only serve to make them more odious.

AttilathehungryToday 01:09 pm JST

If private businesses and websites want to have policies about insults and abuse, that is their perogative. I have no problem with that, as long as the rules are enforced fairly.

This is what I am advocating for, yes. Just as I would kick someone out of my home for saying racist things, websites have the power to ban people for writing racist things.

However, having the government deploy men with guns hunt for people and put them in steel cages is another level entirely, and it needs another level of proof.

This is not what I am advocating for. I think someone else said this; it wasn't me.

If there is no causal link there is no crime. Otherwise any peripherally related remark could be construed as "indirectly" responsible.

There is plenty of evidence from research that online rhetoric fuels crime in real life. A good and easily available case study is Elliot Rodgers. A lot has been written on that case.

The "rise in anti-Asian crime" is an interesting case.

Let's be clear: the recent spate of attacks have been traced back to online racist rhetoric. The perpetrators themselves referenced this rhetoric when arrested.

Hate crimes in general have been going down, just as other crime has been falling. This doesn't mean we can relax our standards, or ignore that online media has had a hand in fueling negative discourse.

It is a fact that hateful rhetoric has real life consequences, whether that rhetoric takes place in face to face conversations or online ones.

Zichi, I stand corrected. Let me rephrase "the government will send men with truncheons to extract money from your wallet, and if you don't comply, THEN they will put you in a cage". Better?

I am not sure why you are asking my race, what does that have to do with the situation? If it makes you feel better, I am biracial. Does my ethnicity somehow give me more authourity to speak on this topic?

I am sure it is very easy to trace the perpetrator of the vile comments, 1: if it is sent from a computer it will have the IP address embedded in the message, 2: Text or tweets that come from a mobile phones these mobile number will be registered to a person, it does make it more difficult if these are cheap throw away phones, and are not registered to anyone. but the account for registering the twitter account should be a valid house address.

What can be done even if some one is behind a vile comment? The UK police force is at best a skeleton crew, and the CPS, crown prosecuting service is in total disarray, even if a prosecution gets sent to be seen by a court, they will probably be let off.

I dont know how other countries are going to tackle this problem, other than suspending someones amount what will be done?

Does anyone even know what was supposedly said? Are you just going to take someone's word that the comments were racist at a time where simply flying the US flag is being called racist?

Brian; the question also becomes, should the police even be involved in this kind of thing? I am not comfortable with the government regulating what is and isn't rude speech. Also as darknuts said, in this specific incident, we don't even know what was actually said.

I'd like to know what specifically crosses the threshold from rude to illegal. Not out of any purient interest, but from a legal point of view. What phrases and I allowed to utter (or write) and what phrases are verboten? Laws need to be as clear as possible in these cases.

People of the UK need to stand up and acknowledge this ugly aspect of their society.

Yes, like all countries.

You seem very interested in the UK and are clearly a big football fan. Try visiting my hometown ( Liverpool - a great football city ) in the UK. It has a museum in the city centre, prime real estate, dedicated to showing the evils of slavery.

It’s not for the faint hearted or hysterical. It’s pretty brutal.

Zichi, in the case of Hamilton, what specifically was said that crossed the line from rude to criminal? Also, if you could explain why you wished my racial background, I would be greatful.

From what I could glean, Hamilton was sent monkey emojis via his team Instagram account. That and being called a gorilla. The Daily Mail had a screenshot of one comment. It said;

"I was his fan before this race!...very bad, sir lewis hamilton" (gorilla emoji)

Is that enough for an investigation?!? Tempest, meet teapot.

AttilathehungryToday  02:20 pm JST

I am not sure why you are asking my race, what does that have to do with the situation? If it makes you feel better, I am biracial. Does my ethnicity somehow give me more authourity to speak on this topic?

The irony, right? An article on racial abuse, and some poster asking about your race.

For what it is worth, apologies for that.

JimizoToday  04:10 pm JST

Yes, like all countries. 

This article is about a British driver, in a British race; thought it was relevant to mention Britain in my comment.

You seem very interested in the UK and are clearly a big football fan.

Because I am commenting about sn article dealing with Britain? There are many many posters here who are not American, yet comment on all distinct aspects of American society--which is actually amusing to me in a way--as maybe my comments are amusing to you. Nothing against a Brit discussing US politics or culture or whatever, but getting into "Americans always" statements, well, come on. Lots of my references mimic those.

Try visiting my hometown ( Liverpool - a great football city ) in the UK. It has a museum in the city centre, prime real estate, dedicated to showing the evils of slavery. 

Actually have met the primary owner of your team, and of course have visited as a Beatles thing.

Many of the houses were built with money from the slave trade, many streets named after slave traders (does Tarleton Street still exist?). Lots of slaves shipped out from Liverpool ports.

I think the city should keep all those historical markers of the slave trade--those should stand as a historical point of reference. History is not cancelled by asking down a statue.

And the city is overall impressionable for Americans; some very nice buildings old and new.

Hamilton drove disgracefully, he can't beat Verstappen fairly so runs him off the track them celebrates that as if it's something to be proud of.

As for racist comments I don't know as I havent seen it but he should certainly be getting 'abuse' for the unsportsmanlike move he pulled.

P. SmithToday  07:05 pm JST

This is not accurate because it’s an extreme oversimplification of the law, which binge watchers of Fox “News” constantly do.

It is 100% accurate because it is not a US law or the law.

In the UK, I don't know.

You seem very interested in the UK and are clearly a big football fan. 

Because I am commenting about sn article dealing with Britain?

I wrote this because you’ve posted quite a lot on English football threads and have clearly read up on the UK.

Do you usually post on subjects you are not interested in?

I post on some US topics because I’m interested in them, have some knowledge of them, and I have lived US for a time and will live there again. I don’t post on sports like baseball, American Football, Basketball or ice-hockey because I have no interest in them and next to no knowledge of them.

Who do you fancy for the Premier League this coming season?