Unveiling Threats in Discourse: Investigating the Shift from Protected Speech to Potential Menace

• In Event: Understanding and Addressing Hate Crimes and Discrimination

Abstract

The internet’s rapid proliferation has facilitated the swift dissemination of speech, yet it has also escalated the potential for harm caused by that speech. Recent years have witnessed a surge in threats targeting election administrators across all levels of government, coinciding with the proliferation of disinformation campaigns surrounding the 2020 U.S. presidential election. As false narratives regarding election integrity proliferated, so too did hostility toward election officials, manifesting in various forms of harassment and intimidation. Such threats not only undermine democratic processes but also jeopardize the safety and well-being of election administrators, potentially dissuading qualified individuals from fulfilling these essential roles. This paper delves into the language employed in harassing messages directed at election administrators during the 2020 election. By analyzing 15 in-depth interviews with current and former local election officials, the study examines the legal complexities surrounding “credible threats” and addresses the lack of clarity regarding sender intent, a critical consideration in assessing the boundaries of protected speech. By illuminating the nuanced meanings within threatening messages, this research offers insights crucial for safeguarding both online discourse and the integrity of democratic processes.

Authors

• Steven Windisch, University of Arkansas

• Adan Vela, University of Central Florida