speech. If there is a general preference for avoiding conflict, this also needs to be taken into account by campaigns that seek to promote counter-speech. 4. Some vocabularies of counter speech on Facebook 4.1 – Human Quality Observations Denigrating peoples’ qualities and status as humans was a central theme in both hate-speech and counter-speech. Analogies to animals that are regarded as dangerous, dirty, or undesirable were common in hate speech comments; analogies to dogs occurred the most and to cows relatively less. Some counter speech also used the same form of rhetoric but only to target hate-speech speakers. The most common way to denigrate via analogy to an animal analogy was to imply an individual or a group thinks or lives like dog11. But not all analogies between humans and animals are negative or likely to generate negative effects. For example, many proverbs operate by using animals as an analogy for humans. Animals are also used as images to make reference to political parties, such as the lion (USDP) and peacock (NLD)12. At the same time, speech that dehumanizes individuals or groups does not always need to use animal comparisons to set standards as less than human or inferior. The same effect was achieved through calling people mindless/heartless, or not eating “rice” (thus not eating human food). Such comments were used by both the hate-speech speakers and counter speakers in the same way. This form of rhetoric can be dangerous because the hate-speech speaker implies that “if you live like a human, you will be treated as human”13, which can set a standard with the implication that it is okay to deprive such individuals of basic human rights. Counter-speaker are also very likely to use the same rhetoric to denigrate hate speakers by saying they do not have a human mind or heart for lacking human qualities such as sympathy. In a few cases of counter speech, hate-speech speakers were insulted by being called uneducated, in cases when counter speaker tried to debunk false claims made by hate-speech speaker14. Another way that human qualities were emphasized was when counter speakers used “being human” as a plea to see people as humans in response to hate speech15. We observed this more commonly in responses to anti-Muslim and anti-LGBTQ hate-speech, especially by those 11 See Annex 8.1 for examples Annex 8.2 13 Annex 8.3 14 Annex 8.4 15 Annex 8.5 12 14