Tag: Digital Platforms

Empowerment Is Key? How Perceived Political and Critical Digital Media Literacy Explain Direct and Indirect Bystander Intervention in Online Hate Speech

With hate speech being so widespread in digital media and capable of harming people and fueling recurring hostile discourse, the study of the factors that shape bystander intervention in response to online hate speech is crucial.

Specifically, there is still a need to understand how perceived political and digital media literacy are related to the frequency of various forms of online bystander intervention, such as counter-speech or reporting. This is what this study seeks to do.

Based on a national online survey of German citizens (N = 2,691), the analysis focuses on individuals with prior experience in responding to online incivilities (n = 672). The study examines how perceived levels of political and digital media literacy are associated with private and public, direct and indirect forms of intervention, such as counter-speech or reporting harmful content.

Results indicate that a sense of empowerment in dealing with digital media content is associated with more frequent direct and public interventions, including the use of counter-speech against online hate.

Learn more about this study here: https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251325598

Reference

Obermaier, M., Schmid, U. K., & Rieger, D. (2025). Empowerment Is Key? How Perceived Political and Critical Digital Media Literacy Explain Direct and Indirect Bystander Intervention in Online Hate Speech. Social Media and Society, 11(1)

2025-03-29
Engagement with Radical Propaganda drives Cognitive Radicalization: An Analysis of a Right-Wing Online Ecosystem

Studies into the psycho-social processes involved in the phenomena of radicalization have revealed that social exclusion, cognitive inflexibility and the perception of threats to an ingroup are significant factors in the propensity to engagement with radical content online and the posterior commitment to related offline behaviours.

In evidence of this, a recent study seeks to research user engagement and the proxy effect in the process of cognitive radicalization within a radical-right online ecosystem.

The findings support the assumption that content containing outgroup prejudice contributes to cognitive radicalization, and further demonstrate that user engagement plays a central role, with an engagement-dependent framework in which individual posts carry a higher likelihood of radicalizing impact based on the level of interaction they receive.

The author highlights the implications of these dynamics for understanding behavioural trajectories, from viewing and engaging with content to joining radical groups or engaging in offline violence.

Learn more about this study here: https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.17.1.2160

Reference

Calvert, J. B. (2024). Engagement with Radical Propaganda drives Cognitive Radicalization: An Analysis of a Right-Wing Online Ecosystem. Journal of Strategic Security, 17(1), 24–30

2024-12-05
Towards a Definition of Hate Speech—With a Focus on Online Contexts

This review addresses the ongoing challenges faced by legislators and digital platforms in defining and regulating hate speech online.

Despite increased attention to the issue, questions surrounding the definition of hate speech remain unresolved, raising concerns about both theoretical clarity and practical applicability. For this reason, the paper focuses on three central questions: the main challenges involved in defining hate speech, the possible alternatives to existing definitions, and the relationship between the scope of a definition and its operationalization in online contexts.

By tracing regulatory and definitional efforts across legal, paralegal, and technology platform settings, the review identifies four main modes of defining hate speech: teleological, pure consequentialist, formal, and consensus or relativist approaches.

The authors highlight that, although hate speech has long been the focus of legal and ethical debate, both its theoretical definition and its regulation remain elusive. Existing definitions are often vague or internally inconsistent, with no universally accepted framework emerging from legal theory, jurisprudence, or academic research. This lack of consensus is further complicated by new ethical and communicative challenges posed by digital and social media environments.

Learn more about this review here: https://doi.org/10.1177/01968599221124309

Reference

Hietanen, M., & Eddebo, J. (2022). Towards a Definition of Hate Speech—With a Focus on Online Contexts. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 47(4), 440-458

2022-10-05
Youths as Targets: Factors of Online Hate Speech Victimization among Adolescents and Young Adults

In this study, the victimization of adolescents and young adults through online hate speech was investigated, a phenomenon that can cause severe psychological harm during critical developmental stages.

Drawing on criminology’s routine activity theory, the research investigates factors that help explain why young people become targets of online hate speech.It is empirically based on a national, quota-based quantitative online survey representative of adolescent and young adult internet users (N = 1,180).

Data analysis identifies six latent profiles of young targets, characterized by overall high or low levels of online hate speech victimization, as well as victimization related to gender, migration background, religion, and political engagement on behalf of the queer community.

Concluding results show that relative subjective deprivation, political participation, and lower levels of digital media literacy are positively associated with overall victimization through online hate speech. At the same time, members of specific social groups and politically engaged youths are more likely to be targeted.

Learn more about this study here: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac012

Reference

Obermaier, M., & Schmuck, D. (2022). Youths as targets: Factors of online hate speech victimization among adolescents and young adults. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 27(4)

2022-07-22
Prevalence and Psychological Effects of Hateful Speech in Online College Communities

This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and impact of hateful speech within college communities, where such speech can have particularly harmful psychological and social consequences.

Regulating hateful speech on college campuses raises complex socio-political challenges, making it essential to assess both how widespread the phenomenon is and how it affects students’ psychological well-being.

Focusing on the online dimension of campus life, a dataset of approximately six million Reddit comments shared across 174 college-related communities was analyzed.

To measure the prevalence of hateful speech, the authors introduce the College Hate Index (CHX), which is used to examine the distribution of hateful speech across categories such as behavior, class, disability, ethnicity, gender, physical appearance, race, religion, and sexual orientation. A causal inference framework is then applied to investigate the psychological effects of exposure to hateful speech, particularly through expressions of online stress.

The analysis also explored differences in psychological endurance by examining language use, discriminatory keywords, and personality traits.

Findings showed that hateful speech is prevalent in online college communities, with around 25% of college subreddits exhibiting higher levels of hateful speech than non-college subreddits. Exposure to hateful content was associated with increased stress expression, although individuals were not affected equally. Students with lower psychological endurance appear more vulnerable to emotional outbursts and exhibit higher levels of neuroticism compared to those with greater resilience.

Learn more about this study here: https://doi.org/10.1145/3292522.3326032

Reference

Saha, K., Chandrasekharan, E., & De Choudhury, M. (2019). Prevalence and Psychological Effects of Hateful Speech in Online College Communities. Proceedings of the … ACM Web Science Conference. ACM Web Science Conference, 2019, 255–264

2019-06-26