Online Hate Speech and the Erosion of Social Safety: How Does Hostile Content Undermine Users’ Sense of Safety?

Mahsa Dini

M.A. in International Relations, Allameh Tabataba’i University

Introduction

Despite facilitating communication, cyberspace has also become a setting for the emergence and spread of new forms of aggression that seriously threaten users’ psychological and social safety. An analysis of the underlying psychological and social mechanisms indicates that exposure to hate speech leads to increased anxiety and isolation, as well as a decline in public trust. The expected findings suggest that these effects are not confined to direct victims; they also affect indirect observers and ultimately undermine public trust in both online environments and society offline. In this context, systemic and educational interventions aimed at addressing this phenomenon can play an effective role.

An examination of the definition of cyberspace and its role in modern life over the past two decades shows that cyberspace has evolved from a mere means of communication into a vital arena for social, economic, political, and cultural interaction. By enabling extensive and instantaneous communication, it has contributed to the formation of new identities and the democratization of civic participation. At the same time, however, this digital environment lacks the traditional oversight mechanisms that exist in face-to-face interactions. As a result, certain social harms, including hate speech, have expanded on an unprecedented scale.

From an academic perspective, hate speech goes beyond the expression of a dissenting opinion; such content is deliberately intended to undermine human dignity and challenge the legitimacy of the target group’s very existence. Common classifications include racist, misogynistic, and religiously motivated hate speech directed against particular communities. The significance of this issue therefore lies in its impact on the mental health of the digital community. Ignoring this phenomenon amounts to accepting an unhealthy online environment that disrupts active participation and constructive exchange of views. Accordingly, a careful analysis of the relevant psychological and social mechanisms demonstrates that exposure to such content undermines users’ sense of social safety. Consequently, repeated exposure to hate speech significantly increases levels of anxiety and social paranoia.

Theoretical Foundations of Online Hate Content and Social Safety

In the context of online human interactions, social safety refers to an individual’s sense of confidence that their privacy and dignity will be preserved and that they will not be vulnerable to structural or interpersonal threats within a particular social environment. In cyberspace, this concept has two principal dimensions. The first is psychological security, meaning the assurance that individuals can express their views and identities without fear of rejection, harassment, or being targeted. The second is interactive security, meaning confidence that interactions with other users—who are often anonymous—will take place within a framework of respect and without the risk of exploitation, fraud, or cyberharassment. When users encounter hate speech, both dimensions of security are seriously undermined. An examination of relevant theories and an analysis of the effects of hate content demonstrate that behaviors, including aggressive conduct and the acceptance of hostile norms, can be learned through observation and imitation. Exposure to hate speech, particularly when it is expressed repeatedly or by influential individuals, may normalize such conduct in the minds of observers and lower their threshold of tolerance toward verbal violence (Dreißigacker et al., 2024: 15).

In addition, the hostile environment doctrine, which has been developed primarily in anti-discrimination and employment law, holds that even where an individual is not directly targeted, an environment characterized by hostility, discrimination, and threats can make participation in that environment intolerable for a particular individual or group. Hate content can effectively transform cyberspace into a hostile environment for targeted groups. In this context, the impact of hate content on social safety varies according to the form of exposure. In cases of direct victimization, the user is personally targeted by hateful messages, representing the most severe level of impact. Media reports, news coverage, and analyses of hate-speech incidents across different platforms also indicate that witnessing another user being harassed—even when the observer is not personally targeted—can itself cause distress and harm.

Mechanisms Affecting the Sense of Safety in Encounters with Hate Speech

The creation of a hostile online environment and repeated exposure to hate speech, even when users are not directly targeted, can lead them to perceive the online environment as generally unsafe and threatening. This occurs through a kind of domino effect in collective perception. As threats become normalized and the perceived likelihood of being targeted increases over time, users may begin to assume by default that the environment is hostile. This pervasive paranoia and suspicion can erode the basic trust necessary for future interactions (Ghernaouti-Helie, 2013: 96).

Direct victimization and the first-hand experience of hatred and cyberharassment through hate speech—such as receiving insulting messages, threats of violence, or the dissemination of false information targeting an individual’s identity—can trigger severe psychological reactions. These may include acute psychological distress, elevated cortisol levels, and anxiety attacks. As a result, victims may experience a sharp decline in their sense of personal safety and feel that they have no refuge in cyberspace, particularly because their identity, part of which is constructed and expressed online, has itself come under attack. This can create a tendency toward digital escape. Importantly, the anxiety and heightened shock associated with hate content are not confined to direct victims. Observers who witness the harassment of others may experience what can be described as vicarious anxiety.

The Impact of a Hostile Environment on Observers and Target Groups

1. Generalization of Threat: Observers may begin to wonder: if this person was targeted today, could I be the next target? This concern becomes particularly pronounced when the observer is themselves a member of the targeted group or feels a strong sense of identification or empathy with that group.
2. Declining Trust in Platform Governance: Observing inaction or delayed responses by platforms in removing hate content can undermine users’ trust in the oversight and governance of cyberspace.
3. Increasing Paranoia: Observers may begin to grow suspicious of the intentions of other users. Any comment or interaction may come to be perceived as potentially threatening, which can result in a substantial decline in positive interaction and collective cooperation.

Psychological and Social Consequences of Exposure to Hate Speech

Hate speech in digital environments can produce long-term and structural consequences for both users and society. From a psychological perspective, repeated exposure to verbal threats can keep the body and mind in a state of constant alert. As rates of depression and social anxiety increase, users may begin to avoid spaces they once found enjoyable, such as specialized discussion groups. In this context, social anxiety intensifies because of the fear of being judged or targeted while participating (Tsesis, 2001: 93). In addition, users may develop self-imposed isolation. Rather than leaving a platform altogether, many resort to extensive self-censorship. They refrain from expressing challenging views or even from fully expressing their identities in order to avoid attracting negative attention. This isolation prevents the formation of multidimensional perspectives and constructive dialogue. Moreover, hate messages, which often target an individual’s identity, can foster self-doubt, causing individuals to question their own worth or place within society. The social consequences of these psychological effects can rapidly extend to the broader social level and destabilize the foundations of collective interaction.

Another consequence is the decline of interpersonal trust. Trust is a cornerstone of all social interaction. In cyberspace, such trust rests on the assumption of reasonable conduct. When hate content circulates, this assumption is undermined. As users encounter evidence suggesting the widespread presence of hostile intentions, trust declines. This erosion of trust can also spill over from online environments into offline life through the generalization of effects. At the same time, a declining willingness to participate in online civic and social activities may lead users to refrain from activities such as signing campaigns, organizing initiatives, and other forms of participation. In effect, users may come to believe that active participation exposes them to the attention of intruders and harassers (Keipi & Räsänen, 2016: 54).

Finally, the chilling effect plays a powerful role in this process, because the perceived costs of social participation come to outweigh its benefits. As a result, moderate voices and vulnerable groups participate less frequently in public discussions, while online spaces gradually become dominated by extremists and those who disseminate hate speech, who are more willing to tolerate persistent conflict.

Positions and Actions of International Organizations on Online Hate Speech and Social Safety

International organizations, particularly those focused on human rights and communications, place particular emphasis on combating online hate speech, as they regard it as a serious threat to democracy, social solidarity, and the public sense of safety. The United Nations (UN), under the leadership of the Secretary-General, has expressed concern over the growth of hate speech as a major factor undermining global peace and security. The United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech treats this phenomenon not merely as an individual matter, but as a systemic threat. The principal aim of this document and strategy is to establish a global framework for responding to hate speech, with a focus on maintaining a balance between freedom of expression and protecting communities against discrimination and violence.

With regard to the human rights implications of this issue, United Nations Special Rapporteurs on freedom of opinion and expression and on minority issues have repeatedly emphasized that exposure to online hate speech undermines the fundamental rights of vulnerable groups, including the right to security and the right to participate without fear (Leets, 2001: 71). UNESCO, with the aim of promoting Media and Information Literacy, also implements programs designed to help users identify and critically engage with misinformation and hateful content. The Council of Europe, particularly through the Commissioner for Human Rights and the Committee of Experts on Combating Hate Speech, has also been active in regional lawmaking and in the following areas:

• Legal Recommendations: The Council of Europe has issued guidelines calling on its member states to update their national laws to criminalize severe forms of online hate speech that result in incitement to violence or discrimination.
• Focus on Young People: Campaigns such as the No Hate Speech Movement have been specifically designed to raise awareness among young people and encourage positive and civic responses to hate speech. The aim is to make online spaces safer for future generations.

The European Union (EU) has likewise sought to hold major technology platforms accountable through the following measures:

• Digital Services Act (DSA): This legislation represents one of the most comprehensive legal efforts in the world and requires Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) to actively address systemic risks, including the dissemination of illegal content and hate speech. The objective of the DSA is to make online environments safer and more trustworthy.
• Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online: The European Union works with major technology companies, including Meta, Google, and X, to ensure that the majority of valid notifications concerning illegal hate speech are reviewed within 24 hours and that, where content is found to be unlawful, appropriate measures are taken to remove it or restrict access to it. This measure directly affects users’ sense of safety by increasing the speed of platform responses to relevant reports.

In summary, the position of these organizations is that online hate speech is not merely an ethical issue or a content-related violation; it also constitutes a serious threat to civil peace, social cohesion, and human rights. Addressing it therefore requires a global, coordinated, and multilateral response encompassing legislation, platform-level measures, and media literacy in order to restore users’ sense of safety in cyberspace.

Individual and Systemic Strategies for Addressing the Negative Consequences of Online Hate

Continued exposure to hateful content requires the adoption of multilevel strategies to mitigate its harmful effects on the sense of social safety. These strategies include individual measures undertaken by users as well as systemic interventions by platforms and legal institutions (Oksanen & Räsänen, 2014: 87).

Individual Strategies

1. Critical Media Literacy: Users of cyberspace need to be able to identify and analyze hateful content, recognize the motives behind it, and assess the credibility of its source. This skill helps users avoid accepting such content as factual and, consequently, reduces its impact on their worldview and sense of safety (Chetty, 2018: 102).
2. Digital Detox and Exposure Management: Experts recommend the active use of filtering and blocking tools (Block/Mute) to control the content to which users are exposed. Limiting social media use to specific and defined periods is also recommended in order to prevent users from becoming immersed in unhealthy and negative online environments (Harriman, 2020: 237).
3. Seeking Social Support: In cases of victimization or repeated exposure to distressing content, maintaining contact with support networks in the offline world and sharing one’s experiences can be both important and effective. This can help prevent social isolation, which is one of the consequences of exposure to hateful content.
4. Focusing on Safe Alternative Spaces: Participating in online communities and groups that actively foster positive and supportive environments, while distancing oneself from platforms with weak oversight of hate speech, can help users remain vigilant and reduce their exposure to harm.

Systemic and Platform-Level Interventions

1. Revising Recommendation Algorithms: Platforms should adjust their algorithms so that, rather than prioritizing engagement—which is often amplified by controversial and hateful content—they give greater priority to community well-being. This includes reducing the automatic dissemination of content that has been reported by multiple users as hateful (Celik, 2019: 21).
2. More Active and Transparent Moderation: Improving the speed and accuracy with which hateful content is removed, applying community standards consistently to all users regardless of their fame or influence, and establishing simpler and more transparent reporting systems that clearly explain how complaints are handled can help maintain a healthier online environment.
3. Cooperation with Law Enforcement Agencies: In cases where hate speech develops into physical threats or organized crime, effective cooperation between platforms and public authorities in identifying perpetrators and pursuing legal action is necessary. Such cooperation can itself contribute to strengthening users’ sense of safety.
4. Education and the Promotion of Respect: Implementing in-platform educational campaigns to promote civil discourse and mutual respect, while highlighting positive and anti-hate content, is among the measures that can help foster a more constructive culture in online spaces.

Conclusion

Exposure to online hate speech goes beyond individual psychological harm and systematically erodes the foundations of trust and tolerance that are essential to a collective sense of social safety, transforming cyberspace from a space for communication into an environment of threat. The findings confirm a strong negative relationship between exposure to hateful content and users’ sense of social safety. These effects extend beyond direct victims and, through the normalization of hostility and the transmission of fear to observers, undermine the structures of trust and participation within online communities. Online social safety ultimately depends on users feeling that they can be part of these communities without being subjected to threats or harassment.

Policy and operational measures aimed at restoring social safety in cyberspace therefore require a multidimensional approach. Among the recommendations for platforms is the improvement of reporting and response systems. In this regard, artificial intelligence systems should be further developed to identify patterns of hate speech more rapidly and accurately. Response times to user reports should be minimized in order to reduce the chilling effect resulting from platform inaction. Greater transparency in the implementation of platform policies is also necessary. In other words, platforms should communicate more clearly how they deal with violators and explain the reasons for content removal so that users’ trust in moderation and oversight processes can be restored.

In this context, the development of clearer laws requires precise legal and operational definitions of the boundaries between freedom of expression and hate speech in order to establish effective legal frameworks. Moreover, because hate speech transcends borders, cooperation in the enforcement of laws and the blocking of principal sources of hate speech is essential. Other important measures include promoting media literacy and digital empathy, educating users from an early age about the risks of hateful content and the importance of active reporting rather than merely ignoring such content or remaining silent, and encouraging users to establish and strengthen support communities for victims of cyber harassment. Future research should therefore focus on the long-term effects of chronic exposure to hate speech. It should also examine how different types of platforms—such as image-based platforms as opposed to text-based platforms—differ in the extent to which they contribute to reductions in users’ sense of safety.

References

• Celik, S. (2019). Experiences of internet users regarding cyberhate. Information Technology & People. From: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ITP-01-2018-0009/full/html
• Chetty, N., & Alathur, S. (2018). Hate speech review in the context of online social networks. Aggression and violent behavior. From: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178917301064
• Dreißigacker, A., Müller, P., Isenhardt, A., & Schemmel, J. (2024). Online hate speech victimization: consequences for victims’ feelings of insecurity. Crime Science. From: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40163-024-00204-y
• Ghernaouti-Helie, S. (2013). Cyber power: Crime, conflict and security in cyberspace. Crc Press. From: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eYJFAQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=The+effects+of+exposure+to+hateful+content+on+cyberspace+users%27+sense+of+social+security&ots=_B9R7te4rw&sig=F3tcpN8drVAX-BP-DcE_Hg_tXI8
• Harriman, N., Shortland, N., Su, M., Cote, T., Testa, M. A., & Savoia, E. (2020). Youth exposure to hate in the online space: An exploratory analysis. International journal of environmental research and public health. From: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/22/8531
• Keipi, T., Näsi, M., Oksanen, A., & Räsänen, P. (2016). Online hate and harmful content: Cross-national perspectives (p. 154). Taylor & Francis. From: https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/103072
• Leets, L. (2001). Responses to Internet hate sites: Is speech too free in cyberspace?. Communication Law & Policy. From: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15326926CLP0602_2
• Oksanen, A., Hawdon, J., Holkeri, E., Näsi, M., & Räsänen, P. (2014). Exposure to online hate among young social media users. In Soul of society: A focus on the lives of children & youth . Emerald Group Publishing Limited. From: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1537-466120140000018021/full/html
• Tsesis, A. (2001). Hate in cyberspace: Regulating hate speech on the Internet. San Diego L. Rev. From: https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/sanlr38&section=24