Check out this new article by Ursula Kristin Schmid, Diana Rieger, and Anna Sophie Kümpel in Social Media + Society! Their study dives into why people engage or avoid engaging with hate speech online. While there is a lot of research on how users recognise and respond to hate speech, this study focuses on the crucial middle step: why some people engage with it, while others consciously ignore it.
The researchers used the uses and gratifications approach to examine users’ motivations. They conducted a large-scale, quota-based online survey with 4,020 adult social media users in Germany. Participants answered questions about how often they encountered hate speech and rated 21 motivations for engaging with it and 10 reasons for avoiding it. The responses were analysed using exploratory factor analysis to uncover key motivations.
The study found that people engage with hate speech for several reasons. Many do so because they are appalled and concerned, engaging with the content as a response to their shock and worry. Others feel personally involved, especially if they belong to the targeted group or know someone affected. Some users engage because the content challenges their views and inspires them to think differently, while others participate in discussions to stay involved in debates. A smaller number engage with hate speech to confirm their opinions and seek validation from like-minded individuals. Finally, for a minority, engagement is driven by entertainment and amusement, finding some thrill in observing conflict.
On the other hand, the study also identified reasons why people deliberately avoid engaging with hate speech. Many choose to ignore it consciously, believing that giving attention to hateful content only amplifies its reach. Others find it irrelevant, seeing no personal benefit in engaging. Some do not feel responsible for addressing hate speech, while others avoid it to protect their mental well-being. These insights are crucial for understanding how hate speech spreads and how interventions can be designed to counter it effectively.
This research has important implications for policymakers, social media platforms, and researchers. Since negative emotions such as shock and worry drive engagement, strategies that limit exposure or reduce desensitisation could help prevent hate speech from becoming normalised. Understanding why people avoid engagement can also inform better counter-speech initiatives, ensuring that responses to hate speech are both effective and sustainable. Social media platforms could develop tools that encourage positive engagement while limiting the spread of harmful content. Future research should also explore how cultural and legal differences shape user engagement with hate speech on a global scale.
This study offers fresh insights into how users interact with hate speech online and provides new perspectives on strategies to combat its spread.