fr.euronews.com
EU Urges Stronger Action Against Record High Online Hate Speech
The European Commission is urging four European countries to take stronger action against online hate speech, which has reached record levels in 2025, according to the European Online Hate Observatory; the highest toxicity score is for antisemitic content, followed by anti-Roma and anti-LGBTQ+ content.
- How does the European Online Hate Observatory measure online hate speech, and what are the main sources and targets of such speech?
- The Observatory's toxicity score is calculated using lists of hateful and aggressive words and phrases compiled from social media. In May 2025, analysis of over 2.5 million messages across six platforms revealed antisemitic content (0.34 toxicity score) as the most prevalent, followed by anti-Roma (0.30), anti-LGBTQ+ (0.29), anti-Muslim (0.28), and anti-refugee (0.23) content. X (formerly Twitter) was the primary platform for most of this hate speech.
- What specific actions are being taken to combat the rise in online hate speech across Europe, and what are the immediate consequences of this increase?
- The European Commission urged Sweden, Portugal, Croatia, and Latvia to strengthen measures against online hate speech targeting migrants, Roma, LGBTQ+, and people of color. This follows an April report from the European Online Hate Observatory showing record-high online "toxicity" at 0.22 on a 0-1 scale. This toxicity level indicates a prevalence of aggressive but not extreme messages.
- What long-term societal implications might arise from the observed trends in online hate speech, and what innovative strategies could effectively counter these trends?
- The high prevalence of online hate speech, particularly on platforms like X, highlights the need for stronger content moderation and regulatory measures. The persistent targeting of specific minority groups signals a concerning trend, indicating a need for comprehensive strategies that address underlying societal biases and promote inclusivity. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of different interventions.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the quantitative data on online hate speech, highlighting the severity scores and the platforms where hate speech is prevalent. This framing could inadvertently downplay the qualitative aspects of the issue, such as the emotional impact on targeted groups and the potential for real-world consequences. The use of terms like "toxic" and "record levels" creates a sense of urgency and alarm.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective, presenting statistical data and observations. Terms like "toxic" and "hate speech" are used descriptively rather than judgmentally. However, the choice of the word "toxic" might carry negative connotations.
Bias by Omission
The provided text focuses on the quantitative aspects of online hate speech, reporting on specific scores and affected groups. However, it omits analysis of the underlying causes of this hate speech, the effectiveness of current measures to combat it, and the long-term societal impact. It also lacks discussion on the methodologies used by the Observatory, which could influence the accuracy and interpretation of the data.
False Dichotomy
The text doesn't present a false dichotomy, but the categorization of online toxicity into four levels might oversimplify the complex nature of online hate speech, potentially obscuring nuances in the severity and impact of different types of hateful content.
Gender Bias
The analysis includes sexism as a category of online hate speech. While the score is lower than some other categories, the report notes that sexist insults constitute the highest volume of toxic messages. This suggests a need for further investigation into the pervasiveness and impact of sexism online.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a surge in online hate speech targeting vulnerable groups like migrants, Roma people, LGBTQ+ individuals, and people of color. This directly fuels social inequalities and discrimination, hindering progress towards a more inclusive and equitable society. The high volume of hateful content, especially on platforms like X, indicates a significant challenge to reducing inequalities and fostering social harmony.