Since then, newspapers the world over have run the gamut from government propaganda to liberal-minded editorial freedom. Yet, in the age of digital communications, democratic notions of fairness and balance have been turned on their head by misinformation, disinformation, and fake news.

One of the consequences of this reversal has been the rapid rise of hate speech. In July 2021, the UN General Assembly highlighted its “exponential spread and proliferation” around the world, adopting a resolution on “promoting inter-religious and intercultural dialogue and tolerance in countering hate speech”.

International Day for Countering Hate Speech is celebrated on June 18. This year the Council of Europe is pressing to “Enhance legal and non-legal measures against hate speech through a multi-stakeholder approach”. Special attention will be given to collecting insights into existing knowledge, practices, and challenges.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has thrown his MAGA cap into the ring with The White House, a digital newsletter whose aim, judging by its content, is to skew public perception against any criticism of the administration’s policies or actions and to flaunt Trump’s America First dictatorship.

Here’s an example from May 12, 2025: “President Donald Trump ripped legacy and establishment media reporters on Monday, saying they refuse to cover the ‘genocide’ taking place against farmers in South Africa.”

Another from May 1, 2025: “Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order ending the taxpayer subsidization of National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).”

And another from April 28, 2025: “Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to enforce federal law with respect to sanctuary jurisdictions to protect their citizens from dangerous illegal aliens.”

The wording aims to deceive. Genocide against farmers in South Africa, but not against Palestinians? Taxpayers “subsidising” public broadcasting which highlights inconsistencies and injustices? Sanctuary jurisdictions protecting “illegal aliens”? Trump’s propaganda machine includes staged White House events, in which briefings by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and statements by Trump’s agent provocateur J.D. Vance are intended to mislead public opinion.

What can be done? According to the United Nations, “As online environments have become echo chambers for hateful rhetoric, strengthening digital literacy as part of global citizenship education has become even more important than ever. Audiences need to know how to critically analyse and counteract hate speech – both offline or online.”

And, as A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times, underscored in a recent article, we must support free press and democracy by seeking out news sources worthy of our trust. After all:

“Without a free press, how will people know if their government is acting legally and in their interest? How will people know if their leaders are telling the truth? How will people know if their institutions are acting to the benefit of society? How will people know if their freedoms are being sustained, defended and championed – or eroded by forces that seek to replace truth and reality with propaganda and misinformation?”

Only commonsense and decency can stop the Donald Trumps of this world. Learning to question news and information, reading between the lines, recognising deception, and actively countering hate speech will help.

Photo: Joshua Sukoff/Shutterstock

Certainly WACC Europe, after their 2017 media monitoring of the representation of refugees in European media, noted that the prevalence of hate speech towards refugees in social media was unmonitored and potentially more impactful in the public discourse. This observation led to another project to address hate speech online: Breaking Down the Social Media Divides.

Hate speech – born from fear and intolerance and generating more fear and division – has real life consequences for individuals and communities.

The UN  states that hate speech via our new communication technologies “has become one of the most frequent methods for spreading divisive rhetoric and ideologies on a global scale. If left unchecked, hate speech can even harm peace and development, as it lays the ground for conflicts and tensions, wide scale human rights violations.”

And individually, people or vulnerable communities – such as asylum seekers – targeted by hate speech can be, at the minimum, further isolated and, at most, met with physical violence.

The WACC Europe guide Breaking Down the Social Media Divides gives many tools and tips on how to address hate speech online, support those who are targeted, and work towards online communities of respect and dignity.

But it also acknowledges that it’s often very hard to counter hate speech – when you have to choose when to engage and how – knowing that those you may be directly addressing won’t change but that you are showing others there is an alternative view.

Online platforms are being pressed to respond effectively to take down hate-filled posts, and their (inadequate) methods so far rely on platform policies and community reporting – as well as automated processes that search for and block key words and images.

What flies under the radar in these methods are what we call micro-aggressions.

Misogyny, racism, and other forms of discrimination are rampant in the words and images used online. The powerful report “Monetizing Misogyny” documents case after case of abuse and disinformation targeting women in politics with the aim of silencing them.

These should be, the report states, “treated as an early warning system” not just as attacks on women’s rights, but in eroding “democratic principles and institutions.”

So many of these types of aggressions online are dismissed as just comments. But their cumulative effect is perhaps even more harmful – not only isolating and silencing voices but creating a climate that can devolve into hate and actual violence.

Countering hate is essential. But so too is recognizing and challenging discrimination before it grows into hatred.

WACC recognizes the impact of micro-aggressions on individuals and democratic participation, and has developed a social media monitoring tool – adapted from the Global Media Monitoring Project methodology  – that helps people become more aware of misogyny online and collect evidence to bolster advocacy and education. Look for announcements of training or contact WACC to express your interest.

This week, as we mark these international days, we can reconfirm our commitment to expression which respects everyone’s right to have a voice. The more we do this, the more we diminish the impact of hate. As stated in Breaking Down Social Media Divides: “However you choose to respond, your engagement in the matter is important. The number of haters out there is small in absolute terms, but they are very vocal. Using our voices to support the causes we believe in, and the targeted groups we work with, helps to demonstrate that haters are a minority. This is how we move away from being silent bystanders. This is how we confront online hate. This is how we bring respect and civility into the dialogue and break down the social media divides.”

Photo: Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh  Credit: Paul Jeffrey/ACT Alliance

Former US President Donald Trump, current Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, and current Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro have each received one. They have been admonished by Twitter and Facebook for posts that violate public interest policies and rules about misleading information.

When world leaders incite or lie, the impact is potentially more deadly than when armies of bots fabricate disinformation and spread it via social media. Leaders claim to be truthful and trustworthy. Leaders claim to have the best interests of their nation at heart. Some do; others do not.

So when a leader incites hatred and violence via social media, much tougher measures are needed than merely blocking their Twitter feed or removing a Facebook post.

A Star also goes to Mahathir Mohamad, who ruled over Malaysia for 22 years, resigning in 2003 with a promise to leave politics forever. Yet the country’s longest serving premier continued to express controversial views on his blog Chedet, gaining a reputation for anti-Semitic and anti-Western opinions.

In October 2020, as nations struggled to contain the Covid-19 pandemic, the killing of French teacher Samuel Paty in connection with his use of caricatures of the Prophet during a classroom lesson as well as fatal stabbings at a church in Nice shocked the world.

Mahathir Mohamad responded by publishing social media posts that seemingly endorsed the attacks and encouraged Muslims to kill French people. Some posts were taken down by both Facebook and Twitter for “glorifying violence”, although it seems that part of his Twitter thread remains accessible.

Social media platforms have a duty to remove such tweets and blogs. Yet the damage has been done. Thousands of people read these and similar inflammatory words, reinforcing an existing bias and risking incitement to violence.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous.”

Here public interest media – those newspapers, television and radio stations that report in a balanced way what is going on in the world – have a role to play. They can call out hate speech, condemn incitement, and let people see what’s really going on.

While hate on the Internet is a sad reality of life today, public education by trustworthy media can help foster respect, decency, and dialogue.

Photo: VDB Photos/Shutterstock

In Nazi Germany, it was state-controlled newspapers and radio. At the time of the genocide in Rwanda, it was a radio station run by the Hutu government. Today, it is social media, until recently largely unregulated.

In 2019, YouTube said it removed more than 17,000 channels for hate speech. A subsidiary of Google, it also took down 100,000 videos.

It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between free speech, hate speech, and incitement to violence or discrimination. Political and social awareness are needed, together with first-hand knowledge about the local context.

One key to countering hate speech and discrimination is public education. The more people know from childhood onwards about different kinds of discrimination and their root causes, the better equipped they will be.

Yet, hate speech is more than harsh words. It is embedded in customs and actions intended to vilify, humiliate, or incite hatred. It can occur offline or online, given “voice” through symbols, images, inequalities and exclusions.

One of the most effective measures against it is “counterspeech” or public testimony by those who have suffered and who are willing to speak out against its distortions, manipulations, and incitements. For some, that may be a difficult path to take.

In 2018, Anita Lasker-Wallfisch, cellist and a surviving member of the Women’s Orchestra in Auschwitz, gave a commemorative speech in the German parliament to mark the 73rd anniversary of the concentration camp’s liberation. She warned against an increase in anti-Semitism in Germany, yet her message remained one of optimism. “As long as one breathes, one hopes,” she said.

For decades, Lasker-Wallfisch refused to talk about her childhood in Germany or her years in the camps of Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen. Then, in 1996, having finally recounted her story to her family, she published a memoir titled “Inherit the Truth”. It was then that she began telling her story in schools in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Austria.

“Racism hasn’t died out, unfortunately, but as members of the human race we are responsible for one another,” says Lasker-Wallfisch, who has just celebrated her 95th birthday. “Nobody entered the world wearing the label ‘superhuman’ or ‘subhuman’. We are the ones who invented these labels.”

Hate speech must be rooted out wherever it occurs. Online by monitoring and regulating content. Offline by speaking out courageously and defiantly.

Photo above: Anita Lasker-Wallfisch während einer Lesung aus ihrem Erinnerungsbuch “Ihr sollt die Wahrheit erben: Die Cellistin von Auschwitz” (RoRoRo) im Ernst-Bloch-Zentrum in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, 27 Sep 2018 / Wikimedia Commons