Your Voice: Rise of gendered hate speech on social media; debating use of cameras in taxis

While scrolling on Instagram, watching a girl doing a “get ready with me” video, I resist clicking on the comments. Like opening Pandora’s box, a flood of misogyny awaits me – a disturbing reality of the surge in gendered hate speech online. Several concerns have been sparked about the role of algorithms and social media companies’ lax moderation policies.

University College London, the University of Kent and the Association of School and College Leaders conducted a recent study titled “Safer Scrolling.” The study found a fourfold rise in the level of misogynistic content on the “For You” page of TikTok accounts over just five days on the platform. The “For You” page is the first page you land on when you open the TikTok app. These misogynistic videos encompassed the objectification, sexual harassment, and slandering of women. Media reports indicate that TikTok’s “For You” page is actively contributing to the promotion of sexist, racist, homophobic and derogatory content.

Algorithms are not the sole culprit behind the proliferation of hate speech; social media companies are also ineffective in moderating content.

A prime example is X, which witnessed a staggering surge in hate speech following Elon Musk’s acquisition in 2022. Musk disbanded the Trust and Safety Council, removed the Covid-19 misinformation policy, and reinstated problematic accounts like Donald Trump’s. The data conclusively shows that, as per a research team from Montclair State University, there is a correlation between Musk’s arrival and the broader perceived acceptability of posting hostile content on X.

The lack of content moderation has alarming implications, giving rise to the global “manosphere” and the incel movement. One notorious figure in this space is Andrew Tate, an American-British kickboxer turned influencer who has garnered millions of followers on X. Most of his fans are impressionable teenage boys, and he boasts himself as a misogynist, propagating his views on women being “intrinsically lazy”. He also denies the existence of “an independent female”. He has been accused of sex trafficking and rape and is set to be extradited to the UK. This is a disturbing example of the unrestricted freedom on social media platforms that allows people to express their problematic views.

YouTube moves to strengthen age restrictions on gun videos

Online discourse can perpetuate harmful ideologies, contributing to the marginalisation of women through the “three patriarchal strategies of abuse – namely, minimise the abuse, deny its existence, and blame women,” according to Beatrice Spallacci in her PhD thesis for the University of Bologna.

The question arises: are we fostering a safe space for expression and creativity if half the population is subjected to such hostility?

There is a need for social media platforms to have stricter guidelines and policies in place. It is high time to unmask the epidemic of gendered hate and stand united against the rampant sexism that plagues social media platforms.

Only by demanding accountability and transparency from social media companies, petitioning for governments to enact stricter regulations, and implementing comprehensive digital citizenship curricula in schools can we hope to eradicate this toxic culture.

Oscar Ng Shing-hin, Wah Yan College, Hong Kong

The Hong Kong government has recently proposed installing cameras in all taxis to address security problems. While this policy can indeed enhance the safety of taxi drivers and passengers, some possible problems may arise with the mandatory installation of cameras in the city’s taxis.

The potential invasion of privacy that this plan brings is a matter of grave concern. The knowledge that every conversation and action in the vehicle is being recorded can easily instil a sense of discomfort and insecurity. This not only infringes upon the freedom of speech rights of passengers and taxi drivers but also raises serious questions about personal privacy.

Another hidden danger is that recording videos might contain sensitive information. Malicious hackers can easily steal data and critical personal information through video clips. Some random people can find out your exact phone brand and model. Anything you say could be heard by vicious hackers several times.

In short, this policy may become a saviour in a few cases of taxi driver misconduct, but in most cases, it does nothing more than drive fear and gather data for criminals.

With the problems analysed, we are in a good position to proceed with potential solutions. First of all, restricting access to the videotapes to very specific people in very specific departments may be helpful. These police officers should also be allowed to retrieve the video clips only under certain circumstances, such as when the clips can provide evidence to facilitate investigations.

Another possible way is to label the cameras made exactly for this purpose with a government-approved symbol or set up a unique built-in algorithm for identification in the cameras.

By implementing these proposed solutions, we can significantly reduce the fear associated with this policy. The assurance that hackers attempting to exploit the cameras for their benefit will be unable to access these clips should provide a sense of security.

To sum up, strict enforcement limits freedom but safeguards the rights or even lives of others, thus strengthening the sense of security. Overall, making cameras in taxis compulsory will be an asset if appropriate measures are taken beforehand and during the execution.