Academic Edi o : Da id Ga cía-Ma ín
Recei ed: 4 Ma ch 2025
Re ised: 6 May 2025
Accep ed: 8 May 2025
Published: 10 May 2025
Ci a ion: Peña-Fe nández, S.;
Peña-Alonso, U.; La ondo-U e a, A.;
Mo ales-i-G as, J. Shoo ing he
Messenge ? Ha assmen and Ha e
Speech Di ec ed a Jou nalis s on
Social Media. Socie ies 2025,15, 130.
h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/soc15050130
Copy igh : © 2025 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/
licenses/by/4.0/).
A icle
Shoo ing he Messenge ? Ha assmen and Ha e Speech Di ec ed
a Jou nalis s on Social Media
Simón Peña-Fe nández * , U ko Peña-Alonso, Aina a La ondo-U e a and Jo di Mo ales-i-G as
Depa men o Jou nalism, School o Social and Communica ion Sciences, Uni e si y o he Basque
Coun y (UPV/EHU), Sa iena, 48940 Leioa, Spain; [email p o ec ed] (U.P.-A.);
[email p o ec ed] (A.L.-U.); jo [email p o ec ed] (J.M.-i.-G.)
*Co espondence: [email p o ec ed]
Abs ac : Jou nalis s ha e inco po a ed social ne wo ks in o hei wo k as a s anda d
ool, enhancing hei abili y o p oduce and dissemina e in o ma ion and making i easie
o hem o connec mo e di ec ly wi h hei audiences. Howe e , his g ea e p esence
in he digi al public sphe e has also inc eased hei exposu e o ha assmen and ha e
speech, pa icula ly in he case o women jou nalis s. This s udy analyzes he p esence
o ha assmen and ha e speech in esponses (n= 60,684) o messages ha 200 jou nalis s
and media ou le s pos ed on X ( o me ly Twi e ) accoun s du ing he days immedia ely
p eceding and ollowing he July 23 (23-J) gene al elec ions held in Spain in 2023. The esul s
indica e ha he mos common o ms o ha assmen we e insul s and poli ical ha e, which
we e mo e equen ly aimed a pe sonal accoun s han ins i u ional ones, highligh ing he
signi ican ole o poli ical pola iza ion—pa icula ly du ing elec ion pe iods—in shaping
he hos ili y ha jou nalis s ace. Mo eo e , al hough, gene ally speaking, he o al numbe
o ha assing messages was simila o men and women, i was ound ha a g ea e numbe
o sexis messages we e aimed a women jou nalis s, and an ideological dimension was
iden i ied in he ha e speech ha ex emis s o igh -wing populis s di ec ed a hem. This
s udy co obo a es ha his is a mino bu sys emic issue, pa icula ly om a poli ical and
gende pe spec i e. To coun e ac his, he media mus de elop p oac i e policies and
p o ec i e ac ions ex ending e en o he indi idual le el, whe e his issue usually applies.
Keywo ds: jou nalis s; ha assmen ; social ne wo ks; Spain; ha e; Twi e ; gende ; media
1. In oduc ion
Social ne wo ks a e an essen ial ool in he daily wo k o jou nalis s, who use hem o
ollow cu en e en s, con ac sou ces, o sea ch o new opics o ocuses o epo on [
1
,
2
].
They also se e as powe ul ins umen s o b oaden he each o published con en and
s eng hen audience engagemen , always wi h he aim o inc easing he each and impac
o hei con en [
3
,
4
]. The ela ionship be ween jou nalis s and audiences is being ede ined
as inc easingly in e ac i e and pa icipa o y. Pla o ms inco po a e new dynamics o
social alida ion o jou nalis ic knowledge [
5
], challenging hie a chical s uc u es and
os e ing mo e collabo a i e ela ionships in which engagemen and dialog a e cen al o
con empo a y jou nalis ic p ac ice [6,7].
In con as o adi ional news media, whe e jou nalis s adhe e o es ablished no ms
o uphold au onomy and au ho i y, social media pla o ms ope a e beyond ins i u ional
bounda ies. These hyb id spaces os e connec ion and sel -p esen a ion, blu ing pe sonal–
p o essional and public–p i a e di ides [
8
]. In many news ooms, he use o social ne wo ks
has become a na u al ex ension o jou nalis ic wo k, which is ca ied ou using no only
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/soc15050130
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 2 o 13
he co po a e p o iles o he media ou le s bu also he pe sonal accoun s o he jou nalis s
hemsel es. In ac , ou imes as many p o essionals use bo h ypes o p o iles simul ane-
ously compa ed o hose who ely solely on ins i u ional accoun s, e ealing he ex en o
which social media has been in eg a ed in o jou nalis ic p ac ice [9].
As a esul , no only can jou nalis s achie e a much be e connec ion wi h hei
audiences, as well as imp o ed ways o in e ac mo e di ec ly wi h hem in a sha ed
space [
10
,
11
], bu i also enables he c ea ion o hei own b and image, boos ing hei
p o iles beyond he news ou le s whe e hey wo k [12].
Howe e , his g ea e p esence on social ne wo ks also implies a hea ie wo kload,
g ea e u gency in p oducing con en apidly, and heigh ened public exposu e, which
exace ba es p o essional isks and pe sonal ulne abili y due o he blu ing o bounda ies
be ween wo k and p i a e li es [
13
]. As Lewis and Molyneux [
14
] poin ou , he jou nalis ’s
ole has been eshaped no only by pla o m a o dances bu also by ins i u ional p essu es
and audience expec a ions. Ra he han empowe ing jou nalis s, social media o en im-
poses addi ional bu dens, os e s insula i y, and exposes hem o ha assmen —challenging
assump ions o enhanced engagemen and calling o mo e c i ical e lec ion on jou nalis ic
labo and ulne abili y.
In i s mos ex eme o m, he disad an age o using social ne wo ks is he ha assmen
o jou nalis s, whe he due o he ailu e o egula o y and p o ec ion s anda ds o s op
abuse, he speed wi h which in o ma ion ci cula es on he In e ne , he ease o main aining
anonymi y, o he eno mous olume o messages gene a ed [15].
A acks on jou nalis s ia social media ha e a leas h ee impo an dimensions ha
highligh he comp ehensi e impac ha hey ha e on he p o ession. Fi s , in e ms o
pe sonal well-being, pe asi e ha assmen can lead o anxie y and psychological p oblems
among hose expe iencing i [
16
–
20
], which can lead o a igue, bu nou , and a desi e o
qui one’s job p ema u ely [21].
Second, in e ms o he quali y o p o essional p ac ice, online ha assmen can ul i-
ma ely in luence he ypes o s o ies ha a e pos ed on social ne wo ks o he ways in which
po en ially con o e sial opics a e co e ed [
22
], a pa icula ly signi ican epe cussion in
he case o a social g oup such as jou nalis s, whose unc ion is speci ically o help os e
deba e in he public sphe e [23].
The e o e, ul ima ely, a acks on jou nalis s ia social media ep esen a dange o
he public as a whole in ha hey can h ea en jou nalis s’ eedom o exp ession and, by
ex ension, ha o democ a ic socie ies hemsel es, gi en ha hey discou age o hinde
pa icipa ion in public deba e h ough sel -censo ship o lead p o essionals o a oid di-
alogs wi h hei audiences [
24
]. This ype o iolence also aims o unde mine jou nalis s’
p o essional epu a ions and damage hei c edibili y, he eby es ic ing he ee p ac-
ice o jou nalism [
19
] and jeopa dizing public us in he media, plu alism, and social
cohesion [25].
Consequen ly, s udies by in e na ional o ganiza ions such as Repo e s Wi hou Bo -
de s (RWB) and he Uni ed Na ions Educa ional, Scien i ic and Cul u al O ganiza ion
(UNESCO) ha e epo ed conce n ega ding he ha assmen o jou nalis s in he digi al
sphe e and he ways in which i may in luence hei wo k [
26
,
27
]. The ise o populism and
he s igma iza ion o he p ess as an “enemy” ha e u he in ensi ied hese
a acks [28–30].
Such he o ic o en seeks o delegi imize and silence jou nalis s unde he guise o p o-
ec ing eedom o exp ession [
31
]. Thus, ce ain leade s ha e p omo ed an agg essi e
discou se agains jou nalis s and he media, ini ially being dissemina ed by in luence s and
olls on social ne wo ks and inally eaching e en o dina y use s [32].
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 3 o 13
In addi ion, in he case o jou nalis s, women and mino i ies a e he main a ge s o
online ha assmen , including dea h h ea s, he disclosu e o pe sonal da a, o gende -based
iolence [33].
Some imes, he ha assmen o jou nalis s using social ne wo ks akes on he e y
cha ac e is ics o ha e speech [
34
], i.e., a acking a pe son o g oup on he basis o he
ea u es o hei iden i y [
35
]. Al hough his concep has a a ie y o meanings [
36
],
such speech is usually unde s ood o be messages ha inci e iolence and ha e agains
a g oup [
37
] and ha communica e an ideology, usually ia s e eo ypes acco ding o
speci ic ea u es o a gende , eligion, ace, o disabili y [
38
]. The e o e, ha e speech
is bes unde s ood as a subse o b oade bullying and ha assmen beha io s, and i is
cha ac e ized by explici e e ences o iden i y-based ai s.
Indeed, many women jou nalis s epo sexis and misogynis ic a acks on social
ne wo ks [
39
], which a ge hem mo e equen ly han hei male colleagues [
40
]. Such
ha assmen in he digi al sphe e, pa icula ly agains hose co e ing poli ical and gende -
ela ed opics [
41
,
42
], o en mi o s he abuse ha hey endu e in o he con ex s [
43
,
44
],
he eby ein o cing he s uc u al inequali ies ha pe sis in jou nalism and socie y as a
whole [45].
Thus, ha e speech di ec ed a women jou nalis s can be conside ed o be a speci ic ype
o ha assmen ha includes sexis o misogynis ic commen s ia which hey a e c i icized,
a acked, ma ginalized, s e eo yped, o h ea ened on he basis o hei gende o sexuali y.
This is di e en om he o dina y ha assmen o jou nalis s seen on social ne wo ks [
46
,
47
].
The digi al ha assmen o women jou nalis s has hus become one o he main objec s
o in e es in his ield, al hough he limi ed a ailabili y o empi ical esea ch hinde s he
de elopmen o e ec i e esponses [48].
Mos analyses ha e been ca ied ou h ough su eys [
40
,
49
], ocus g oups [
50
], o semi-
s uc u ed in-dep h in e iews wi h p o essionals in di e en
coun ies [17,19,21,22,41,47,51–54].
S udies ha e also been ca ied ou in a numbe o specialized a eas o jou nalism— o
example, spo s [
35
,
43
] o echnology [
15
]. Howe e , quan i a i e s udies based on social
media analysis, pa icula ly in poli ical con ex s and in Spain, emain sca ce [55,56].
In sho , he ela ionship be ween social media and jou nalism e eals a undamen al
pa adox: while media o ganiza ions encou age hei s a o main ain an ac i e p esence
on hese pla o ms [
57
], social media o en unc ions as an echo chambe ha heigh ens
he isk o ha assmen . This dual na u e o digi al ools means ha , al hough hey o e
inc eased isibili y and oppo uni ies o audience engagemen , hey also expose jou nalis s
o ha m ul in e ac ions [45,58–60].
In his con ex , his s udy analyzes he occu ence o ha assmen and ha e speech
di ec ed a jou nalis s and he media agains he backd op o a p ocess wi h a signi ican
news impac , namely he Spanish gene al elec ions o July 23 (23-J). On he basis o his
gene al objec i e, he ollowing esea ch ques ions (RQs) a e posed.
RQ1. Wha is he in ensi y o he ha assmen and ha e speech di ec ed a Spanish
jou nalis s on social ne wo ks?
RQ2. Wha ypes o ha assmen a e he mos common, and wha opics a e hey
ela ed o?
RQ3. Is gende a ac o in his ype o online ha assmen ? Does his gende - ela ed
ac o ha e a poli ical o ien a ion?
2. Ma e ials and Me hods
Twi e (cu en ly called X) was selec ed o his s udy because i is he social ne wo k
ha jou nalis s use mos in hei daily wo k, a mo e han Facebook o Ins ag am [
5
].
This social ne wo k has also been he subjec o much esea ch in he communica ion ield
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 4 o 13
because o i s special ela ionship wi h jou nalism [
11
,
61
]. In addi ion, Twi e is one o
he a o i e means adop ed by poli icians o dissemina e hei p oposals and campaign
messages du ing elec o al p ocesses [
62
]. A he ime o w i ing, he pla o m has o e ou
million accoun s in Spain; one in i e o hese is conside ed ac i e, wi h a leas one message
pos ed du ing he p eceding 2 mon hs [
63
]. Use s who a e men sligh ly ou numbe hose
who a e women on his ne wo k, a 32% e sus 28%; howe e , he majo i y (40%) do no
speci y hei gende .
In o al, 200 p o iles wi h a high le el o ac i i y and impo ance we e analyzed; hal
o hese belonged o media ou le s and hal o jou nalis s. The media ou le accoun s
we e d awn om he Ibe ian Digi al Media Map ca alog [
64
], which con ains 4039 eco ds,
among which he 100 wi h he g ea es numbe o ollowe s we e selec ed. Fo jou nalis s,
he lis s o ac i e p o essionals a ailable on his social ne wo k we e analyzed, and, om
hese, a p elimina y lis o 568 use s was d awn up. O hese, he 100 accoun s wi h he
g ea es numbe o ollowe s we e ul ima ely selec ed.
To quan i y ha assmen and ha e messages on social ne wo ks, esponses o messages
pos ed by he selec ed jou nalis s and media ou le s in he days immedia ely p eceding
and ollowing he 23-J elec ions—speci ically be ween 18 July and 31 July (14 days)—we e
analyzed. In o al, 60,684 use esponses o messages o iginally w i en by jou nalis s
(30,895) and media ou le s (29,789) we e analyzed.
A wo-s ep app oach was adop ed o iden i y ha assmen and ha e speech. Fi s ,
using he X/Twi e Academic API, he esponses di ec ed a hese use s we e collec ed,
limi ed o a maximum o 100 esponses pe use , in acco dance wi h API es ic ions in
e ec a he ime o da a collec ion p io o i s discon inua ion. Second, once he esponses
we e collec ed, hey we e ansla ed in o English, and he machine lea ning model (la ge
language model [LLM]) ca di nlp/ wi e - obe a-base-ha e-la es om he Hugging Face
machine lea ning ecosys em was applied o iden i y and ca ego ize ins ances o ha e speech.
In addi ion o hese au oma ic classi ica ions, ca ego ies o he use s’ gende s and speci ic
ypes o ha assmen o ha e speech we e inco po a ed manually. Al hough he e a e ha e
speech de ec o s o Spanish [
65
,
66
], a mo e obus and cu en English-language model
was selec ed.
Thus, he ex s included in he sample we e i s analyzed au oma ically and hen
e iewed manually o e ine he selec ion and co ec e o s and alse posi i es, messages
whose pos e s had no been con i med, and ad e sa ial con en no s ic ly cons i u ing
ha assmen o ha e.
No e ha al hough he quan i y o oxic wo ds may indica e oxici y, his does no
necessa ily mean ha he in en ion o he wee is o a ack, and o he con ex ual aspec s
should be conside ed [39].
The Doccano so wa e ( . 1.6) was used o da a labeling, and an explo a o y da a
analysis was pe o med using he Py hon p og amming language ( . 3.11.6). In his way, a
inal sample o 1478 esponses wi h ha assmen o ha e con en (2.42%) was es ablished.
Building upon he p e ious s udies a ailable, an induc i e me hod based on an
explo a o y analysis o 10% o he i ems in he sample was used o ca ego ize he messages.
On he basis o his analysis, se en ca ego ies o measu e ha assmen and ha e speech
di ec ed a jou nalis s we e ul ima ely es ablished: (1) insul s, (2) poli ical ha e, (3) ha e
di ec ed a media ou le s, (4) acial disc imina ion and ha e, (5) sexism and misogyny,
(6) homophobia/LGBTQ+
phobia, and (7) o he . The ca ego ies used in he analysis we e
no mu ually exclusi e, as indi idual messages may con ain mul iple o ms o agg ession
(e.g., a sexis commen ha is also poli ically mo i a ed). Ra he han imposing a single-
label classi ica ion, messages we e coded acco ding o all ele an ca ego ies ha hey
displayed, including bo h gene al insul s o poli ical ha ed and speci ic o ms o ha e
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 5 o 13
speech a ge ing iden i y-based cha ac e is ics (e.g., sexism, acism, homophobia, e c.).
Likewise, he poli ical o ien a ion o hese esponses was iden i ied on he basis o a
seman ic analysis o he quali ie s in he ex (e.g., “ ascis ” [“ acha”], “ ed” [“ ojo”], e c.).
We also analyzed whe he hey we e comple ely o pa ially di ec ed a jou nalis s and
media ou le s o whe he , on he con a y, he esponses used such messages o a ack hi d
pa ies. All coding was ca ied ou by a single esea che using an in a- a e eliabili y
sys em, achie ing an accu acy le el abo e 90%.
Fo he analysis o he esul s, we i s iden i ied ou lie s, de ined as samples in he
da ase ha di e ed excep ionally om he majo i y o he da a [
67
]. In his case s udy,
he s anda d de ia ion was no calcula ed because he da ase analyzed did no ollow a
no mal dis ibu ion. The e o e, he chosen measu e was he in e qua ile ange (IQR), wi h
1.5 imes he IQR being conside ed an ex eme alue.
The K uskal–Wallis es was employed, as he da a did no mee he condi ions o
pa ame ic analysis (i.e., no mali y), al hough hey did show equal a iance. E ec sizes
o di e ences be ween use ca ego ies we e measu ed using he
η2
es , which allowed o
he e alua ion o he obse ed simila i ies and di e ences among he g oups.
3. Resul s
3.1. Poli ical Ha e o Insul s
The analysis o use esponses o messages ha jou nalis s and media ou le s pos ed on
Twi e in he con ex o he 23-J elec ion campaign indica ed ha 2.42% o hese messages
(n= 1478) included con en iden i iable as ha assmen o ha e speech. The a ge s o
hese a acks we e a ied bu always had a s ong connec ion o poli ics. O he messages
including ha assmen , 27.13% (n= 401) we e speci ically di ec ed a jou nalis s and media
ou le s, while 34.17% (n= 505) a acked hem along wi h o he a ge s, o en in he con ex
o he elec ions. Con e sely, 34.71% (n= 513) o hos ile esponses a acked hi d pa ies
a he han jou nalis s o media ou le s. In o al, only one in h ee o he accoun s analyzed
did no ecei e any esponses including ha e con en du ing he 2-week sample pe iod.
Focusing on he messages aimed di ec ly o pa ially a jou nalis s o media ou le s,
nea ly hal (46.69%, n= 494) exp essed clea poli ical ha e, which aligned wi h he na u e
o he elec o al con ex . Quali ie s such as “ ascis ” [“ ascis a”], “Nazi,” “communis ”
[“comunis a”], o “ e o is ” [“ e o is a”] we e he mos p ominen in an a mosphe e
o s ong bipa isanship and high pola iza ion. The second mos common ca ego y was
insul s and gene ic slu s (32.61%, n= 345).
By con as , he e was much less con en ha speci ically cons i u ed ha e speech,
i.e., a acks
based on membe ship o a speci ic g oup o on he a ibu ion o i s iden i y
(Table 1). In o al, elemen s cons i u ing disc imina ion o acial ha e we e iden i ied
in 7.18% o he messages analyzed (n= 76), whe eas 5.77% (n= 61) included sexis o
misogynis ic quali ie s. In addi ion, 3.31% (n= 35) o he messages could be ca ego-
ized as homophobic/LGBTQ+-phobic. Finally, ha e speci ically a ge ing he media and
jou nalis s—wi h quali ie s such as “lia s” [“men i osos”], “ ake news” [“bulos”], o “co -
up ” [“co up os”]—appea ed in 1.98% o he messages (n= 21).
Rega ding he accoun ypes, indi idual jou nalis s’ p o iles ecei ed wice as many
hos ile messages compa ed wi h he ins i u ional accoun s o he media ou le s whe e hey
wo ked. The p o iles ha ecei ed he g ea es numbe o messages including ha assmen
belonged, almos en i ely, o media di ec o s and newspape opinion leade s o o p ess
columnis s, p esen e s, o alk-show hos s on poli ical p og ams (Table 2). Focusing on
ou lie s, i.e., hose cases ha exceeded a leas 1.5 imes he in e qua ile ange, he ac-
coun s including he mos ha assmen we e hose o @Al onsoRojoPD, @ja ie neg e10,
@pacoma huenda, @An onioMaes e, @es he palome a, and @An onioRNa anjo.

Socie ies 2025,15, 130 6 o 13
Table 1. Ha assmen o jou nalis s and he media on Twi e .
To al Jou nalis s Men Women Media Ou le s
To al (%) To al (%) To al (%) To al (%)
Insul 251 36.01% 183 37.81% 68 31.92% 94 26.48%
Poli ical ha e 346 49.64% 244 50.41% 102 47.89% 148 41.69%
Ha e di ec ed a he media 13 1.87% 11 2.27% 2 0.94% 6 1.69%
Racial disc imina ion/ha e 15 2.15% 6 1.24% 9 4.23% 58 16.34%
Sexism/misogyny 41 5.88% 13 2.69% 28 13.15% 20 5.63%
Homophobia/LGBTQ+phobia 22 3.16% 19 3.93% 3 1.41% 13 3.66%
O he 9 1.29% 8 1.66% 1 0.47% 16 4.5%
TOTAL 697 100% 484 100% 213 100% 347 100%
Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
Table 2. Jou nalis s who ecei ed he mos ha assmen and ha e (numbe o esponses).
Jou nalis Gende Numbe Jou nalis Gende Numbe
1 Al onsoRojoPD M 53 11 Jo geBus os1 M 18
2 ja ie neg e10 M 48 12 RosaVillacas in F 18
3 pacoma huenda M 40 13 sand asaba es11 F 17
4 An onioMaes e M 40 14 LuciaMendezEM F 16
5 es he palome a F 36 15 Es e aniaJoaq M 15
6 An onioRNa anjo M 28 16 c pandemonium M 15
7 E nes oEkaize M 25 17 _InakiLopez_ M 15
8 ped oj_ ami ez M 22 18 JesusCin o a M 14
9 ca loscues aEM M 20 19 susannag iso F 13
10 Ma iaJama doC F 20 20 Pila GG anja F 13
Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
Analyzing he poli ical o ien a ion o he messages also e ealed signi ican da a.
O he 935 messages including ha assmen and ha e ecei ed by jou nalis s and media
ou le s, 44.04% (n= 425) came om le -wing posi ions, compa ed wi h 32.02% (n= 309)
om igh -wing posi ions. Messages whose poli ical s ance was unclea o could no be
de e mined accoun ed o 23.94% (n= 231). To de e mine he poli ical o ien a ion o a
message, he poli ical na u e and he slan o he slu s con ained in he esponse we e
analyzed. The e o e, conside ing he da a on he poli ical s ances o ha assmen o ha e
messages and hei add essees, he numbe o messages om he le ha we e di ec ed a
jou nalis s wo king in media ou le s a ilia ed wi h he igh was somewha highe han in
he opposi e case.
3.2. The Gende Dimension
In addi ion o a clea poli ical dimension, he da a analyzed also indica ed ha
he e was a gende dimension when i came o ha assmen and ha e speech di ec ed
a women jou nalis s—no gene ally, bu in some speci ic issues iden i ied in he de ails o
he da a analyzed.
On he one hand, he analysis o he o e all da a and o all he esponses analyzed did
no show s a is ically signi ican di e ences in he amoun o ha assmen and ha e ecei ed
by women jou nalis s compa ed wi h ha ecei ed by men (Figu e 1). The K uskal–Wallis
es (0.0413) indica ed no di e ence in he median pe cen age o ha e messages be ween
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 7 o 13
he wo g oups, and, gi en ha he p- alue was high (0.8389) and he e ec size was small
(6.49 ×10−5), he s a is ical di e ence, i any, would no ha e been signi ican ei he .
Socie ies 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 o 14
be ween he wo g oups, and, gi en ha he p- alue was high (0.8389) and he effec size
was small (6.49 × 10−5), he s a is ical diffe ence, i any, would no ha e been signi ican
ei he .
Figu e 1. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s (by gende ). Sou ce: Au ho s’ own
c ea ion.
On he o he hand, messages ha included insul s and poli ical ha e we e dis ibu ed
wi h li le a ia ion be ween men and women and we e in luenced mo e by he poli ical
o ien a ion asc ibed o he ecipien a he han hei gende . As seen in he sca e plo s
(Figu e 2), he e was no a g ea e numbe o ou lie s o women when all he messages
analyzed we e conside ed. Al hough women jou nalis s did appea in he sca e plo ou -
side o he eg ession esul , hey ecei ed oo li le con en con aining ha assmen o ha e
o be seen as ou lie s.
Howe e , when we excluded he wo gene al ca ego ies (insul s and poli ical ha e)
and ocused speci ically on he ca ego ies ha could be quali ied as ha e speech, he da a
sugges ed ha he p opo ion o sexis messages ecei ed by women (13.15%, n = 28) was
much highe han ha ecei ed by men (5.88%, n = 41). Because o he small o al numbe
o esponses iden i ied in his subca ego y compa ed wi h he sample as a whole, he e-
sul s could no be conside ed sufficien ly signi ican ; howe e , hey do indica e a clea
end.
Figu e 2. Ha assmen and ha e di ec ed a media ou le s and jou nalis s (by gende ).
Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
Figu e 1. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s (by gende ). Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
On he o he hand, messages ha included insul s and poli ical ha e we e dis ibu ed
wi h li le a ia ion be ween men and women and we e in luenced mo e by he poli ical
o ien a ion asc ibed o he ecipien a he han hei gende . As seen in he sca e plo s
(Figu e 2), he e was no a g ea e numbe o ou lie s o women when all he messages
analyzed we e conside ed. Al hough women jou nalis s did appea in he sca e plo
ou side o he eg ession esul , hey ecei ed oo li le con en con aining ha assmen o
ha e o be seen as ou lie s.
Socie ies 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 o 14
be ween he wo g oups, and, gi en ha he p- alue was high (0.8389) and he effec size
was small (6.49 × 10−5), he s a is ical diffe ence, i any, would no ha e been signi ican
ei he .
Figu e 1. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s (by gende ). Sou ce: Au ho s’ own
c ea ion.
On he o he hand, messages ha included insul s and poli ical ha e we e dis ibu ed
wi h li le a ia ion be ween men and women and we e in luenced mo e by he poli ical
o ien a ion asc ibed o he ecipien a he han hei gende . As seen in he sca e plo s
(Figu e 2), he e was no a g ea e numbe o ou lie s o women when all he messages
analyzed we e conside ed. Al hough women jou nalis s did appea in he sca e plo ou -
side o he eg ession esul , hey ecei ed oo li le con en con aining ha assmen o ha e
o be seen as ou lie s.
Howe e , when we excluded he wo gene al ca ego ies (insul s and poli ical ha e)
and ocused speci ically on he ca ego ies ha could be quali ied as ha e speech, he da a
sugges ed ha he p opo ion o sexis messages ecei ed by women (13.15%, n = 28) was
much highe han ha ecei ed by men (5.88%, n = 41). Because o he small o al numbe
o esponses iden i ied in his subca ego y compa ed wi h he sample as a whole, he e-
sul s could no be conside ed sufficien ly signi ican ; howe e , hey do indica e a clea
end.
Figu e 2. Ha assmen and ha e di ec ed a media ou le s and jou nalis s (by gende ).
Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
Figu e 2. Ha assmen and ha e di ec ed a media ou le s and jou nalis s (by gende ). Sou ce: Au ho s’
own c ea ion.
Howe e , when we excluded he wo gene al ca ego ies (insul s and poli ical ha e)
and ocused speci ically on he ca ego ies ha could be quali ied as ha e speech, he da a
sugges ed ha he p opo ion o sexis messages ecei ed by women (13.15%, n= 28) was
much highe han ha ecei ed by men (5.88%, n= 41). Because o he small o al numbe
o esponses iden i ied in his subca ego y compa ed wi h he sample as a whole, he esul s
could no be conside ed su icien ly signi ican ; howe e , hey do indica e a clea end.
Mo eo e , i we look a he poli ical o ien a ion o he ha assmen and ha e ecei ed, a
clea gende dimension also eme ges. In his ega d, he o e all numbe o ha assmen mes-
sages di ec ed a jou nalis s and he media was somewha highe o posi ions iden i ied as
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 8 o 13
le -wing. Despi e his, he K uskal–Wallis es (Figu e 3) did no indica e signi ican di e -
ences in he medians be ween he g oups when i came o hese ypes o messages ei he .
Socie ies 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 o 14
Mo eo e , i we look a he poli ical o ien a ion o he ha assmen and ha e ecei ed,
a clea gende dimension also eme ges. In his ega d, he o e all numbe o ha assmen
messages di ec ed a jou nalis s and he media was somewha highe o posi ions iden-
i ied as le -wing. Despi e his, he K uskal–Wallis es (Figu e 3) did no indica e signi i-
can diffe ences in he medians be ween he g oups when i came o hese ypes o mes-
sages ei he .
Figu e 3. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s om le -wing posi ions (by gen-
de ). Sou ce: Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
In con as , he gende dimension was clea and highly signi ican in messages w i -
en om a igh -wing s ance (Figu e 4). Fo hese, he K uskal–Wallis s a is ic was 45.7373,
and he associa ed p- alue was 1.3522 × 10−11, which, oge he wi h a mode a e effec size
(0.1675), indica ed a signi ican diffe ence be ween men and women in e ms o he me-
dian pe cen age o ha e messages.
In o he wo ds, in a con ex in which jou nalis s and media ou le s ecei e sligh ly
mo e ha assmen and ha e on X/Twi e om le -wing posi ions, women jou nalis s e-
cei e his ha assmen o a pa icula ly signi ican deg ee om indi iduals wi h igh -wing
posi ions, which suppo s he no ion o an ideological dimension o gende ed digi al ha -
assmen .
The e o e, in e ms o gende , al hough he o al numbe o sexis messages and ha e
messages was lowe han he p opo ion o poli ical ha e and insul s, i is no ewo hy ha
sexis messages we e ecei ed o a much g ea e ex en by women and we e sen signi i-
can ly mo e o en by use s wi h ex emis o igh -wing populis posi ions.
Figu e 3. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s om le -wing posi ions (by gende ). Sou ce:
Au ho s’ own c ea ion.
In con as , he gende dimension was clea and highly signi ican in messages w i en
om a igh -wing s ance (Figu e 4). Fo hese, he K uskal–Wallis s a is ic was 45.7373, and
he associa ed p- alue was 1.3522
×
10
−
11, which, oge he wi h a mode a e e ec size
(0.1675), indica ed a signi ican di e ence be ween men and women in e ms o he median
pe cen age o ha e messages.
Socie ies 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 o 14
Figu e 4. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s om hose wi h igh -wing posi ions (by gen-
de ).
4. Discussion
This analysis o ha assmen and ha e in he esponses ecei ed o messages ha jou -
nalis s and he media pos ed in he con ex o he 23-J gene al elec ions shows, p ima ily,
he p e alence o poli ical ha e di ec ed a jou nalis s. The da a indica e ha , du ing he
elec o al pe iod, he e was a “shoo he messenge ” effec , whe e, in a clima e o s ong
pola iza ion, jou nalis s we e he a ge s o a acks om one poli ical ex eme o he o he
depending on hei suppo — eal o asc ibed—o one o he dominan poli ical s ances.
While online ha assmen may con ibu e o b oade pa e ns o silencing and sel -censo -
ship, his s udy inds ha such abuse is la gely ideologically d i en, wi h a highly cha ged
poli ical en i onmen eme ging as a cen al ac o in he hos ili y ha jou nalis s ace—
ueling a acks and ein o cing an agonis ic dynamics in public discou se. These esul s
a e consis en wi h hose ob ained by o he p e ious s udies [17,41], which ha e e en
iden i ied o ganized ha assmen and pe secu ion campaigns agains jou nalis s, some-
imes spilling ou beyond he digi al sphe e [50], and hey unde line he ele ance o he
poli ical con ex when i comes o he in ensi y and na u e o ha assmen .
Aside om poli ical ha e, wi h ega d o messages speci ically iden i iable as ha e
speech— ha is, hose e e ing o membe ship o a speci ic g oup—sexism o gende -
based digi al ha assmen was he mos common ype o ha assmen . The da a sugges ha
his ype o ha assmen o women is common, al hough he sample analyzed, ex ac ed a
a ime o s ong poli ical mobiliza ion, p o ided insufficien e idence o es ablish s a is i-
cally signi ican diffe ences. A possible u u e line o esea ch could be o y o co obo-
a e wha hese da a sugges using a b oade empo al sample ob ained a imes o less
poli ical pola iza ion, which would allow his end o eme ge.
Likewise, a signi ican s a is ical diffe ence was ound when i came o digi al ha ass-
men and ha e speech om hose in igh -wing posi ions di ec ed a women. Thus, in a
clima e in which he o e all o ien a ion leaned in he opposi e di ec ion, he numbe o
hos ile ema ks di ec ed a women jou nalis s ha we e ound in igh -wing use s’ e-
sponses was signi ican ly highe . Thus, al hough, a an agg ega e le el, he gende -based
ha assmen o women jou nalis s was no ound o be mo e common, i was ound ha
mo e ha assmen wi h a gende dimension came om use s wi h ce ain poli ical posi-
ions, which is in line wi h public a acks made by some populis leade s [28,29].
The esul s ob ained also emphasize he pe sonal dimension o digi al ha assmen ,
as jou nalis s’ indi idual accoun s ecei ed mo e insul s and ha e han ins i u ional media
Figu e 4. Ha e-con aining esponses o jou nalis s om hose wi h igh -wing posi ions (by gende ).
In o he wo ds, in a con ex in which jou nalis s and media ou le s ecei e sligh ly mo e
ha assmen and ha e on X/Twi e om le -wing posi ions, women jou nalis s ecei e his
ha assmen o a pa icula ly signi ican deg ee om indi iduals wi h igh -wing posi ions,
which suppo s he no ion o an ideological dimension o gende ed digi al ha assmen .
The e o e, in e ms o gende , al hough he o al numbe o sexis messages and ha e
messages was lowe han he p opo ion o poli ical ha e and insul s, i is no ewo hy
ha sexis messages we e ecei ed o a much g ea e ex en by women and we e sen
signi ican ly mo e o en by use s wi h ex emis o igh -wing populis posi ions.
Socie ies 2025,15, 130 9 o 13
4. Discussion
This analysis o ha assmen and ha e in he esponses ecei ed o messages ha
jou nalis s and he media pos ed in he con ex o he 23-J gene al elec ions shows, p ima ily,
he p e alence o poli ical ha e di ec ed a jou nalis s. The da a indica e ha , du ing
he elec o al pe iod, he e was a “shoo he messenge ” e ec , whe e, in a clima e o
s ong pola iza ion, jou nalis s we e he a ge s o a acks om one poli ical ex eme o
he o he depending on hei suppo — eal o asc ibed—o one o he dominan poli ical
s ances. While online ha assmen may con ibu e o b oade pa e ns o silencing and
sel -censo ship, his s udy inds ha such abuse is la gely ideologically d i en, wi h a
highly cha ged poli ical en i onmen eme ging as a cen al ac o in he hos ili y ha
jou nalis s ace— ueling a acks and ein o cing an agonis ic dynamics in public discou se.
These esul s a e consis en wi h hose ob ained by o he p e ious s udies [
17
,
41
], which
ha e e en iden i ied o ganized ha assmen and pe secu ion campaigns agains jou nalis s,
some imes spilling ou beyond he digi al sphe e [
50
], and hey unde line he ele ance o
he poli ical con ex when i comes o he in ensi y and na u e o ha assmen .
Aside om poli ical ha e, wi h ega d o messages speci ically iden i iable as ha e
speech— ha is, hose e e ing o membe ship o a speci ic g oup—sexism o gende -based
digi al ha assmen was he mos common ype o ha assmen . The da a sugges ha his
ype o ha assmen o women is common, al hough he sample analyzed, ex ac ed a a
ime o s ong poli ical mobiliza ion, p o ided insu icien e idence o es ablish s a is ically
signi ican di e ences. A possible u u e line o esea ch could be o y o co obo a e
wha hese da a sugges using a b oade empo al sample ob ained a imes o less poli ical
pola iza ion, which would allow his end o eme ge.
Likewise, a signi ican s a is ical di e ence was ound when i came o digi al ha ass-
men and ha e speech om hose in igh -wing posi ions di ec ed a women. Thus, in
a clima e in which he o e all o ien a ion leaned in he opposi e di ec ion, he numbe
o hos ile ema ks di ec ed a women jou nalis s ha we e ound in igh -wing use s’
esponses was signi ican ly highe . Thus, al hough, a an agg ega e le el, he gende -based
ha assmen o women jou nalis s was no ound o be mo e common, i was ound ha
mo e ha assmen wi h a gende dimension came om use s wi h ce ain poli ical posi ions,
which is in line wi h public a acks made by some populis leade s [28,29].
The esul s ob ained also emphasize he pe sonal dimension o digi al ha assmen , as
jou nalis s’ indi idual accoun s ecei ed mo e insul s and ha e han ins i u ional media
accoun s. This poin calls o e lec ion ega ding jou nalis s’ inc eased exposu e on social
ne wo ks and he ailu e o media ou le s’ codes o conduc o hei use. Gi en ha
he indi idual accoun s used by he as majo i y o jou nalis s o sha e messages exis
somewhe e in he g ey a ea be ween hei pe sonal and p o essional sphe es, he in ensi y
o a acks on indi iduals, a su passing ha expe ienced by ins i u ions, also indica es he
in en ion o in luence hei ac i i y and silence hem [
30
]. This a ge ed hos ili y owa d
indi idual jou nalis s con ibu es o a hos ile en i onmen ha can ul ima ely uel sel -
es ain and discou age open pa icipa ion in public deba e.
Finally, al hough he o e all impac was limi ed, ha e speech and digi al ha assmen
di ec ed a jou nalis s, a leas in hei less ex eme o ms, can be conside ed o be sys emic
ac oss social ne wo ks [
20
,
25
], pa icula ly when i comes o highly pola ized con ex s
such as elec o al p ocesses. I should also be no ed ha he s udy sample was selec ed
o include he 100 jou nalis s wi h he g ea es numbe o ollowe s; as opinion leade s
wi h a g ea deal o public exposu e, hey a e a g ea e isk o being ha assed on social
ne wo ks [
68
]. In his con ex , i can be said ha social ne wo ks should be unde s ood no
only as in e ac i e spaces bu also as se ings ha can ampli y hos ili y and ha e speech,
nega i ely in luencing jou nalis ic p ac ices and democ a ic quali y.