Shooting the Messenger? Harassment and Hate Speech Directed at Journalists on Social Media

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.