Subscription to digital press as a barrier to hate speech

Abstract

User discussions on digital media usually include offensive comments. This kind of content has become more frequent and intense because of political polarization and the health and economic crises associated with Covid-19. Little is known about the journalists who moderate these forums, how they approach this task in such difficult circumstances, and their opinion about their role in the democratic public debate. To improve understanding of this phenomenon, we carried out 12 semistructured open interviews with moderators from several types of Spanish digital newspapers: generalist, local, and sports. The aim was to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of moderation filters against hate speech in readers’ comments. The results show that the introduction of paywalls in many Spanish newspapers has reduced the intensity of such hate speech, although it has not completely disappeared. These moderation systems are limited mainly to ruling out insults and swearing. There is consensus among the interviewed journalists that most hate speech comments relate to political news. The most frequent topics are racism, xenophobia, misogyny, and homophobia. Several journalists presented the banning of offending users as a possible solution. However, others see this as a business opportunity and proposed solutions ranging from creating specialized moderators to controlling the activity history or trying to educate those users how to participate in a democratic forum. This research contributes to the ongoing debate about moderation systems among media professionals.