The article proposes a reflection on the contemporary Italian news media system, which is facing the threat of fostering a powerful ‘hate factory’, connected to the pervasive and planetary practices of divisive news construction and sharing trough the social media. Recent studies have pointed out both an increase of lexical choices based on hate or verbal violence in Italian news coverage (above all referring to women and migrants) and of threats and insults against news professionals. Therefore, in the contemporary media system news media actors are challenged to find innovative strategies to face insulting and hate in the digital agorà created by online platforms and transformed by AI. Through 10 in-depth interviews with local media news professionals, this study analyses the presence of hate speech against local journalists in Italy and its influence both on their informative practices and on their private life. In the study concrete actions against hate speech are also presented, aiming at underlining that Italian local journalists are daily involved to combat hate speech at an individual level with personal and legal risks.
In a social context where the dimensions of uncertainty and insecurity coexist and are tragically exacerbated by wars and the disruption of the geopolitical balances of the 20th century, the contemporary digital agorà is pervaded by the proliferation of online threats and hate speech in a communication short-circuit, capable of spreading and exponentially multiplying negative and divisive contents and fostering an uncontrolled dissemination of false information in order to activate emotional opinion dynamics (
The research is based on the assumption that the pervasive spread of hate speech has been accelerated by the recent transformation of Italian media market (
The infosphere is now dominated by the ‘opaque’ algorithms elaborated by the platforms (
The topic of hate speech and its ties with the rise of social media points to some difficulties since both its theoretical definition as well as practical and legal regulations seem inadequate. One of the most relevant problems has been the definition itself: the tension inherent in this concept derives from its opaqueness (definitions are often considered vague or contradictory), and from the fact that the framing tends to be emotional and tinged with a moral tenor. Moreover, as
In this study it is used the definition of hate speech proposed by ECRI (European Commission against Racism and Intolerance) in 2015 which included «advocacy, promotion or incitement, in any form whatsoever, to the denigration, hatred or defamation of any person or group of persons, as well as any harassment, insult, negative stereotyping, stigmatization or threat against that person or group of people and the justification of all the foregoing types of expression, whether on grounds of race, color, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, language, religion or belief, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation and other personal characteristics or status» (
Literature has addressed online hate speech from a variety of perspectives: the academic discourse on this topic (
Assuming that the spread of various forms of verbal violence is present in different national contexts (
Previous studies have offered insights into how social networks affect journalism in different national contexts, underlining the relevance of algorithms in the selection of topics, which brings about a radical change in the relationship between journalists and audiences and transforms newsrooms daily work. One of the main objects of interest in this field is the digital harassment of women journalists: in different national contexts, scholars analysed the presence of an aggressive discourse against journalists disseminated on social networks, focusing on the case of women who are targets of online harassment, death threats, the disclosure of personal data, or gender-based violence (
Literature shows a growing body of research examining the impact of sensationalisation on news, associated with the increasing presence of social media in the post-truth cultural context (
This study assumes that the digital age presents new elements, which have altered communication circuits and social interactions (
The next section begins with an overview of the most recent transformations of the Italian informative system, describing the process of digitization and its main consequences on journalism, both at an economic and at a reputational level. The following pages offer a reflection on the dynamics at work between the logic of platforms and their impact on journalistic practices, focusing on Italian local news media: the contemporary critical conditions of local media market are presented, underlining how they affect journalists’ work, forcing them to stay online and become more exposed.
In the last decade, Italian journalism has been deeply changed by the process of digitization, which brought about an economic and a reputational crisis of TV and print journalism: as
According to Reuters Digital Report 2025, in the Italian media market new balances among different owners and new information sources are emerging, with relevant consequences for journalism (on channels, on contents and on revenues): traditional media and social networks coexist and, while legacy news organizations dominated the online news market for many years, from 2022 the main TV broadcasters and the most important newspapers have been surpassed by digital-born players and digital advertising revenues have become predominant (
The use of different technological tools, the pervasiveness of social media in the daily experiences of individuals as well as the growing influence of search engines have been indicated as the main factors of a
The presence of social networks strongly impacted on Italian news professionals, in terms of compression of time, speed of communicative flows, availability of information, but also on the perceived meaning of their traditional role. However, the recent drastic crisis of the social significance of Italian journalism cannot be attributed exclusively to the radical changes of the media market brought about by digital technologies. Once again, the changes in the profession and its social perception must be read in connection with the cultural context, now characterized by the predominance of a problematic irrelevance of the boundary between truth and plausibility (
Many reports (
In Italy, there is a broader discussion concerning the state and the viability of local media outlets: even if policymakers and industry professionals recognize the importance of sustaining local independent media for the sake of democracy and pluralism, experts describe their contemporary conditions as critical. The historical presence of local media (municipal, provincial, regional, or multi-regional) is diminishing above all for technological and economic factors: consequently, local media outlets must compete for a significantly declining source of revenue, while most media activities have shifted online. The incessant crisis of Italian print national and local newspapers is evident if we look at the data produced by ADS (Associazione Diffusione Stampa) and AGCOM, which show that the decline in sales of the local newspaper segment has been even more severe: from January to April 2025 total national print copies were approximately 95 million (51.8 million sold by national newspapers and 42.7 million by local ones) and local newspapers represent almost half of total print copies (45%), but at significantly lower levels than in previous years. In comparison with 2024, print sales fell by 8.0%, even if the local newspapers lost 8.8% and the national ones 7.3%: therefore, the decline is more relevant in the local areas, affecting regional and provincial newspapers, small entities that have traditionally generated overall volumes, even higher than those of the most important national newspapers. In addition, the crisis of local distribution channels and the decrease of the number of local television and radio stations (after the switch-over between 2008 and 2012) are contributing to a structural decline in Italian local news coverage (AGCOM
As editorial resources and coverage decline, daily accurate reporting about government, healthcare, justice, and environment ends: the most problematic consequence is that the agenda shifts toward press releases and spokespeople, with less independent fact checking and a greater standardization of sources. In this context, public conversations migrate to local social networks platforms like Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, where fragments, rumors, and polarized contents freely circulate, without a professional editorial control. When resources become scarcer, journalists are increasingly forced to “stay online” and smaller newsrooms and cumulative tasks reduce time for investigative journalism, while the individual visibility of reporters increases: therefore, the greater presence on social networks implies heavier workload and heightens public exposure and exacerbates professional risks, up to harassment of journalists. The most recent data confirm an increase in the number of attacks against Italian journalists: in 2024,
The literature review has shown a growing body of research examining the presence of social media in the informative practices as well as an increase of online hate speech. While previous studies have addressed journalists’ perceptions in different national contexts, in Italy there are limited insights on how local journalists interpret the role of social media in news practices, the presence of hate speech and how they face digital hostility.
To address this gap, the research questions refer to following three thematic macro-areas: (1) the impact of social networks on journalistic practices in Italian local news media; (2) the presence of hate speech and its influence on journalists and on their work; (3) concrete actions to find strategies against insulting and hate in the digital
The research questions (RQs) were:
This article is based on an exploratory study, one of the first to investigate Italian local journalists’ perspectives on hate speech in news-related online environments. The study employs a qualitative research design based on 10 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with journalists working in Italian local media (
The participants were 10 local journalists working in print and television news organizations who were regularly involved in digital publishing and audience interaction. A purposive sampling strategy was adopted to ensure variation in professional role, length of experience, and organizational context. Interviews were conducted between August and September 2025. All participants were between 26 and 61 years of age: five respondents were born before 1980 and five after 1980. The sample included five men and five women. Their professional experience ranged from 5 to 35 years. All participants had personal social media accounts and also used social media through their news organizations’ platforms. Respondents held different professional roles within local media organizations, including editors, editors-in-chief, and reporters. For the sake of simplicity, all participants are referred to as “journalists” throughout the article. They worked for different types of organizations, including four newspapers, five television broadcasters, and one freelance journalist, collaborating with local media outlets. At the time of the interviews, all respondents were employed by regional commercial and private media organizations not affiliated with national media corporations, political parties, or public broadcasters. Regional editions of national media were excluded from the sample. Each interview lasted approximately 45–60 min. Interviews were conducted in Italian, the native language of both the participants and the researcher, with informed consent and were fully transcribed. The excerpts presented in this article were translated into English by the author. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, who were assured of confidentiality. To protect their identities, all respondents were anonymized in the transcripts and subsequent analysis. Quotations are identified using “M” for male journalists and “W” for female journalists, followed by a numerical code (e.g., M1, W2).
The interview guide explored journalists’ use of social media in news production, their exposure to online hate speech, the professional and personal consequences of such exposure, and the individual and institutional strategies adopted to face it. A qualitative pattern-matching strategy was employed for data analysis (
The main findings are shown below for the three macro thematic areas investigated, and significant excerpts from the interviews are quoted in the text.
The interviewed journalists point out that in the last decade the use of social networks has become a daily practice in their professional work, also in local reporting: they describe the use of platforms as a structural phenomenon and argue that
This daily use of social networks means that journalists inextricably link their private sphere to their professional work, using both the “institutional” accounts of the newspaper/television they work for and their personal ones for different professional practices like, for example,
Interviewed journalists use both institutional and personal accounts to achieve a much better connection with their audiences, to interact more directly with them in a shared space: they are allowed to have real-time feedback on news products as well as to identify current trends, implementing cross-media experiences during live broadcasts where it is possible to read listeners’ comments and react to them. Therefore, social media let news professionals have:
“
Respondents point out that they operate in a radically changed informative context and clearly outline the distinction between the traditional professional duty of verifying each informative
In other words, all the interviewees clearly show to perceive the
In general, the massive use of social media seems justified, beyond the dissemination of its products and articles, firstly by a new, increasingly interconnected relationship with readership, and, secondly, because it also enables them to be always connected among colleagues in the same media organization in a de-spatialized context, which means in a more fragmented form of interaction, dominated by speed and by the absence of traditional deadline.
“
Moreover, from the interviews it emerges a factor that has recently become a topic of Italian scientific debate (
“
The ability to be connected more easily with the audience and the immediacy of these interactions have been offset by increased production rates to levels considered exhausting, which do not reflect a professional’s traditional criteria for selecting and verifying sources. This has exposed the interviewed local journalists to constant judgment, criticism, and hostile messages from the audience. Respondents say they feel vulnerable online, not only in their professional lives, but also in their private lives; unfortunately, this fear is confirmed by the fact that most assert they experienced hate speech, both on their institutional and personal accounts. From their perspective, there is a strong connection between the benefits coming from the use of platforms and the normalization of hate speech or verbal violence which deeply impacts on profession. Therefore, it emerges that due to the direct relationship with audience, journalists feel more exposed than in the past decades, “
The general view is that:
“
Respondents believe that they are negatively influenced by the new context at many other levels, above all on decisions concerning contents or news they would like to present in their informative products:
“
Consequently, they assert to often self-limit their editorial freedom and reporting methods: in some cases, self-censorship is used to prevent insults and threats, or to avoid legal actions (such as retaliation) due to problematic contents shared on social media. Therefore, the perceived risk of being target of online harassment as well as the experienced legal problems often undermine the professional norms and the proper practice of journalism. In addition, it is argued that another relevant factor impacts on the editorial choices: the growing dependence on the platforms’ logic which strongly interferes in the decision-making process, as it is pointed out by these extracts:
In addition, respondents emphasize that the vulnerability due to the risk of becoming victims of online haters must be considered as a concrete and systemic threat for journalists not only at an individual and professional level, but also for their relationship with audiences in the democratic circuit:
Another important factor is presented as a key element of the contemporary journalistic vulnerability in the digital agorà: the economic weakness of news professionals, connected to the recent changes of Italian media market and to its digital transition, has brought about new organizational risks, and imposes a reduced coverage of controversial issues that increases journalists’ burnout. It is evident in this extract:
The most frequent motivation behind this hate speech directed at interviewed journalists appears to be readers’ disagreement with the reported news or its narrative. Every topic seems to be a potential source of conflict; gender, however, appears to be a determining factor behind hate speech: it is often present even if not always explicit. Respondents agree on this, and three out of five female journalists interviewed report having received sexist comments, while two male professionals confirm having seen attacks against female colleagues in their newsroom. It emerges that the violence of these comments not only aims to delegitimize female journalists as professionals, but it also affects their private lives. Female journalists assert having felt “persecuted” and, in some cases, they admit having suffered serious menaces and online attacks that forced them to seek concrete protection measures. So negative experiences made the victims feeling not safe and inadequately protected by their news organizations and this interfered with their professional as well as private life.
Therefore, gender factor is not simply an accessory: on the contrary, it amplifies and specializes verbal violence, turning it into a true professional delegitimizing strategy, since online attacks against female journalists are often a mix of different elements like sexist insulting, threats against their private life as well as professional delegitimating and political accusations. As a matter of fact, being a female journalist imposes, as an additional burden, the risk of having to manage attacks that are not merely professional and becomes systematically personal.
In general, the interviewed female journalists report sexist attacks on social networks, more frequently than their male colleagues; as a consequence, they feel much more vulnerable than they male colleagues, who assert to have received more ideological or political violence from online users. Therefore, hate speech directed at women journalists is peculiar: comments coming from users criticize, attack, marginalize or threaten them because of their gender or sexuality; therefore, social media cannot be considered as a neutral ground, but as an arena where violence becomes sexist, that reinforces the structural inequalities that persist in journalism and society as a whole, as it clearly emerges from this extract:
“
From the interviews a fundamental paradox in the relationship between social media and journalism emerges: while media organizations encourage their staff to maintain an active presence on these platforms, they often become a sphere that heightens the risk of harassment for news professionals. This dual nature of digital tools means that, although they offer increased visibility and opportunities for audience engagement, they also expose journalists to harmful interactions more frequently than in the past (
Loneliness in front of all forms of hostility encountered during their professional activities is exacerbated by the fact that newsrooms rarely adopt concrete strategies to face, and fight hate speech or other forms of harassment. Interviewees who experienced hate speech independently decided on their own strategy, whether it was responding, ignoring, or reporting about it,
While the newsrooms actions and strategies at a local level are lacking in this area, the normative rules, both Italian and European, are considered as generally adequate but too abstract, and it is perceived a strong difficulty to apply them in the different national informative contexts. In particular, the European regulatory framework about hate speech is generally considered as a valid scheme in principle, but lacking in implementation: consequently, many respondents call for a faster and more effective enforcement. According to the participants, the European framework is useful because it establishes common principles and guidelines, but its effectiveness depends on national normative actions and the concrete commitment of platforms, so that any regulatory framework, without rapid and concrete enforcement tools, risks remaining ineffective.
At the European level, one of the most relevant guidelines is the
Another important topic emerges from the interviews: respondents are all very concerned for the frequent legal actions aimed at blocking the actions of journalists and/or activists. According to them, one of the most dangerous limits of the Italian normative system is the frequent recourse to legal actions against journalists, promoted above all from prominent political figures, including members of the government, who start many defamation lawsuits or other forms of actions. From 2022 to 2024, 132 legal actions against 290 journalists have been documented and most lawsuits or damage claims were promoted by public institutions (56%), above all by local administrators (
This study investigates the role of social media in news production and how they influence journalistic practices at the local level, focusing on the presence of harassment and hate speech directed at journalists. The experiences shared by the respondents demonstrate a strong awareness of the radical changes brought about by the presence of social media in their practices as well as in the relationship with their audience and colleagues.
In Italy, in the last years, models of news production and consumption totally changed the local media market, but this transformation seems full of contradictions. Italian informative system has always been economically weak and not autonomous from politics; however, its contemporary crisis seems different from that discussed in the last decades. In the contemporary scenario of Italian journalism, we can observe the compresence of trends deriving from
In sum, the findings reveal consistency with previous studies that argue that social media are not only new instruments, but they transformed news making and editorial practices: they have evolved into infrastructural elements of local journalism, becoming simultaneously channels of dissemination and interactive spaces of audience engagement, displacing the traditional static and vertical model of news. Fostering speed, emotional reactions, which are often in contrast with fact-based reporting and investigative journalism practices, and making the journalists more exposed, social media contribute to produce a hostile context with a problematic consequence: the perception of being vulnerable. The findings highlight the complex ways in which local journalists in Italy experience and face hate speech in digital media environments, offering both empirical and theoretical insights. It is confirmed that hate speech and verbal violence are strictly connected to the characteristics of the contemporary hybrid media system: the spectacularization of news promoted by the commercial logic in the Italian informative system and the structural features of platforms have facilitated the rise and salience of emotions-based and divisive messages, so that the growing reliance on social media both in producing and searching information has become a phenomenon that has amplified the potential reach of hate speech and online violence. Consistent with prior research on digital harassment in journalism (
In sum, an alarming picture emerges both at the economic and professional level: the infrastructural fragility due to the decline in sales is compounded by a growing pressure on professionals, who are more and more obliged to face both online hostility and the use of lawsuits promoted against them, factors acting as constraints on press freedom, especially in local newsrooms. Respondents confirm that, in this context, individual visibility is increasing without a corresponding increase in internal protocols, resources, and actions to protect journalists, bringing about three main consequences: less time for investigations and verification, a bigger exposure to haters and litigations, and a greater risk of self-censorship. In conclusion, from this study negative factors emerge: rather than empowering journalists, social media impact negatively on the profession, on the person and on citizens, reducing journalists’ freedom of expression and discouraging or hindering participation in public debate.
The failure of regulatory and protection standards adopted in Italy, the presence of self-censorship, but above all within a menacing hostile climate, fueled by many Italian political leaders and their legal actions against news professionals, represent a concrete danger for Italian democracy. This danger is even bigger in small communities, where the decline in sales is damaging local media outlets, creating “information deserts,” precisely where local presence is most needed. Local journalists occupy a vulnerable position within digital public spheres due to their visibility, proximity to audiences, and frequent legal actions promoted by political leaders; on the contrary, it might build bridges and enforce the sense of belonging, giving voices to different positions, contributing to create digital communities and connect to concrete geographic contexts; as Molino pointed out “the real challenge for Italian local journalism will therefore be this: remaining relevant because it is rooted. Cultivating trust, not only overseeing information, but contributing to building meaningful landscapes, networks of relationships, and vibrant and informed local systems. Being, even in the digital world, architectures of trust. Not simply a news channel, but a place of mutual recognition, capable of generating the future” (
This study also has some limitations. On one hand, the analysis focused on local media, which could have biased the results toward a highly polarized national context: this limits the generalizability of the conclusions. On the other hand, the sample included only 10 journalists, all very active online, which may not reflect the experiences of harassment and hate toward journalists with less exposure. Therefore, their perspectives do not represent practices and views of all Italian local media organizations. Future lines of research might include a longitudinal analysis of hate speech over an extended period, a comparison of the occurrence of harassment in other regional European contexts or an analysis of different regulatory landscapes.
Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found at:
Ethical approval was not required for the studies involving humans because the participants provided written informed consent to participate in this study. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.
FR: Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Investigation, Software, Methodology.
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Edited by:
Reviewed by: