Search

Bad language, swearing and use of a disrespectful tone that degrade personal dignity, reputation and/or status in society. Pictures, videos, memes and gifs can also be utilised to inflict humiliation/shame. 

Everyone has different tolerance levels and the line between libel and criticism is often blurred.  Public figures, especially politicians who represent the general public,  must  display a higher level of tolerance of criticism. On the other hand, journalists, and human rights’ defenders, have the right to shock, disturb and even offend members of and the public at large, when carrying out their professional duties and in the public’s interest.

Female journalists, activists and women politicians are more likely to be targets of libel and humiliation than their male counterparts.  Offense based on gender identity or presentation is a silencing mechanism, and has been recognized as a form of gender-based violence and, as such, publicly condemned. https://twitter.com/UNESCO/status/1140888153928196096

If you are targeted with any type of digital violence, we urge you to seek support from your support networks that understand you and your feelings. Take time away from spaces where you’re experiencing the harassment, and ask people you trust to check on your accounts, emails and update you about the status of attack, or help you document the abuse.

If you are a  female journalist, there is  an initiative “Female Journalists against violence”, which offers support and help rooted in the empathy, trust and mutual learning.

Digital evidence Reputation Tactic Support Journalists Public official

Trolling has previously been described as intentional, but with the intention of being humorous or witty. The term has now come to describe intentional and ill-spirited mockery, shaming, and provocation.  
 

“Troll farms'' are a fairly recent phenomenon, that utilize both human engagement and algorithms to actively influence opinion- and decision-making by distorting online discussions and narratives.  While troll farms may not directly spread misinformation and fake news, they do plant the seeds of mistrust and division. Given the importance of the internet for our everyday lives, trolls can critically impact societal and political processes, such as the election process. 

For some who have been targeted with online violence, instead of moving away from online participation, they chose to respond with more speech and more engagement. Speaking openly about an experience of online abuse (in addition to utilizing institutional or alternative mechanisms of protection), can be helpful for several reasons. Naming and shaming your abuser and exposing them to public scrutiny can also be a mechanism of protection, helping you regain a sense of control and empowerment in helping others in similar experiences, and raises public awareness about digital violence. As the broader public learns the extent and scope of online abuse, they will recognize its negative effects on society and, hopefully, demand a response from State officials. If you chose this path, try to focus on sharing your experience and the personal and community impacts of an assault.

One well-known female journalist established communication with her troll over social media, in order to eventually try and meet them. She later made a series of stories out of these conversations - a creative and courageous way to counter harassment. Here are some useful tips on how to talk to your trolls, if you decide to take this path. 

It is not impossible to identify the person behind online abuse. Keeping regular track of abuse also helps in documenting  the digital traces left behind by the perpetrators. Using these clues, and with the help of friends, digital security experts, investigative journalists and a little bit of luck, it may be possible to identify individuals or groups responsible for abuse. Take a look at this great example from Latin America’s Center for investigative journalism - when collaboration resulted in the discovery that a group of politicians were responsible for online assaults across the continent.

Tactic Media Pressure Public shaming Innovative strategy Provocation

Hyper-realistic software-manipulated video or audio content, falsely depicting the target’s behavior or speech with the goal of damaging the target’s reputation, degradation of dignity.

Development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has enabled manipulation that can perfectly mimic reality. This has serious and terrifying implications for the future of fake news and disinformation, as fake content will be more and more difficult to identify.
 

Among other consequences, the spread of fake news has undermined public trust in professional journalism, and it remains to be seen how the media and broader society will cope with  hyper-realistic disinformation. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chenxiwang/2019/11/01/deepfakes-revenge-porn-and-the-impact-on-women/?sh=45ed6ff1f53f

Digital hygiene Damage Reputation Tactic

It would be nearly impossible to exhaustively list the ways in which someone can put pressure on and threaten freedom of expression. Those who have been targeted with online pressure or abuse will undoubtedly feel its consequences.

For the broader public, we can see these threats everywhere - from commenting threads, social media platforms, and increasing hate speech and intentional defamation.  It has been nearly impossible to legally qualify perceived ‘pressure’, as it rarely meets legal thresholds, but in targeting journalists and activists, it causes serious distortions in and to public debate and decision-making.

When this type of pressure is top-down - coming directly from public figures, politicians, or others in power (employers, editors), it can have a multiplier effect on the spread and resulting effects on the target. Even if perceived as a form of micro-aggression, long-term consequences are hard and prevent,  not only for the target, but also for the general public and media ecosystem.

For some who have been targeted with online violence, instead of moving away from online participation, they chose to respond with more speech and more engagement. Speaking openly about an experience of online abuse (in addition to utilizing institutional or alternative mechanisms of protection), can be helpful for several reasons. Naming and shaming your abuser and exposing them to public scrutiny can also be a mechanism of protection, helping you regain a sense of control and empowerment in helping others in similar experiences, and raises public awareness about digital violence. As the broader public learns the extent and scope of online abuse, they will recognize its negative effects on society and, hopefully, demand a response from State officials. If you chose this path, try to focus on sharing your experience and the personal and community impacts of an assault.

During the COVID pandemic, critical reporting about our governments’ work and health services has become even more important for the public, and, in many cases, more problematic for governments interested in suppressing information. These methods of suppression have been so egregious, that if not for the real danger they pose to public interest, they could even be deemed laughable. https://balkaninsight.com/2020/07/03/pandemic-worsens-crisis-for-media-in-central-eastern-europe/

All journalists and media workers can report violence to an official Journalists’ Association, even if they aren’t members. These associations can provide information and advice on how to file criminal charges, and other suggestions for dealing with and overcoming online harassment. Even if you decide not to report the crime to the police, consider informing the Journalists Association or relevant CSOs about the incident. This information is valuable for them to learn more about online violence, and to later use this data for advocacy purposes and, ideally, change. Associations often have resources and services, including mental health support or legal counseling that smaller media organizations or freelance journalists can’t easily access. Several CSOs have developed expertise after years of work combating online violence, and can offer valuable information and assistance.

A number of international organizations have specifically addressed the importance of and obstacles to the safety of journalists and human rights defenders: Council of Europe/Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, OSCE Mission to Belgrade, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, UNESCO Safety of journalists programmes. For those cases lacking State support, these organizations can bring attention to the case, advocate for change and put pressure on State authorities.

Some organizations provide financial aid and/or legal services for journalists targeted with violence, including Media Defence in London or Free Press Unlimited, based in Amsterdam (they also offer a rapid response service). In situations where the scope and scale of violence threatens physical safety, these organizations can provide relocation assistance until the situation calms down.

Tactic Support Journalists Media Public official Innovative strategy Associations

As a result of structural power inequality, false accusations, even if proven false, have the potential to inflict serious and lasting reputational damage on the accused. 
 

False accusations may be seen as a form of pressure on one’s freedom of expression, but if accusations are intentionally orchestrated and persistent, they can also distort public opinion and debate while stigmatizing and silencing the target of the false accusations.  
 

If you are a female journalist, there is an initiative “Female Journalists against violence”, which offers support and help rooted in the empathy, trust and mutual learning.

Reputation Tactic Journalists Pressure

Usually found on internet forums or reddit-style threads, flaming refers to the use of offensive language, swearing and other methods of provocation for the purpose of eliciting a response from or engagement with the target. The ultimate goal is to inflict humiliation, shame, and ruin the target’s credibility. 
 

Before being recognized as a tool for digital harassment and abuse, flaming was normalized as part and parcel of online communication in closed fora and chat rooms.  

For some who have been targeted with online violence, instead of moving away from online participation, they chose to respond with more speech and more engagement. Speaking openly about an experience of online abuse (in addition to utilizing institutional or alternative mechanisms of protection), can be helpful for several reasons. Naming and shaming your abuser and exposing them to public scrutiny can also be a mechanism of protection, helping you regain a sense of control and empowerment in helping others in similar experiences, and raises public awareness about digital violence. As the broader public learns the extent and scope of online abuse, they will recognize its negative effects on society and, hopefully, demand a response from State officials. If you chose this path, try to focus on sharing your experience and the personal and community impacts of an assault.

Read more about how online discussions nose-dive into dangerous discourse. https://www.lifewire.com/what-is-flaming-2483253 

It might be difficult but it is not impossible to identify the person behind online abuse. Keeping regular track of abuse also helps in documenting the digital traces left behind by the perpetrators. Using these clues, and with the help of friends, digital security experts, investigative journalists and a little bit of luck, it may be possible to identify individuals or groups responsible for abuse. Take a look at this great example from Latin America’s Center for investigative journalism - when collaboration resulted in the discovery that a group of politicians were responsible for online assaults across the continent.

Tactic Support Pressure Innovative strategy

The misuse of reporting or flagging mechanisms, or false claims of copyrights infringement or other violations of Terms of Service or Community rules and regulations on social media platforms, for the purpose of blocking, suspension or preventing more extensive digital participation.

Regaining control over your online profiles is often a burdensome process. Suspension appeal procedures on many social media platforms are costly - both in terms of time and resources. Even when appeals are successful, initial false reports will have also succeeded in keeping a target offline for various amounts of time. 

The most well-known case of false reporting (for violations of terms and services on a social media platform) in Serbia is the  suspension of the official profile of an Ombudsperson on YouTube:

https://resursi.sharefoundation.info/sr/resource/kako-mreze-ureduju-javni-prostor-youtube-protiv-ombudsmana/

Digital evidence Report to platform Tactic Identity Pressure

Bad language, swearing and use of a disrespectful tone that degrade personal dignity, reputation and/or status in society. Pictures, videos, memes and gifs can also be utilised to inflict humiliation/shame. 

Criminal charges detailing the assault, and any evidence (hard copy) must be officially filed with the police, referencing the criminal offense - in this case art. 170 of the Criminal Code. Note that the entire procedure as well as identification of the perpetrator is the responsibility of the filing party, given the designation of this criminal charge as a private offence. 

ADVICE: try not to respond to the statements/acts of libel and humiliation, as these responses could ultimately be used against you in court. 

Also, thoroughly assess the situation before initiating a court procedure, to ensure a bad joke or harsh criticism is not being claimed as offence. If the court makes this determination, the outcome can be negative for the filing party. 

If the identity of the perpetrator is known to you, you have the option of claiming damages before a civil court, although police support cannot be relied upon in this type of proceeding. A civil case can be initiated via lawsuit, and if the court finds in your favor, it results in monetary settlement.

Assessment of risk is a useful way to evaluate a potential offence - when it happened, why and from whom? For example, if you post an article on a sensitive societal issue, this tool can help with risk management, to evaluate  which groups or individuals may react negatively. It is important not to internalize  or normalize these types of offences. 

Choose a response that will help you feel safe and decrease the possibility of further harm, document  (or ask family and friends to) all acts of libel/humiliation, and learn more about digital safety, mechanisms for semi-functional protection on social media platforms.

Digital evidence Report to platform Block user Reputation Tactic Criminal charges

Trolling has previously been described as intentional, but with the intention of being humorous or witty. The term has now come to describe intentional and ill-spirited mockery, shaming, and provocation.

It has been difficult to prove that trolling alone reaches the legal threshold to be qualified as a criminal act, as trolling has been determined not to constitute an assault on one’s dignity or basis for panic or fear.

ADVICE: Do not respond to trolls with hate or threats, as this type of response could provide them the opportunity to file charges against you (and, in fact, this is often their intent).

There are very few successful mechanisms for preventing or punishing trolling. One remedy is to ignore them and avoid their attempts to bait you into engagement, but whatever remedy you use, you must, first and foremost, feel safe.  

Making use of reporting mechanisms - flagging these profiles, filtering or blocking their posts  , or restricting access to your profile - is always an option.

Block user Tactic Provocation

It would be nearly impossible to exhaustively list the ways in which someone can put pressure on and threaten freedom of expression. Those who have been targeted with online pressure or abuse will undoubtedly feel its consequences.

For the broader public, we can see these threats everywhere - from commenting threads, social media platforms, and increasing hate speech and intentional defamation. 

It has been nearly impossible to legally qualify the idea of ‘pressure’ as it is perceived, as it rarely meets legal thresholds for prosecution. However, this type of assault, in targeting journalists and activists, causes serious distortions in and manipulates public debate and decision making. Taken as a threat to freedom of expression as a whole, ‘pressure’ can reach a legal threshold, but the legal system is unable to effectively address the problem as it can provide only individual, and not collective, protections.

Independent State bodies, such as the Ombudsperson for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights can carry out investigations and issue public warnings to government officials or other public figures who put pressure on journalists and/or single them out through targeted assaults.
 

Digital hygiene Encryption Tactic Support Journalists Media

Verbal assaults based on race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity, or political and union affiliation or other identities or characteristics such as age or economic status can be described as hate speech.

Although there is no legally accepted definition of hate speech, the Criminal Code offers several mechanisms of protection. Under art. 317 (Instigating National, Racial and Religious Hatred and Intolerance) of the Criminal Code any and all speech negatively targeting people from certain backgrounds is prohibited. Art. 387 of the Criminal Code prohibts discrimination based, not only on race, but also on skin color, religous, national, or ethnic background, and personal characteristics and affiliations. 

This article also bans the publication of texts and material that propagates discrimiantion, conspiracy, and violence against individuals or groups belonging to these protected categories.  

Hate speech is also forbidden under the media law, and members of the media and media organizations can be penalized for hate speech in civil court proceedings. 

ADVICE: File charges and request the police and prosecutor initiate an investigation.

In addition to documentation , you can also report hate speech to the platform, as all explicitly forbid it in their terms of service. 

If hate speech is published online - on a website or media platform - you can request, via email or directly via the platform, removal of this content. 

Also, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality can initiate a civil legal procedure investigation into the content. Initiated via written request, the Commissioner has 90 days to investigate and take a decision to respond to posted hate speech. Responses can include an apology, publication of an opinion, or a cease and desist order related to the hate speech.

 

Report to platform Reputation Tactic Safety Criminal charges

As the result of structural power inequality, false accusations, even if proven untrue, have the potential to inflict serious and lasting reputational damage on the accused. 
 

This type of attack can also be considered a form of pressure on freedom of expression, and it is difficult to ensure protection in this case. 

In the case that a false accusation results in the endangerment of safety, protection under art. 138 of the Criminal Code is available. In this case, public prosecutors and police are mandated to follow up, investigate and responsible for protection. As the filing party, you are responsible for collecting evidence needed for filing the criminal charges. This charge provides stricter sanctions if the target is a (female) journalist.

ADVICE: Explain in detail how, why and when you feel unsafe, and detail your concern for the safety of your family and loved ones. These details could be the key to success when it comes to court proceedings.

For harm suffered in the form of damage to reputation and dignity, compensation may be claimed through civil legal proceedings initiated via a lawsuit. Before initiating this type of lawsuit, the identity of the perpetrator as well as evidence substantiating the claim of identity manipulation and resulting harm must be provided.

Document how false accusations have caused you harm. If accusations have been published online, request that the website or platform remove this information. 

If the amount of content posted becomes too much to collect, ask your friends, and family to help you document false accusations and report them to the websites or platforms. 

Publicly commenting on or calling out  accusations is another way to address the attack, but do a preliminary risk assessment to evaluate the potential for negative reactions and amplification of the false accusations. 

 

Damage Report to platform Reputation Tactic Support Media Criminal charges

Usually found on internet forums or reddit-style threads, flaming refers to the use of offensive language, swearing and other methods of provocation for the purpose of eliciting a response from or engagement with the target. The ultimate goal is to inflict humiliation, shame, and ruin the target’s credibility. 
 

There are a number of methods this type of  assault can be carried out, so several corresponding criminal acts could be considered as mechanisms for protection.

In the case of flaming that includes threats, in which art. 138 of the Criminal Code- Endangering safety could offer protection. In this case, public prosecutors and police are mandated to follow up, investigate and responsible for protection. As the filing party, you are responsible for collecting evidence needed for filing the criminal charges. This charge provides stricter sanctions if the target is a (female) journalist.

ADVICE: Explain in detail how, why and when you feel unsafe, and detail your concern for the safety of your family and loved ones. These details could be the key to success when it comes to court proceedings.

If flaming is offensive and disrespectful in nature, court proceedings can be initiated via private lawsuit, requiring the identity of the perpetrator.  

Flaming is often accompanied by a high volume of anonymous messages and comments, further complicating the process of pursuing legal protection.

Your physical safety is your highest priority! Make sure you are in a safe place.  Turn off the location tracking options on your devices, including Google Maps and other apps. 
In addition to documenting evidence , reach out to your family, friends and partners for support. If the flaming is connected to your work, talk to your colleagues and employer to come up with a response that works best for you. 
Flaming usually comes with a high volume of messaging and can be quite intense, so consider taking a break from the platforms or websites where the abuse is occuring. 

Reputation Tactic Support Journalists Media Criminal charges

The misuse of reporting or flagging mechanisms, or false claims of copyright infringement or other violations of Terms of Service or Community rules and regulations on social media platforms, for the purpose of blocking, suspending or preventing more extensive digital participation.

Similar to trolling, it is difficult to qualify false reporting as a criminal offense. Rather, it is seen as a misuse of social media platforms’  internal reporting mechanisms. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to find a remedy, as the mechanisms for reporting usually employ automated systems that often fail to offer adequate help. 

It is difficult to combat false reporting. Both Facebook and Twitter offer assistance for reactivating accounts that have been shut down due to false reporting. Unfortunately, these platforms are slow to respond to this particular issue, and creating a new account is generally a quicker solution. 
 

Digital evidence Password Authentication Recovery account Damage Tactic User account