Gov Study Finds Hate Online Tracks With Isolation

A federal government crime research body surveyed 9,951 Australians and found that nearly 170 of them, 1.7 per cent, had subjected others to online hate. The Australian Institute of Criminology, a federal government crime research organisation, ran the survey between October and November 2024, two years ago. Its headline finding: the people posting the hate were more likely to have suffered first.

Who Gets Hurt First

The report's own words are blunt. This group was "more likely to have experienced negative life events compared with those who had not subjected others to online hate." They were "more likely to spend less time connecting with people offline and to be concerned about their internet use." Many had been victims of hate speech, online harassment and abuse themselves. The researchers tied it to "close ties to online communities and low offline social capital."

Read that again. Cut off from people. Hurt. Wound up in online corners where somebody will have them. The report doesn't say who cut them off or what happened in their lives, but it does say they were more likely to have been diagnosed with a mental health condition.

What They're Calling "Hate"

The institute borrowed the eSafety commissioner's definition: "hateful posts or comments about a person or group based on discrimination or bias related to their identity or beliefs." Under that frame, the researchers measured attitudes and behaviours, and the picture they drew wasn't only about keyboards.

Those who posted hate were more likely to believe that "superior groups" should dominate "inferior groups" and that society shouldn't push for group equality. "After controlling for gender and age, these respondents were more likely to believe that some groups should hold greater dominance over others," the report read. That's a belief in hierarchy, stated plainly, held by the people the state now wants to study as a problem. It's also the founding logic of every boss, border guard and landlord.

They were more likely to hold misogynistic attitudes, and almost twice as likely to agree that women seek power by controlling men, use sexuality to manipulate men, exploit men for their own agendas, and play the victim when things don't go their way. They were almost two times more likely to have viewed fringe and radical content online than the group who hadn't posted hate.

The Criminal Justice Pipeline

Perpetrators were likely to have had contact with the criminal justice system as both adults and juveniles. "Those who had subjected others to online hate were more likely to have used violence against another person. They were also more likely to have threatened another person," the report read.

About half did at least one of the following, compared with two per cent of those who hadn't: bullied, harassed, stalked or abused someone online; hacked into someone else's account; or sent phishing messages meant to trick someone into handing over money or personal information.

No major demographic differences showed up by place of residence, country of birth, or language spoken. Hate doesn't sort neatly by postcode or passport. It sorts by loneliness, prior harm and the pull of online communities.

What the Report Doesn't Say

The findings come from a federal government crime research organisation, and the report offers no account of mutual aid, community care or offline connection as a response. The institute measured the damage. It didn't point to anyone repairing it. The people at the centre of its data had less time with others offline and more time inside the networks that welcomed them. A system that leaves people isolated, then studies what they do next, has produced the very problem it's counting.