The Silencing Effect AND THE EFFECT OF SILENCE Why we’re self-censoring online and why it matters New research reveals that social media users are withdrawing and self-censoring to protect themselves from widespread abuse. Being attacked for expressing an opinion, or support for a cause online has become normalised: a culturally ingrained, quietly toxic feature of our virtual town squares. At The Syria Campaign, we see, day to day, how difficult it is becoming for activists to use social media: the real-life risks and consequences they face, the online abuse they endure, the disinformation and misinformation they battle. But our new research reveals that these same pressures are also affecting ordinary social media users in the UK, France and Germany. online abuseⓘ Online abuse, in this report, covers receiving direct threat of physical or sexual violence, abusive messages, violent or graphic content, attacks based on your religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, ancestry, sexuality or gender; offline threats related to your online activity, and doxing (intentional online exposure of an individual’s identity, personal details or sensitive information). misinformationⓘ Misinformation is the inadvertent spread of this content. disinformationⓘ Disinformation is the deliberate creation and spread of false or misleading content, often in order to distort or disrupt. In November 2024, The Syria Campaign, together with Data4Change and pollsters RIWI, surveyed more than 4,000 social media users across the UK, France and Germany. Our report tells this story: two groups of people – activists and ordinary social media users – using social media in very different contexts and often for different purposes, facing many of the same challenges and choosing to respond in many of the same ways. Our report shows how new laws in Europe and the UK that seek to better regulate online spaces must be enforced to offer greater user protection – and what you can do to help. At a time when our active participation as global citizens has never been more critical to solving the world’s most pressing challenges, we need to ensure that these new laws work to protect us all. Introduction We’re silencing ourselves online. Afraid of the consequences of speaking out and exhausted by abuse, we’re losing our freedom of expression on social media. In this report we explore what self-censorship looks like, what’s driving it, why it really matters and, importantly, what we can do about it. Data insights from our survey of more than 4,000 social media users in France, Germany and the UK, show that many of us are facing online abuse and are disengaging as a way to stay safe. In this report you will also get first-hand testimonials from human rights defenders on the frontline of conflict in Palestine, Syria, and Ukraine, revealing the real-life impact of toxic online behaviour. At the end of the report is a call to action – for EU and UK policy makers, to enforce new legislation, and for anyone who cares about making our online world a safer place. It is quite possible that withdrawal and self-silencing will act as early catalysts for change – after all, should enough of its users fall silent, the power of social media will be fundamentally diminished. But, while they may be legitimate responses to the challenges posed by today’s social media environment, there are other proactive steps that we – as citizens or policy-makers – can take to reclaim these spaces, to protect users from harm and to combat disinformation. Social media has become too central, not only to our news ecosystem but to the geopolitical landscape, and too powerful a tool in civil society’s arsenal, to simply cede ground and walk away. Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “It has been almost three years of the war. On one hand, I feel strong emotions, but they are more bottled inside me. I used to write about it and now I don’t have the energy to do that because I know how emotionally difficult it is. I feel numb and I don’t feel as motivated to create content.” If people like Julia, in contexts like Ukraine – and countless more like her – stop posting, stop telling their story, stop countering disinformation, the cost to us all – to our democracies and to the cohesion of our societies is huge. Join us in urging EU governments to maximise the potential of new legislation to make our online world a safer place. Your activism does make a difference. We’re calling on EU governments to fully enforce the new Digital Services Act and focus on three key areas of implementation: Ensuring social media platforms respond to user complaints and act to protect them from online harms. Introducing specific protections for human rights defenders. Improving digital literacy and education. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “I’ve noticed that many people who lived through the siege and shared their stories have now gone silent. This is a disaster because our history is being erased. If we stop talking, it’s as if we never existed.” The research Human rights organisations, The Syria Campaign and Data4Change work with frontline human rights defenders and European publics to respond to global challenges. Every day, we see the real world impact of mis/disinformation and online hate. So, we set out to understand how people are responding to the threats they face online and what can be done to protect the space for citizen action and solidarity. We started by holding a series of listening sessions with human rights defenders from Syria, Palestine and Ukraine, whose work documenting war crimes and advocating for peace and justice puts them on the frontline of toxic abuse. All three conflicts have attracted high levels of public awareness and have generated particularly polarised public debate. They’re also the most socially mediated conflicts in history to date. So much of what we know about how these conflicts are playing out comes from images, videos and commentary posted on social media networks. The listening sessions, combined with a short survey, enabled us to identify core themes and trends of exploration. Read about the report’s methodology in greater depth here. 3 listening sessions and 1 survey with 12 human rights defenders 7 in-depth interviews with human rights defenders from 3 conflict situations: Syria, Palestine, Ukraine A survey of 4,000+ social media users in 3 European countries: France, Germany and the UK We took these themes to polling company RIWI. Together, we developed questions and, over two weeks in November 2024, RIWI used cutting edge technology to survey more than 4,000 people in Germany, France and the UK who do not normally respond to polls. Over 80% of our respondents read news on social media daily or a few times a week. 93% consider themselves to be aware of current global conflicts and 63% ‘very aware’ of what’s happening in the world. We also then conducted seven in-depth interviews with human rights defenders from Syria, Palestine and Ukraine to gain a deeper understanding of their experiences on social media and the effects on their life and work. The experiences of those living and working under bombardment are of course different to those facing online abuse in the UK, France and Germany. But we juxtapose these different realities here to highlight the common challenges faced by all users of social media spaces. The fall of the Assad regime Shortly after we conducted our research, the Syrian regime collapsed. This sudden, unexpected end to more than 40 years of Assad rule, means that many Syrian human rights defenders are reducing the protection measures they take in public life. Many of those who’d adopted pseudonyms for their advocacy work in order to protect their families and themselves from state retaliation, for example, are now choosing to use their real names or to speak more openly about their experiences. But, at this critical crossroads in the country’s history, the need to protect the civic space and reduce the threat of online harms in order to enable democratic debate has perhaps never been more urgent. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “Facebook became my window to the outside world. I was documenting snapshots because I wanted them to be preserved, for people to know what was happening. Those who died deserve more than silence. Those who were killed by chemical weapons suffered the most horrific deaths imaginable. They must be talked about, mentioned by name. At the very least, our children must know the truth.” Meet the activists Hiba Barakat is a journalist and human rights defender documenting life in northwest Syria. Essam Hajjaj is a Palestinian poet, writer and human rights defender in Gaza. His blog Witness from Gaza documents his life under attack. Oula Osman Abou is a former student who demonstrated alongside her peers against the Syrian regime in Aleppo. She was later displaced and became a refugee in Europe, where she continues her activism. Julia Tymoshenko is a Ukrainian advocate and social media blogger in Ukraine. Valeriia Voshchevska is a digital strategist, storyteller, and advocate for human rights from Ukraine. Baker Abdul-Haq is the founder and editor-in-chief of Tahaqaq Monitor, a factchecking website. Laila Sheikh Bakri is a Syrian human rights defender from East Ghouta now living in France. In conflict… In conflict situations, social media isn’t only a battleground for the information wars waged by governments or military groups, it’s a crucial means of communication for ordinary people caught up in events: a way for them to document their experiences, to raise global awareness and to seek vital human connection and solidarity. Their first-hand testimonies and images appear on our social media feeds in real time, helping document atrocities, as well as acts of heroism and hope. Longer-term, these social media posts form and preserve a collective narrative, which is often critical to healing and reconciliation, to challenging denial and impunity, to creating a foundation for legal accountability and for honouring victims and survivors. Our world is facing some of its most divisive and damaging crises in generations. As we write, a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas has been announced, following 18 months of relentless civilian bombardment in Gaza and unspeakable humanitarian suffering. Almost three years into the invasion of Ukraine, the number of civilian deaths is rising as Russia deploys drones, long-range missiles and glide bombs. In Syria, the fall of the Assad regime has ended decades of torture, detention, and killing. This has created new opportunities for Syrians to reshape and rebuild their own country. But has also induced a surge in mis/disinformation, further shrinking the space for civil society to lead the transition to a new government and threatening the path to justice and accountability. Our conversations with activists from all three of these brutal conflicts have laid bare the remarkable power and importance of connecting with each other and mobilising for action on social media. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “I felt an urgent need to tell the world what was happening and to become the voice of those who had no way to reach out or defend themselves. I was driven by one thought: that we might die one day without anyone telling the truth.” Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “My page became a way for me to tell the world what was really happening in Ukraine. There are enough of us who have first-hand experience to show what Russia is doing cannot be accepted by the international community.” Essam Hajjaj, poet, writer and human rights defender, Gaza “I want people to know the truth. I have a story, and I want to share it. Palestinians are not just about blood, wars, and loss. We dream and want to live. We want to build a future in our own place, to feel safe, and to create something meaningful.” The activists told us that the human connection, support and acknowledgement they receive via social media could be vital sources of encouragement and sustenance amid the horror, despair and isolation of their everyday life. Essam Hajjaj, poet, writer and human rights defender, Gaza “When I posted stories on WhatsApp, some people would message me privately, saying, ‘We hear you. We’re amplifying your voice. We can’t do much, but our hearts are with you’. I realised that there was still a segment of people paying attention to what was happening to Palestinians.” Oula Osman Abou, activist, Syria “Sometimes I keep screenshots of messages from people grateful for me spreading the truth about Syria. It’s rewarding when someone sees me as a bridge between them and the truth.” Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “It’s especially supportive for me to see foreigners reach out to me to say thank you for sharing, or that they support us, or to say how they’ve donated or been to a protest.” Self-censorship Self-censorship refers to the censoring of our own speech or expression. Not inherently dangerous, self-censorship is a voluntary act, a vital editing power we all exercise day to day. But our research clearly shows that people are self-censoring online due to the harms they are experiencing: theirs is a self-censorship rooted in fear and pressure, driven by the impulse to self-protect. In the results of our survey of French, German and UK social media users and in the interviews we conducted with activists from Ukraine, Syria and Palestine, we identified several common, defining characteristics of self-censorship in social media spaces. Withdrawal It is startling to see that around 30% of the social media users we surveyed are considering leaving social media platforms. Facebook stood out as the platform most respondents are considering leaving at 35%. Our youngest survey respondents (those aged 18-24 years) are the most engaged online, reading more news and being much more likely to think that using social media to show support for those in conflict situations is important. But those aged 18-24 years are also by far the most likely to be considering withdrawing from social media: 48% say they’re thinking of leaving the platforms they currently use, compared to just 16% of those aged 65 and over. We also gathered strong evidence that our frontline activists are withdrawing from social media in multiple ways. Baker Abdul-Haq, Tahaqaq Monitor, editor-in-chief, Gaza “Our media participation across platforms has become increasingly reserved, and our activity has been reduced to a minimum in recent months.” Oula Osman Abou, activist, Syria "I feel safest expressing my opinions within a private circle – friends, family, and trusted followers, but nothing beyond that." Valeriia Voshchevska, digital strategist, storyteller, and human rights advocate, Ukraine “I’m not on X/Twitter. I only use it for work. The point was Elon Musk buying the platform. When I started checking the most popular tweets, it’s horrendous. I haven’t left but I don’t comment on anything.” Changing behaviours Although the cross-section of engaged and globally informed social media users we surveyed regularly consume news on social media, they are far less likely to share that media onwards and even less likely still to express their own opinions on it. The 4,000+ people we surveyed told us that they’re reducing the amount of time they spend online; that they’re no longer engaging with comments or debate; and that they’re changing the nature of what they will post about. Let’s have a closer look at how engagement on social media affects the level of trust in the information people are consuming. The same changing behaviour patterns were evident in conversations with our group of activists. Baker Abdul-Haq, Tahaqaq Monitor, editor-in-chief, Gaza “If you compare my social media activity before 2022 to now, you’ll notice a significant decline. This reduction reflects the caution I now adopt, driven by internal self-censorship and fear of potential consequences for expressing opinions, publishing content, or interacting online.” Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “In my experience, any tweet that gets more than 1,000 likes would immediately attract bots, trolls, they don’t look like real people – a lot of them have avatars. At the beginning I would engage with them and fight with them. Now I completely ignore them.” Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “I used to be a daily user of Facebook, but now I rarely even open it. I haven’t commented, participated in discussions, or engaged in debates for a long time.” Some of the activists we spoke to went into more detail about taking steps to conceal their location and identities. Picking their way through the social media minefield, they told us how they’re using carefully chosen or coded language to avoid what they perceive to be politically-biased content filtering systems or automated moderation algorithms, as well as to avoid attracting social media trolls. Why are we self-censoring? Of course, for human rights defenders in conflict situations, the level of risk associated with posting on social media is, in general, far greater than for those in France, Germany and the UK. Government crackdowns in response to criticism, or perceived criticism, can mean arrest, torture or even death. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “My family is the main reason I hesitate and take steps back. I fear for their safety and I would never put them in harm’s way just to make my voice heard. I wouldn’t endanger the people I love.” Hiba Barakat, journalist and human rights defender, Syria “We have seen how when activists and journalists criticise the de-facto powers here, they get arrested and get accused of affiliation with the regime or the international coalition. I stopped even commenting on posts because my friends got arrested because of that. I am convinced that social media is not a place to express opinions and views.” But, whether they’re in France, Germany or the UK or on the frontline of conflict, we identified four driving factors behind why people are self-censoring online. Fear of negative consequences When asked about the emotions they associated with expressing an opinion online, our survey respondents reported a range of negative and positive feelings, suggesting that posting on social media can be emotionally complex for the user. ‘Anxious’ was one of the most cited feelings across all age groups, but selection rates for this emotion were disproportionately high among our two youngest age groups. Younger respondents also showed higher rates for ‘afraid’ and ‘isolated’. When asked how they feel specifically when showing support online for those affected by conflict, our respondents showed significantly higher rates of negative emotions, and we saw a sharp drop in confidence among our older respondents. Fear of repercussions when expressing support for those affected by conflict was a universal concern among our respondents: 99.8% of respondents selected at least one reason for hesitating to express support on social media. This suggests that posting about potentially contentious issues clearly involves a greater degree of emotional tension. Activists from Syria, Ukraine and Palestine, expressed similar feelings of fear, though the repercussions they anticipate are significantly more severe. Often they fear consequences that may impact not only themselves as individuals, but their entire communities. For them, the concept of ‘reverse collective harm’ came up time and again: a deep-rooted fear that information shared on social media could be misinterpreted - accidentally or deliberately–and used against them or their cause. The fact that sharing information leaves individuals vulnerable to negative consequences, including a potentially severe backlash from community, family or social networks was a constant source of apprehension. Speaking to Syrian human rights defenders, living in Lebanon, Turkey and the UK, just prior to the fall of Assad’s regime, it was clear that being politically engaged online came with the constant fear of direct repercussions from their host countries for family, friends, community and networks back in Syria. Threats of physical harm stemming from racism towards the Syrian diaspora were also a significant concern. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “I find myself screening every word I write. Any idea that comes to mind goes through endless self-scrutiny. Even though I’m not the kind of person who usually cares about others’ opinions, social media has made me overly cautious. It’s reached the point where I’ve stopped posting entirely.” Oula Osman Abou, activist, Syria “We constantly censor ourselves in many ways and against many potential threats, from regime supporters, Turkish extremists, Zionists, right-wing factions, misogynists… and as women, we deal with an extra layer of sexism on top.” Speaking to Ukrainian social media users, our interviews revealed the heavy, continual responsibility they felt to calculate the potential impact of their words on the overall narrative surrounding Ukraine and its conflict with Russia. Given the country’s heavy reliance on international support for survival, criticising its backers is seen as fraught with risk and speaking out as something that has limitations. There is the constant, ominous sense that a single, short post that goes viral could have unforeseen consequences. Our interviewees cited the case of Miloš Biković, a Serbian actor who lost his contract with HBO for his role in hit TV drama, ‘The White Lotus’ because of criticism from Ukraine of his ties with Russia. They explained the phrase ‘get on the Jackal Express (‘Shakal express’), an online cultural phenomenon that has emerged amid the conflict in Ukraine, and used by anyone keen to draw attention to a particular post so that it will be flooded by (usually) negative comments. Valeriia Voshchevska, digital strategist, storyteller, and human rights advocate, Ukraine “After one bad incident, I called out a public figure who said something extremely harmful, and they unleashed their following onto my post. It gets amplified by those for whom it’s beneficial and can be used against your whole cause.” For those we spoke to from Palestine, the risk of direct physical harm – to either themselves, their families or their communities – as a result of posting on social media weighed heavily. Legal boundaries in Palestine are unclear amid the chaos of war and the fear of capture, arrest and detention are all leading to self-censorship. The possibility that they could suffer consequences, not only from occupying Israeli forces, but from their own community was also a factor. Essam Hajjaj, poet, writer and human rights defender, Gaza “During the aggression, there were accounts commenting on our posts, threatening us. When we posted updates about what was happening or expressed opposition to the occupation, they’d say things like ‘You will be killed’. These threats are constant.” Baker Abdul-Haq, Tahaqaq Monitor, editor-in-chief, Gaza “I often write posts or create videos but decide against publishing them out of caution. Self-censorship now plays a significant role, rooted in fear of the consequences of my work.” Toxic abuse and the need to self-protect The impact of online abuse on self-censorship and withdrawal from social media has emerged clearly in our survey results. Evidence that the likelihood of users withdrawing from social media platforms increases with the severity and frequency of the online abuse they experience correlates with the qualitative evidence we gathered from activists. The activists we spoke with expressed a pervasive sense of fear and exhaustion in the face of relentless abuse, violent content, threats and racism online. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender from, Syria “My presence on social media has become a psychological burden. I no longer have the energy for it. I’m sad because I have so many ideas but I can’t share them.” Those from Ukraine, Syria and Palestine all spoke about how their experience of racism, racial biases and discrimination significantly impact their choices around self-censorship and shape their decisions to withhold or modify their speech. Many also touched upon their experiences as women posting in public online spaces and the additional abuse this seems to invite. Valeriia Voshchevska, digital strategist, storyteller, and human rights advocate, Ukraine “Being a woman really sucks. You get attacked for your looks. Rape threats, death threats…” Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “The most recent from Instagram – someone DM’ing me: a Russian soldier in occupied territory…not sure if they are real. ‘I cannot wait until Russia reaches Kyiv and so I can come and find you’.” Mis- and disinformation and the feeling of futility Our survey results clearly showed that trust in online information is low. We also found that distrust seems to reduce online participation. Those with higher trust in online information are generally more engaged in both news consumption and posting. Those who report lower levels of trust are less engaged. The more important someone thinks it is to show support online for people affected by conflict, the more likely they are to avoid posting due to fears of inaccurate information. Feelings of discouragement were high across all survey respondent age groups. Unlike feelings of anxiety or fear, the number of respondents who reported feeling discouraged when they expressed an opinion online did not decline with age. In our conversations with activists, the feeling that it has become impossible to assert truth, and that facts have become almost meaningless, was a common thread. Julia Tymoshenko, social media blogger and advocate, Ukraine “There is so much disinformation. No matter how much proof, they will always deny the truth. I posted a video of me seeing my grandparents after the occupation. Some of the comments were ‘Are these even your grandparents?’, ‘This is faked’. It’s crazy but there is no way to prove that your lived experience is real.” For those activists we spoke to from Syria just prior to the fall of the Assad regime, a feeling that it had been overshadowed by other crises was feeding a decline in their social media engagement. But so too was a prevailing sense of hopelessness in the face of mis- and disinformation. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “What bothers me the most is how misinformation alters content. Stories get twisted, words are taken out of context, and sometimes the entire narrative is distorted to serve propaganda. This fostering of lies and denial discourages people from speaking out. It makes you hesitate, step back, and question whether it’s even worth it.” Oula Osman Abou, activist, Syria “The most challenging thing about my work is facing a lot of counter narratives online. I get very anxious when I see fake information or attacks on me when I tell the truth. I get scared and feel like I am getting arrested.” Activists from Gaza clearly felt that online mis- and disinformation formed a major part of Israeli efforts to discredit and undermine their work, to sow confusion and division and to conceal humanitarian atrocities from the rest of the world. For those trying to use social media to document unfolding events, it posed a constant threat. Baker Abdul-Haq, Tahaqaq Monitor, editor-in-chief, Gaza “Misinformation remains a significant challenge, directly impacting the credibility of journalists and media organisations.” Loss of confidence in platform safeguards It’s perhaps not surprising that our research showed low levels of confidence in social media platforms’ ability or willingness to protect their users. The last couple of years have seen tech giants stripping away some of the few protections users once enjoyed. Taking over Twitter in 2022, Elon Musk famously wasted no time in sacking the moderation staff tasked with tackling disinformation and hate speech on the platform. And in January 2025, Meta announced it would be dissolving its own fact checker team in the US, which is likely to have disastrous consequences in conflict-affected countries. Among our survey respondents, younger age groups are far more likely to think that social media platforms could improve safety by becoming more transparent. Older age brackets have more faith in the potential of government regulation. The activists we interviewed spoke at length about their feelings that social media platforms are unwilling, or unable, to protect users or the truth. They felt that sufficient – and sufficiently impartial – content moderation mechanisms and culturally-nuanced user safeguards were lacking. The US-centric nature of the platforms’ design and management was identified as a fundamental part of this problem. And, with little or no action taken by social media platforms, activists from Syria, Palestine and Ukraine all saw current mechanisms for reporting abuse or mis/disinformation as utterly futile. Valeriia Voshchevska, digital strategist, storyteller, and human rights advocate, Ukraine “I report abuse for my friends and they do it for me…We never get a response.” Hiba Barakat, journalist and human rights defender, Syria “When I see someone posting hatred…I report then block them. No positive response ever.” Oula Osman Abou, activist, Syria “I report disinformation and nothing happened…I report people who send hateful messages, but never receive a positive response.” Baker Abdul-Haq, Tahaqaq Monitor, editor-in-chief, Gaza “It is essential to reconsider the laws governing these platforms. Global platforms like Meta should not solely adhere to local laws, such as U.S. policies that classify some Palestinian factions as terrorist organisations. Under these laws, even mentioning these factions in a news context can lead to actions like account restrictions or bans.” What effect is it having? Psychological strain and isolation Some of the effects of online self-censorship were evident in our research, most notably the psychological strain associated with it for individual social media users. Though it is impossible for us to untangle cause and effect, our survey results clearly show that, for many people considering leaving social media and already taking steps to withdraw and self-protect, feelings of fear, anxiety, powerlessness and isolation are at play. As the activists talked about self-censoring online and withdrawing from these spaces, a deep, pervasive sense of isolation emerged. This stood in stark contrast to the vital sense of encouragement and connection they spoke of receiving from positive interactions on social media, often in the earlier days of their online engagement. In the darkest days for their countries, communities and for them as individuals, the need to self-censor online is limiting their ability to connect meaningfully with others. The despair they feel permeates their daily life, having a profound detrimental impact on their well-being and severely limiting their capacity to record unfolding events, raise awareness or counter mis- and disinformation. Practical changes to social media Online self-censorship will also inevitably involve practical changes to the social media landscape. Across all our research groups, we saw a significant shift of conversations away from social media platforms to private apps, or offline altogether. Our survey respondents told us they feel safer expressing opinions on encrypted, private messaging apps like Telegram, WhatsApp or in in-person conversations. Only 13% said they feel safe sharing their opinions on X/Twitter. For those who are, for now, remaining online, we’re seeing significant changes to their online behaviour. Their self-censorship means they’re no longer engaging in debate, or expressing opinions on potentially contentious issues. They’re taking down posts, moderating their language and blocking other users. Should this trend continue, social media platforms will become changed places. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “Unfortunately, my opinions are currently limited to private conversations with friends and family. When it comes to sharing publicly, it’s very different.” Tech giants like Meta have trampled the competition to such an extent that there is a dearth of alternatives to current social media platforms. But, users, and user engagement, are critical to their success. Should confidence in these platforms continue to decline and users continue to disengage, their growth-at-all-costs ideology may end up becoming their downfall. Broader harms But, beyond the isolating effect it has on individual users and the damage it may do to social media platforms’ bottom lines, the effects of self-censorship, in terms of broader societal harms, are likely to be profound. More than half of adults in the UK and US now use social media as a news source and, in the popularity stakes, online news has overtaken radio, print and even TV. But social media has also become instrumental in our politics, our social justice movements and our business models; it connects us globally, fosters relationships and builds communities. It’s a tool that is shaping how we live. In recent years, we’ve seen time and again how social media can act as a catalyst and coordinator of powerful protests and campaigns for social justice, from the Arab Spring to MeToo to Black Lives Matter. Yet 41% of our survey respondents cited a sense of futility at online activism’s lack of impact (with older people feeling particularly disillusioned). And the most common reason given for not expressing support on social media for people affected by conflicts was the feeling that posting won’t lead to meaningful change. This feeling of hopelessness fuels a vicious cycle: disillusioned, we withdraw, the power and potential of social media as a force for good is corroded, and we become more hopeless still. It matters that people are withdrawing from social media. These online spaces have become synonymous with our democratic spaces. Truth and balanced debate are pillars of democratic, open societies and self-censorship is a body blow to both. Positive human connections and trust are fundamental to the social contracts on which we depend, but social media - in its current form – is mirroring, and contributing to, a decline in our ability to trust, co-operate and disagree well. As we disengage from the web - with its power to connect us to others all over the world – and retreat into the on – and offline siloes where it’s safer to express our opinions, we place profound limits on our capacity for progress. As the balance of world power tilts and shifts, as international norms splinter and international law is flouted, as the geopolitical landscape looks increasingly uncertain, this silencing is insidious. But we can speak up. Act now Recommendations Pioneering new laws, shaped by civil society, in the form of the EU’s Digital Services Act and the UK’s Online Safety Act could, if implemented well, ensure platforms work harder to protect their users. In the early years of this new legislation, the precedents that are set by regulators matter. If social media platforms are required to meet certain standards in Europe, then the argument for rolling them out worldwide is strengthened. Valeriia Voshchevska, digital strategist, storyteller, and human rights advocate, Ukraine “There’s a lot in the Digital Services Act that can be used. Policymakers should think specifically about Twitter and what to do about it. If it becomes a tool that divides society and leads to very bad things, it should be seen as a security threat. It’s not just a comms tool, it has direct implications in the real world.” If you are an EU or UK citizen, you can impact the way our laws are implemented. Join our campaign, share these recommendations with your political representative and urge them to act. What EU policy makers can do Here are three ways the EU could make the online world safer for us all: 1. Ensure better protection for users Ensure platforms make it easier to report online abuse and mis- and disinformation and act to protect people from the reported harms. Improve data access tools and publish risk assessments to help researchers and civil society investigate online harms. Ensure users know how to submit complaints and that platforms respond in a meaningful way, including by communicating explanations for their response. Create ways for groups of users to complain against human rights abuses posed by platform systems and processes. Ensure that content policies are easily accessible, written in simple machine-readable format allowing for easy analysis by researchers, and compliant with international human rights law. 2. Introduce specific protections for Human Rights Defenders Ensure platforms introduce mechanisms that provide tailored safety features, expedited moderation for human rights defenders. Ensure platforms introduce protective mechanisms that provide tailored safety features and effective content moderation and ensure that the visibility of content shared by human rights defenders is not decreased or limited by erroneous content moderation decisions. Require platforms to conduct region-specific risk assessments for human rights defenders and apply heightened due diligence in countries and regions with armed conflicts. Work with civil society to ensure that HRDs are consulted by platforms when defining their policies. Create a designation for accounts of human rights defenders and journalists that grants expedited appeals for content removal or account suspensions and priority support channels for reporting threats, harassment, or disinformation targeting their accounts. Laila Sheikh Bakri, human rights defender, Syria “Pages that document crimes or share the truth about what’s happening should be recognised and empowered, but instead, they’re suppressed. If I could make one change, it would be to give those pages the visibility and protection they deserve.” 3. Improve Digital Literacy and Education Empower digital users with the skills to navigate online risks, identify mis- and disinformation, and use platforms responsibly. Allocate dedicated funding for EU member states to implement educational initiatives in schools, workplaces, and community centres, including grants for digital organisations to provide workshops on online safety for the EU public. Develop a certification programme for digital literacy trainers to standardise and professionalise efforts across the EU. Require platforms to include educational resources within their apps (e.g., tooltips, pop-ups) that explain reporting tools, data privacy, and ways to identify misinformation. What UK policymakers can do Here are three ways the UK could make the online world safer for us all. 1. Localised Human Rights Safeguards Introduce binding obligations for platforms to implement moderation policies that are sensitive to local languages, cultures, and dynamics. This will ensure platforms address specific regional concerns and reduce harm in politically sensitive areas. Expand special protocols for vulnerable users to include human rights defenders, allowing for expedited appeals and protections against arbitrary account suspensions. 2. Regulatory Oversight Enhance regulatory oversight mechanisms to ensure platform policies meet a minimum standard and require independent third-party audits of platform practices and provision of data to researchers. This will ensure platforms are held to account on human rights and duty of care obligations. 3. Education and Literacy Incorporate funding and initiatives to promote digital literacy programmes across the UK, empowering users to recognise mis- and disinformation, understand its impact, and engage responsibly online. This would include public campaigns, platform resources, and partnerships with educational institutions. What you can do But we can all act. If you want human rights defenders to feel safe online and for all of us to be able to express our opinion without fear of attack, join us. Write to the EU Commission urging them to do more to make our online world a safer place. Your activism does make a difference. This is a project by The Syria Campaign, powered by RIWI research, designed and built by Data4Change.