The Enforcement and Feasibility of Hate Speech Moderation on Twitter
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866910128013312000 |
|---|---|
| author | Tonneau, Manuel Thurgood, Dylan Liu, Diyi Malhotra, Niyati Orozco-Olvera, Victor Schroeder, Ralph Hale, Scott A. Ribeiro, Manoel Horta Röttger, Paul Fraiberger, Samuel P. |
| author_facet | Tonneau, Manuel Thurgood, Dylan Liu, Diyi Malhotra, Niyati Orozco-Olvera, Victor Schroeder, Ralph Hale, Scott A. Ribeiro, Manoel Horta Röttger, Paul Fraiberger, Samuel P. |
| contents | Online hate speech is associated with substantial social harms, yet it remains unclear how consistently platforms enforce hate speech policies or whether enforcement is feasible at scale. We address these questions through a global audit of hate speech moderation on Twitter (now X). Using a complete 24-hour snapshot of public tweets, we construct representative samples comprising 540,000 tweets annotated for hate speech by trained annotators across eight major languages. Five months after posting, 80% of hateful tweets remain online, including explicitly violent hate speech. Such tweets are no more likely to be removed than non-hateful tweets, with neither severity nor visibility increasing the likelihood of removal. We then examine whether these enforcement gaps reflect technical limits of large-scale moderation systems. While fully automated detection systems cannot reliably identify hate speech without generating large numbers of false positives, they effectively prioritize likely violations for human review. Simulations of a human-AI moderation pipeline indicate that substantially reducing user exposure to hate speech is economically feasible at a cost below existing regulatory penalties. These results suggest that the persistence of online hate cannot be explained by technical constraints alone but also reflects institutional choices in the allocation of moderation resources. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_12289 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | The Enforcement and Feasibility of Hate Speech Moderation on Twitter Tonneau, Manuel Thurgood, Dylan Liu, Diyi Malhotra, Niyati Orozco-Olvera, Victor Schroeder, Ralph Hale, Scott A. Ribeiro, Manoel Horta Röttger, Paul Fraiberger, Samuel P. Computers and Society Computation and Language Online hate speech is associated with substantial social harms, yet it remains unclear how consistently platforms enforce hate speech policies or whether enforcement is feasible at scale. We address these questions through a global audit of hate speech moderation on Twitter (now X). Using a complete 24-hour snapshot of public tweets, we construct representative samples comprising 540,000 tweets annotated for hate speech by trained annotators across eight major languages. Five months after posting, 80% of hateful tweets remain online, including explicitly violent hate speech. Such tweets are no more likely to be removed than non-hateful tweets, with neither severity nor visibility increasing the likelihood of removal. We then examine whether these enforcement gaps reflect technical limits of large-scale moderation systems. While fully automated detection systems cannot reliably identify hate speech without generating large numbers of false positives, they effectively prioritize likely violations for human review. Simulations of a human-AI moderation pipeline indicate that substantially reducing user exposure to hate speech is economically feasible at a cost below existing regulatory penalties. These results suggest that the persistence of online hate cannot be explained by technical constraints alone but also reflects institutional choices in the allocation of moderation resources. |
| title | The Enforcement and Feasibility of Hate Speech Moderation on Twitter |
| topic | Computers and Society Computation and Language |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.12289 |