The BBC’s Hypocrisy on Online Abuse: Condemning Trolls While Giving Them a Platform

 

The BBC’s Double Standards: Reporting on Abuse While Ignoring It on Their Own Platforms

In an era where online abuse and trolling are unfortunately part of the digital landscape, the role of media organisations in addressing or amplifying this behaviour has never been more important. This week, the BBC has been at the forefront of reporting on the abuse directed at British tennis stars like Katie Boulter and Emma Raducanu. 

Articles have highlighted the vitriol these players receive, lamenting the toxic environment of social media and the impact it has on athletes’ mental health. However, a closer look reveals a glaring hypocrisy: while the BBC is quick to condemn online abuse in theory, it does little in practice to curb the tide of trolling on its own platforms — and may even be fuelling it in the pursuit of clicks and engagement.

When the BBC publishes stories about the abuse that players such as Boulter and Raducanu face, these pieces often appear on their website and across social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter (X), and Instagram. 

The irony is hard to miss: under these very posts lie hundreds of offensive, derogatory, and hateful comments, which are rarely, if ever, moderated or removed. The articles ostensibly aim to highlight and combat abuse, yet the BBC provides a space where abusers feel free to post exactly the type of content being condemned.

This contradiction exposes a troubling truth about the BBC’s priorities. On the surface, these stories seem like a call to action, a way to raise awareness about an issue that affects not only tennis players but public figures across all walks of life. 

But the reality is that these reports generate substantial traffic. Articles about Emma Raducanu’s struggles or Katie Boulter’s experiences attract attention, spark debate, and — crucially for the BBC — drive engagement metrics. And engagement, whether positive or negative, means more clicks, more shares, and ultimately, more revenue and reach.

The BBC has long positioned itself as a beacon of integrity in journalism, funded by the British public through the licence fee. Part of this trust involves holding itself accountable to the same standards it demands of others. 

When it calls out social media companies for failing to protect users, or when it interviews experts about the need for greater regulation of online platforms, it implicitly commits to upholding these values within its own domain. Yet in the case of articles about abuse, the broadcaster appears content to allow harmful comments to proliferate unchecked — because doing so ensures the conversation (and the clicks) keep going.

Moderation is not an impossible task. Other media organisations, as well as individual pages and content creators, have implemented effective systems to manage trolling and abusive posts. Whether through human moderators, filters, or AI tools, it is entirely possible to significantly reduce the volume of hate speech and personal attacks under social media posts. 

The BBC, with its vast resources and technical expertise, is more than capable of doing the same. The fact that it does not raises serious questions about intent.

Is the BBC genuinely interested in tackling online abuse, or is it simply using it as another hook for audience engagement? The evidence suggests the latter. If the BBC were serious about addressing this problem, it would take responsibility for its own comment sections. 

It would delete hateful posts, block persistent offenders, and perhaps most importantly, stop giving a platform to the abusers it claims to oppose. Instead, the broadcaster seems happy to watch as their social media pages become breeding grounds for the very behaviour they are decrying — as long as it means more people are interacting with their content.

This double standard is damaging on multiple levels. First, it undermines the BBC’s credibility. Readers are not blind to the disconnect between the organisation’s moral stance and its actions. When people see hateful comments left to fester under articles about abuse, they begin to question whether the BBC is truly committed to change or simply paying lip service to the issue. 

Second, it further harms the victims. By providing a platform for trolls, the BBC becomes complicit in the spread of abuse, subjecting individuals like Raducanu and Boulter to even more negativity under the guise of reporting on their plight.

Finally, it contributes to the wider culture of online toxicity. Every unmoderated comment thread reinforces the idea that abuse is an acceptable part of public discourse. It tells trolls that they can continue their behaviour without consequence, and it normalises a level of hostility that should never be acceptable — especially not on the platforms of a public service broadcaster.

If the BBC truly wishes to be a force for good in this space, it needs to look inward. Condemning abuse while facilitating it is not enough. The organisation must take tangible steps to clean up its own platforms before it can expect others to follow suit. 

This means actively moderating comments, taking down offensive posts, and rethinking the way it approaches stories about abuse — not as clickbait, but as opportunities to genuinely foster understanding and change.

Until that happens, the BBC’s stance on online abuse will remain not just ineffective, but hypocritical. And the damage done — to the athletes, to the public discourse, and to the BBC’s own reputation — will continue to mount.