Major social media companies are failing to protect LGBTQ+ users from hate speech and harassment, according to a new report from GLAAD released Tuesday.
The Social Media Security Index report highlights that major platforms either lack policies to protect user data or fail to enforce them; refusing to protect users from online hate; and cannot or will not stop the proliferation of harmful stereotypes and disinformation about LGBTQ+ people.
The report, now in its fourth year, ranked Meta’s six social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and Threads, as well as TikTok, YouTube and X (formerly Twitter), based on 12 different criteria. These metrics include whether each company has clear policies to protect trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming users from necronomizing and misgendering; There are options for users to add their pronouns to profiles; Protects legitimate LGBTQ+ related advertising; Tracks and discloses violations of LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
GLAAD found that social media companies missed the mark on nearly all of these metrics, allowing harmful rhetoric to proliferate on their platforms even while raking in billions of dollars in profits from advertising.
Almost all platforms received an F rating and a corresponding percentage. But TikTok received a D+, a slight improvement from last year’s rating, because it recently adopted a policy that prevents advertisers from targeting users based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
While many of these social media companies currently have policies that appear to protect LGBTQ+ users on paper, the report notes that the platforms are doing little to actually stop the spread of harmful and misinformation.
For example, X, which scored lowest on a percentage basis, saw a sharp increase in misinformation about LGBTQ+ people by “anti-LGBTQ” influencers. For example, the Libs of TikTok account run by Chaya Raichik is known for posting misinformation about gender-affirming care and equating LGBTQ+ people with “caregivers” and “pedophiles.” Dozens of bomb threats were reported against schools, gyms and children’s hospitals mentioned in the account.
X owner Elon Musk has also promoted anti-trans content by Raichik and others, including posts praising restrictions on transgender women’s participation in sports. Republican lawmakers, who have introduced a record number of anti-LGBTQ bills to government agencies across the country each year since 2020, have similarly amplified and encouraged anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment on social media.
“There is a direct line between dangerous online rhetoric and targeting and violent offline behavior against the LGBTQ community,” GLAAD CEO Sarah Kate Ellis wrote in the report.
Despite being one of the largest platforms for anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, X only generated $2.5 billion in ad revenue in 2023. Meta has allowed posts that equate trans people to “terrorists,” “perverts,” and “mentally ill”” will remain on its platforms — it generated $134 billion in revenue last year.
The report notes that social media companies are also targeting legitimate LGBTQ+ content and making their platforms less safe and accessible for LGBTQ+ users.
The report highlights an example from March of this year, when the nonprofit organization Men Have Babies shared a photo of two gay fathers and their newborn child in an Instagram post. Shortly after the post, the organization found that the platform flagged Men Having Babies’ post as “sensitive content” that may be “graphic or violent.”
Leanna Garfield, GLAAD’s social media safety program manager, said the hashtag is often “used to reduce extreme content.” Pink News earlier this year. “This shouldn’t include something as innocuous as a photo of two dads with their newborn baby.”
Increased use of AI tools for content moderation could lead to LGBTQ+ posts surfacing be targeted even more. An investigation by Wired in April found that AI systems like OpenAI’s Sora exhibited biases when depicting gay people.
Companies like Facebook have at times relied “exclusively” on automated systems to review content, foregoing any human review in the process, Axios reported last year. A GLAAD report published around the same time said this practice was “seriously concerning” and could compromise the safety of all users, including LGBTQ+ ones.
The new GLAAD report alleges that other tech companies, which the report does not name, are developing “automatic gender recognition” technology that purports to predict a person’s gender to better sell products through targeted ads. But privacy advocates have warned that these technologies could go a step further and attempt to categorize and surveil people in gender-segregated or sex-segregated spaces, such as bathrooms and locker rooms.
Some countries and regions, such as the European Union, have placed restrictions on AI and regulate the practices of social media platforms, but the United States has lagged behind. The GLAAD report recommends that platforms strengthen and enforce existing policies to protect LGBTQ+ people, including stopping advertisers from targeting LGBTQ+ users and improving content moderation rather than just automating it.