Racism and hate are running rampant online, and Australia’s race discrimination commissioner is sounding the alarm. But here’s where it gets controversial: he’s pointing the finger directly at social media companies, accusing them of allowing antisemitic and racist content to spread unchecked—and even profiting from it. Could these platforms be complicit in fueling real-world violence? That’s the chilling question raised after the devastating Bondi beach terror attack, which left 15 people dead. The Guardian reports that commissioner Giridharan Sivaraman didn’t hold back during a recent Queensland Council of Unions meeting and a follow-up interview, arguing that social media’s prioritization of engagement over safety has created a breeding ground for hate.
‘Turning off the tap of online hate is possible,’ Sivaraman stated, ‘but it’s not in the financial interest of these platforms to do so.’ And this is the part most people miss: the deliberate removal of fact-checkers and moderation tools across some platforms has allowed misinformation and hate speech to thrive. While no single action could have prevented the Bondi tragedy, Sivaraman believes the government’s failure to adopt the Australian Human Rights Commission’s national anti-racism framework—a comprehensive plan launched in November 2024—has left a critical gap in addressing antisemitism and other forms of racism.
The framework, which includes 63 recommendations like legal protections against online hate and a dedicated taskforce, was designed to tackle racism head-on. ‘It’s not just about reacting to crises,’ Sivaraman explained. ‘It’s about proactively building a society that rejects hate.’ Yet, despite its potential, the framework remains unfunded and unimplemented. Even after the Bondi attack, the taskforce could have convened urgently to prioritize actions, particularly against antisemitism. Instead, the commissioner argues, inaction has allowed hate to fester.
Sivaraman’s emotional plea for the Jewish community and his warning about broader racial tensions are hard to ignore. He highlighted alarming online messages promoting a ‘Cronulla 2.0’—a chilling reference to the 2005 race riots—and expressed deep concern about the weeks leading up to Australia Day on January 26. ‘It’s going to get worse before it gets better,’ he warned, urging immediate action.
Here’s the controversial question: Are social media companies inadvertently—or intentionally—amplifying hate for profit? And if so, what responsibility do they bear for the real-world consequences? Sivaraman’s call for broader action isn’t just about antisemitism; it’s about protecting all communities from the rising tide of racism. But with platforms prioritizing engagement over safety, is change even possible? Let’s discuss—what do you think? Is it time to hold social media companies accountable, or is this an overreach? Share your thoughts in the comments.
