Most people want harmful content, such as threats and defamation, to be restricted on social media. This holds true even in the United States, where several platforms have recently eased moderation in favor of unrestricted free speech. Yet, many users believe that intolerance and hate have become an unavoidable part of online discourse.
A large-scale survey by the Technical University of Munich and the University of Oxford explored public attitudes on content regulation across ten countries, spanning Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Australia. While much of the debate over social media regulation focuses on platform owners, policymakers, and the media, this study shifts the focus to users themselves.
Broad support
The findings suggest broad support for moderation. A clear majority—79% of respondents—favor removing incitements to violence, with the strongest support (86%) in Germany, Brazil, and Slovakia. Even in the U.S., where free speech protections are among the strongest, 63% agree. Only 14% believe threats should remain online so users can respond, and just 17% think people should be free to post offensive content targeting specific groups. Support for such speech is highest in the U.S. (29%) and lowest in Brazil (9%).
When asked to choose between unlimited free expression and a platform free of hate speech and misinformation, most respondents leaned toward safety. “Influential entrepreneurs like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk argue that free speech must take precedence over content moderation,” the researchers note. “But this study shows that most people, even in democracies with strong speech protections, want platforms that curb hate and abuse.”
However, attitudes vary by country, shaped by cultural norms and legal traditions. This complicates efforts to establish global standards. There is also disagreement over who should be responsible for making social media safer. On average, 35% of respondents believe platform operators should take the lead, 31% place responsibility on individual users, and 30% on governments.
National differences
But national differences emerge: 39% of Germans, Britons, and Brazilians favor platform-led enforcement, while only 29% do in France, South Africa, and Greece. Support for government oversight is highest in Germany and France (37%) but drops to 14% in Slovakia. Swedes are the most likely to say individuals should self-police (39%), whereas only 17% of Germans agree.
Despite broad support for moderation, resignation is widespread. Some 59% of respondents believe exposure to rudeness and hate on social media is inevitable, and 65% expect aggressive comments when they post online. This sense of hostility is strongest in South Africa (81%) and the U.S. (73%). “People increasingly feel that no matter what platforms promise, nothing is improving,” the researchers conclude. “This normalization of hate and violence is a serious problem, as it gradually erodes societal norms.”
Still, most users have not given up on social media as a space for civil debate. Only 20% say rudeness is sometimes necessary to make a point.
