Introducing the Privacy-HSD Trade-off: Hate Speech Detection, but not at the Cost of Privacy
Authors: Stephen Meisenbacher, Vlad Garbuz, Chirill Donos, Maxim Dnestreanschii, Gabriel Creanga, Andreea-Elena Bodea, Thomas Lampert, Jana Diesner
Organizations: Technical University of Munich, Chair of Human-Centered Computing, Munich, Germany · Munich Center for Machine Learning, Munich, Germany · Munich Data Science Institute, Munich, Germany · University of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg, Denmark · Technical University of Moldova, Chis,in˘au, Republic of Moldova · ICube, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
Hate speech is a real and timely threat that affects a large portion of online users, especially youth and minority groups. While building reliable and robust automatic hate speech detection (HSD) systems is paramount, we argue that this must also be balanced with the individual right to privacy. Exploring the intersection of HSD and privacy, we demonstrate that HSD systems might unintentionally achieve performance at the cost of encoding authorship, posing a threat to privacy. Building on these findings, we establish the notion of a privacy-HSD trade-off, which demands a careful balance. We benchmark a series of text privatization methods, as well as our newly proposed domain-specific AgnoSpeech technique, showing that balancing privacy and HSD is difficult but feasible. The findings make a strong case for more research on the trade-offs between privacy and HSD, both of which have tangible implications for the safeguarding of online participation.
Figures & tables
Linear Probing
Statistical Tests
Adversary
Dataset / HSD Model
Random/Majority
Baseline
Probe Acc. (HSD)
η2
Mean FPR
FPR σ
Majority Class
Micro F1
Reddit-25
4%/8.2%
40.69%
39.83%
0.2205
7.68%
0.1079
15.95%
19.04%
Reddit-50
2%/4.5%
25.35%
21.73%
0.2227
8.33%
0.1564
10.55%
13.09%
Twitter-10
10%/53.1 %
83.96%
88.24%
0.6095
16.36%
0.2078
69.61%
87.20%
Table 1: Results of our linear probing and statistical tests. Probe accuracy measures the ability to train authorship re-identification models solely from HSD model embeddings, as compared to random or majority-guessing accuracy (on the test set), as well as the non-fine-tuned baseline. η2 denotes variance in HSD that can be attributed to the author signal, where as FPR σ indicates the standard deviation of false positive rates across all authors in a dataset. The Adversary (F1) denotes adversarial classification performance (for authorship), trained solely on text contents. In all scores, a higher result denotes that authorship has become entangled with detecting hate speech.
Reddit-25
Reddit-50
Twitter-10
Method
PPL ↓
HSD ↑
Probe ↓
η2↓
FPR σ↓
Adv ↓
TO ↑
PPL ↓
HSD ↑
Probe ↓
η2↓
FPR σ↓
Adv ↓
TO ↑
PPL ↓
HSD ↑
Probe ↓
η2↓
FPR σ↓
Adv ↓
TO ↑
TO↑
Baseline
377
89.0%
39.8%
0.22
0.11
19.0%
–
346
86.0%
21.7%
0.22
0.16
13.1%
–
250
91.0%
88.2%
0.61
0.21
87.2%
–
–
Presidio (redact)
8034
90.0%
40.5%
0.21
0.00
5.6%
0.44
5298
86.8%
21.4%
0.23
0.00
0.6%
0.50
1050
87.2%
82.6%
0.51
0.01
10.7%
0.34
0.43
Presidio (replace)
376
90.2%
39.0%
0.21
0.00
4.8%
0.46
344
86.9%
19.2%
0.23
0.00
0.8%
0.51
273
87.6%
83.5%
0.50
0.02
11.2%
0.34
0.44
GLiNER (redact)
467
87.7%
34.3%
0.20
0.00
4.3%
0.49
436
84.9%
19.7%
0.19
0.00
1.1%
0.52
556
86.6%
81.4%
0.50
0.00
2.4%
0.35
0.45
GLiNER (replace)
347
87.4%
36.7%
0.19
0.00
5.6%
0.45
317
83.7%
20.6%
0.19
0.00
1.1%
0.49
167
87.1%
83.6%
0.53
0.01
3.6%
0.34
0.43
Table 2: Complete results of the case study (top) and AgnoSpeech evaluations (bottom). PPL denotes perplexity (coherence) and HSD is hate speech classification performance (in micro-F1). The four remaining privacy metrics are those introduced in Section 4 and Table 1 . The TO score denotes the PrivHSD score (Equation 1 ), or relative gains in the four privacy metrics over HSD preservation. ↑ denotes higher is better, and ↓ means lower is better. The best and second-best average trade-offs ( TO ) per dataset and overall ( TO ) are bolded and underlined , respectively. We note that while TO incorporates the normalized HSD results (Equation 1 ), HSD presents the raw F1 scores.
Figure 1: An overview of AgnoSpeech, a multi-tiered method for facilitating HSD, but not at the cost of privacy. Note: harmful language has been pre-redacted.
Setting
HSD (s)
Build (s)
Priv. (ms/post)
fast , CPU
0.76
3.19
0.45
performance , GPU
23.5
10.4
7.5
Table 3: Runtime benchmarks for the full AgnoSpeech pipeline on Reddit-25. Runtime includes HSD model download / fitting, L1–3 build ing, and text priv atization. The fast variant is run on a two-core Colab vCPU, and performance is run on a single Colab T4 GPU. Times are in seconds (s) or milliseconds (ms).
The increasing volume of hate speech on online platforms poses significant societal challenges. While the Natural Language Processing community has developed effective methods to automatically detect the presence of hate speech, responses to it, called counter-speech, are still an open challenge. We present PEACE 2.0, a novel tool that, besides analysing and explaining why a message is considered hateful or not, also generates a response to it. More specifically, PEACE 2.0 has three main new functionalities: leveraging a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipeline i) to ground HS explanations into evidence and facts, ii) to automatically generate evidence-grounded counter-speech, and iii) exploring the characteristics of counter-speech replies. By integrating these capabilities, PEACE 2.0 enables in-depth analysis and response generation for both explicit and implicit hateful messages.
Greta Damo, Stéphane Petiot, Elena Cabrio +1
Université Côte d’Azur, CNRS, Inria, I3S, France · Université Côte d’Azur, Institut 3IA Côte d’Azur, Techpool, France
Classifying implicit hate speech remains a challenge, as intent is often masked through insinuation and context rather than explicit slurs. Prior supervised contrastive approaches improve in-domain detection but can overfit surface cues and struggle to transfer across datasets. We propose ImpSH, a triplet-based framework that aligns posts with implied statements when available and uses context-bounded semi-hard negatives to focus learning on near confusions. We also examine AugSH, which forms positives via data augmentation. In controlled evaluations on IHC, SBIC, and DynaHate with BERT and HateBERT, ImpSH is a viable alternative to standard supervised contrastive baselines and often improves cross-domain performance under matched preprocessing and tuning budgets. Representation analysis using alignment and uniformity indicates tighter positive pairs with balanced global spread, and qualitative nearest-neighbor case studies illustrate typical false negatives under domain shift. These results demonstrate that aligning posts with their implied statements via context-bounded mining provides a more stable, bijective-like mapping to related insinuations, overcoming the volatility inherent in traditional clustering-based representation learning.
Hate, derogatory, and offensive speech remains a persistent challenge in online platforms and public discourse. While automated detection systems are widely used, most focus on censorship or removal, raising concerns for transparency and freedom of expression, and limiting opportunities to explain why content is harmful. To address these issues, explanatory approaches have emerged as a promising solution, aiming to make hate speech detection more transparent, accountable, and informative. In this paper, we present a hybrid approach that combines Large Language Models (LLMs) with three newly created and curated vocabularies to detect and explain hate speech in English, French, and Greek. Our system captures both inherently derogatory expressions tied to identity characteristics and direct group-targeted content through two complementary pipelines: one that detects and disambiguates problematic terms using the curated vocabularies, and one that leverages LLMs as context-aware evaluators of group-targeting content. The outputs are fused into grounded explanations that clarify why content is flagged. Human evaluation shows that our hybrid approach is accurate, with high-quality explanations, outperforming LLM-only baselines.
Jason Liartis, Eirini Kaldeli, Lambrini Gyftokosta +2
National Technical University of Athens · Datoptron · Independent Researcher +3