Hate Speech Detection

This paper compares a PyCaret AutoML branch and a CNN-BiLSTM branch for binary hate speech detection on Indonesian Twitter using the HS label from the corpus of Ibrohim and Budi. Both branches share the same preprocessing pipeline so that the comparison reflects modelling differences rather than inconsistent data preparation. The conventional branch uses TF-IDF with a lexicon-based abusive-word count, whereas the neural branch learns dense token representations and captures both local phrase patterns and bidirectional context. The benchmark is built from the released 13,130-row annotation table, whose HS label yields a 58:42 class ratio. On the held-out split, CNN-BiLSTM achieves the best result with 83.8% accuracy, 79.8% precision, 82.7% recall, and 81.2% F1-score. Within the PyCaret branch, Random Forest is the strongest conventional model with 77.2% accuracy and 77.0% F1-score. The neural branch therefore improves accuracy by 6.6 points and F1-score by 4.2 points. Exploratory corpus analysis, learning curves, and confusion matrices show that the dataset is short-text, moderately imbalanced, and still difficult because many decisions depend on local lexical cues plus short contextual composition. The study concludes that PyCaret AutoML is an effective conventional benchmarking framework, whereas CNN-BiLSTM is the stronger end model for the reported benchmark setting.

Information disorder is a challenging phenomenon that affects society at large. This phenomenon entails the diffusion of misleading, misinforming, and hateful content online. In different contexts, one aspect of the problem may prevail, but overall, this is a broad problem that requires comprehensive solutions. While each dimension of the problem (hate speech, disinformation, misinformation, etc.) requires in-depth analysis, in this paper, we look into the possibility of argument structure to provide relevant information to link these different areas of the problem. In particular, we focus on the WSF-ARG+ dataset, which consists of white supremacy forum messages annotated in terms of argument structure (premises and conclusion). There, we leverage the checkworthiness and hatefulness annotations of the argument components to obtain insights into the hatefulness of the whole message. Our results show promising insights (up to 96% F1), indicating the possibility of extending this direction in the future to tackle hateful content identification and information disorder countering.

Detecting hate speech in memes is challenging due to their multimodal nature and subtle, culturally grounded cues such as sarcasm and context. While recent vision-language models (VLMs) enable joint reasoning over text and images, end-to-end prompting can be brittle, as a single prediction must resolve target, stance, implicitness, and irony. These challenges are amplified in multilingual settings. We propose a prompted weak supervision (PWS) approach that decomposes meme understanding into targeted, question-based labeling functions with constrained answer options for homophobia and transphobia detection in the LT-EDI 2026 shared task. Using a quantized Qwen3-VLM to extract features by answering targeted questions, our method outperforms direct VLM classification, with substantial gains for Chinese and Hindi, ranking 1st in English, 2nd in Chinese, and 3rd in Hindi. Iterative refinement via error-driven LF expansion and feature pruning reduces redundancy and improves generalization. Our results highlight the effectiveness of prompted weak supervision for multilingual multimodal hate speech detection.

Memes convey meaning through the interaction of visual and textual signals, often combining humor, irony, and offense in subtle ways. Detecting harmful or sensitive content in memes requires accurate modeling of these multimodal cues. Existing CLIP-based approaches rely on static fusion, which struggles to capture fine grained dependencies between modalities. We propose DARC-CLIP, a CLIP-based framework for adaptive multimodal fusion with a hierarchical refinement stack. DARC-CLIP introduces Adaptive Cross-Attention Refiners to for bidirectional information alignment and Dynamic Feature Adapters for task-sensitive signal adaptation. We evaluate DARC-CLIP on the PrideMM benchmark, which includes hate, target, stance, and humor classification, and further test generalization on the CrisisHateMM dataset. DARC-CLIP achieves highly competitive classification accuracy across tasks, with significant gains of +4.18 AUROC and +6.84 F1 in hate detection over the strongest baseline. Ablation studies confirm that ACAR and DFA are the main contributors to these gains. These results show that adaptive cross-signal refinement is an effective strategy for multimodal content analysis in socially sensitive classification.

Reclaimed slur usage is a common and meaningful practice online for many marginalized communities. It serves as a source of solidarity, identity, and shared experience. However, contemporary automated and AI-based moderation tools for online content largely fail to distinguish between reclaimed and hateful uses of slurs, resulting in the suppression of marginalized voices. In this work, we use quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the attitudes of social media users in LGBTQIA+, Black, and women communities around reclaimed slurs targeting our focus groups including the f-word, n-word, and b-word. With social media users from these communities, we collect and analyze an annotated online slur usage corpus. The corpus includes annotators' perceptions of whether an online text containing a slur should be flagged as hate speech, as well as contextual features of the slur usage. Across all communities and annotation questions, we observe low inter-annotator agreement, indicating substantial disagreement among in-group annotators. This is compounded by the fact that, absent clear contextual signals of identity and intent, even in-group members may disagree on how to interpret reclaimed slur usage online. Semi-structured interviews with annotators suggest that differences in lived experience and personal history contribute to this variation as well. We find poor alignment between annotator judgments and automated hate speech assessments produced by Perspective API. We further observe that certain features of a text such as whether the slur usage was derogatory and if the slur was targeted at oneself are more associated with whether annotators report the text as hate speech. Together, these findings highlight the inherent subjectivity and contextual nature of how marginalized communities interpret slurs online.

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.

Online hate speech and abusive language pose a growing challenge for content moderation, especially in multilingual settings and for low-resource languages such as Lithuanian. This paper investigates to what extent modern multilingual sentence embedding models can support accurate hate speech detection in Lithuanian, Russian, and English, and how their performance depends on downstream modeling choices and feature dimensionality. We introduce LtHate, a new Lithuanian hate speech corpus derived from news portals and social networks, and benchmark six modern multilingual encoders (potion, gemma, bge, snow, jina, e5) on LtHate, RuToxic, and EnSuperset using a unified Python pipeline. For each embedding, we train both a one class HBOS anomaly detector and a two class CatBoost classifier, with and without principal component analysis (PCA) compression to 64-dimensional feature vectors. Across all datasets, two class supervised models consistently and substantially outperform one class anomaly detection, with the best configurations achieving up to 80.96% accuracy and AUC ROC of 0.887 in Lithuanian (jina), 92.19% accuracy and AUC ROC of 0.978 in Russian (e5), and 77.21% accuracy and AUC ROC of 0.859 in English (e5 with PCA). PCA compression preserves almost all discriminative power in the supervised setting, while showing some negative impact for the unsupervised anomaly detection case. These results demonstrate how modern multilingual sentence embeddings combined with gradient boosted decision trees provide robust soft-computing solutions for multilingual hate speech detection applications.

Annotating data remains a costly bottleneck for supervised NLP. Active learning (AL) reduces the number of human labels needed by selecting only the most informative instances, while instruction-tuned LLMs attack the same bottleneck from the other side, making labels cheap enough to annotate entire corpora. This raises two questions: can LLM labels replace human labels within the AL loop, and does AL remain necessary when entire corpora can be cheaply labeled? We investigate both by training supervised hate speech classifiers on a new dataset of 278K German political TikTok comments, comparing human and LLM annotation under matched conditions. LLM annotation at scale outperforms human-supervised classifiers at roughly one-tenth the cost, for both a closed-source (GPT-5.2) and an open-weight (Qwen3.5-122B-A10B) LLM, and the advantage is robust under soft-label evaluation. It hinges on the annotation interface: only a two-question decomposition mirroring the human annotation task unlocks it. AL provides no reliable advantage over random sampling in our prefiltered pool. Error structure depends on the LLM: only GPT-5.2 matches the human FP/FN balance, while other variants over-flag border-control and economic-competition discourse. Humans remain essential as evaluators; for training labels, the question shifts to which LLM, which interface, and what shape of pool.

Online hate speech is associated with harms ranging from deteriorating mental health to violence, yet how consistently platforms moderate hate, and whether enforcement is feasible at scale, remain poorly understood. We audit hate speech moderation on Twitter (now X) using 540,000 tweets annotated by trained native speakers, representative of a full day on the platform. Five months after posting, 80% of hateful tweets, including violent ones, remained online. Removal was only marginally more likely than for non-hateful tweets, far below scams or adult content, and insensitive to severity and reach. Automated detection could not reliably classify hate but ranked it highly, enabling human triage. Simulating this workflow, current staffing curbed little exposure, yet substantial reductions proved financially feasible, far below applicable regulatory fines. Persistent hate reflects resource allocation, not technical limits.

Hate speech detection in Devanagari-scripted social media memes presents compounded challenges: multimodal content structure, script-specific linguistic complexity, and extreme data scarcity in low-resource settings. This paper presents our system for the CHiPSAL 2026 shared task, addressing both Subtask A (binary hate speech detection) and Subtask B (three-class sentiment classification: positive, neutral, negative). We propose a hybrid cross-modal attention fusion architecture that combines CLIP (ViT-B/32) for visual encoding with BGE-M3 for multilingual text representation, connected through 4-head self-attention and a learnable gating network that dynamically weights modality contributions on a per-sample basis. Systematic evaluation across eight model configurations demonstrates that explicit cross-modal reasoning achieves a 5.9% F1-macro improvement over text-only baselines on Subtask A, while uncovering two unexpected but critical findings: English-centric vision models exhibit near-random performance on Devanagari script, and standard ensemble methods catastrophically degrade under data scarcity (N nearly equal to 850 per fold) due to correlated overfitting. The code can be accessed at https://github.com/Tri-Yantra-Technologies/MEME-Fusion/

Toxicity and harassment are widespread in the video-gaming context. Especially in competitive online multiplayer scenarios, gamers oftentimes send harmful messages to other players (teammates or opponents) whose consequences span from mild annoyance to withdrawal and depression. Abundant prior work tackled these problems, e.g., pointing out the negative effects of toxic interactions. However, few works proposed countermeasures specifically developed and tested on textual messages sent during a match -- i.e., when the "harassment" actually occurs. We posit that such a scarcity stems from the lack of high-quality datasets that can be used to devise "automated" detectors based on natural-language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML), and which can -- ideally -- mitigate the harm of toxic comments during a gaming session. This work provides a foundation for addressing the problem of toxicity and harassment in video games. First, through a systematic literature review (n=1,039), we provide evidence that only few works proposed ML/NLP-based detectors of toxicity/harassment during live matches. Then, we partner-up with 8 expert League of Legend (LoL) players and create a fine-grained labelled dataset, L2DTnH, containing 1.4k toxic and 13.8k non-toxic messages exchanged during LoL matches. We use L2DTnH to develop a detector that we then empirically show outperforms general-purpose and state-of-the-art toxicity detectors reliant on NLP. To further demonstrate the practicality of our resources, we test our detector on game-related data beyond that included in L2DTnH; and we develop a Web-browser extension that flags toxic content in Webpages -- without querying third-party servers owned by AI companies. We publicly release all of our resources. Our contributions pave the way for more applied research devoted to fighting the spread of toxicity and harassment in video games.

Automating legal reasoning forces a choice between imperfect alternatives: symbolic systems offer transparency but struggle with ambiguity, whereas neural systems handle natural language flexibly but lack verifiability. This paper investigates whether a hybrid, neuro-symbolic approach can reconcile this trade-off. We evaluate this architecture in the domain of online content moderation, which serves as a proxy for high-volume legal decision-making such as mass administrative proceedings. In these settings, operators must assess thousands of cases daily under strict legal standards. Specifically, we examine whether constraining large language models (LLMs) within deterministic symbolic scaffolds improves statute-grounded illegality assessment while preventing "scope drift" (where LLMs conflate moral offensiveness with legal illegality). We evaluate the neuro-symbolic variant of Rulemapping - a visual logic-tree method that operationalises the classic legal syllogism - on online hate-speech classification under §130(1) of the German Criminal Code. Across diverse LLMs, Rulemapping maintains high recall (0.82-0.89) while achieving precision of 0.80-0.86, compared to 0.34-0.49 for unconstrained prompting. Expert-authored symbolic scaffolds thus enable robust legal automation aligned with regulatory requirements for auditability and verifiable decision-making.

Abusive and hateful speech is increasingly spoken rather than written, surfacing in voice notes, calls, and short-form videos. Most detection systems still transcribe speech to text before classifying it, but transcription is unreliable for languages lacking strong speech recognisers, and it discards the tone and emotion that often carry the abuse itself. This paper examines whether abusive speech can instead be detected directly from audio, using CLAP, a model that learns a shared representation of sound and language, evaluated across ten Indic languages in the ADIMA dataset. A lightweight classifier trained on CLAP's existing audio representations, without adapting the model itself, comes within one to three points of a fully supervised system, and far outperforms prompting with no labelled examples at all. Further adaptation with a handful of labelled examples per language yields little extra benefit, varying unpredictably across languages. CLAP-based audio representations thus already offer a strong, inexpensive foundation for detecting abusive speech across languages, lowering the labelled data needed in practice.

Digital forensic investigations increasingly rely on heterogeneous evidence such as images, scanned documents, and contextual reports. These artifacts may contain explicit or implicit expressions of harm, hate, threat, violence, or intimidation, yet existing automated approaches often assume clean text input or apply vision models without forensic justification. This paper presents a case-driven multimodal approach for hate and threat detection in forensic analysis. The proposed framework explicitly determines the presence and source of textual evidence, distinguishing between embedded text, associated contextual text, and image-only evidence. Based on the identified evidence configuration, the framework selectively applies text analysis, multimodal fusion, or image-only semantic reasoning using vision language models with vision transformer backbones (ViT). By conditioning inference on evidence availability, the approach mirrors forensic decision-making, improves evidentiary traceability, and avoids unjustified modality assumptions. Experimental evaluation on forensic-style image evidence demonstrates consistent and interpretable behavior across heterogeneous evidence scenarios.

When LLM-based multi-agent systems disagree, current practice treats this as noise to be resolved through consensus. We propose it can be signal. We focus on hate speech moderation, a domain where judgments depend on cultural context and individual value weightings, producing high legitimate disagreement among human annotators. We hypothesize that convergent disagreement, where agents reason similarly but conclude differently, indicates genuine value pluralism that humans also struggle to resolve. Using the Measuring Hate Speech corpus, we embed reasoning traces from five perspective-differentiated agents and classify disagreement patterns using a four-category taxonomy based on reasoning similarity and conclusion agreement. We find that raw reasoning divergence weakly predicts human annotator conflict, but the structure of agent discord carries additional signal: cases where agents agree on a verdict show markedly lower human disagreement than cases where they do not, with large effect sizes (d>0.8) surviving correction for multiple comparisons. Our taxonomy-based ordering correlates with human disagreement patterns. These preliminary findings motivate a shift from consensus-seeking to uncertainty-surfacing multi-agent design, where disagreement structure - not magnitude - guides when human judgment is needed.

Toxic content detection in online communication remains a significant challenge, with current solutions often inadvertently blocking valuable information, including medical terms and text related to minority groups. This paper presents a more nu-anced approach to identifying toxicity in Bulgarian text while preserving access to essential information. The research explores two distinct methodologies for detecting toxic content. The developed methodologies have po-tential applications across diverse online platforms and content moderation systems. First, we propose an ontology that models the potentially toxic words in Bulgarian language. Then, we compose a dataset that comprises 4,384 manually anno-tated sentences from Bulgarian online forums across four categories: toxic language, medical terminology, non-toxic lan-guage, and terms related to minority communities. We then train a BERT-based model for toxic language classification, which reaches a 0.89 F1 macro score. The trained model is directly applicable in a real environment and can be integrated as a com-ponent of toxic content detection systems.

Online abuse has grown increasingly complex, spanning toxic language, harassment, manipulation, and fraudulent behavior. Traditional machine-learning approaches dependent on static classifiers and labor-intensive labeling struggle to keep pace with evolving threat patterns and nuanced policy requirements. Large Language Models introduce new capabilities for contextual reasoning, policy interpretation, explanation generation, and cross-modal understanding, enabling them to support multiple stages of modern safety systems. This survey provides a lifecycle-oriented analysis of how LLMs are being integrated into the Abuse Detection Lifecycle (ADL), which we define across four stages: (I) Label & Feature Generation, (II) Detection, (III) Review & Appeals, and (IV) Auditing & Governance. For each stage, we synthesize emerging research and industry practices, highlight architectural considerations for production deployment, and examine the strengths and limitations of LLM-driven approaches. We conclude by outlining key challenges including latency, cost-efficiency, determinism, adversarial robustness, and fairness and discuss future research directions needed to operationalize LLMs as reliable, accountable components of large-scale abuse-detection and governance systems.

Hateful content online is often expressed using fact-like, not necessarily correct information, especially in coordinated online harassment campaigns and extremist propaganda. Failing to jointly address hate speech (HS) and misinformation can deepen prejudice, reinforce harmful stereotypes, and expose bystanders to psychological distress, while polluting public debate. Moreover, these messages require more effort from content moderators because they must assess both harmfulness and veracity, i.e., fact-check them. To address this challenge, we release WSF-ARG+, the first dataset which combines hate speech with check-worthiness information. We also introduce a novel LLM-in-the-loop framework to facilitate the annotation of check-worthy claims. We run our framework, testing it with 12 open-weight LLMs of different sizes and architectures. We validate it through extensive human evaluation, and show that our LLM-in-the-loop framework reduces human effort without compromising the annotation quality of the data. Finally, we show that HS messages with check-worthy claims show significantly higher harassment and hate, and that incorporating check-worthiness labels improves LLM-based HS detection up to 0.213 macro-F1 and to 0.154 macro-F1 on average for large models.

Current multimodal toxicity benchmarks typically use a single binary hatefulness label. This coarse approach conflates two fundamentally different characteristics of expression: tone and content. Drawing on communication science theory, we introduce a fine-grained annotation scheme that distinguishes two separable dimensions: incivility (rude or dismissive tone) and intolerance (content that attacks pluralism and targets groups or identities) and apply it to 2,030 memes from the Hateful Memes dataset. We evaluate different vision-language models under coarse-label training, transfer learning across label schemes and a joint learning approach that combines the coarse hatefulness label with our fine-grained annotations. Our results show that fine-grained annotations complement existing coarse labels and, when used jointly, improve overall model performance. Moreover, models trained with the fine-grained scheme exhibit more balanced moderation-relevant error profiles and are less prone to under-detection of harmful content than models trained on hatefulness labels alone (FNR-FPR, the difference between false negative and false positive rates: 0.74 to 0.42 for LLaVA-1.6-Mistral-7B; 0.54 to 0.28 for Qwen2.5-VL-7B). This work contributes to data-centric approaches in content moderation by improving the reliability and accuracy of moderation systems through enhanced data quality. Overall, combining both coarse and fine-grained labels provides a practical route to more reliable multimodal moderation.

Hate speech online targets individuals or groups based on identity attributes and spreads rapidly, posing serious social risks. Memes, which combine images and text, have emerged as a nuanced vehicle for disseminating hate speech, often relying on cultural knowledge for interpretation. However, existing multimodal hate speech datasets suffer from coarse-grained labeling and a lack of integration with surrounding discourse, leading to imprecise and incomplete assessments. To bridge this gap, we propose an agentic annotation framework that coordinates seven specialized agents to generate hierarchical labels and rationales. Based on this framework, we construct M^3 (Multi-platform, Multi-lingual, and Multimodal Meme), a dataset of 2,455 memes collected from X, 4chan, and Weibo, featuring fine-grained hate labels and human-verified rationales. Benchmarking state-of-the-art Multimodal Large Language Models reveals that these models struggle to effectively utilize surrounding post context, which often fails to improve or even degrades detection performance. Our finding highlights the challenges these models face in reasoning over memes embedded in real-world discourse and underscores the need for a context-aware multimodal architecture. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/mira-ai-lab/M3.

Combating hate speech on social media is critical for securing cyberspace, yet relies heavily on the efficacy of automated detection systems. As content formats evolve, hate speech is transitioning from solely plain text to complex multimodal expressions, making implicit attacks harder to spot. Current systems, however, often falter on these subtle cases, as they struggle with multimodal content where the emergent meaning transcends the aggregation of individual modalities. To bridge this gap, we move beyond binary classification to characterize semantic intent shifts where modalities interact to construct implicit hate from benign cues or neutralize toxicity through semantic inversion. Guided by this fine-grained formulation, we curate the Hate via Vision-Language Interplay (H-VLI) benchmark where the true intent hinges on the intricate interplay of modalities rather than overt visual or textual slurs. To effectively decipher these complex cues, we further propose the Asymmetric Reasoning via Courtroom Agent DEbate (ARCADE) framework. By simulating a judicial process where agents actively argue for accusation and defense, ARCADE forces the model to scrutinize deep semantic cues before reaching a verdict. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ARCADE significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines on H-VLI, particularly for challenging implicit cases, while maintaining competitive performance on established benchmarks. Our code and data are available at: https://github.com/Sayur1n/H-VLI

We study whether large-scale unlabelled web data and LLM-based synthetic annotations can improve multilingual hate speech detection. Starting from texts crawled via OpenWebSearch.eu~(OWS) in four languages (English, German, Spanish, Vietnamese), we pursue two complementary strategies. First, we apply continued pre-training to BERT models by continuing masked language modelling on unlabelled OWS texts before supervised fine-tuning, and show that this yields an average macro-F1 gain of approximately 3% over standard baselines across sixteen benchmarks, with stronger gains in low-resource settings. Second, we use four open-source LLMs (Mistral-7B, Llama3.1-8B, Gemma2-9B, Qwen2.5-14B) to produce synthetic annotations through three ensemble strategies: mean averaging, majority voting, and a LightGBM meta-learner. The LightGBM ensemble consistently outperforms the other strategies. Fine-tuning on these synthetic labels substantially benefits a small model (Llama3.2-1B: +11% pooled F1), but provides only a modest gain for the larger Qwen2.5-14B (+0.6%). Our results indicate that the combination of web-scale unlabelled data and LLM-ensemble annotations is the most valuable for smaller models and low-resource languages.

Hate speech detection relies heavily on linguistic resources, which are primarily available in high-resource languages such as English and Chinese, creating barriers for researchers and platforms developing tools for low-resource languages in Southeast Asia, where diverse socio-linguistic contexts complicate online hate moderation. To address this, we introduce SEAHateCheck, a pioneering dataset tailored to Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Vietnam, covering Indonesian, Tagalog, Thai, and Vietnamese. Building on HateCheck's functional testing framework and refining SGHateCheck's methods, SEAHateCheck provides culturally relevant test cases, augmented by large language models and validated by local experts for accuracy. Experiments with state-of-the-art and multilingual models revealed limitations in detecting hate speech in specific low-resource languages. In particular, Tagalog test cases showed the lowest model accuracy, likely due to linguistic complexity and limited training data. In contrast, slang-based functional tests proved the hardest, as models struggled with culturally nuanced expressions. The diagnostic insights of SEAHateCheck further exposed model weaknesses in implicit hate detection and models' struggles with counter-speech expression. As the first functional test suite for these Southeast Asian languages, this work equips researchers with a robust benchmark, advancing the development of practical, culturally attuned hate speech detection tools for inclusive online content moderation.

This paper evaluates data augmentation and feature enhancement techniques for hate speech detection, comparing traditional classifiers, e.g., Delta Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (Delta TF-IDF), with transformer-based models (DistilBERT, RoBERTa, DeBERTa, Gemma-7B, gpt-oss-20b) across diverse datasets. It examines the impact of Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE), weighted loss determined by inverse class proportions, Part-of-Speech (POS) tagging, and text data augmentation on model performance. The open-source gpt-oss-20b consistently achieves the highest results. On the other hand, Delta TF-IDF responds strongly to data augmentation, reaching 98.2% accuracy on the Stormfront dataset. The study confirms that implicit hate speech is more difficult to detect than explicit hateful content and that enhancement effectiveness depends on dataset, model, and technique interaction. Our research informs the development of hate speech detection by highlighting how dataset properties, model architectures, and enhancement strategies interact, supporting more accurate and context-aware automated detection.

Subtle and indirect hate speech remains an underexplored challenge in online safety research, particularly when harmful intent is embedded within misleading or manipulative narratives. Existing hate speech datasets primarily capture overt toxicity, underrepresenting the nuanced ways misinformation can incite or normalize hate. To address this gap, we present HateMirage, a novel dataset of Faux Hate comments designed to advance reasoning and explainability research on hate emerging from fake or distorted narratives. The dataset was constructed by identifying widely debunked misinformation claims from fact-checking sources and tracing related YouTube discussions, resulting in 4,530 user comments. Each comment is annotated along three interpretable dimensions: Target (who is affected), Intent (the underlying motivation or goal behind the comment), and Implication (its potential social impact). Unlike prior explainability datasets such as HateXplain and HARE, which offer token-level or single-dimensional reasoning, HateMirage introduces a multi-dimensional explanation framework that captures the interplay between misinformation, harm, and social consequence. We benchmark multiple open-source language models on HateMirage using ROUGE-L F1 and Sentence-BERT similarity to assess explanation coherence. Results suggest that explanation quality may depend more on pretraining diversity and reasoning-oriented data rather than on model scale alone. By coupling misinformation reasoning with harm attribution, HateMirage establishes a new benchmark for interpretable hate detection and responsible AI research.

Combating online hate speech in multilingual settings requires approaches that go beyond English-centric models and capture the cultural and linguistic diversity of global online discourse. This paper presents a comprehensive survey and practical guide to multilingual hate speech detection and counterspeech generation, integrating recent advances in natural language processing. We analyze why monolingual systems often fail in non-English and code-mixed contexts, missing implicit hate and culturally specific expressions. To address these challenges, we outline a structured three-phase framework - task design, data curation, and evaluation - drawing on state-of-the-art datasets, models, and metrics. The survey consolidates progress in multilingual resources and techniques while highlighting persistent obstacles, including data scarcity in low-resource languages, fairness and bias in system development, and the need for multimodal solutions. By bridging technical progress with ethical and cultural considerations, we provide researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with scalable guidelines for building context-aware, inclusive systems. Our roadmap contributes to advancing online safety through fairer, more effective detection and counterspeech generation across diverse linguistic environments.

Hateful memes often require compositional multimodal reasoning: the image and text may appear benign in isolation, yet their interaction conveys harmful intent. Although thinking-based multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have recently advanced vision-language understanding, their capabilities remain underexplored for hateful meme analysis. We propose a reinforcement learning based post-training framework that improves reasoning in thinking-based MLLMs through task-specific rewards and a novel Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) objective. Specifically, we (i) conduct a systematic empirical study of off-the-shelf MLLMs for hateful meme understanding, (ii) extend an existing hateful meme dataset by generating weakly or pseudo-supervised chain-of-thought rationales via distillation, and (iii) introduce a GRPO-based objective that jointly optimizes meme classification and explanation quality to encourage fine-grained, step-by-step reasoning. Experiments on the Hateful Memes benchmark show that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance, improving accuracy and F1 by approximately 1 percent and explanation quality by approximately 3 percent. We will publicly release our code, dataset extensions, and evaluation resources to support reproducibility.

Cyberbullying has become a serious and growing concern in todays virtual world. When left unnoticed, it can have adverse consequences for social and mental health. Researchers have explored various types of cyberbullying, but most approaches use single-label classification, assuming that each comment contains only one type of abuse. In reality, a single comment may include overlapping forms such as threats, hate speech, and harassment. Therefore, multilabel detection is both realistic and essential. However, multilabel cyberbullying detection has received limited attention, especially in low-resource languages like Bangla, where robust pre-trained models are scarce. Developing a generalized model with moderate accuracy remains challenging. Transformers offer strong contextual understanding but may miss sequential dependencies, while LSTM models capture temporal flow but lack semantic depth. To address these limitations, we propose a fusion architecture that combines BanglaBERT-Large with a two-layer stacked LSTM. We analyze their behavior to jointly model context and sequence. The model is fine-tuned and evaluated on a publicly available multilabel Bangla cyberbullying dataset covering cyberbully, sexual harassment, threat, and spam. We apply different sampling strategies to address class imbalance. Evaluation uses multiple metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, Hamming loss, Cohens kappa, and AUC-ROC. We employ 5-fold cross-validation to assess the generalization of the architecture.

Internet memes have become a dominant form of expression on social media, including within the Bengali speaking community. While often humorous, memes can also be exploited to spread offensive, harmful, and inflammatory content targeting individuals and groups. Detecting this type of content is exceptionally challenging due to its satirical, subtle, and culturally specific nature. This problem is magnified for low-resource languages like Bengali, as existing research predominantly focuses on high-resource languages. To address this critical research gap, we introduce Bn-HIB (Bangla Hate Inflammatory Benign), a novel dataset containing 3,247 manually annotated Bengali memes categorized as Benign, Hate, or Inflammatory. Significantly, Bn- HIB is the first dataset to distinguish inflammatory content from direct hate speech in Bengali memes. Furthermore, we propose the MCFM (Multi-Modal Co-Attention Fusion Model), a simple yet effective architecture that mutually analyses both the visual and textual elements of a meme. MCFM employs a co-attention mechanism to identify and fuse the most critical features from each modality, leading to a more accurate classification. Our experiments show that MCFM significantly outperforms several state-of-the-art models on the Bn-HIB dataset, demonstrating its effectiveness in this nuanced task. To facilitate reproducibility and future research, the Bn-HIB dataset has been made publicly available through Mendeley Data. Warning: This work contains material that may be disturbing to some audience members. Viewer discretion is advised

Detecting hateful content in multimodal memes presents unique challenges, as harmful messages often emerge from the complex interplay between benign images and text. We propose GatedCLIP, a Vision-Language model that enhances CLIP's multimodal capabilities with specialized architectural improvements for hateful memes detection. Our approach introduces learned projection heads that map CLIP embeddings to a task-optimized semantic space, a dynamic gated fusion mechanism that adaptively weights visual and textual features, and a contrastive learning objective that maintains cross-modal semantic alignment. Experiments on the Hateful Memes dataset demonstrate that GatedCLIP achieves an AUROC of 0.66, substantially outperforming the CLIP baseline (AUROC 0.49) while maintaining computational efficiency with only 350K trainable parameters.