Online speech and communal conflict: Evidence from India

TL;DR

This paper explores how online speech influences real-world attacks in India, finding that Hindu-chauvinist hashtags correlate with increased violence against religious minorities.

Contribution

The study introduces evidence on how non-aggressive, value-based online speech affects communal conflict in religiously divided societies.

Findings

Hindu-chauvinist hashtags correlate with increased attacks on Muslims and Christians.

Hashtags promoting religious unity correlate with fewer attacks.

Internet outages eliminate the observed relationships, confirming online speech's role.

Abstract

How does online speech affect offline attacks? While a growing literature has examined this link in right-wing violence in the West, much less is known about its importance in the religiously divided societies of the Global South. Furthermore, existing research has overwhelmingly focused on negative externalities of social media, while paying comparatively little attention to their conciliatory effects. We advance the scholarship in both of these areas by analyzing 22.4 million posts from Koo, an Indian social media network popular among India’s Hindu nationalists. We combine these data with information on attacks on religious minorities in India from 2020 through 2022. We find that the frequency of hashtags with a Hindu-chauvinist connotation are associated with increased attacks on Muslims and Christians. We also find that the frequency of hashtags alluding to the overcoming of religious divisions is associated with fewer attacks. These results survive a battery of robustness checks and supplemental tests. Additionally, the observed relationships disappear during exogenous Internet outages, consistent with the effect being driven by online speech. Importantly, since the content we study is not overtly aggressive and conveys values rather than factual claims, it does not classify as hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. This suggests that the scholarly debate on what kinds of online speech influence offline harm has to be broadened and that censorship and fact-checking can fall short of addressing online speech’s negative consequences in religiously divided societies.

Figures