In the age of social media, where everyone is simultaneously a critic and an observer, the lives of public figures can quickly turn into an arena for clashes of opinion. Three social media users shared their experiences encountering online hate and spoke about the necessity of spreading kindness and love.
Losh Naidu, a reality show personality, digital content creator, and host of the podcast The Double Dose Podcast, noted that publishing material on social networks forces one to realize that every person has their own opinion. She reported receiving comments regarding her appearance, age, parenting, and even character from people who did not know her.
Naidu emphasized that there are careless remarks and those explicitly aimed at causing pain. According to her, there is a clear difference between honest criticism and words intended to hurt, with the latter often coming from fake accounts. She stated that words carry weight and admitted that comments affected her, even if they came from strangers.
However, over time, she learned not to judge her worth by what appears on social media. She also realized that harsh comments say more about the person writing them than about the person receiving them, and that online hate often attracts more attention than it deserves. Naidu is willing to listen to respectful criticism, but in cases of intentionally cruel or offensive comments, she either ignores, deletes, or blocks the account, believing that protecting mental well-being is not a weakness but a healthy approach.
She added that she was fortunate to have a strong support system and prefers to focus on support and encouragement from people who genuinely support her work. Naidu reminded people that it is easy to forget that behind the screen is a real human being. She suggested asking themselves before commenting: 'Would I say this to someone's face?' or 'Would I say this to my child, brother, or friend?' If the answer is no, the comment probably should not be posted.
In Naidu's view, social media is an extremely powerful tool capable of inspiring, educating, uniting, and uplifting people, but it can also cause serious emotional harm when used carelessly. She concluded that kindness costs nothing, and we can disagree while remaining respectful and expressing opinions without infringing upon another's dignity. Everyone is responsible for creating a safer, more compassionate, and respectful online space, especially for the next generation in the digital world, calling for the use of words to build, not to destroy.
Tsheshen Naiker, a beauty artist, actor, and known by his comedic pseudonym Aunty Sheila, shared that discussing his life as a gay man and LGBTQ+ rights made him vulnerable to people who expressed hatred online. He attributed this to differing views, noting that while he respects differences of opinion, he believes a person does not have to be hostile because of them. Naiker reported facing online hate and insults, and although it initially affected him deeply, he understood that as an influencer, one needs thick skin and must be prepared to accept both good and bad.
He sometimes responds to negative comments if he feels a correction is necessary, and in some cases, reacts with humorous videos to show that the hate does not affect him. His message is for people to 'love and be complimentary, not hate,' because the world needs more love and less hate. He quotes a proverb that hate is like drinking poison while waiting for someone else's death, and urges people not to react to negativity but to rise above it and spread love.
Natasha Portrag Munian, known by the stage name Bash with Tash, a comedian and entrepreneur, recounted how she and her husband were often attacked due to their appearance, particularly their weight. Initially, this greatly affected her, but she learned that there would be people trying to harm others, and they cannot be allowed to win. She believes that her own opinion of herself is more important than anyone else's. Although she and her husband sometimes respond to some negative comments, they believe the best response is no response. Munian stressed that this does not mean people can judge and attack if someone shares part of their life, reminding people that life is hard, and everyone fights unknown battles, so one should be kind.
On all social media platforms, fertile ground easily forms for racists, homophobes, sexists, sexual predators, misogynists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, and bullies. A natural question arises: who are these people in real life?
Social media users may experience disappointment, anger, confusion, and irritation. In the context of online culture, where algorithms and anonymity combine with toxicity that destroys rational discussions, there is a clear trend toward an outburst of fierce hatred in comments on sometimes harmless posts.
An example is given of a mother facing a barrage of accusations and hatred after her children died at the hands of their father, as well as a young girl whose swimsuit photos provoke mockery and comments degrading her appearance.
On the vast highway of the internet, ordinary people transform into aggressive animals. The safety provided by the screen acts as a kind of protective barrier. Any mention of the world, humanity, compassion, inclusivity, anti-racism, anti-xenophobia, or gender violence provokes a negative reaction. Online abuses, from crude profanity to personal attacks, aim for one goal—to silence and humiliate a person.
Psychologists call this phenomenon the 'online disinhibition effect,' which arises due to physical distance and the illusion of no consequences. People say things they would never dare to say face-to-face. Perhaps in this bullying lies a sense of bravado they do not receive in everyday life.
The author notes that trying to understand the psychology of this dangerous behavior may lead more to disappointment than enlightenment. However, it can be objectively concluded that without common sense and with moral and intellectual bankruptcy, online bullies and haters are incapable of logical debate. Their standard mode of communication becomes sarcasm, to which readers are accustomed in the comments on news and personal pages.
The author, having personally encountered online hatred, comes to the understanding that the truth often elicits a strong emotional reaction. Going beyond what is permissible and calls for unity and compassion have their price. At the same time, the author sees something greater than hatred and bullying.
The author testifies to people from different parts of the community and country who stood up against online hatred when necessary. Loud voices do not reflect the opinion of the majority in the community or the country. Social media algorithms feed on outrage, amplifying division and creating the appearance that the country is drowning in xenophobia, racism, sexism, Islamophobia, and other forms of prejudice.
Some people benefit from this situation. The reality is that online culture skillfully distorts rather than reflects society. When platform creators and other structures monetize profiles, morality and humanity become financially unviable, while hatred brings greater profit.
The author emphasizes that the residents of South Africa continue to live daily in multi-confessional and multi-racial harmony with greater tact and dignity than suggested by social media comments. This is not an attempt to oversimplify the problem, but a way to understand the origin of the madness.
People prone to humiliating others and suppressing constructive conversations are generally insecure, unnoticed, or suffering from pain, seeking fleeting fame and pleasure. This demonstrates the worst impulses of a small segment of users, not the soul of the entire community or country.
However, distortions have real consequences: online hatred and harassment undermine mental health, especially among young people. In the local community, this exacerbates external racism with internal mechanisms such as colorism, religious intolerance, and marginalization of people. Conservative groups quickly become judgmental towards those who express their opinions, especially women challenging the status quo. These disagreements are not localized; they weaken solidarity and penetrate the national landscape, deepening distrust at a critical moment.
There is an obvious fact: behind every hateful comment is a real person targeted by that hatred. Cases of suicide due to social media bullying have been documented, which in itself should awaken conscience. Therefore, it is crucial that decent people refuse to remain silent or afraid, standing up for justice.
Changing frequency or algorithms may not ensure popularity on social media, but it can be decisive in the effort to restore humanity. This is the moral battle of our time: keyboard warriors versus the unity of the community and the country. Neutrality is not an option here.
