One of the main problems in the study of online harassment in local politics relates to the lack of reliable data about the extent and nature of the problem. There is anecdotal evidence based on news coverage that the online abuse and intimidation of council members is becoming worse. However, the lack of systematic evidence makes it difficult to reach conclusions with regard to the most common forms of online abuse, who is being targeted and with what consequences.
To get a clear understanding of the nature of online abuse experiences by councillors, this section presents results derived from a large online survey conducted by Dr Sofia Collignon (Royal Holloway, University of London) and Dr Wolfgang R Rüdig (University of Strathclyde) between April and June 2020.
The survey was answered by 1,487 local councillors in England elected in 2019. The response rate was 17 per cent (from a total number of 8, 296 councillors contacted), of which:
• 72 per cent identified as men and 28 per cent women
• 4 per cent identified as black, Asian or minority ethnic
• 11 per cent identified as disabled.
Summary of findings
The survey asked councillors if they had suffered from any form of abuse, harassment or intimidation, according to their understanding of the terms. Thirty-four per cent of councillors explicitly identified the abuse as harassment.
The survey then presented councillors with a list of possible experiences of physical, psychological and online abuse. We observe an increase in the number of councillors that indicated they have experienced some form of inappropriate behaviour. Forty-six per cent of councillors suffered from harassment, 12 percentage points more than those who explicitly labelled their experiences as such. Together, these results indicate that there is still work to be done to inform councillors of what constitutes intimidatory behaviour and to de-normalise abuse.
Councillors reported that harassment came equally from residents who were angry about local situations or decisions, and from their fellow councillors (71 per cent in each case).
The harassment and intimidation of councillors can have strong emotional consequences which can affect councillors’ wellbeing and capacity to engage in meaningful council activities. The survey indicates that the majority of councillors were concerned (63 per cent) and annoyed (72 per cent) by the abuse received. Thirty-seven per cent of councillors experienced some fear as a result (Figure 1).
Figure one
Thirty per cent experienced harassment on social media and 28 per cent received abusive or threatening emails. Forty per cent of councillors have been on the receiving end of at least one form of technology-enabled abuse.
There is a strong significant correlation between being the victim of online abuse and feelings of security. Fifty-nine per cent of councillors who suffered online harassment have experienced some fear while performing their duties. But this can also be because abuse on social media often correlates with other forms of abuse. Twenty-five per cent of those harassed online also received threats and 12 per cent had people loitering around their homes or work.
The survey did not ask councillors specifically if they have been victims of smear campaigns or rumours. However, it included an open-ended question asking them to describe the experience that affected them the most. The qualitative analysis of this open-ended question suggests that the spread of rumours or mis and disinformation about councillors are a widespread practice and that it is extremely harmful to councillors' wellbeing and ability to perform their duties. While it is not possible at this stage to quantify the frequency of this practice, further interviews sustained with councillors corroborate these findings. Spreading of rumours for character assassination and smear campaigns were mentioned as perhaps one of the most used and damaging tools to harass and intimidate councillors.
Councillors response to abuse
The survey asked in an open-ended question to briefly describe any action taken in response to inappropriate behaviour experienced as a councillor. Analysis (figure two) of the open-ended question shows that among councillors who have suffered online harassment, almost half did not do anything in response (49 per cent). The large proportion of councillors that decided to take no action suggests again a degree of normalisation of abuse in politics but also the perception that currently available mechanisms are not efficient or enough to deal with the problem. This is exemplified by comments made by councillors:
"None [action is taken], nothing would be done about it."
None, don't want to exacerbate the situation or rise to the threat.
"No, as it would be emotionally exhausting, highly time-consuming and not be taken seriously. My biggest concern is bullying and online abuse and harassment such as Next Door social media web site which I sadly no longer use as a result."
Figure two
Other councillors indicated that they dealt with the abuse themselves (12 per cent), successfully in some cases and unsuccessfully in others. For example, one councillor decided to withdraw from social media:
“Yes, I stood up for myself. It has happened so often I became resilient to a lot of it. I stopped using social media for a year to give myself a break - I didn't miss it but recently re-joined temporarily. Although the prolonged period and the severity of the bullying I received as a parish councillor before I became a district councillor, had a detrimental effect on my mental health I suffer from PTSD and anxiety as a result of it.”
It is important to flag here the role democratic and member services play in supporting councillors to deal with abuse, as this is the most frequent action taken in response (16 per cent).
“Spoke to democratic services and now use them as email contact and removed address from council site.”
“Consulted Democratic Services for advice.”
“I contacted democratic services at the borough to ask how to respond. On one particular occasion, they advised me to respond with an answer that suggested the question was over and above my responsibilities as a councillor. This didn't stop resident continuing with his line of enquiry.”
Phoned the police. Made sure democratic services were informed. Made sure the MO [monitoring officer] was informed if the behaviour involved a complaint. Responded directly with a calm and clear 'agree to disagree and request not to attack me personally’. In one instance, blocked an individual from my Facebook.
The next most frequent action was reporting to the police (11 per cent). The open-ended questions highlight the difficulty of getting police action. One reason frequently mentioned by participants is that the abuse does not always come from one single person, that perpetrators cannot be easily identified and the high threshold required by the police to get involved.
“Reported to the police twice when coming from a member of the public that I could identify. I reported threats by [omitted for privacy reasons] and were told by the police that it is was all part of the rough and tumble of politics."
Every time the perpetrator did something we logged and reported it on 101 eventually after he took pictures of my home from my front lawn, I reported him to the police who visited him, we installed CCTV. He continued to stalk all of my family members and fellow councillors even after that.
“Contacted police, they felt I was perhaps worrying too much”
Only a minority of councillors decided to block the accounts or to remove content. This may be because of a desire to engage with, and appear open to engagement with, residents, or a lack of understanding of the different privacy tools offered by social media platforms.
Lessons from Wales
Evidence presented to the Senedd Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee in 2019 suggest a similar picture in Wales. The Committee heard that elected representatives have experienced bullying, discrimination and harassment as part of their public lives, and that the fear of such experience is a barrier to many potential candidates. Of the councillors who participated in the committee’s survey, a quarter had experienced abuse, bullying, discrimination or harassment from within their local community; one in five (19.2 per cent) from within the council; one in ten (11.8 per cent) from within their political party or group. Only a third of councillors had not suffered such behaviour during their time in office.
The full “Diversity in Local Government” report of the committee is available online.
Lessons from the analysis of the data
The data provides key insights into the dynamics behind online harassment and intimidation of councillors. It shows that online abuse is widespread and correlates with other forms of physical and psychological abuse. The survey also shows that abuse comes from members of the public and other councillors alike and that it has emotional consequences. The analysis of the open-ended question highlights the difficulties that councillors face to effectively deal with the abuse, with a considerable proportion of them deciding to do nothing, or feeling there is nothing that can effectively be done, in response. The answers also highlight the importance of having clear and effective institutional mechanisms to deal with the abuse, and institutions that provide timely support.
The following section provides an overview of current national and international initiatives to deal with the problem of online harassment and intimidation. The section closes with the limitations of current approaches, highlighting the need to transition from reactive measures that deal with the abuse once committed to a more proactive and preventive approach.