I’ve been involved in two new publications recently, part of a wider program of work on social media and control features.

The first is a paper led by Asher Flynn in Policy & Internet looking at some focus group research we conducted in Australia examining social media users’ experiences reporting harmful and offensive content on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter:
Flynn, A., Vakhitova, Z., Wheildon, L., Harris, B., & Robards, B. (2025). Content Moderation and Community Standards: The Disconnect Between Policy and User Experiences Reporting Harmful and Offensive Content on Social Media. Policy & Internet, 17(3).

Abstract:
Moderating harmful and offensive content on social media is challenging for digital platforms that seek to balance regulation and censorship across a diverse user group. It is further complicated by discrepancies between platform policies, user expectations and user experiences. Informed by focus groups with 104 Australians aged 13–74 years, and a walkthrough analysis of three social media platforms, this article examines users’ experiences reporting harmful and offensive content on Facebook, Instagram and X. It explores user expectations and the complexities that arise when platforms claim to maintain Community Standards, while prioritising (only some) users’ freedom of expression and wellbeing. It argues that existing platform policies and content moderation relating to reporting harmful and offensive content are inconsistent, contradictory and non-transparent, and this is most acutely felt by users from marginalised communities who are most likely to be the targets of harmful and offensive content. We argue that moderation of harmful and offensive content should expand beyond binary retaining or removal. Rather, it could utilise innovative, context and socially-specific prospective outcomes, which could contribute towards user autonomy, freedom of expression, shared community learning of social norms and a reduction in the silencing of marginalised users.

https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.70006

The second paper was led by Rachele Reschiglian, looking specifically at the experiences of LGBTQ+ young people in Italy and their experences of safety and control on dating apps:
Reschiglian, R., Scarcelli, C. M., & Robards, B. (2025). “To be Queer, To be in Dating Apps, To be Queer in Dating Apps”: Biographical Queerness and the Creation of Safety Strategies in Online Dating behind Stigma and Fears of Italian LGBTQ+ Young Adults. Mediascapes journal, 25(1), 260-280.

Abstract:
This study examines the experiences of Italian LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and/or Queer) young adults (aged 19-35) navigating safety in online dating apps in the context of growing sociocultural challenges. Situating itself in the study of digital intimacies, the research explores how platform affordances, societal norms, and individual identity journeys shape digital dating safety practices and their perceptions among LGBTQ+ users. Drawing on eight focus groups with 39 people, in this article we employ thematic analysis to uncover users’ experiences of risks, fears, and strategies for navigating safety on dating apps. These findings expand on Babcock et al.’s (2024) Safety Spectrum Theory Model by introducing the concept of “Biographical Queerness,” which captures the dynamic and evolving relationship between LGBTQ+ users’ identities, their digital practices, and the idea of modality spectrum between offline and online safety practices. The findings reveal that Italian LGBTQ+ young adults frequently face risks such as harassment, fetishisation, unsolicited explicit content, and the fear of being outed in both digital and physical spaces, based on their gender (identity and perception), and sexual orientation.. These risks are compounded by Italy’s current sociocultural climate, which often stigmatises LGBTQ+ identities, making digital visibility a precarious endeavour. To mitigate risks, participants report employing a range of safety strategies spanning in-app, multi-app, and offline practices. Users’ approaches in the apps to safety are shaped by what we describe as their Biographical Queerness, which reflects their evolving gender and sexual identities and their sociocultural and biographical contexts. These strategies intersect with the Safety Spectrum Theory’s (Babcock et al., 2024) categories of strict, fluid, and relaxed safety protocols, demonstrating how users adapt their behaviours based on perceived risks and contextual factors. By examining the interplay between LGBTQ+ identities, digital practices, and cultural contexts, this study nuances understanding of safety negotiation in digital dating spaces for LGBTQ+ users in Italy. This paper seeks to highlight the significance of identity-specific risks, platform affordances, and the sociocultural landscape shaping LGBTQ+ digital intimacy and safety practices.

https://rosa.uniroma1.it/rosa03/mediascapes/article/view/19070