Overview
The human rights initiative Journalists for Tolerance conducted a systematic monitoring of hate speech and incorrect vocabulary targeting LGBTQ+ individuals in Belarusian media. Covering the period from January through October 2024, the research is part of a long-term observation series documenting rhetorical patterns and trends in media representations of vulnerable groups.
The study analysed 834 publications from 32 Belarusian online media outlets, including both national and local websites as well as Telegram channels. Each item was assessed for the presence of stereotypical, incorrect expressions as well as more overt hate speech. Special attention was paid to content that formally used correct vocabulary but was still employed to incite or legitimise hatred.
Trends in 2024
Compared to previous years, the findings from 2024 reveal some significant developments. On the one hand, the share of publications using correct vocabulary slightly exceeded the share of those using incorrect language — 52% versus 48%. On the other hand, 48% of all materials contained hate speech, a figure that exceeds the previous year’s average and doubles the rate recorded in 2021.
More concerning is the fact that hate speech is increasingly present even in texts that use formally correct terms. In 2024, such cases doubled in frequency compared to 2023. This signals the deepening of a rhetorical strategy where discriminatory messages are wrapped in neutral-sounding language — a trend that complicates detection and response.
Unlike in the pre-2020 period, when national media often demonstrated better adherence to inclusive language, today’s media landscape shows no significant difference between national and local outlets. In fact, regional media were particularly aggressive in 2023, and this pattern largely persisted into 2024.
Role of “Extremist” and “Non-Extremist” Media
For the first time, the research disaggregated data based on whether a media outlet was officially labelled as “extremist” by Belarusian authorities. The contrast was stark. Among “extremist” media — typically independent outlets — 96% of publications about LGBTQ+ topics used correct vocabulary, with only 2% containing hate speech. In contrast, the so-called “non-extremist” media, which generally align with state propaganda, showed overwhelmingly hostile rhetoric: 84% of their LGBTQ+-related publications contained hate speech, and only 23% were deemed correct. Telegram channels were especially problematic, with hate speech found in 82% of relevant posts, compared to 24% on websites.
Visibility of LGBTQ+ Groups
The monitoring continued to document the dominance of the terms “LGBT” and “gay” as umbrella categories for the entire LGBTQ+ spectrum. In 2024, the most frequently mentioned subtopics were same-sex relationships, transgender issues, and homosexuality. Approximately 11% of all publications employed stigmatizing expressions such as “non-traditional orientation,” “sexual minority,” and “homosexualism.” These terms are now being gradually replaced by the politically charged label “LGBT propaganda,” which has gained popularity in state-controlled discourse. Additionally, openly derogatory terms such as “sodomite,” “rainbow,” and “tranny” were still found in 2024, often used without quotation marks or critical commentary.
Conclusions and Implications
The media landscape in Belarus remains unstable when it comes to the representation of LGBTQ+ issues. While there was a modest increase in the quantity of publications, this did not translate into improved quality of coverage. On the contrary, there has been a consolidation of discriminatory rhetoric, both in overt and covert forms. Hate speech no longer operates solely through offensive terms; it now also exploits correct language for manipulative purposes.
This deterioration calls for urgent attention from journalists, educators, human rights defenders, and media watchdogs. Strengthening professional ethics, building media literacy, and supporting independent reporting remain key priorities. Particular focus should be placed on countering the normalisation of latent hostility, which risks becoming a default setting in Belarusian media narratives.
The full report and accompanying data files are available on request.
