Introduction
This report documents instances of hate speech, discriminatory expressions, and unjust criticism disseminated through social media, online platforms, and print media. It analyzes the nature, prevalence, and societal impact of hate speech observed throughout February.
This report aims to promote safer and more respectful communication while fostering greater social harmony in online spaces. By sharing knowledge on how to identify, respond to, and protect against hate speech, we hope to contribute to a more stable and inclusive society.
Research Methodology
As hate speech is a term that comes from emotion, there is a wide spectrum in defining it, not a specific one. BHRN, therefore, standardized the definition of hate speech for this report as follows. Hate speech in this report means aggressiveness and hatred against protected characteristics of a person or a group, blaming, discriminative expression, writing, gesture, or art expression of excoriation, dehumanization.
It means attacking someone’s faith, language, gender, sexual orientation, origin, ethnicity, skin color, race, belief, citizenship and physical appearance. The monitored hate speeches were categorized as (1) Criminalizing Hate Speech, (2) Abusive Hate Speech, (3) Dehumanizing Hate Speech, (4) Violence Inciting Hate Speech, (5) Threatening Hate Speech, and (6) Hate Speech that supports prejudicial actions inspired by hate speech.
BHRN has daily documented hate speech terms and usages found in the contents – based on the current political crisis - disseminated by the military’s propagative channels during the political and war tensions.
This report was written after monitoring both online and printed media which Junta and its supporters used to spread their hate speeches. BHRN has recorded a total of 8 hate speech posts from monitoring 3 Facebook groups and 13 Facebook accounts, a total of 63 hate speech posts from monitoring 24 Telegram channels, and 16 posts from 34 TikTok accounts. In the printed media, two newspapers and one journal were also monitored. A total of 87 hate speech cases were recorded during January of 2025. There are many limitations to conducting monitoring that can cover the entirety of Burmese social media, and there may be cases of hate speech that go unreported here.
Context of misinformation as hate speech
In this report, BHRN has analysed hate speech in the context of the ongoing political tensions in Myanmar. Sometimes, when measured by international standards, what might look like misinformation takes on a different significance in the aftermath of the 2021 coup. This is because misinformation, particularly when aimed at individuals, groups with opposing political beliefs, or minority religious communities, can have severe consequences, even leading to loss of life and the intensification of religious and community conflicts. Hate speech in Myanmar's current political climate is more than just false information; it can be a catalyst for very real and harmful outcomes, especially in the post-coup environment. Understanding this complex relationship between hate speech, misinformation, and their tangible impacts is crucial for grasping the region's broader social, political, and intergroup dynamics.
Findings of hate speech in Social Network
Hate Speech Targets and Usages
The followings are the hate speech targets recorded in February.
- Ethnic Groups
- Kachin Independence Army and Arakan Army were often targeted.
- Rohingyas were lebelled as “Illegal Immigrants” and “Terrorists”.
- Religious Communities
- Muslim community and the religion of Islam were targeted and linked them to terrorism.
- Buddhists were also targeted in some cases.
- Women
- Woman activists, female PDFs and CDMs were sexually targeted.
- Political Organizations
- National Unity Government (NUG) and People Defense Force (PDF) were labelled as “terrorists”
The most common usages of hate speech are dog, terrorist, condom, Kalar (a derogatory term referring to Muslim), Bengali and Rapists.