magazine issue 9 2025 / Issue

Viral and harmful: Violence in media and its impact on empathy

• written by Mira Fauth-Bühler
• edited by Rinat Meerson

Reviewers: Melanie Elizabeth Jacobsen and an undisclosed reviewer.

Editorial Assistant: Zoey Chapman.

From fight videos on TikTok to hate comments on Instagram, violence is omnipresent online, but what does it do to our empathy? Studies reveal that repeated exposure to digital aggression can reduce our ability to feel concern or discomfort when witnessing others' pain, especially in teens. Yet empathy doesn’t have to erode. This article explains how online violence affects our ability to care and offers practical strategies to maintain compassion in virtual spaces and effectively strengthen empathy over the long term.

May 2024, Mannheim: A police officer is fatally injured in a stabbing attack. Before news outlets can respond, videos of the incident are already circulating on TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), and Telegram, according to CBS News [1]. Some clips are overlaid with dramatic music, commented on, and shared millions of times. Have you seen the video? If so, how did it make you feel? Compassion? Horror? Or rather, a feeling of distance, maybe even indifference? These reactions are not isolated but widespread. Instead of horror, many viewers respond with emojis: flames, laughing faces, or thumbs up. Research shows that consuming violent content on social media often does not provoke the intense emotions one might expect. Instead of pity and compassion, many viewers experience emotional distancing. The fast and constant availability of such content often causes reactions to dull over time. Violent depictions are increasingly consumed as “content” and no longer perceived as real suffering [2].  

Platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok have greatly increased the availability of violent content by enabling users to share in real time. Algorithms targeting high engagement often amplify violent content and accelerate its spread [3]. Another notable trend is the viral spread of violence videos deliberately produced for high visibility. Examples include “fight compilation” videos or livestreams of real violent acts, promoted by social media mechanisms designed for maximum visibility and engagement. 

Psychologically, this is no coincidence: Violent content grabs our attention more than other posts. Psychologists explain this with what's called a negativity bias: we naturally focus more on danger and disturbing images, because our brains are wired to notice threats. This helps explain why social media platforms amplify violent content. It gets clicks, shares, and reactions faster than almost anything else. 

What impact do these contents have on our mental health and especially on our capacity for empathy? This question will be explored in the following article. 

Figure 1: Media violence

What is empathy? 

Empathy is the ability to understand and emotionally share the thoughts and feelings of others [4]. It is a central foundation for interpersonal interaction and develops early in childhood. Empathy plays a crucial role in social relationships, conflict resolution, and moral action. 

Two dimensions can be distinguished based on Hoffmann’s work [5]: 

• Cognitive empathy, also called perspective-taking, describes the ability to put oneself into the thoughts, beliefs, and intentions of others. It is closely related to the theory of mind:  the ability to recognize and understand the mental states of others.
• Affective empathy refers to the ability to emotionally respond to the emotions of others. It enables not only recognizing others’ feelings but also resonating or feeling along even to similar emotional states. In particularly intense cases, emotional contagion may occur, where the feelings of another person directly transfer to the observer.

Empathy is thus far more than a psychological concept; it is a social necessity. It fosters compassion, cooperation, and social cohesion -  that is, the feeling of connectedness and mutual support among individuals. 

Impact of digital violence on empathy 

In our digitalized world, social media platforms are much more than places for communication. They are also stages where violence spreads in various forms: real violent acts, psychological violence such as bullying or threats, but also subtle forms like discriminatory memes or stereotypes. The problem is that violence is often not problematized but staged as content. Dramatically edited clips, sound effects, and likes make it consumable. 

Those regularly exposed to such content become emotionally desensitized over time. This process is called desensitization in psychology [6], [7]. What initially provokes outrage gradually loses its impact. Violence becomes normalized, often entertainment, and sometimes even a habit. 

From the perspective of social cognitive learning theory [8], a theory that explains how people learn by observing and imitating others, this has consequences. People learn by observation, especially when the observed behavior is reinforced. When violent content is widely liked, shared, or commented on in social media, it may contribute to the normalization of violence in online discourse, making it seem less shocking or morally problematic over time.  Adolescents are particularly receptive to these messages, since digital status, that is, visible social recognition through online platforms, often matters more in peer groups than moral standards. 

But what does this mean for our capacity for empathy? A recent study shows that repeated exposure to non-empathic reactions on social networks can impair one’s own empathy [9]. The researchers found that those who often witness indifferent reactions to suffering are more likely to adopt that attitude, a classic case of observational learning. Neurobiologically, this is reflected in altered activity in the insular cortex, a brain area closely linked to empathetic processing. 

Adolescents are particularly affected. Their brains are in a developmental phase where key areas for empathy, impulse control, and perspective-taking are not yet fully matured [10]. Meanwhile, media consumption increases sharply, while parental control often decreases. The result: a particularly high risk of long-term effects. For example, neuroscientific studies show that adolescents who frequently consume violent media have significantly reduced activity in the insular cortex [11]. This brain region plays a key role in emotional awareness, empathy, and processing others' pain - functions that are essential for social understanding and moral behavior. 

But what does this mean concretely for adolescents in everyday life beyond neurobiological findings? A longitudinal study by Krahé and Möller [12] with a large sample of German adolescents provides insightful evidence. Over a period of twelve months, regular consumption of violent media was associated with increased physical aggression and decreased empathetic abilities. This effect occurred independently of academic performance, was specific to violent content, and the consumption of non-violent media had no comparable influence. Particularly noteworthy: adolescents with initially low aggression were especially sensitive to repeated exposure to media violence. This suggests a desensitizing mechanism through which even previously unremarkable youths may have impaired emotional responsiveness. The effects appeared in both genders, although boys showed overall higher aggression levels. 

Figure 2: Violence to share: When the deed shocks and desensitizes

The role of platforms and their responsibility 

Social network operators face growing criticism for their inconsistent enforcement of community guidelines. Violent videos can often circulate freely for hours – sometimes indefinitely – before being removed, if at all. Automated filtering systems are insufficient, frequently missing symbolic, psychological, or context-dependent forms of violence [13]. In addition to these technical limitations, platforms struggle to balance freedom of expression with the need to protect users from harmful content. In many cases, their responses are slow or overly cautious. At the core of this issue lies the platform logic itself: Social media systems tend to amplify emotionally charged content, not because of ideological intent, but because such material maximizes user engagement. And since engagement translates directly into advertising revenue, content moderation often becomes a secondary priority, which allows harmful content to remain visible if it continues to attract attention. 

Another problem lies in the opacity of algorithmic decisions: users often cannot understand why certain content is recommended. This lack of transparency hinders conscious, reflective consumption. Platforms can actively influence violence perception, often without users’ awareness [14]. The consequence: violent content remains online, and with it, the risk that social norms begin to shift. When violence is publicly visible, accepted, or even celebrated, the social climate can become coarser. The boundary between reality and staging blurs, along with moral orientation and emotional clarity.  

Prosocial potentials of social media 

Crucial is also the type of content consumed: while violent portrayals are often linked to a decline in empathy [12], prosocial content can increase empathetic behavior and willingness to help [15]. 

Social media offers opportunities for supportive sharing, expressing solidarity, or participating in campaigns. Such digital interactions are associated with positive experiences, perceived social support, and a stronger sense of community [16]. Storytelling formats, documentary shorts, or personal testimonials create emotional closeness and promote prosocial behavior. Studies show that moving content, such as reports on flight or illness, increases willingness to help or donate [17]. 

The online social space can amplify compassion and civic courage, provided the content is authentic, well-curated, and emotionally engaging. When these conditions are met, digital media can help foster empathy, promote solidarity, and inspire collective action. Movements like #MeToo or #BlackLivesMatter have enabled people to share personal stories that have garnered worldwide attention and fostered empathy for affected groups [18]. Such movements raise awareness of social issues and strengthen users’ empathy by offering insights into others’ life experiences. 

To understand whether empathy is fostered or hindered, it’s essential to focus not on the platform itself, but on the nature of the content, how it is used, and the surrounding social context. Social media reflects society and can both undermine but also strengthen empathy. 

Figure 3: Empathy to share: when the feed feels and helps

Strategies to promote empathy in the digital world 

Adolescents, in particular, go through a sensitive developmental phase. They are especially receptive to positive, empathy-enhancing experiences but also vulnerable to the negative effects of media violence. Therefore, they need effective protective measures: media literacy education, the ability to find, understand, and critically evaluate digital content, empathy-strengthening content, and platforms that value more than just clicks. 

Despite the well-documented negative impacts of media violence, effective countermeasures exist: reflective engagement with digital content and targeted educational and training programs can help preserve and promote empathy online. 

Five key strategies (e.g., [19]) 

1. Strengthen media literacy: Teach students how social media algorithms shape what they see, how emotional content can influence behavior, and how to spot manipulation and misinformation. Early awareness helps users navigate digital spaces more critically and responsibly. 
2. Empathy training: Use programs that foster emotional intelligence, such as role plays, theater, or digital simulations. Studies show that mindfulness- and compassion-based trainings can enhance social skills and overall well-being [4]).  
3. Boost digital civil courage, the willingness to speak up or take action online against hate speech, misinformation, or harmful behavior: Encourage users not to ignore violence but to report, speak out, or support victims. Initiatives like “UNESCO – #SpreadNoHate” and “LoveStorm.eu” demonstrate effectiveness. 
4. Expand psychosocial support: Schools and social institutions should provide spaces to process online experiences, such as digital counseling or peer support.
5. Improve platform regulation: Social networks must be held accountable through binding laws, improved moderation, and independent oversight. Although regulating platforms is a complex and long-term challenge, especially given their profit-oriented design, the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) marks a significant step forward. It requires major platforms to identify and reduce systemic risks, including the spread of harmful or illegal content.

 

Conclusion 

Violence on social media is not an exception, it’s part of everyday digital life. It encounters us daily in the form of explicit violent videos, digital humiliation, or subtle forms of exclusion. Research shows that regular exposure to such content can impair empathy and moral judgment, especially in adolescents. This makes media violence a serious challenge for society, politics, and science. 

Yet social media need not be places of emotional numbing. When designed responsibly, they can foster compassion, open perspectives, and encourage solidarity. What matters is how we engage with them. For instance, the German public broadcaster ZDF is part of the international research project Public Spaces Incubator. Together with partners from Canada, Belgium, Switzerland, and Australia, this project explores how digital platforms can be designed to foster respectful and inclusive public dialogue. 

So, what is needed? Comprehensive media education empowering young people to critically and reflectively handle digital content. More empathy-promoting formats on social media are needed—formats that tell personal stories instead of shocking, and foster emotional connection through short videos, interviews, or narrative threads that highlight individual experiences with dignity and depth. And platforms that take responsibility proactively – not only after violence goes viral. 

Empathy is not a given. But it can be learned, trained, and is indispensable. For our coexistence both online and offline. 

Bibliography 

[1] Noryskiewicz, A. (2024, June 1). Video shows anti-Islam activist among those stabbed in Germany knife attack. CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/germany-knife-stabbing-attack-mannheim-vide...

[2] Mrug, S., Madan, A., & Windle, M. (2016). Emotional desensitization to violence contributes to adolescents’ violent behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 44(1), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-9986-x 

[3] Milli, S., Carroll, M., Wang, Y., Pandey, S., Zhao, S., & Dragan, A. D. (2025). Engagement, user satisfaction, and the amplification of divisive content on social media. PNAS Nexus, 4(3), pgad062. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad062 

[4] Singer, T. (2025). A neuroscience perspective on the plasticity of the social and relational brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15319 

[5] Hoffman, M. L. (1984). Interaction of affect and cognition in empathy. In C. E. Izard, J. Kagan, & R. B. Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, cognition, and behavior (pp. 103–131). Cambridge University Press. 

[6] Brockmyer, J. F. (2022). Desensitization and violent video games: Mechanisms and evidence. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 31(1), 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2021.06.005 

[7] Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2009). Comfortably numb: Desensitizing effects of violent media on helping others. Psychological Science, 20(3), 273–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02287.x 

[8] Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

[9] Zhou, Y., Han, S., Kang, P., Tobler, P. N., & Hein, G. (2024). The social transmission of empathy relies on observational reinforcement learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(9), e2313073121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2313073121 

[10] Luna, B., & Sweeney, J. A. (2004). The emergence of collaborative brain function: fMRI studies of the development of response inhibition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1021, 296–309. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1308.035 

[11] Guo, X., Hu, L., Zhan, R., & Han, S. (2013). Exposure to violence reduces empathetic responses to others’ pain. Brain and Cognition, 82(2), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2013.04.005 

[12] Krahé, B., & Möller, I. (2010). Longitudinal effects of media violence on aggression and empathy among German adolescents. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 401–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.07.003 

[13] Ayadi, Y. (2025). Automatic moderation of visual content: Integration of emotions and semantic analysis through deep learning for the safety of young users. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-025-04979-z 

[14] Olteanu, A., Varol, O., & Kıcıman, E. (2017). Distilling the outcomes of personal experiences: A propensity-scored analysis of social media. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 370–386). https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998353 

[15] Greitemeyer, T., & Osswald, S. (2010). Effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016997 

[16] Oh, H. J., Ozkaya, E., & LaRose, R. (2014). How does online social networking enhance life satisfaction? The relationships among online supportive interaction, affect, perceived social support, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.053 

[17] Ye, J., Jindal, N., Pierri, F., & Luceri, L. (2023). Online networks of support in distressed environments: Solidarity and mobilization during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.04327 

[18] Chakma, K. (2024). A review of the role of social media in shaping social movements. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=5083142 

[19] Friesem, Y. (2021). Developing digital empathy. In Y. Yildiz & J. Keengwe (Eds.), Handbook of Media Literacy. IGI Global. 

Figure Sources

Figure 1: OpenAI, “Keywords” [Generative AI Image], Generated on May 20, 2025. Available at: https://chat.openai.com 

Figure 2: OpenAI, “Media Violence with Likes” [Generative AI Image], Generated on May 20, 2025. Available at: https://chat.openai.com 

Figure 3: OpenAI, “Media Donation Appeal with Likes” [Generative AI Image], Generated on May 20, 2025. Available at: https://chat.openai.com