Hate Speech Classification for Text

Abstract

Hate speechhas turned into anoffense that hasincreased in therecent past, bothonline and offiine. There areseveralfactorsthatexplainwhythisisso.Ononeside,peoplearemoreinclinedtoactviolentlybecause of the anonymity provided by the internet,and social networks in particular.Conversely,people’s needto express themselves on the internet has grown, and with this has been the prevalence of hate speech. Given how detrimental this kind of discriminatory speech is to society, detection and prevention by social media companies and governments can both be useful. With this survey, we provide an overall overview of the work that has been accomplished in the field, which addresses this dilemma. The use of many com- plex and non-linear models made this challenge possible,and CAT Boost carried out the others becauseit employed latent semantic analysis (LSA) for dimensionality reduction.Hate speech refers to abusiveor discriminatory language directed at an individual or group based on attributes such as race, religion, ethnicity,gender,orsexualorientation. Itsproliferationcanre sultinconcretedamag eandannihilate the security and inclusivity of online environments. This paper presents a machine learning approach to hate speech categorization in text. Utilizing publicly accessible labeled data, we examine various natural languageprocessing(NLP)techniquesandsupervisedlearningalgorithmslikelogisticregression,support vectormachines, anddeeplearningmodelstocategorizeintohatespeech,offensivelanguage,andinnocu- ouscontent. Keyfeaturessuchasn-grams,TF-IDFscores,andwordembeddingsareexploitedtoenhance model performance.The results validate the effectiveness of utilizing linguistic features in combination with optimal classifiers to achieve high precision and accuracy for hate speech detection.The findings emphasize the importance of using well-balanced datasets and ethical considerations while developing automated content moderation systems.

Introduction

With the rise of the digital era, internet platforms have become central to public communication, enabling widespread information sharing but also facilitating the spread of harmful content like hate speech—abusive language targeting individuals or groups based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and other characteristics. Detecting and filtering hate speech automatically using natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) is crucial to maintain platform integrity, protect users, and promote respectful communication.

Hate speech detection is challenging due to subjectivity, cultural context differences, data imbalance, and evolving language, including coded or slang terms. Hate speech classification involves distinguishing hate speech from offensive language and neutral content through supervised learning models trained on annotated datasets.

The text outlines methodologies including data collection from social media and public datasets, preprocessing steps (cleaning, tokenization, stemming/lemmatization), handling class imbalance, feature extraction (Bag of Words, TF-IDF, word embeddings, contextual embeddings like BERT), and model training using classical ML models (Logistic Regression, SVM), deep learning (CNN, RNN, transformers), or hybrid approaches.

Evaluation metrics such as precision, recall, F1-score, and fairness/bias assessments are critical to ensure ethical and effective hate speech detection. The text also discusses challenges in dataset quality, annotation consistency, and the importance of continuous model updating and deployment considerations for real-time moderation.

The work ultimately aims to develop robust hate speech classifiers to make online environments safer and more tolerant, balancing the reduction of harmful content with freedom of expression.

Conclusion

The conclusion emphasizes the success of this project in overcoming such challenges with a multi-class classification approach.The success factor was the development and utilization of ten separate binary datasets, eachdealingwithaparticulartypeofhatespeech. Ratherthangroupingeverythingtogether, this fine-grained approach allowed models to concentrate on distinctive features of each hate category. Each dataset was annotated with great care by domain experts strictly adhering to guidelines, so labeling was highlyconsistentandaccurate.Takingsuchcareenhancedtrainingandtestingofthemodels,resulting in improved generalization and practical application. Also, the datasets were balanced, which in machine learning is important to avoid bias towards the majority class. Hate speech has been underrepresented in mostoftheexistingdatasets, andsuchbiascanoccurinmodeloutputs. Equalrepresentationhereallowed classifiers to perform better on all the classes.

References

[1] HateSpeechExplained: AToolkit,vol. 19,London,U.K.,2015. [2] K.Saha,E.Chandrasekharan,andM.DeChoudhury,“Prevalenceandpsychologicaleffectsofhateful speechinonlinecollegecommunities,”inProc.10thACMConf.WebSci.,Jun.2019,pp.255–264. [3] M.BilewiczandW.Soral,“HatespeechEpidemic. Thedynamiceffectsofderogatorylanguageon intergrouprelationsandpoliticalradicalization,”PoliticalPsychol.,vol. 41,no. S1,pp. ,Aug. 2020. [4] E. Blout and P. Burkart, “White supremacist terrorism in charlottesville: Reconstructing unite the Right,”Stud. ConflictTerrorism,pp. 1–22,Jan. 2021. [5] R. McIlroy-Young and A. Anderson, “From ‘welcome new gabbers’ to the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting: The evolution of gab,” in Proc.Int.AAAI Conf.Web Social Media, vol.13, 2019, pp. 651–654. [6] A. Warofka, “An independent assessment of the human rights impact of Facebook in Myanmar,” Facebook Newsroom, vol. 5, Nov. 2018. [7] T.H.Paing,“ZuckerbergurgedtotakegenuinestepstostopuseofFbtospreadhateinMyanmar,” Irrawaddy. [8] Z. Waseem and D. Hovy, “Hateful symbols or hateful people?Predictive features for hate speech detectiononTwitter,”inProc. NAACLStudentRes. Workshop,2016,pp. 88–93. [9] T.Davidson,D.Warmsley,M.Macy,andI.Weber,“Automatedhatespeechdetectionandtheprob- lemofoffensivelanguage,”Proc.Int.AAAIConf.WebSocialMedia,vol.11,no.1,pp.512–515,May 2017 [10] A.SchmidtandM.Wiegand,“Asurveyonhatespeechdetectionusingnaturallanguageprocessing,” in Proc. 5th Int. Workshop Natural Lang. Process. Social Media, 2017, pp. 1–10. [11] P. Fortuna and S. Nunes, “A survey on automatic detection of hate speech in text,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1–30, 2018. [12] V. Basile, C. Bosco, E. Fersini, D. Nozza, V. Patti, F. M. R. Pardo, P. Rosso, and M. Sanguinetti, “SemEval-2019 task 5: Multilingual detection. [13] hatespeechagainstimmigrantsandwomeninTwitter,”inProc. 13thInt. WorkshopSemanticEval. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019, pp. 54–63

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Ajay Bhagat, Snehal Bhalerao, Radhika Jagtap, Siddhi More, Dr. Dinesh Bhagwan Hanchate, Prof. Swati Mahadev Atole, Dr. Sachin Sukhadeo Bere. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.