Tailored Trainings on Reporting on Male Supremacism and Supremacist Violence for Newsrooms, Journalism Associations, and Media Coalitions
IRMS offers tailor trainings for media seeking to deepen their understanding and improving coverage of misogynist ideology and violence, and other, frequently intersecting forms of supremacist violence. Drawing on on a transnational community of dozens of fellows who are experts in varied aspects of research on male supremacism, IRMS is able to tailor trainings sessions to a range of specific needs in terms of topics covered. Trainings usually include the IRMS executive director, Alex DiBranco, and 1-2 additional IRMS fellows, depending on the scale and range of topics sought.
Potential topics include:
Covering complex supremacist manifestos in acts of mass violence
Situating “everyday violence” in the male supremacist structure
Avoiding common errors in extremism/radicalization reporting, including navigating the legitimacy of experts and published research
Understanding the foundations of male supremacism and antifeminist conspiracism, and intersecting forms of supremacism/conspiracism such as white supremacism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, Christian nationalism
Small adjustments with big impact in shifting narratives; i.e., countering disinfo claiming that transgender people commit most acts of mass violence by naming when perpetrators are cisgender men in reporting
Topics of your choosing: reach out to us to discuss at contact@theirms.org
Two IRMS resources for journalists are included below to get a sense of our work: our long-standing guidelines for reporting on male supremacist violence and misogynist incels, and our new guidance on navigating coverage of “formers” from our recent white paper on barriers and solutions in male supremacism research, practice, and coverage.
Email contact@theirms.org to inquire about a tailored media training and rates for your group. Estimated pricing: $2000-$3500 for a half- or full-day session (plus travel for in-person sessions), dependent on total length, range of topics, and number of trainers.
Recommendations for Reporting on Male Supremacist Violence and Misogynist Incels
Media coverage tends to engage in a form of “deviance amplification” wherein they paint the incel movement as something apart and sinister from larger society. Media outlets like the BBC, CNN, and many major publications like The New York Times have aired or written numerous pieces about misogynist incels without tying it back to male supremacist ideology. Countering these narratives requires journalists to cover misogynist incel ideology through the framework of male supremacism and surmount the instinct to sympathize with these men and privilege their self-perception as victims. As Tomkinson et al (2020) write, comments “which publicly affirm a feeling of ‘victimhood’ or persecution among men, not only undermine any political action on gendered violence, they actually encourage those who feel ‘persecuted’ towards violence.”
Distinguish incel identity from misogynist incel ideology and violence.
Women, men, and non-binary people can identify as incels while holding worldviews that are not rooted in deep misogyny. Separately, there is a misogynist incel men’s movement, shaped around dehumanization of women and glorification of violence. Distinguish this in your reporting and clarify, when reporting on a given forum, whether it is a general incel community or a misogynist incel forum (and note if the forum excludes women).
Recognize male supremacism as a threat in its own right, not only as a conduit to other harmful ideologies.
Cross-pollination occurs between male supremacism and white supremacism, but misogyny is not simply a “gateway” to white supremacism and other aspects of the far-right. Since 2016, male supremacism has been labeled a ”gateway” to white supremacism by media outlets such as Vox and The Atlantic and a report by the Anti-Defamation League.
Be careful not to conflate incels as representative of all misogyny and/or male supremacists.
We have seen a worrying trend where any misogynistic attack is labeled as “incel” whether or not the perpetrator was connected to these communities or ideology. Treating misogyny as unique to incel groups obfuscates the real and violent nature of heteropartriarchy and misogyny in the lives of women. Incels should be treated as one part of the larger male supremacist movement.
Avoid creating content that allows misogynist incels to shape their own narratives, particularly in the use of interviews.
Be aware that misogynist incels will purposely manipulate sympathetic journalists and present themselves as victims. By taking a stance of strategic silence (not covering them at all) or not letting them frame their own narrative, journalists can mitigate the channels available for male supremacists to recruit and gain legitimacy.
Incorporate “No Notoriety” protocols when reporting on mass violence.
Many perpetrators of mass violence seek notoriety, and past reporting on misogynist incel violence has fed into this by spotlighting their names, photos, and manifestos.
Speak to experts to understand the content of these communities.
Like other online subcultures, misogynist incel forums contain a significant amount of content meant to “troll” or entrap curious onlookers—and then accuse reporters of cherry-picking content. Being skeptical of content within their forums is crucial, and learning to parse out what is genuine and what is not is a critical step in understanding their communities.
Platforming of “Former” and Active Male Supremacists
Self-identified “formers,” people who self-label as previously involved in supremacist movements, have gained significant platforms in media, conferences, trainings, and other venues. Platformed formers are usually cisgender white men with white nationalist histories, with a smaller and more recent growth in platforming male supremacist “formers.” (We specify self-identified “formers” here as it is unclear what evaluation process, if any, is used to assess these men’s status as former supremacists.) This platforming runs the risk of doing further harm in spreading supremacist messaging. Often these men present themselves and their (former) movements as victims while minimizing or dismissing their harm to marginalized communities. Panels of “formers” are too often composed entirely of cisgender white men, frequently including the moderator, with no voices from the harmed communities or critical voices represented. Despite excitement about what has been perceived as successful exit programming, follow-up research has found that many self-identified “formers” maintain supremacist beliefs. Prominent speakers who claimed to be non-violent or reformed later walked back their performative reformation and returned to espousing explicitly supremacist views.
In rare but damaging cases, researchers and media producers have uncritically platformed active members of male supremacist communities. This is justified by an excessively and uncritically sympathetic perspective toward misogynist incel men, in which researchers and mediamakers accept their claims of being unfairly maligned. This has involved not only speaking platforms but even research co-authorship, providing a veneer of legitimacy that enables male supremacists to present themselves and their movements and ideologies in ways that advance their interests.
Recommendation: Approach “Formers” Speakers and Narratives Critically
Pursuant to the discussion of himpathy and excessive centering of men’s interests, critical empathy offers guidelines to prevent platforming and legitimizing supremacists. Recognition of the humanity and potential suffering of self-identified formers does not require accepting their sense of victimization or offering platforms to advance that perception. A fundamental question for those proposing research, events, responses, or reporting on supremacism is: whose interests will be served and whose will be harmed? Centering voices from the communities that are targeted and harmed by supremacist ideologies provides a more ethical approach that mitigates the harmful impact of only hearing (former) supremacist voices and self-serving narratives. The strategy of deny, attack, reverse victim and offender (DARVO), a concept coined in domestic violence work to describe how perpetrators respond to attempts to hold them accountable, is a useful framework for understanding male supremacism and other supremacist narratives.
Furthermore, being aware of the prevalence of continuing supremacist beliefs among “formers” highlights the importance for researchers, practitioners, and journalists to deeply understand their subjects and the context they come from before giving them a platform. Entering into work on supremacists requires an investment in understanding the research and the structure and ideology of supremacism, including manipulation tactics common to adherents, to produce high-quality work that is accurate and ethical. Incorporating systematic accountability can involve fact-checking claims, consulting with experts, declining to reproduce quotations from supremacists, and correcting mis- and disinformation.
Source articles from IRMS fellows:
M. Kelly, “The Mainstream Pill: How Media and Academia Help Incels Rebrand,” The Public Eye, Spring/Summer 2021, https://politicalresearch.org/2021/07/01/mainstream-pill
M. Kelly and J. DeCook, “Not So Reformed: How ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Groups Elevate ‘Former’ White Nationalists,” Political Research Associates, April 1, 2022, https://politicalresearch.org/2022/04/01/not-so-reformed
A. Czerwinsky, “Learning from the Leavers? The Promise (and Perils) of r/IncelExit,” GNET, December 8, 2023, https://gnet-research.org/2023/12/08/learning-from-the-leavers-the-promise-and-perils-of-r-incelexit/
Other sources:
D.-M. Ordway, “10 Tips for Covering White Supremacy and Far-Right Extremists,” The Journalist’s Resource, July 22, 2019, https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/white-supremacy-alt-right-wing-tips/
L. Fekete, “Rewiring Fascists: Behind the Cult of Exit,” Race & Class 56, no. 3 (2015): 91–101, doi: 10.1177/0306396814556226.
L. Fekete, Exit from White Supremacism: The Accountability Gap within Europe’s De-Radicalisation Programmes, European Research Programme Briefing No. 8 (London: Institute of Race Relations, 2014).
Gaudette, R. Scrivens, and V. Venkatesh, “Pathways Out of Violent Right-Wing Extremism: Insights from Former Extremists,” Center for Research on Extremism (C-REX), June 10, 2022, https://www.sv.uio.no/c-rex/english/news-and-events/right-now/2022/pathways-out-of-violent-right-wing-extremism.html.