By Kat Moody
I recently read Fiona O’Malley’s article for the Law Society Gazette considering the Tate brothers and the wider issue of profiting from misogynistic online content.
What does this mean? Monetising misogyny means turning content that promotes, reinforces or exploits misogynistic attitudes into a source of income. Online personalities and businesses may generate revenue through advertising, subscriptions, paid content, memberships, courses or other products, while social media algorithms can reward provocative material with greater reach and engagement. The result is that harmful attitudes towards women can become not only highly visible, but commercially valuable.
That matters beyond social media platforms and the individuals creating the content. The language, ideas and behaviours normalised online do not necessarily remain online. They can influence attitudes and conduct in workplaces, professional environments and wider social settings. The questions raised by Fiona therefore have practical consequences for employers, employees and employment lawyers.
Online misogyny may enter the workplace through messaging groups, social events, recruitment and promotion decisions, workplace “banter” and everyday interactions between colleagues. Employers therefore need to consider whether their policies, training and reporting arrangements adequately address digital conduct as well as its consequences within the workplace.
Under the Equality Act 2010, sex-related conduct may constitute harassment where it has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. Employers may also be vicariously liable for discriminatory acts committed by workers in the course of employment, subject to the applicable statutory defence. Since October 2024, employers have also been under a positive duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment at work.
More difficult questions can arise where an employee shares, endorses or engages with misogynistic material outside working hours. Disciplinary action cannot safely be based on reputational concern alone. Employers should consider the connection between the conduct and the workplace, the employee’s role, the actual or potential harm caused, consistency with internal policies and the employee’s rights to privacy and freedom of expression. A fair investigation and proportionate response remain essential.
The same conduct may also give rise to civil disputes outside the scope of employment law. Depending on the circumstances, claims may concern harassment, misuse of private information, data protection and defamation, amongst others. Claimants may seek damages, injunctions and orders requiring the removal or non-publication of material.
The broader lesson is that misogyny monetised online can create very real legal and organisational risks offline. For employers, digital conduct should increasingly be viewed as part of equality, safeguarding and workplace culture responsibilities rather than as something entirely separate from working life.
Fiona O’Malley’s article provides a timely prompt to consider whether existing legal and organisational responses are keeping pace with the business models and digital platforms that can enable harmful content to spread and, in some cases, make it profitable.
This commentary discusses general legal issues and does not address the merits of any current or contemplated proceedings involving particular individuals.
