Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What are the most common online behaviors that lead to cyberbullying arrests in 2025?
Executive Summary
Law enforcement actions in 2025 most commonly arise from online behaviors that constitute clear criminal conduct: sexual extortion and coercion, targeted threats and intimidation, doxxing and the sharing of intimate images without consent, and large-scale coordinated harassment amplified on major social apps. Reports and prosecutions show a rising volume of incidents tied to visual-heavy platforms and emergent technologies such as AI-generated deepfakes, prompting legislative and regulatory responses in jurisdictions like Australia and Singapore to expand powers and penalties [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. The pattern: severity, platform amplification, and new tech drive arrests.
1. Why arrests spiked: platform dynamics fueling criminal charges
Police and prosecutors link the increase in arrests to the visual and viral nature of platforms where abuse spreads quickly, notably TikTok and Instagram, which researchers identified as primary venues for reported incidents rising markedly between 2018 and 2023. The shift from private text-based abuse to public, shareable multimedia means harms are more visible, evidence is easier to aggregate, and incidents can attract law enforcement attention sooner [1]. This platform-driven amplification, combined with greater public reporting and legal reform momentum, helps explain the higher arrest counts documented in recent studies and reporting [1] [2].
2. The categories of behavior most likely to result in arrest
Criminal cases in 2025 cluster around a few actionable behaviors: sexual extortion or “sextortion” involving threats to release intimate material; targeted campaigns of harassment or stalking that cross thresholds for threats or intimidation; doxxing that exposes victims to real-world danger; and distribution or creation of non-consensual sexual imagery, including AI deepfakes. High-profile prosecutions, such as sexual extortion convictions referenced in reporting, illustrate how coercive demands tied to sexual images increasingly move from civil complaints to criminal charges [2] [3].
3. Technology’s double role — facilitating harm and enabling evidence
Advanced techniques like AI-generated deepfakes and rapid viral reposting create novel harms and complicate attribution, yet the same digital traces — metadata, platform retention, and forensic analysis — often produce actionable evidence for investigators. Policy and practitioner guidance emphasize both the emergence of deepfakes as a weapon and the growing role of tech tools in detection, particularly in school contexts and child protection where patterns of abuse are increasingly identified through digital forensics and platform cooperation [3] [4] [7].
4. Jurisdictional responses: harsher penalties and new regulators
Governments responded to the rising caseload with legal changes and institutional innovation. Australia has defined cyberbullying to include harassment and humiliation via technology and considered increasing penalties from three to five years’ imprisonment for severe offences, signaling prosecutorial appetite for criminal sanctions. Singapore moved to create an Online Safety Commission able to order removals and require platform responses, showing regulatory, not just criminal, levers being deployed to reduce harms [5] [6]. These moves reflect a policy consensus that platform-amplified harms need stronger remedies.
5. Youth, schools, and timing — where arrests often start
Data show a pronounced surge in reports tied to children transitioning to secondary school, with more than one-third of reported cases occurring in that cohort and a 450% rise in eSafety reports over five years. The back-to-school spike is a recurring operational detail for law enforcement and school authorities, where repeated or escalatory harassment around this transition often precipitates criminal investigations when threats, extortion, or sustained stalking are present [4]. This demographic concentration has driven targeted prevention and enforcement efforts in educational settings.
6. Media cases and public pressure shaping prosecutions
High-profile cases and lawsuits — such as reported convictions and civil actions by public figures — create visibility that can influence prosecutorial prioritization and legislative attention. Coverage of convictions for sexual extortion and lawsuits by victims highlights the role of media attention in elevating cases to criminal scrutiny, while also prompting platforms and regulators to act faster on takedowns and evidence preservation requests [2] [7]. These dynamics can bias which incidents receive resources, privileging cases with public profiles.
7. What’s missing from the record and implications for enforcement
Available analyses emphasize incident counts, platform involvement, and new modalities like deepfakes, but they often omit longitudinal outcomes such as conviction rates, demographic details of perpetrators, and cross-border enforcement challenges. The focus on penalties and commissions suggests a policy-driven agenda toward criminalization and platform accountability, but gaps remain in measuring deterrence, rehabilitation, and the capacity of law enforcement to pursue anonymous or jurisdictionally diffuse offenders [1] [5] [6]. Addressing these omissions will shape whether arrests translate into lasting reductions in harm.