Back
Mwangaza WatchOpen Intelligence · Africa
Child Safety and Digital Exploitation · Research Briefing

When We Talk About CSAM Online,
What Do We Actually Say?

Thousands of public posts about child sexual abuse material were analysed to map the shape of the public conversation. What emerged is a picture of a discourse that responds to news but rarely leads it. And what that silence costs child protection work.

Published 2024 Data 6,085 public posts on X, 2010 to 2024 Read time ~10 minutes
6,085
Public posts analysed across 14 years of data
2
Dominant themes found consistently across all analyses
4x
More posts use the old term than the recommended "CSAM"
82M+
CyberTipline reports received by NCMEC globally to date

A Language Problem That Points to a Deeper One

Every month, child protection agencies process millions of reports of child sexual abuse material. The scale has long outpaced the capacity of any single institution. So when the public talks about this issue online, what do they actually say? Is the conversation driving awareness? Pushing for policy change? Supporting survivors? Demanding more from platforms and governments?

To find out, over 6,000 public posts on X were collected and systematically analysed, spanning 14 years from 2010 to 2024. Before looking at what people say about child sexual abuse material, it is worth looking at what they call it.

Public language: how people refer to this issue online
The recommended term reaches roughly one in six posts
3,795
Used "child pornography" or "child porn." The old term. Still overwhelmingly dominant in public posts despite professional guidance against it since the mid-2000s.
787
Used "CSAM" or "child sexual abuse material." The recommended term. Found mainly in posts from professionals, NGOs, and journalists covering child protection specifically.

The recommended terminology accounts for roughly one in six posts. The language of public discourse has not caught up with the language of professional child protection practice.

When most public discussion of this issue uses a term that softens the severity of what is happening, it shapes how casual readers understand the problem. It makes it easier to see individual cases as isolated incidents rather than symptoms of a structural failure to protect children online.

The Two Things People Mostly Talk About

Across the full analysis, two themes dominated the public conversation consistently, regardless of how the data was examined. Together they account for almost everything the public says about CSAM online.

The two dominant themes in public CSAM discourse
Both themes are news-driven rather than advocacy-driven
🔨

Legal actions and proceedings

Arrests, charges, court cases, investigations, sentences. This is what people post about most. Someone is arrested. A charge is laid. A verdict comes down. The conversation spikes around that event and then drops off. The words that appear most: arrested, charged, sentenced, investigation, police, court, prison.

📋

The nature of the material or incident

What CSAM is, what it involves, what forms it takes. This theme also tends to appear in the context of specific cases being reported rather than as standalone awareness content. It describes what happened. It does not discuss what to do, who is responsible, or how to prevent it.

Both themes are news-driven. A case breaks, and people react. The conversation does not tend to start independently of news events.

The Threat That Needs Its Own Conversation: Live Streaming

Live online child sexual abuse deserves specific attention because it is growing rapidly, it is structurally different from image and video CSAM, and the public conversation about it is almost entirely absent from the data. Perpetrators can commission live abuse of children in real time. The child is abused on screen, for payment. No file is necessarily created. The transaction is completed, and the evidence largely disappears.

The platform problem
Platforms are simultaneously part of the problem and part of the solution

The platforms through which CSAM is shared, distributed, and increasingly commissioned are also the platforms through which child protection organisations reach parents, educators, and young people. This means the advocacy cannot simply move off the platforms. It has to work on them, with them, and against them simultaneously. What the data shows is that public conversation about platform responsibility is present but thin. It spikes when a specific platform is named in a high-profile case. It does not sustain between those moments.

What the Conversation Is Missing

The two dominant themes, legal proceedings and material descriptions, crowd out everything else. The following topics are largely absent from the public conversation despite being central to child protection work.

Topics largely absent from public CSAM discourse online
Prevention, education and policy advocacy are missing from the public conversation
Prevention and education: how to stop exploitation before it happens
Survivor support and recovery: what happens to children after exploitation is identified
Platform accountability: ongoing pressure on technology companies between news events
Financial flows: how exploitation is funded and how that can be disrupted
Policy advocacy: calls for legislative and regulatory change
International cooperation: the cross-border dimension of organised exploitation networks

Three Things That Follow From This

Implications for child protection communication strategy
What the shape of the conversation tells us about what needs to change
1

Terminology adoption needs consistent, long-term effort

The 4-to-1 ratio of "child pornography" to "CSAM" in public posts is not going to change through a single campaign. The terminology shift in professional circles has taken decades and is still incomplete. Public language follows professional language, but with a significant lag.

2

Prevention content needs to be created independently of news events

The public conversation is almost entirely reactive. When there is no high-profile case, there is almost no conversation about CSAM at all. Child protection organisations need to find ways to sustain public awareness that does not depend on a news hook.

3

Live streaming needs its own public conversation

Live online child sexual abuse is growing, it is not being named in mainstream discourse, and it requires a specific response that is different from image and video CSAM. Starting that conversation in public-facing communication is a gap that child protection organisations can directly address.

Methodology. Over 6,000 public posts on X were collected and systematically analysed using keyword-based search and thematic analysis. Posts span 14 years from 2010 to 2024. Thematic classification was applied consistently across the full dataset. Language usage counts reflect how posters referred to child sexual abuse material in their posts. All analysis was conducted on public posts only. No personal identifying information was collected or retained.

Mwangaza Watch produces structured briefings on human security across Africa.
All public briefings are open access. mwangazawatch.org