Terrorism, foreign conflict and the lingering effects of Covid-19 have strained existing fractures in trust, putting Australia’s social cohesion under “sustained pressure”, a new report warns.

In its latest report, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute argues that online outrage is no longer an abstract social concern but a strategic risk to security.

The report has found social media platforms reward speed and spectacle over nuance and truth, and that politically motivated violence risk is elevated and more complex.

Rather than calling for censorship, it says social cohesion is a capability that must be actively built and protected like defence or cyber security.

“What Australia now requires, as individuals, communities and a nation, is a strengthened capacity to hold multiple, sometimes uncomfortable, beliefs simultaneously,” report authors Dr John Coyne and Justin Bassi write.

“A democratic society must be capable of condemning terrorism, criticising state conduct, encouraging policy debate and protecting minority communities simultaneously, without collapsing into moral absolutism or grievance‐based justifications.”

The report also found Australians’ trust in government, media and institutions has slipped, with grievance and disinformation filling in the gaps since the Bondi Beach terror attack, the October 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas and the Covid pandemic.

Events such as these have fomented social unrest in Australia, with waves of anti and pro-immigration protests, violence at a Sydney protest against the visit of Israeli president Isaac Herzog, and attacks on synagogues and threats to mosques.

“Across this period, social media have turbocharged outrage, normalised aggression online and collapsed the space between online hostility and offline harm,” the report states.

Coyne and Bassi found trust in institutions has fallen since these defining events, as cynicism towards authority and expertise has increased.

They said the right to protest must be protected but that condemnation of extremist symbolism must be swift and clear.

“It’s legitimate to peacefully protest for an end to the war in Gaza and to disagree with the policies of any government,” they said.

“But it’s not legitimate to advocate violence, promote terrorist organisations (such as by carrying terrorists’ flags), or chant slogans such as ‘Death to the IDF’, which should not be protected by freedom of speech or political expression.”

Coyne and Bassi also warn that actions that are “awful but lawful” should not be banned – but also must not be ignored.

“Setting a red line for taking action only once a crime has been committed allows lawful‑but‑awful beliefs to go unchecked, to fester, to grow out of the dark corners of the internet and be amplified in mainstream social‑media feeds and then normalised in society,” they said.

The report recommends the federal government appoint a national resilience communications lead in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to coordinate a national social cohesion communications strategy.

It says a digital outrage risk index overseen by the eSafety Commissioner to monitor “hyper-virality events” must also be established.

The authors also suggest a national review of civics, media and digital literacy education to embed critical thinking and respectful debate across schools, TAFE and community settings.

A final recommendation is a National Social Cohesion Dashboard to track trust, protest polarisation and resilience that would be published twice a year.

“The dashboard would operate like Australia’s national terrorism threat level or fire danger rating system, providing a clear public indicator of the country’s social temperature,” Coyne and Bassi write.

-with AAP