Racism in football isn’t new - but the Football Association (FA) is signalling it might finally be done waiting. After England defender Jess Carter revealed the racist abuse she's endured throughout the Women’s Euros, the FA has said it may consider boycotting social media platforms altogether. As pressure mounts on tech giants like X and Instagram to act, this moment marks a sharp inflection point – not just for football governance, but for how brands engage with online platforms that fail to curb hate.

Supporting Stats

74% of online abuse in UK football during major tournaments is racially motivated (Kick It Out, 2024).
64% of fans believe social media companies should be legally accountable for abuse on their platforms (YouGov, 2023).
After the men’s Euro 2021 final, over 2,000 abusive posts were reported against Black players – yet only 11% resulted in prosecutions (Home Office, 2022).

Pros - Why the FA’s stance matters

Institutional visibility: The FA’s position sends a clear message that governing bodies can no longer be passive observers of digital hate. A public boycott, even symbolic, sets precedent.
Public alignment: The FA reflects a growing cultural consensus that platforms must enforce safety and dignity. This resonates strongly with younger, values-driven audiences.
Leveraging legislation: The UK’s Online Safety Act empowers Ofcom to fine platforms for failing to remove harmful content. The FA’s call could accelerate enforcement.

Cons - The risks and limitations

Reduced fan engagement: Social media is a core driver of visibility for women’s football. A boycott could limit tournament reach, media coverage and grassroots excitement.
Platform apathy: Despite pressure, companies like X and Instagram have made minimal proactive changes. As of July 2025, neither had responded to the FA’s latest reports of abuse.
Short-term disruption: Pulling teams and players off social media mid-tournament could affect brand partnerships, audience retention and commercial commitments.

Opportunities - What brands should watch

New standards for online sponsorships: Brands can demand safety assurances from platforms before committing ad spend, helping to shift industry norms.
Backing zero-tolerance movements: Brands that align publicly with anti-abuse actions (like Coca-Cola during the 2023 Women's World Cup) build credibility and loyalty.
Building alternative platforms: With declining trust in legacy platforms, there’s space to invest in safer, niche digital communities or direct-to-fan channels.

Challenges - What stands in the way

Corporate accountability loopholes: Many platforms still argue they are not ‘publishers’ and dodge liability for user-generated abuse.
Regulatory inertia: Ofcom’s powers under the new legislation are promising, but enforcement mechanisms are still ramping up.
Normalisation of abuse: Without sustained visibility and pressure, online racism risks becoming ambient - tolerated as part of the ‘cost’ of public life.

Key Takeouts

The FA is actively exploring a boycott of social media platforms due to persistent racism.
Social platforms like X and Instagram have failed to respond to abuse reports - highlighting systemic gaps.
New online safety laws may introduce meaningful fines and accountability, but brands can’t afford to wait.
Public opinion and cultural momentum are firmly behind those demanding action.

Next Steps for Brand Marketers

Audit your partnerships: Re-evaluate sponsorships or media buys involving platforms that lack adequate safety measures.
Take a stance: Don’t wait for governing bodies to act. Public statements, policy updates and influencer partnerships can reinforce a brand’s position.
Design with safety in mind: Ensure your digital campaigns build community without fuelling toxicity. Moderate comments, train teams, and protect talent from online harm.
Support athlete wellbeing: Collaborate with teams and associations to create protective infrastructures for players - especially during high-stakes tournaments.

The FA’s reckoning with online abuse is a warning shot for digital complacency. For brands, the choice is clear: lead with integrity, or be complicit in silence.