IT takes only a few minutes on social media to leave people suddenly feeling drained.
This is not new, but lately, casual scrolling often turns into a stream of provocative opinions, heated arguments and stories that seem almost designed to provoke a reaction. By the time users put their phones down, many are left feeling annoyed, stressed or inexplicably frustrated.
The feeling may be easy to dismiss as part of life online. Yet the growing sense of irritation that follows many social media users is not always accidental.
True, in some cases, the objective is merely attention for attention’s sake. Increasingly, however, outrage has also become profitable.
You may have heard all about the hotly debated American Eagle’s Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans campaign online, but most of the time the content designed to make you mad is almost mundane: the mean boss, the loud neighbour, the selfish co-worker....
Other times you have the over-pampered pet, the racist shopkeeper, the dirty restaurant, and the list goes on.
You read the post or watch the video and click a link; suddenly you’re at an online store looking at pink massage cushions and miracle anti-ageing cream or reading the profile of a questionable wellness guru.
The practice has become so widespread that Oxford University Press named “rage bait” its 2025 Word of the Year, defining it as online content deliberately designed to provoke outrage and drive engagement.
The economy of online outrage
You can’t avoid them.
Across platforms such as X and Threads, feeds are increasingly populated with content built around anger. Posts about toxic relationships, workplace conflicts, gender issues and class tensions routinely attract thousands of comments, shares and reactions.
While some of these discussions emerge organically, others appear carefully constructed to generate anger and keep users engaged.
Creators may use controversial posts to funnel traffic towards affiliate links, online stores, or professional services. Others may build audiences around inflammatory content before monetising their following or selling the account altogether.
Scripted videos presented as authentic encounters, exaggerated personal stories, and deliberately divisive opinions have become common tools to garner clicks and visibility for business.
Apart from recurring patterns like relying on provocative captions, emotionally-charged language or shocking visuals, another common indicator of “rage bait marketing” is when complex social or political issues are simplified into “us vs them” discourses, says Dr Najah Zainal Abidin, senior lecturer in Linguistics at Universiti Malaya.
While provocative content has long been used to chase attention and virality, there is now a growing financial incentive to manufacture outrage. The question then arises whether the harmful effects of rage bait extend beyond a few moments of irritation and into the way people think, feel and interact with one another.
Does rage bait actually work?
While rage bait marketing may be effective for short-term visibility, this kind of engagement doesn’t guarantee long-term business growth or stable monetisation.
According to Najah, research suggests that while rage bait may attract attention, it does not necessarily encourage audiences to financially support creators or buy promoted products. Brands and advertisers may also avoid associating themselves with highly controversial content due to reputational risks.
More concerningly, these methods of commodifying public anger pose tangible harms to individuals and society at large. For one, repeated exposure to rage-bait content can normalise toxic communication, create emotionally exhausting environments, and encourage increasingly hostile online behaviour.
But on a broader level, Najah explains that rage-bait marketing can intensify social and political divides due to its highly polarised content, which amplifies echo chambers and encourages emotional reactions rather than thoughtful or critical discussion, making nuanced conversations more difficult.
“The monetisation systems used by some social media platforms can also reward creators for being provocative, reinforcing what researchers describe as an ‘attention economy’ driven by outrage and controversy,” she says.
Impacts on the individual
Beyond its broader effects on public discourse, rage bait can also influence individual behaviour and emotional wellbeing.
Senior lecturer at Monash University Malaysia’s Department of Marketing Dr Ewe Soo Yeong says that from a consumer psychology perspective, individuals generally pay greater attention to negative information than positive information. This phenomenon, known as negativity bias, means negative or emotionally provocative posts are often perceived as more important, threatening or emotionally stimulating.
She points out that continuous exposure to emotionally provocative content may reduce psychological well-being by increasing stress, anger, frustration, or emotional fatigue. On a larger scale, this could potentially contribute to social polarisation and the spread of misinformation.
This is where digital literacy becomes particularly important. While some users recognise that content is intentionally provocative, others may react instinctively to the emotions it triggers.
“Even when users are aware of the tactic, they may still engage because emotionally charged content often triggers immediate reactions before reflective thinking occurs.
“Individuals with certain personality traits, such as higher neuroticism, impulsivity, or moral outrage sensitivity, may be more likely to respond strongly to provocative content,” Ewe explains.
How can we minimise it?
Although outright censorship may raise concerns about restricting free speech, some action should still be taken to reduce the spread of harmful rage-bait content, says Najah.
She suggests measures such as limiting monetisation opportunities for repeatedly inflammatory creators, enforcing stricter sponsorship disclosure rules, and giving advertisers greater control over where their ads appear.
Apart from that, improving digital literacy education is equally important, especially for younger audiences.
“Teaching users how algorithms promote engagement, how emotional manipulation works online, and how outrage is monetised may help people become more critical and less reactive when consuming online content,” she says.
Not every controversial post is rage bait. But in an online environment where attention can be converted into income, there is growing incentive to manufacture anger and an increasing need for users to recognise when it is happening, and to stop engaging.
