Ineke Nierstrasz
Strategic Advisor, City of Rotterdam · International Safety Representative
I’m writing from Rotterdam, a city of 670,000 people across 176 nationalities — a place whose extraordinary diversity is also its greatest test when it comes to keeping people safe, online and off.
Between 18 and 19 May I had the privilege of speaking at the OSPREY consortium General Assembly, hosted by Erasmus University Rotterdam. What I shared there felt too important to keep in a conference room.
Rotterdam is a special city because of its port, because of its history and architecture, and due to its people. This diversity creates a wonderful vitality and variety, which makes the city what it is. A place where people meet, work and live. This diversity, however, is accompanied by its own set of problems. In this respect, Rotterdam is no different from other cities. In a city where so many people live together in such a small area, safety is obviously an important issue.
Therefore, in Rotterdam, we pay a lot of attention to safety. Safety has always been the responsibility of the mayor. But that does not mean that she is alone in this. In public safety there is a close cooperation together with the chief constable and the chief public prosecutor together with the people of Rotterdam.
In Rotterdam, we have learned firsthand about the realities of online threats, Regardless of whether the mayor has a Muslim background, is a Christian, or is a woman, such personal characteristics are often exploited by individuals seeking to express dissatisfaction with public measures. Instead of engaging with policy decisions, online critics may use religion, gender or other aspects of a mayor’s identity as a basis for harassment, discriminatory remarks, or personal attacks.
The online world has brought many benefits. It allows for easier communication, faster information sharing, and gives people a voice like never before. It has enabled citizens to engage with their governments and express opinions in ways that were impossible a few decades ago. However, as we all know, the same tools can be misused. Social media can for instance amplify harassment and threats, targeting politicians, mayors, and police officers. This dual nature of the online world — its tremendous benefits alongside its serious risks — became particularly evident with the rise of social media in the mid-2000s. Because the digital landscape is constantly evolving, security policies must adapt all the time to new developments and emerging threats. This makes online protection a challenging and ever-changing field.
Another important factor we are seeing today is how conflicts and wars elsewhere in the world can now have a direct impact on our local communities. Thanks to the internet, images, messages, and propaganda from international conflicts spread instantly and globally. These digital connections can inflame tensions locally, sparking threats, aggression, or clashes in cities far from the original conflict zones. Public officials, community leaders, and local populations can find themselves caught in the middle of these tensions, which adds a new layer of complexity to online protection and public safety.
When we look specifically at Public Facing Professionals, the challenges become even clearer. Local politicians, such as mayors and aldermen, are increasingly taking extra steps to protect themselves, especially when addressing sensitive topics like asylum centers, wind turbines, or wildlife management (wolfs). Aggression and intimidation, both online and offline, are becoming more frequent.
The Center for Crime Prevention and Safety in the Netherlands, the CCV, has also observed these trends. Their security assessments have become far more comprehensive, covering not only home safety and workplace risks, but also travel security and online threats. This holistic approach helps create safer environments for public officials and provides valuable lessons for other organizations seeking to strengthen online protection measures.
Research tells us that nearly half of all political officeholders experience some form of aggression, and over half of this occurs online. A study examining politicians’ posts on X, formerly Twitter, found hundreds of threats and hateful messages targeting people based on origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability. Politicians with a migration background, and those addressing sensitive issues such as asylum or LGBTQ+ rights, are particularly vulnerable. While some online comments fall under freedom of expression, others clearly cross the line into insults or even incitement to hatred. For example, a comment like “go back to your sandbox” is insulting, whereas “deport all Muslims” constitutes clear incitement. Prosecuting such cases is complex, because criminal law is not designed to deal with large-scale, systemic online harassment. These realities highlight the key challenge we face protecting public officials in a digital world that evolves faster than legislation and traditional security measures. New platforms emerge, anonymous accounts multiply, and harassment tactics become more sophisticated. Security policies must be flexible and continuously updated, balancing freedom of speech with the need for personal protection and effective legal enforcement.
This is where projects like OSPREY become vital. By providing tools, frameworks, and shared knowledge, OSPREY will help to safeguard public officials in the digital age. It is not just about protecting individuals — it is about maintaining trust in public institutions and ensuring that democracy can function safely. Strong online protection allows public officials to focus on their work without fear.
In conclusion, Rotterdam’s experiences, combined with the wider trends we are seeing across Europe and elsewhere, underline that online protection is no longer optional — it is essential. By learning from each other, sharing knowledge, and implementing flexible security policies, we can create a safer and more resilient environment for Public Facing Professionals everywhere.