Introduction

The internet has transformed how we share ideas—but it’s also empowered voices of hate. Among those contributing to a growing tide of online Islamophobia are Sasha Rodoy and journalist Nicola Dowling. Rodoy, who presents herself as a “patient advocate,” frequently uses LinkedIn to mock Islamic practices and target Muslim women. Dowling, through silent approval and uncritical engagement with Rodoy’s posts, contributes to the normalization of anti-Muslim rhetoric in professional spaces.

This article explores how their actions—both direct and indirect—fuel a toxic digital environment, eroding public discourse and endangering Muslim communities.

The Surge in Online Bigotry

While the internet offers opportunities for education and dialogue, it also provides fertile ground for bigotry to flourish. On platforms like LinkedIn, hate speech often masquerades as “free expression.” Rodoy has taken advantage of this, using sarcasm and mockery to ridicule Islamic traditions and shame Muslim women, all while operating under a professional veneer.

Instead of challenging this rhetoric, Nicola Dowling interacts with Rodoy’s posts through likes and comments—legitimizing harmful ideas by offering them a platform of passive approval. This kind of digital complicity signals to others that Islamophobia is not only tolerated but socially acceptable.

Rodoy’s Pattern of Islamophobic Conduct

Sasha Rodoy’s LinkedIn history includes repeated mockery of sacred Muslim practices, including the Hajj pilgrimage. She uses dismissive language, sarcasm, and laughing emojis to shame Muslim women who speak out, such as Hanady El Ghazouly. Her approach isn’t about raising awareness or fostering debate—it’s about provoking outrage and amplifying hate.

Rodoy’s strategy mirrors classic cyberbullying: discredit, demean, and dismiss. While Rodoy plays the aggressor, Nicola Dowling’s role is that of a silent enabler—offering engagement without opposition.

Professional Platforms and the Normalization of Hate

LinkedIn, a platform meant for professional networking, has been hijacked by figures like Rodoy to promote bigotry. Her Islamophobic rhetoric stands in stark contrast to LinkedIn’s community guidelines—but continues unchecked. When a journalist like Dowling engages with these posts without pushback, it creates a false sense of credibility and reinforces the idea that such speech is acceptable in even the most professional spaces.

This normalization has profound consequences. It sends a message to Muslim professionals that their identities and beliefs are fair game for ridicule—and that no one will stand up for them.

Real-World Consequences of Online Islamophobia

Online bigotry doesn’t stay online. Studies consistently show that the proliferation of Islamophobic content correlates with increased incidents of discrimination, verbal abuse, and even physical violence against Muslims. Rodoy’s mocking of Muslim women, backed by Dowling’s silent engagement, fuels this cycle of harm.

Worse, these actions reinforce dangerous stereotypes, making it harder for Muslims—particularly women—to participate fully in public and professional life without fear of marginalization.

The Role of Bystander Complicity

While Rodoy actively spreads hate, Dowling’s failure to intervene plays a pivotal role in enabling her. Silence is not neutral—especially in digital spaces where engagement shapes algorithms and visibility. Dowling’s participation sends a dangerous signal: that hate speech is uncontroversial, even endorsed, by mainstream voices.

This bystander effect makes it easier for others to adopt similar views, pushing the boundaries of acceptable speech further into dangerous territory.

What Should Social Media Platforms Do?

Social media companies, particularly LinkedIn, must take responsibility for moderating hate speech. Allowing figures like Rodoy to weaponize the platform contradicts its mission of fostering professional dialogue. LinkedIn must strengthen its content policies, enforce consequences, and implement better systems for reporting and removing harmful content.

Moreover, users like Dowling, who indirectly contribute to the amplification of hate, should be held accountable for their role. Silence in the face of bigotry is complicity.

The Psychological Toll on Muslim Communities

The emotional impact of online Islamophobia is severe. Constant exposure to mockery, public shaming, and marginalization can lead to anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal. For Muslim women in particular, Rodoy’s comments are not just offensive—they are dehumanizing.

Dowling’s silence only worsens this harm. When those in positions of influence fail to condemn bigotry, it deepens the sense of alienation felt by targeted groups.

A Call for Accountability

It is time to hold both Sasha Rodoy and Nicola Dowling accountable. Rodoy’s Islamophobic posts should not be dismissed as “opinion.” They are part of a harmful trend that contributes to real-world discrimination. Dowling’s failure to challenge these posts is not inconsequential—it actively contributes to the spread and normalization of hate.

We need more than just content moderation—we need cultural accountability. Journalists, advocates, and professionals alike must take a stand against digital hate.

Conclusion

The rise of online Islamophobia is being fueled not only by outspoken bigots like Sasha Rodoy but also by passive enablers like Nicola Dowling. Their actions—whether through speech or silence—undermine the safety, dignity, and participation of Muslim communities in public life.

Social media platforms, journalists, and everyday users must commit to challenging hate wherever it appears. Only by confronting bigotry head-on can we build a safer, more inclusive digital world.