In a complex world, even in the digital criminogenic context, journalistic communication could encourage scientists, citizens, and associations to discuss the ‘unusual’ and what is still far from the digital cultural heritage of public opinion.
As with violent crimes, journalistic representation of digital risk, especially complex cybercrimes such as identity theft, oscillates between ‘dramatisation’ and ‘understatement’, which influences the public’s understanding of the phenomenon’s true extent. According to the 2024 Clusit Report, identity theft constitutes 18% of reported cybercrimes, marking a +14% increase compared to the previous year. Investigations by the Italian Postal Police (2024) reveal a surge in cases involving social engineering, phishing, and deepfake impersonation.
So, how should all this be communicated to citizens? How can we inform, raise awareness and help people to respond?
In short, an exploratory analysis recently carried out by the undersigned within the main Italian newspapers (ANSA, Sole24Ore and Corriere della Sera) between 2024 and 2025 shows that:
- Only 6% of articles on digital threats explicitly mention identity theft.
- 80% of articles focus on individual cases, while only 12% adopt an explanatory or preventive approach.
The language used oscillates between simplified technicalities and sensationalism; words such as ‘alarm’, ‘shock scam’ and ‘stolen identity’ prevail over technical terms such as ‘phishing’, ‘data breach’ and ‘illegal profiling’.
Currently, public and journalistic communication on these risks in Italy is often fragmented, discontinuous and technocratic. Institutional campaigns are sporadic and concentrated on symbolic days or temporary emergencies. There is no continuous, structured or recognisable communication programme. Online crime stories are episodic and therefore traumatic at the time, but not culturally integrated into everyday life. Information is scattered across multiple portals (Postal Police, Privacy Guarantor, AGID, Ministries), is often poorly updated and uses technical language that is difficult for the average citizen to understand.
There is a complete lack of empathetic narration. Media communication ignores the emotional impact of identity theft on victims, who may experience feelings of shame, helplessness or guilt. Stories are rarely told and experiences are not humanised. Only the affected economic or health institutions are mentioned; they are always presented as autonomous spaces, far removed from people’s daily lives.
Therefore, it is urgent to rethink the way media institutions communicate identity theft, shifting from an emergency-based approach to a more proactive, preventive one that fosters trust. While covering the topic, the Italian media often adopt a reactive, sensationalist or overly technical approach, failing to contribute to true digital literacy. The dominant narrative is one of ‘damage’, followed by fear and uncertainty.
However, in the two-year period 2024–2025, the Italian press showed a growing interest in digital identity theft, particularly in conjunction with institutional events (e.g. Data Protection Day), the publication of reports (Postal Police, CRIF, Clusit) and security-related scandals.
A comparison of the data on media coverage of online identity theft in Italy with that in the main European newspapers, such as The Guardian (UK), Le Monde (France) and El País (Spain), is useful here, while considering the different techno-cultural problems within each local reality. In the 2024–2025 period, the situation is somewhat more encouraging in two respects: clear and comprehensive coverage of the topic, and less infotainment.
In summary, communicating digital risks, such as online identity theft, involves more than just providing technical information. It also involves raising awareness, reducing panic, encouraging appropriate behaviour, and fostering trust in the digital transformation of the country and Europe as a whole. This can also be achieved through media institutions.
Giacomo Buoncompagni, University of Macerata