Parasocial vs rage bait: Oxford matches Cambridge with its Word of the Year

The Oxford University Press has followed Cambridge Dictionary’s lead by releasing its own linguistic snapshot of the year. Just weeks after Cambridge chose ‘parasocial’ as its Word of the Year — a term highlighting the rise of one‑sided emotional bonds with influencers, livestreamers and AI companions — Oxford has selected a very different term: ‘rage bait’, the label for online content engineered to make users seethe.

Oxford Languages says use of the phrase has tripled over the last 12 months, reflecting how outrage has become a dependable form of digital currency.

Oxford defines ‘rage bait’ as material that is “frustrating, provocative or offensive”, circulated to drive traffic to websites or social-media accounts. The mechanics are familiar to anyone who spends time online. Posts designed to derail a discussion, videos edited to inflame, or opinions calibrated to annoy have become routine features of digital life.

Often they appear innocuous — a clip cut out of context, a remark stripped of nuance, or a headline crafted to irritate — yet they reliably pull users into disputes they never intended to join. Algorithms favour what triggers the strongest reaction, and the result is a flood of irritation disguised as information.

Casper Grathwohl, president of Oxford Languages, describes the trend as part of a broader evolution in digital behaviour. “Before, the Internet was focused on grabbing our attention by sparking curiosity in exchange for clicks. But now we’ve seen a dramatic shift — it hijacks and influences our emotions, and changes how we respond,” he said.

He sees this as “the natural progression” of life in an increasingly technologised society, and part of what he calls a “powerful cycle”: outrage powers engagement, inflammatory posts are boosted, and users feel mentally depleted. That concern was reflected in Oxford’s 2024 winner, ‘brain rot’, which described the exhaustion that follows long stretches of aimless scrolling.

The two other shortlisted phrases — ‘aura farming’, the careful cultivation of a cool or enigmatic public image; and ‘biohack’, the fashionable pursuit of enhanced performance through dietary tweaks or technology — point to the pressures of self-presentation and self-optimisation that have dominated cultural conversations in 2025. In different ways, all three shortlisted terms describe an online environment in which attention, identity and emotional reaction have become commodities.

The contrast with Cambridge’s ‘parasocial’ is particularly revealing.

Cambridge defined its chosen word as the one-sided relationship a fan might feel towards someone they have never met, a phenomenon intensified by the rise of influencers, podcasters and AI-generated personalities. Cambridge noted that the term had surged as psychologists and cultural analysts debated why so many people now feel intimately connected to individuals on a screen. These quasi-relationships can inspire, entertain or comfort, but they also blur the boundaries between public performance and private emotion.

Taken together, ‘parasocial’ and ‘rage bait’ map two opposing emotional currents shaping contemporary life online. One works through simulated closeness: the YouTuber who shares their morning routine, the podcaster who confesses their anxieties, the AI companion offering personalised support. The other works through provocation: the edited video designed to inflame political tribalism, the sarcastic post aimed at derailing a debate, the crafted opinion whose only purpose is to unsettle. They represent the digital world’s twin strategies for holding attention: comfort and conflict.

India offers a vivid illustration of this duality. Tens of thousands of Indian creators now command devoted audiences who address them with affectionate familial terms like didi, bhaiya or guruji. Study vloggers, fitness coaches, comedians, gamers and financial advisers all build intimate, parasocial relationships that feel almost personal. For millions of viewers, especially the young, these creators feel like companions or mentors.

At the same time, Indian political discourse has become highly vulnerable to rage-baiting techniques. Clips taken out of context, misleading captions and inflammatory commentary often dominate social media feeds. A single provocation can trend nationally within minutes, amplified by partisan accounts and recommendation algorithms. As in other democracies, the online environment rewards anger more reliably than nuance.

What distinguishes 2025 is the growing public awareness of these dynamics. The fact that two major dictionaries have chosen words capturing different emotional manipulations of the digital age suggests a collective recognition of how deeply technology now shapes everyday feeling. Oxford’s past winners — ‘selfie’, ‘goblin mode’, ‘rizz’ — captured cultural moods, but the pairing of ‘parasocial’ and ‘rage bait’ points to something more structural: the psychological circuitry of online life.

Whether these terms endure is uncertain, but the behaviours they describe show no sign of fading. Rage is quick, cheap and instantly shareable; simulated intimacy is soothing and easily automated. Both are highly profitable in an attention economy that measures value in clicks, views and engagement spikes.

As 2025 draws to a close, the dictionary-makers may be telling us something important about our relationship with the digital world. Cambridge’s choice reflects the global hunger for connection in an age of loneliness and algorithmically curated companionship. Oxford’s choice reflects the fatigue and frustration produced by constant provocation. Between them lies the emotional landscape of our time, a world where many of our bonds are imaginary, and many of our conflicts manufactured.