A TikTok trend has been exploited to target disabled people amid rising hate crimes on public transport, highlighting systemic challenges and the need for greater online and offline protections.
In an unsettling incident at London’s Finsbury Park station, a man in an electric wheelchair was targeted by a group of strangers who mocked him by performing TikTok’s “tongue-out” trend , a social media prank where individuals stick their tongue out and pull faces at unsuspecting strangers while filming their reactions. The man described how one of the group members stood mere inches from his face, staring down with a vacant expression and a smirk, before more of the group joined in and fled when he tried to confront them. Despite his calls for help and the presence of numerous commuters, nobody intervened. This incident has been reported as a hate crime under UK law, which includes hostility perceived towards disability as a protected characteristic.
The man’s experience echoes a troubling pattern of disability harassment inspired by social media trends. A year prior, he recounted facing similar abuse involving schoolchildren who mocked him by shouting “Timmy,” referencing a disabled character from the show South Park in a manner now stripped of any comedic context on TikTok. The latest incident, however, demonstrated a more sinister take on the trend, where the perpetrators seemingly exploited the “tongue-out” challenge specifically to ridicule disability, possibly aiming to gain notoriety or viral status online. Ciaran O’Connor from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) highlighted that social media algorithms often amplify confrontational and shocking content , sometimes known as “ragebait” , at the expense of empathy and decency.
The original “tongue-out” TikTok trend started as an obnoxious but largely harmless prank popularized by young US influencers who captured bemused reactions from unaware customers. However, the trend has been distorted and weaponised against minority groups, including disabled people, LGBTQ+ individuals, and migrants, driven by content creators seeking engagement and online clout. TikTok insists that most of the content related to this trend is not hateful and abides by their community guidelines, which prohibit hate speech and discrimination, including on the grounds of disability. Nonetheless, there have been instances where troubling content was removed following media exposure.
Reporting disability hate crime continues to be a significant challenge. Government statistics show that while recorded disability hate crimes fell slightly in 2025, this drop may reflect diminishing confidence in law enforcement rather than a genuine decline in hostility. Disability charities warn that such crimes remain pervasive and under-reported, with research revealing that less than 30% of disabled victims report offences to the police. Conviction rates for related public order offences also lag behind those for other minority groups. The Finsbury Park victim experienced these systemic issues firsthand; his case was initially dismissed due to lack of audio evidence and absence of explicit derogatory language, despite clear targeted intimidation. Only after persistent advocacy was the case reopened, with relevant CCTV footage analysed and suspects identified. Transport for London (TfL) has since apologised for the incident and the early handling of the complaint, with commissioner Andy Lord expressing disgust and reaffirming a commitment to tackling disability hate crime.
The wider context of hate crime on public transport underscores the urgency for action. TfL data reveals a nearly 40% increase in hate crime reports on its services from 2022 to 2025, although a slight dip was noted between 2023 and 2024. Recent high-profile cases, such as comedian Rosie Jones who experienced an ableist and homophobic attack on a train, highlight how public transport environments can be hotspots for such abuses. Many bystanders remain reluctant to intervene, often unsure how to act, which inspired TfL’s “Act Like A Friend” campaign encouraging passengers to support victims through simple acts like conversational engagement.
This disturbing blend of online trends with real-world disability harassment illustrates how social media’s reach can have harmful ripple effects, fostering environments where offensive behaviour can escalate unchecked. It also shines a light on the importance of improved reporting mechanisms, public awareness, and collective responsibility to challenge hate and support vulnerable individuals in daily life.
📌 Reference Map:
- [1] (BBC News) – Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- [2] (BBC News) – Paragraph 2
- [3] (BBC News) – Paragraph 3
- [4] (BBC News) – Paragraph 4
- [5] (BBC News) – Paragraph 5
- [6] (BBC News) – Paragraph 6
- [7] (BBC News) – Paragraph 7
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative appears to be original, with no prior reports found. The incident is recent, and the report includes updated data, justifying a higher freshness score. However, the lack of earlier coverage may raise questions about the timeliness of the information. 🕰️
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
No identical quotes were found in earlier material, suggesting the content is potentially original or exclusive. However, the absence of earlier matches may also indicate a lack of corroboration. ✅
Source reliability
Score:
10
Notes:
The narrative originates from the BBC, a reputable organisation known for its journalistic standards. This enhances the credibility of the information presented. ✅
Plausability check
Score:
7
Notes:
The claims about the ‘tongue-out’ TikTok trend being weaponised against minority groups are plausible and align with known patterns of social media misuse. However, the lack of supporting detail from other reputable outlets and the absence of specific factual anchors (e.g., names, institutions, dates) reduce the score. ⚠️
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
While the narrative is original and comes from a reputable source, the lack of earlier coverage and supporting details from other outlets raise questions about its timeliness and completeness. Further verification is needed to confirm the accuracy and context of the claims. ⚠️