Skip to content
Note: This abbreviated article is based on an 18-month investigation by the Dating Apps Reporting Project, produced in partnership with the Pulitzer Center’s AI Accountability Network and The Markup (now a part of CalMatters), and co-published with The Guardian and The 19th.
Match Group, the company behind popular dating apps like Tinder, Hinge, OkCupid, and Plenty of Fish, has known for years that predators use its platforms to commit sexual assault. Despite this knowledge, the company has kept users in the dark, failing to take meaningful action to prevent repeat offenders from victimizing more people.
As an example, the investigation led with the story of a Denver woman who met a man through Hinge and had no way of knowing that Match Group had already received reports from two other women who accused him of rape. When she accepted his invitation to his apartment, she was unknowingly walking into a nightmare. After drinking what he handed her, her memory blurred. She fell to the ground as he filmed her, put her in a headlock, and attempted to force her back inside his home. She managed to escape and later reported the assault to Hinge.
The man, Stephen Matthews, was first reported to Match Group in 2020 for sexual assault. But Match Group failed to act. By the time he was finally arrested in 2023, at least 15 women had reported him for drugging and assaulting them after meeting him through Match Group’s apps. In October 2024, Matthews was convicted of 35 counts related to sexual assault and sentenced to 158 years to life in prison.
A Pattern of Ignoring Sexual Assault Reports
Despite public statements claiming that all accounts associated with reported offenders are banned across Match Group’s platforms, internal documents show that the company has long been aware of predators using its apps and has repeatedly failed to take action. Since 2019, Match Group has maintained an internal database called “Sentinel” to track users reported for sexual violence. By 2022, it was collecting hundreds of new reports each week.
Yet Match Group has never released a transparency report detailing the scale of sexual violence on its platforms. Instead, internal presentations show that executives debated whether they should “push back” against requirements to disclose safety data. The company has been repeatedly asked by Congress to provide details about how it handles reports of sexual violence. It has yet to comply.
Loopholes That Keep Predators on the Apps
Even when Match Group bans a user for sexual misconduct, the ban is easy to bypass. Investigations show that users who have been banned for sexual assault can create new accounts using the same name, birthday, and photos. Since Match Group does not require photo ID verification for all users, perpetrators can repeatedly rejoin or move to a different Match-owned app.
Efforts to implement better safety measures have been deprioritized in favor of increasing Match Group’s profits. Internal documents reveal that the company has resisted expanding key safety features across all of its apps. Employees have been pressured to focus on growth, and Match Group has quietly downsized its trust and safety team, outsourcing investigations to contractors with minimal training.
Lawmakers and Survivors Demand Action
Congress and state legislators have called on Match Group to take accountability for sexual violence occurring on its platforms. In Colorado, a new law now requires dating app companies to disclose their safety practices to the state attorney general. However, there is still no legal requirement forcing Match Group to reveal how many people are sexually assaulted after meeting someone through its apps.
Meanwhile, users remain vulnerable. When Match Group was tested for this investigation, banned users were still able to return to the platform using common techniques found in online forums. Women who reported sexual assault were left without recourse, while their attackers continued to use the apps without consequence.
A former Match Group employee summed up the company’s priorities: “If they’re looking at the bottom line, then it’s easier to have a lawsuit than it is to provide safety. I know which one they’re gonna pick.”
The Reality for Users
Despite pledging to improve safety, Match Group has failed to take the necessary steps to protect users. While its executives focus on stock prices and subscriber numbers, survivors are left to fend for themselves. Until Match Group is forced to be transparent about the dangers on its platforms, millions of people will continue to unknowingly swipe into harm’s way.
