Daniel Naroditsky (Danya) was a brilliant chess player, a generous and inspiring educator, a mellifluous commentator and a content creator beloved by thousands of people. 1 His sudden passing at the age of 29 on 19 October 2025 initiated an avalanche reaction over the impact of cyberbullying on his mental health over the last 2 years of his life. The chess community, now comprising millions of people, went into collective grief for the loss of one of its most valued members. Although the circumstances surrounding his death are still under investigation and will not be discussed in the context of this editorial, one thing has dominated the discourse following his death: the potential links between Naroditsky’s 2-year journey of public cyberbullying victimisation and his struggling mental health leading to his final days.
What is cyberbullying?
Cyberbullying (cyberharassment or online bullying) is a form of bullying or harassment using electronic means, i.e. via electronic media or occurring in the online space. Reference Stein, Fineberg and Chamberlain2 It often takes place on social media, messaging platforms, gaming platforms and mobile phones. It is repeated behaviour, aimed at scaring, angering or shaming those who are targeted. 3 There are two parts to cyberbullying, that of victimisation (the victim, the party receiving the abuse) and the perpetration (the aggressor, the party committing the abuse). Professional streamers, including gamers and commentators, are particularly vulnerable to cyberbullying victimisation because they use online platforms as their professional space and are exposed to a large and often anonymous audience. Streamers represent a new digital-era workforce who are unduly exposed to cyberbullying risks, without however enjoying the benefits of governing and regulating bodies to protect them from work-based harassment. Female gamers are currently experiencing high degrees of online sexual harassment, Reference Trudgett-Klose and McLinton4 with heterosexual males being more often the perpetrators, although with large portions of gaming communities both experiencing victimisation and committing perpetration. Reference Ballard and Welch5 Cyberbullying is so common in some spaces that is considered an ‘expected’ cultural norm. The normalisation of cyberbullying is a reeking problem within domains of online space, which ferment with aggressive behaviours among community members and enabled by the fact that aggressors often remain without consequences. Despite the efforts made on various platforms, a substantial degree of content moderation remains somewhat ineffective. Concerned individuals and parents are already seeking safe pockets of online space in which children and everyone can enjoy the benefits of online engagement without being subject to cyberbullying risks. An example of this has been the development of dedicated gaming platforms for neurodiverse children, where heavy moderation of chat interactions among members is deployed for the protection of its vulnerable members. The new era of artificial intelligence-generated media and streaming content at unprecedented scale is bringing new challenges. The proliferation of bots and deepfake media for cyberbullying is unprecedented, with large-scale deployment now occurring in settings well beyond gaming: for example, in child sexual abuse materials and non-consensual intimate imagery (‘revenge porn’), pranks among children, social shaming and for large-scale political denigrative and manipulative messaging.
Psychoanalytical concepts can help explain the victimisation–perpetration overlap
There are a few psychoanalytical ideas that can be helpful in explaining the large overlap between cyberbullying victimisation and perpetration. For example, identification with the aggressor is a defence mechanism described by Anna Freud in which the person identifies with the aggressor to protect themselves from harm. Displacement of anger (Freud) may also be relevant in cases where the bullied party may not be able to confront the original perpetrator (deemed too powerful or inaccessible). Reaction formation (acting tough to hide vulnerability) and narcissistic injury (assertion of dominance to hide insecurity) may drive cyberbullying behaviours in those who have had victimisation experiences.
Other theories relevant to explaining cyberbullying experiences
The Routine Activities Theory describes that crime happens when three things converge: a motivated offender, a suitable target and the absence of a capable guardian. In cyberbullying, targets are easily accessible via online channels and authority surveillance is ineffective, thus creating frequent opportunities for the offender to act. The General Aggression Model provides an explanatory framework in which someone with a history of being bullied (personal factors) might react more aggressively to perceived insults; this can be very relevant to cyberbullying retaliation, the perpetuation of aggression cycles and the blurring of victim–perpetrator roles. The Ecological Systems Theory and its relevant expansion to the cyberbullying context can provide helpful insights, particularly regarding the chronosystem and digital context, bringing in the relevance of neurodevelopmental trajectories for children and young people involved in cyberbullying acts (either as victims or perpetrators).
Cyberbullying and its impact on mental health and emotional well-being
Cyberbullying victimisation can have significant lasting effects on the person’s self-esteem and mental well-being, Reference Stein, Fineberg and Chamberlain2,Reference Modecki, Minchin, Harbaugh, Guerra and Runions6 including inducing prolonged fear, humiliation, shame, rejection, guilt and a sense of injustice. Victimisation is linked to internalising psychopathology including anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation. Cyberbullying perpetration is linked to externalising psychopathology including conduct disorder, as well as aggression, narcissism and callous/unemotional traits. The role of neurodiversity in cyberbullying has been debated, with some suggesting that it may heighten the impact of such experiences. Reference Stein, Fineberg and Chamberlain2 The differences with which neurodiverse populations sometimes present (e.g. having difficulties in understanding social cues, social contexts or metaphorical or abstract speech) can lead to misunderstandings in online space and open these populations to predatory harassment or fuel retaliative attacks. In the UK, such behaviours may lead to legal consequences (civil and criminal offences) for the parties involved under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988, which covers both written and electronic communications. Notably neurodivergent children are currently over-represented in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Overall, the damage done by cyberbullying to mental health and emotional well-being is multidimensional: by eroding online trust and escalating conflict, it promotes social fragmentation and poses legal, educational and healthcare burdens while amplifying risks for young people and vulnerable groups.
Naroditsky’s cyberbullying saga
Naroditsky endured cyberbullying, in both English-speaking and Russian social media, comprising accusations of cheating in online chess games, led by former world Champion Vladimir Kramnik who, according to Naroditsky, ran an endless vitriolic campaign against him. 7 A year prior to his death, Naroditsky, acknowledged by many as someone with a very strong work ethos and moral compass, expressed being deeply aggrieved by accusations of cheating and described those as ‘a sustained, evil, and absolutely unhinged attempt to destroy my life’. Naroditsky saw no good intentions behind those public accusations: ‘He [Kramnik] is trying to ruin my life, he’s trying to inflict emotional harm, physical harm on me’; adding, ‘my physical health is impacted, I can’t sleep’. 7 Naroditsky spoke about trying very hard and utterly failing to address the public slander in a civilised and rational manner, unable to ‘reason with Kramnik’s mental acrobatics’ and finding it impossible ‘to discredit the accusations’, despite ‘how absurd those were in the first place’. Naroditsky was left to deal with legions of ‘trolls’, influenced by Kramnik’s viewpoint, harassing him on public forums. Naroditsky made analogies of his personal experience to the Salem Witch Trials of colonial Massachusetts, where inquisitorial ‘gaslighting’ had eclipsed reason. In his last stream on 17 October 2025, Naroditsky was seen visibly struggling to stay awake and reluctant to end his chess stream despite prompts from concerned friends, referring to being unwilling to deal with the ‘lingering effect of accusations’, indicating that, if he plays better off-stream (i.e. having switched off his camera), he would have to deal with an unpleasant aftermath of ongoing harassment.
Not alone in suffering
Naroditsky was not alone in suffering harassment for cheating accusations. Another top player and affable chess figure, David Navarra, openly outspoken for his neurodiversity, reflected publicly about feeling suicidal and seeking professional help, in the context of battling with what he considered to be a pattern of unfounded public accusations and the offensive framing of those on the social platform X. 8 Navarra’s victimisation enraged the public, due to his perceived vulnerability to the mental impact of cyberbullying. Kramnik himself was targeted in retaliation during his anti-cheating campaign, including receiving death threats logged with the Switzerland police following Naroditsky’s death. One of Kramnik’s old friends and top chess Grandmaster, Levon Aronian, made a public plea to Kramnik to seek professional help, while reconciling with his ‘enemies’. Aronian made a magnanimous tribute to Kramnik’s past and the impact he had on the history of the game. He also made references to Kramnik being accused of cheating when younger, and currently ‘battling his own demons [which] drains him physically and mentally’. The International Chess Federation has recently filed a complaint against Kramnik that centres on harassment and ‘the insulting of an individual’s dignity’ following Naroditsky’s death. It is important to note that there is currently no evidence to suggest that Naroditsky’s death is causally linked to his cyberbullying experiences or Kramnik’s anti-cheating campaign; nor is it the purpose of this editorial to interrogate this question. Nevertheless, many questions arise in this context: are there obstacles to accessing fit-for-purpose mental health support for those who endure cyberbullying? Are mental health services well attuned to this issue? Is there a paucity of protective reactivity in the public discourse supporting those targeted, and is this paucity driven by an innocent bystander effect? Is there a social expectation for professionals to ‘toughen up and take harassment in stride’? Do professional bodies react in a timely and effective manner to address the issue in its naissance?
Genius misunderstood?
Naroditsky was an auspicious under-12 World Youth Champion (2007), later becoming a chess streamer, educator and commentator. He wrote a successful chess strategy book at the age of 14 and played more than 140 000 games of chess in one of the main online chess platforms alone, referring to his passion as ‘bullet chess addiction’. 7 The Bay Area prodigy was a speed chess specialist, quoted as competing on a par with the very best in the world, often ranked no. 1 on online platforms and thriving in this ultra-fast online chess format. A few players have specialised in this specific format, achieving world rankings far higher than their classical (slower chess) performance. Should that be a cause for concern? Another chess prodigy, Alireza Firouja, was infamously temporarily banned for ‘cheating’ at the age of 12 due to ‘unexpected results’ – this proved to be a misunderstanding – he was just too strong at a very young age. Naroditsky tried to prove himself, both online and on the board. In the 2024 World Blitz Chess Championship on 31 December 2024, he tied for first place (finished ninth), which was a stunning performance under top anti-cheat measures. He later stated that ‘I felt my life was on the line’, showing how much the public cacophony had affected him. He then regretted that even this display of chess strength was not enough to silence the online ossified hate. He pleaded publicly in an interview with female chess Grandmaster Dina Belenkaya, in August 2025: ‘I have sacrificed everything to chess and made it my priority to play honestly my whole life […] where are the defending voices?’; ‘my honour means the world to me; it would truly break my heart beyond repair if there was a scintilla of doubt in the top player’s brain, when they sit in a chessboard in front of me thinking whether I am playing honestly or not […] Please leave me alone and let me play chess’. Reference Belenkaya9
Data availability
Data availability is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
Author contributions
K.I. prepared the manuscript and takes responsibility for the contents of the paper. Some of the adjectives used in this manuscript were deliberately ornamented in tribute to Naroditsky’s commentary style.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency or commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of interest
K.I. is a member of the BJPsych Editorial Board and did not take part in the review or decision-making process of this paper. K.I. is a consultant psychiatrist and clinical lead for the Southern Gambling Service, Southampton, UK and honorary associate professor at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, UK. K.I. receives a stipend from Elsevier for journal editorial work, and research funds from Horizon 2022 (Boosting societal adaptation and mental health in a rapidly digitalising, post-pandemic Europe) and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration Wessex. The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care UK.
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.