The Dating Apps Reporting Project produced this story in partnership with the Pulitzer Center’s AI Accountability Network and The Markup, now a part of CalMatters, and copublished with The Guardian and The 19th.
Six women who were drugged and raped or sexually assaulted by the same Denver cardiologist filed a lawsuit against Match Group on Tuesday, accusing the world’s largest dating app company of “accommodating rapists across its products” through “negligence” and a “defective” product.
The women, backed by four law firms, said that by allowing known abusers like Stephen Matthews to remain on its apps, Tinder and Hinge, even after they are reported for rape, the company fostered a breeding ground for “sexual predators”.
“Even when Match Group receives reports about rapists, they continue to welcome them, fail to warn users about the general and specific risks, and affirmatively recommend known predators to members,” the complaint said. “Rapists know each Match Group platform offers a catalog of available victims.”
Though Match Group claimed to a survivor who reported Matthews that they had “permanently banned” him, the suit contends, he remained active on Hinge – and was even promoted as a “standout” match.
“ Dating apps have a duty to protect their users from known dangers,” said Carrie Goldberg, one of the attorneys representing Matthews’s survivors. Goldberg, who is known for high-profile lawsuits against large companies, including Amazon and Meta and high-profile abusers, like Harvey Weinstein, said “Stephen Matthews was a known danger,” and called dating apps “potentially the most dangerous product.”
The 54-page complaint, filed in Denver district court, cites an 18-month investigation into Match Group by the Dating App Reporting Project, published in the Guardian in February.
In October 2024, Matthews was sentenced to 158 years to life in prison. He was convicted in August of 35 counts of drugging and/or sexually assaulting 11 women between 2019 and 2023. The six women bringing civil lawsuit against Match Group are proceeding anonymously to protect their identities.
Match Group did not provide comment before publication. In February, in a statement provided to the Dating App Reporting Project by former company spokesperson Kayla Whaling, the company cast itself as an industry leader in deploying technology to promote safety, including “harassment-preventing AI tools, ID verification for profiles, and a portal that helps us better support and communicate with law enforcement investigating crimes … Every person deserves safe and respectful experiences. We are committed to doing the work to make dating safer on our platforms and beyond.”
“We recognize our role in fostering safer communities and promoting authentic and respectful connections worldwide,” the February statement read. “We will always work to invest in and improve our systems, and search for ways to help our users stay safe, both online and when they connect in real life.”
The Dating Apps Reporting Project investigation found that Match Group, an $8bn dating app behemoth that operates in more than 40 languages and 190 countries, had known the scale of harm on its platforms for years, but kept that information secret. It promised to publish a transparency report to share this data with the public in 2022, but never followed through. After the Dating Apps Reporting Project investigation in February, mentions of this promise have been removed from the company’s website. The investigation also found Match Group scaled back critical trust and safety teams.
Matthews was first reported to Hinge in 2020 but remained on Match Group apps, the investigation found, continuing to match with and assault women until 2023 when one survivor walked into a Denver police station.
Relying on the Dating App Reporting Project’s investigation, along with new details from a survivor’s attempts to warn the company of danger, the Denver lawsuit details the cardiologist’s years-long sexual assault spree on Hinge. Even after being reported multiple times, Matthews was able to continue to match with and assault women – usually with the same pattern – disarming them methodically with a trip to the park with his dog, a brunch near his townhouse, or a game of Jenga.
The lawsuit calls Hinge’s product design “defective”, alleging a bad actor can easily unmatch with a victim before they report them. “Once unmatched, the reporting option disappears,” the lawsuit said.
Product testing performed by the Dating Apps Reporting Project found banned users were easily able to rejoin Tinder, without changing their name, birthday or profile photo as late as February 2025.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for plaintiffs.
One of the women suing Match Group told the Dating Apps Reporting Project that she was initially intrigued by a profile showing a handsome doctor hiking with his dog in 2023. “This guy has it together,” she thought.
Alexa, then 22 years old, whose last name is being withheld to protect her privacy, met Matthews at his house where he offered her a shot. Not long after, she said, she started stumbling. Matthews then pushed her into a bedroom and began kissing her, she said. That’s when Alexa said she blacked out.
After being contacted by the Denver district attorney’s office, she was infuriated to learn that Matthews had been reported to Hinge three years before her attack.
“Hinge was liable for giving him a platform.” Alexa said. “They had all the power and the resources to prevent this from happening.”
Legal analysts say the lawsuit faces an uphill battle against section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that grants online platforms immunity from liability for most user-generated content.
In 2019, Goldberg herself lost an effort to sue Grindr, a gay dating app, on behalf of a user who claimed the app’s technology resulted in men following him for sex. The courts sided with the app and ruled that they were immune from liability due to section 230.
In 2023, the US supreme court in Gonzalez v Google declined to rule on whether tech platforms like YouTube are liable for terrorist content recommended to users by their algorithms, with families of Isis victims suing and remanded the case to the ninth circuit and referenced their decision in a separate case, Twitter v Taamneh, finding “little if any” claim for relief.
Match says it is improving the safety of its apps. During its most recent earnings call in November, Match Group and Tinder CEO Spencer Rascoff said the company was “doubling down on trust and safety across our platforms” because “trust is core” to its “long term success”. He spoke of the safety tools being integrated into the company’s portfolio – like video verification technology, recommendation algorithms, and AI assisted moderation tools.
Some of these tools, Rascoff admitted, are decreasing the apps’ monthly active users but, he added, “the fact that we’re able to improve user outcomes at minimal impact to revenue” is “a good sign”.
Since 2022, the company has been struggling to return its stock price to even a third of its peak. Rascoff, a venture capitalist and co-founder of the real estate website Zillow, cut headcount at the company by 13% after taking the reins in February.
In December 2025, the Dating Apps Reporting Project retested whether banned users could still sign up for new accounts on Match Group’s dating apps, without lying about who they are. Testing confirmed that banned users could sign up again on Hinge, Plenty of Fish and OkCupid with the exact same name, birthday and profile photos used in their banned accounts. Match Group did not respond to an inquiry about the product testing.
On Tinder however, testing showed that some new users are now prompted to take a video selfie, so that Tinder can use facial recognition to “confirm users are real and match their profile photos”. The new security feature is called Face Check and Tinder has launched it in several states and countries. This feature also may not have prevented Matthews from returning to a dating app, as he never lied about who he was.
Reporters also checked their old accounts from February, which had the same name, birthday, and profile photos of banned accounts, to see if Match Group or its moderation systems eventually banned the accounts. Every account that reporters checked was still in good standing.
Alexa believes that she wouldn’t have been harmed if Hinge had invested more in prioritizing women’s safety. “If these companies are making billions of dollars, they definitely have the resources to make them effective and safe,” she said.
She said she no longer uses dating apps.
“I will never date the same again,” Alexa said. “I’ve kind of even accepted that I would be totally fine being alone for the rest of my life if it means keeping myself safe from what happened to me.”
