ABSTRACT Purpose: This short paper describes the dashboard design process for online hate speech monitoring for multiple languages and platforms. Methodology/approach: A case study approach was adopted in which the authors followed a research & development project for a multilingual and multiplatform online dashboard monitoring online hate speech. The case under study is the project for the European Observatory of Online Hate (EOOH). Results: We outline the process taken for design and prototype development for which a design thinking approach was followed, including multiple potential user groups of the dashboard. The paper presents this process's outcome and the dashboard's initial use. The identified issues, such as obfuscation of the context or identity of user accounts of social media posts limiting the dashboard's usability while providing a trade-off in privacy protection, may contribute to the discourse on privacy and data protection in (big data) social media analysis for practitioners. Research limitations/implications: The results are from a single case study. Still, they may be relevant for other online hate speech detection and monitoring projects involving big data analysis and human annotation. Practical implications: The study emphasises the need to involve diverse user groups and a multidisciplinary team in developing a dashboard for online hate speech. The context in which potential online hate is disseminated and the network of accounts distributing or interacting with that hate speech seems relevant for analysis by a part of the user groups of the dashboard. International Information Management Association
LINK
This study explores how TikTok Live’s fusion of immediacy, interactivity, and monetization creates a powerful infrastructure for political communication, one increasingly exploited for extremist mobilisation and disinformation. Focusing on far-right actors in Germany, it combines technical monitoring, content analysis, and policy review to examine how extremist networks exploit the platform’s live-streaming affordances to spread propaganda, monetize hate, and evade moderation, often in ways that outpace both TikTok’s self-regulation and external oversight under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
MULTIFILE
De hoge percentages van het aantal mensen dat te maken krijgt met online haat of bedreigingen, liegen er namelijk niet om. De sociale norm dat online discriminatie onacceptabel en niet oké is, lijkt nauwelijks aanwezig. Van augustus 2019 tot en met augustus 2022 heeft het project #DatMeenJeNiet van Movisie, Hogeschool Inholland en Diversity Media geprobeerd om een steentje bij te dragen aan het veranderen van deze norm. Dit is het eindrapport van de onderzoeken die zijn uitgevoerd binnen dit project.
DOCUMENT
Content moderation is commonly used by social media platforms to curb the spread of hateful content. Yet, little is known about how users perceive this practice and which factors may influence their perceptions. Publicly denouncing content moderation—for example, portraying it as a limitation to free speech or as a form of political targeting—may play an important role in this context. Evaluations of moderation may also depend on interpersonal mechanisms triggered by perceived user characteristics. In this study, we disentangle these different factors by examining how the gender, perceived similarity, and social influence of a user publicly complaining about a content-removal decision influence evaluations of moderation. In an experiment (n = 1,586) conducted in the United States, the Netherlands, and Portugal, participants witnessed the moderation of a hateful post, followed by a publicly posted complaint about moderation by the affected user. Evaluations of the fairness, legitimacy, and bias of the moderation decision were measured, as well as perceived similarity and social influence as mediators. The results indicate that arguments about freedom of speech significantly lower the perceived fairness of content moderation. Factors such as social influence of the moderated user impacted outcomes differently depending on the moderated user’s gender. We discuss implications of these findings for content-moderation practices.
DOCUMENT
Este artículo busca señales de discursos de odio aparecidos en comentarios sobre el procés y el independentismo catalán publicados en las noticias en prensa sobre Lionel Messi en Madrid y en Barcelona (Abc, La Vanguardia, Mundo Deportivo, Marca, El mundo y As) en el periodo 2019-2021. Partiendo de 2.639 noticias con Messi en el titular, se usaron métodos cuantitativos para identificar los hilos con comentarios políticos para estudiarlos después a través de análisis cualitativo del discurso. Los resultados reflejan que en Madrid se usan noticias y comentarios sobre Messi para hablar del procés y del independentismo, mientras que en Barcelona (tanto medios como comentaristas) no relacionan al jugador con la política. Dos periódicos de Barcelona (La Vanguardia, Mundo Deportivo) y dos de Madrid (Marca y El mundo) reúnen los 12 hilos con más comentarios políticos en ambas ciudades: 487, en total. Su análisis revela que la prensa deportiva concita opiniones más diversas que la generalista y, por tanto, recoge más conflicto y más presencia de discursos de odio por ideología política. Los primeros mensajes (1-25) en los hilos de comentarios aparecen un 77% de las veces como los más seguidos y, por lo tanto, los usuarios que escriben primero influyen más. Esta investigación concluye que los discursos de odio se detectan más en estructuras y argumentaciones que en palabras concretas, pero su existencia no tiene por qué ser negativa y puede derivar en un efecto búmeran contra el propio mensaje de odio si aparece derrotado en la dinámica de intervenciones.This paper examines hate speech traces within comments about the Catalan independentist procés embedded in news published about Lionel Messi in Madrid’s and Barcelona’s online newspapers (Abc, La Vanguardia, Mundo Deportivo, Marca, El mundo, As) during the period 2019-2021. Starting from 2,639 news with Messi in the title, quantitative techniques were applied to identify those with the highest volume of political terms, and their comments’ threads were later studied in depth by means of qualitative discourse analysis. The results show that in Madrid news and comments about Messi are leveraged to discuss the procés, while in Barcelona both press and commenters refrain from tying politics to the footballer. Two newspapers from Barcelona (La Vanguardia, Mundo Deportivo) and two from Madrid (Marca, El mundo) gather the 12 threads with the highest prevalence of political comments: 487 in total. Their analysis reveals that opinions in sports newspapers are more diverse than in the general press and, consequently, show more conflict and more hate messages linked to opposing political views. The few first (1-25) of the threads’ comments turn out to be the most followed 77% of the times, making the users who comment first become more influential than the latecomers. This research concludes that hate speech appears more in structures and argumentations than in specific words, but their presence isn’t necessarily negative and can create a boomerang effect against the hate message if this becomes defeated during the subsequent online dispute.
DOCUMENT
Full text via link. Human rights safeguard that individuals can develop their ideas and identity undisturbed by government or governmental agencies. With regard to radicalisation, adopting radical ideas is not a crime. Some crimes, such as hate-speech and ideological violence, are associated with radicalisation, but when individuals or groups only develop ideas without committing crimes there is no legal ground or justification for intervening.
LINK
Project objectives Radicalisation research leads to ethical and legal questions and issues. These issues need to be addressed in way that helps the project progress in ethically and legally acceptable manner. Description of Work The legal analysis in SAFIRE addressed questions such as which behavior associated with radicalisation is criminal behaviour. The ethical issues were addressed throughout the project in close cooperation between the ethicists and the researchers using a method called ethical parallel research. Results A legal analysis was made about criminal law and radicalisation. During the project lively discussions were held in the research team about ethical issues. An ethical justification for interventions in radicalisation processes has been written. With regard to research ethics: An indirect informed consent procedure for interviews with (former) radicals has been designed. Practical guidelines to prevent obtaining information that could lead to indirect identification of respondents were developed.
DOCUMENT
(English below)Esta investigación estudia las características de los comentarios que logran más impacto en un entorno digital. Se emplea una metodología cualitativa que analiza los 50 mensajes con más likes del foro de una noticia, publicada en Marca.com, en la que el jugador del Real Madrid Vinicius Junior denuncia los episodios racistas sufridos en los estadios de fútbol españoles. Se tienen en cuenta las emociones expresadas por los autores, así como las estrategias retóricas y argumentales utilizadas en los comentarios. Se concluye que los mensajes escritos con empatía, aunque estén en contra de la opinión mayoritaria, pueden tener cierto impacto si formulan un argumento dual que reconoce las opiniones contrarias como valiosas en algún punto, incluso sin validarlas. En el análisis de la eficacia de los mensajes se observa que lo distinto se premia, como aportar un dato inesperado de forma inteligente (ironía) o presentar una opinión contraria a lo que se espera por pertenecer a un determinado grupo (afiliación):en este último caso el comentario resulta más auténtico y, por lo tanto, es más impactante. Se demuestra también que la percepción de los mensajes es compleja y que algunos elementos o rasgos que habitualmente se consideran eficaces pueden no serlo. Así sucede con los comentarios breves, que no siempre tienen trascendencia y pueden aparecer como inconsistentes si no incluyen una argumentación. Tampoco la diversidad o la acumulación de argumentos es positiva en cualquier circunstancia: compensa más usar los argumentos por separado para no distraer del objetivo persuasivo. This research examines the characteristics of comments that achieve the greatest impact in a digital environment. A qualitative methodology is used to analyse the 50 most liked messages in the forum discussion prompted by a news article published on the Spanish sports newspaper Marca.com. The article focuses on Real Madrid player Vinicius Junior’s denunciation of racist incidents in Spanish football stadiums. This study considers the emotions expressed by the authors, as well as the rhetorical and argumentative strategies employed in the comments. The findings suggest that messages written with empathy, even when opposing the opinion of the majority, can have a significant impact if they present a dual argument that acknowledges opposing views as valuable in some respects, even without validating them. The analysis reveals that originality is rewarded, such as introducing an unexpected fact in an intelligent manner (e.g., irony) or expressing an opinion contrary to expectations based on group belonging (affiliation). In the latter case, the comment appears more authentic and, therefore, more impactful. The study also demonstrates that the perception of messages is complex, and some elements traditionally considered effective may not always be so. For example, brief comments do not always carry weight and can come across as inconsistent if they lack sufficient argumentation. Similarly, the diversity or accumulation of arguments is not universally positive; it is often more effective to present arguments separately to avoid distracting from the persuasive objective.
DOCUMENT
Social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter have millions of users logging in every day, using these platforms for commu nication, entertainment, and news consumption. These platforms adopt rules that determine how users communicate and thereby limit and shape public discourse.2 Platforms need to deal with large amounts of data generated every day. For example, as of October 2021, 4.55 billion social media users were ac tive on an average number of 6.7 platforms used each month per internet user.3 As a result, platforms were compelled to develop governance models and content moderation systems to deal with harmful and undesirable content, including disinformation. In this study: • ‘Content governance’ is defined as a set of processes, procedures, and systems that determine how a given platform plans, publishes, moder ates, and curates content. • ‘Content moderation’ is the organised practice of a social media plat form of pre-screening, removing, or labelling undesirable content to reduce the damage that inappropriate content can cause.
MULTIFILE
