Is radicalization reinforced by social media censorship?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12842v1
• Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:07:34 GMT
• Title: Is radicalization reinforced by social media censorship?
• Authors: Justin E. Lane, Kevin McCaffree, F. LeRon Shults
• Abstract summary: Radicalized beliefs, such as those tied to QAnon, Russiagate, and other political conspiracy theories, can lead some individuals and groups to engage in violent behavior. This article presents and agent-based model of a social media network that enables investigation of the effects of censorship on the amount of dissenting information.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Radicalized beliefs, such as those tied to QAnon, Russiagate, and other political conspiracy theories, can lead some individuals and groups to engage in violent behavior, as evidenced in recent months. Understanding the mechanisms by which such beliefs are accepted, spread, and intensified is critical for any attempt to mitigate radicalization and avoid increased political polarization. This article presents and agent-based model of a social media network that enables investigation of the effects of censorship on the amount of dissenting information to which agents become exposed and the certainty of their radicalized views. The model explores two forms of censorship: 1) decentralized censorship-in which individuals can choose to break an online social network tie (unfriend or unfollow) with another individual who transmits conflicting beliefs and 2) centralized censorship-in which a single authority can ban an individual from the social media network for spreading a certain type of belief. This model suggests that both forms of censorship increase certainty in radicalized views by decreasing the amount of dissent to which an agent is exposed, but centralized "banning" of individuals has the strongest effect on radicalization.

Related papers

• Pathfinder: Exploring Path Diversity for Assessing Internet Censorship Inconsistency [8.615061541238589]
  We investigate Internet censorship from a different perspective by scrutinizing the diverse censorship deployment inside a country. We reveal that the diversity of Internet censorship caused by different routing paths inside a country is prevalent. We identify that different hosting platforms also result in inconsistent censorship activities due to different peering relationships with the ISPs in a country.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-05T01:48:31Z)
• Understanding Divergent Framing of the Supreme Court Controversies: Social Media vs. News Outlets [56.67097829383139]
  We focus on the nuanced distinctions in framing of social media and traditional media outlets concerning a series of U.S. Supreme Court rulings. We observe significant polarization in the news media's treatment of affirmative action and abortion rights, whereas the topic of student loans tends to exhibit a greater degree of consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-18T06:40:21Z)
• Unveiling the Hidden Agenda: Biases in News Reporting and Consumption [59.55900146668931]
  We build a six-year dataset on the Italian vaccine debate and adopt a Bayesian latent space model to identify narrative and selection biases. We found a nonlinear relationship between biases and engagement, with higher engagement for extreme positions. Analysis of news consumption on Twitter reveals common audiences among news outlets with similar ideological positions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-14T18:58:42Z)
• How We Express Ourselves Freely: Censorship, Self-censorship, and Anti-censorship on a Chinese Social Media [4.408128846525362]
  We identify the metrics of censorship and self-censorship, find the influence factors, and construct a mediation model to measure their relationship. Based on these findings, we discuss implications for democratic social media design and future censorship research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-24T18:28:16Z)
• Adherence to Misinformation on Social Media Through Socio-Cognitive and Group-Based Processes [79.79659145328856]
  We argue that when misinformation proliferates, this happens because the social media environment enables adherence to misinformation. We make the case that polarization and misinformation adherence are closely tied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T12:34:24Z)
• Perspective-taking to Reduce Affective Polarization on Social Media [11.379010432760241]
  We deploy a randomized field experiment through a browser extension to 1,611 participants on Twitter. We find that simply exposing participants to "outgroup" feeds enhances engagement, but not an understanding of why others hold their political views. framing the experience in familiar, empathic terms by prompting participants to recall a disagreement does not affect engagement, but does increase their ability to understand opposing views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T20:25:10Z)
• Reaching the bubble may not be enough: news media role in online political polarization [58.720142291102135]
  A way of reducing polarization would be by distributing cross-partisan news among individuals with distinct political orientations. This study investigates whether this holds in the context of nationwide elections in Brazil and Canada.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T11:34:04Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• #ISIS vs #ActionCountersTerrorism: A Computational Analysis of Extremist and Counter-extremist Twitter Narratives [2.685668802278155]
  This study will apply computational techniques to analyse the narratives of various pro-extremist and counter-extremist Twitter accounts. Our findings show that pro-extremist accounts often use different strategies to disseminate content when compared to counter-extremist accounts across different types of organisations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-26T20:46:45Z)
• Towards control of opinion diversity by introducing zealots into a polarised social group [7.9603223299524535]
  We explore a method to influence or even control the diversity of opinions within a polarised social group. We leverage the voter model in which users hold binary opinions and repeatedly update their beliefs based on others they connect with. We inject zealots into a polarised network in order to shift the average opinion towards any target value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-12T15:27:30Z)
• Echo Chambers on Social Media: A comparative analysis [64.2256216637683]
  We introduce an operational definition of echo chambers and perform a massive comparative analysis on 1B pieces of contents produced by 1M users on four social media platforms. We infer the leaning of users about controversial topics and reconstruct their interaction networks by analyzing different features. We find support for the hypothesis that platforms implementing news feed algorithms like Facebook may elicit the emergence of echo-chambers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-20T20:00:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.