Identifying and characterizing superspreaders of low-credibility content on Twitter

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.09524v4
• Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 23:54:37 GMT
• Title: Identifying and characterizing superspreaders of low-credibility content on Twitter
• Authors: Matthew R. DeVerna, Rachith Aiyappa, Diogo Pacheco, John Bryden, Filippo Menczer
• Abstract summary: We introduce simple metrics to predict the top superspreaders several months into the future. Superspreaders include pundits with large followings, low-credibility media outlets, personal accounts affiliated with those media outlets, and a range of influencers. They are primarily political in nature and use more toxic language than the typical user sharing misinformation.
• Score: 2.8488230743364236
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The world's digital information ecosystem continues to struggle with the spread of misinformation. Prior work has suggested that users who consistently disseminate a disproportionate amount of low-credibility content -- so-called superspreaders -- are at the center of this problem. We quantitatively confirm this hypothesis and introduce simple metrics to predict the top superspreaders several months into the future. We then conduct a qualitative review to characterize the most prolific superspreaders and analyze their sharing behaviors. Superspreaders include pundits with large followings, low-credibility media outlets, personal accounts affiliated with those media outlets, and a range of influencers. They are primarily political in nature and use more toxic language than the typical user sharing misinformation. We also find concerning evidence that suggests Twitter may be overlooking prominent superspreaders. We hope this work will further public understanding of bad actors and promote steps to mitigate their negative impacts on healthy digital discourse.

Related papers

• Influencers' Reposts and Viral Diffusion: Prestige Bias in Online Communities [0.19285000127136376]
  We analyzed over 55 million posts and 520 million reposts on Twitter (currently X) Our findings indicate that posts shared by influencers were more likely to be further shared compared to those shared by non-influencers. A small group of highly influential users accounted for approximately half of the information flow within repost cascades.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-08T09:48:21Z)
• Who Checks the Checkers? Exploring Source Credibility in Twitter's Community Notes [0.03511246202322249]
  The proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms has become a significant concern. This study focuses on the specific feature of Twitter Community Notes, despite its potential role in crowd-sourced fact-checking. We find that the majority of cited sources are news outlets that are left-leaning and are of high factuality, pointing to a potential bias in the platform's community fact-checking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T09:47:58Z)
• Incentivizing News Consumption on Social Media Platforms Using Large Language Models and Realistic Bot Accounts [4.06613683722116]
  This project examines how to enhance users' exposure to and engagement with verified and ideologically balanced news on Twitter. We created 28 bots that replied to users tweeting about sports, entertainment, or lifestyle with a contextual reply. To test differential effects by gender of the bots, treated users were randomly assigned to receive responses by bots presented as female or male. We find that the treated users followed more news accounts and the users in the female bot treatment were more likely to like news content than the control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T07:44:06Z)
• An influencer-based approach to understanding radical right viral tweets [0.0]
  ROT provides insight into the content, engagement and followership of a set of 35 radical right influencers. It includes over 50,000 original entries and over 40 million retweets, quotes, replies and mentions. It is crucial to account for the influencer-level structure, and find evidence of the importance of both influencer- and content-level factors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-15T21:40:25Z)
• 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)
• Misinfo Belief Frames: A Case Study on Covid & Climate News [49.979419711713795]
  We propose a formalism for understanding how readers perceive the reliability of news and the impact of misinformation. We introduce the Misinfo Belief Frames (MBF) corpus, a dataset of 66k inferences over 23.5k headlines. Our results using large-scale language modeling to predict misinformation frames show that machine-generated inferences can influence readers' trust in news headlines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T09:50:11Z)
• Causal Understanding of Fake News Dissemination on Social Media [50.4854427067898]
  We argue that it is critical to understand what user attributes potentially cause users to share fake news. In fake news dissemination, confounders can be characterized by fake news sharing behavior that inherently relates to user attributes and online activities. We propose a principled approach to alleviating selection bias in fake news dissemination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-20T19:37:04Z)
• Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking [54.23273310155137]
  We propose using the political diversity of a website's audience as a quality signal. Using news source reliability ratings from domain experts and web browsing data from a diverse sample of 6,890 U.S. citizens, we first show that websites with more extreme and less politically diverse audiences have lower journalistic standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-16T02:13:55Z)
• Information Consumption and Social Response in a Segregated Environment: the Case of Gab [74.5095691235917]
  This work provides a characterization of the interaction patterns within Gab around the COVID-19 topic. We find that there are no strong statistical differences in the social response to questionable and reliable content. Our results provide insights toward the understanding of coordinated inauthentic behavior and on the early-warning of information operation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T11:34:25Z)
• 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.