Verbreitungsmechanismen sch\"adigender Sprache im Netz: Anatomie zweier Shitstorms

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.07194v1
• Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 12:00:04 GMT
• Title: Verbreitungsmechanismen sch\"adigender Sprache im Netz: Anatomie zweier Shitstorms
• Authors: Tatjana Scheffler, Veronika Solopova, Mihaela Popa-Wyatt
• Abstract summary: We focus on two exemplary, cross-media shitstorms directed against well-known individuals from the business world. Both have in common, first, the trigger, a controversial statement by the person who becomes the target of the shitstorm. We examine the spread of the outrage wave across two media at a time and test the applicability of computational linguistic methods for analyzing its time course.
• Score: 0.9898607871253772
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: In this working paper, we turn our attention to two exemplary, cross-media shitstorms directed against well-known individuals from the business world. Both have in common, first, the trigger, a controversial statement by the person who thereby becomes the target of the shitstorm, and second, the identity of this target as relatively privileged: cis-male, white, successful. We examine the spread of the outrage wave across two media at a time and test the applicability of computational linguistic methods for analyzing its time course. Assuming that harmful language spreads like a virus in digital space, we are primarily interested in the events and constellations that lead to the use of harmful language, and whether and how a linguistic formation of "tribes" occurs. Our research therefore focuses, first, on the distribution of linguistic features within the overall shitstorm: are individual words or phrases increasingly used after their introduction, and through which pathways they spread. Second, we ask whether "tribes," for example, one group of supporters and one of opponents of the target, have a distinguished linguistic form. Our hypothesis is that supporters remain equally active over time, while the dynamic "ripple" effect of the shitstorm is based on the varying participation of opponents.

Related papers

• Inside the echo chamber: Linguistic underpinnings of misinformation on Twitter [4.62503518282081]
  Social media users drive the spread of misinformation online by sharing posts that include erroneous information or commenting on controversial topics. This work explores how conversations around misinformation are mediated through language use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-24T15:37:12Z)
• Beyond Denouncing Hate: Strategies for Countering Implied Biases and Stereotypes in Language [18.560379338032558]
  We draw from psychology and philosophy literature to craft six psychologically inspired strategies to challenge the underlying stereotypical implications of hateful language. We show that human-written counterspeech uses strategies that are more specific to the implied stereotype, whereas machine-generated counterspeech uses less specific strategies. Our findings point to the importance of accounting for the underlying stereotypical implications of speech when generating counterspeech.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T21:33:46Z)
• Evolving linguistic divergence on polarizing social media [0.0]
  We quantify divergence in topics of conversation and word frequencies, messaging sentiment, and lexical semantics of words and emoji. While US American English remains largely intelligible within its large speech community, our findings point at areas where miscommunication may arise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T15:21:55Z)
• From Dogwhistles to Bullhorns: Unveiling Coded Rhetoric with Language Models [73.25963871034858]
  We present the first large-scale computational investigation of dogwhistles. We develop a typology of dogwhistles, curate the largest-to-date glossary of over 300 dogwhistles, and analyze their usage in historical U.S. politicians' speeches. We show that harmful content containing dogwhistles avoids toxicity detection, highlighting online risks of such coded language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T18:00:57Z)
• Fake News and Hate Speech: Language in Common [73.4764550713355]
  We compute a novel index, the ingroup vs outgroup index, in three different datasets and show that both phenomena share an "us vs them" narrative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-05T15:35:10Z)
• "Stop Asian Hate!" : Refining Detection of Anti-Asian Hate Speech During the COVID-19 Pandemic [2.5227595609842206]
  COVID-19 pandemic has fueled a surge in anti-Asian xenophobia and prejudice. We create and annotate a corpus of Twitter tweets using 2 experimental approaches to explore anti-Asian abusive and hate speech.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-04T06:55:19Z)
• Perception Point: Identifying Critical Learning Periods in Speech for Bilingual Networks [58.24134321728942]
  We compare and identify cognitive aspects on deep neural-based visual lip-reading models. We observe a strong correlation between these theories in cognitive psychology and our unique modeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-13T05:30:50Z)
• Exploring Polarization of Users Behavior on Twitter During the 2019 South American Protests [15.065938163384235]
  We explore polarization on Twitter in a different context, namely the protest that paralyzed several countries in the South American region in 2019. By leveraging users' endorsement of politicians' tweets and hashtag campaigns with defined stances towards the protest (for or against), we construct a weakly labeled stance dataset with millions of users. We find empirical evidence of the "filter bubble" phenomenon during the event, as we not only show that the user bases are homogeneous in terms of stance, but the probability that a user transitions from media of different clusters is low.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-05T07:13:18Z)
• Towards Controllable Biases in Language Generation [87.89632038677912]
  We develop a method to induce societal biases in generated text when input prompts contain mentions of specific demographic groups. We analyze two scenarios: 1) inducing negative biases for one demographic and positive biases for another demographic, and 2) equalizing biases between demographics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T08:25:11Z)
• A Framework for the Computational Linguistic Analysis of Dehumanization [52.735780962665814]
  We analyze discussions of LGBTQ people in the New York Times from 1986 to 2015. We find increasingly humanizing descriptions of LGBTQ people over time. The ability to analyze dehumanizing language at a large scale has implications for automatically detecting and understanding media bias as well as abusive language online.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-06T03:02:12Z)
• Where New Words Are Born: Distributional Semantic Analysis of Neologisms and Their Semantic Neighborhoods [51.34667808471513]
  We investigate the importance of two factors, semantic sparsity and frequency growth rates of semantic neighbors, formalized in the distributional semantics paradigm. We show that both factors are predictive word emergence although we find more support for the latter hypothesis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-21T19:09:49Z)

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.