Putting the Count Back Into Accountability: An Analysis of Transparency Data About the Sexual Exploitation of Minors

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14625v2
• Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:13:13 GMT
• Title: Putting the Count Back Into Accountability: An Analysis of Transparency Data About the Sexual Exploitation of Minors
• Authors: Robert Grimm,
• Abstract summary: This study seeks answers to two research questions: First, what does the data tell us about the growth of online CSE?<n>We analyze the growth in CSE reports over the last 25 years and correlate it with the growth of social media user accounts.<n>While half of surveyed organizations release meaningful and reasonably accurate transparency data, the other half either fail to make disclosures or release data with severe quality issues.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Alarmist and sensationalist statements about the "explosion" of online child sexual exploitation or CSE dominate much of the public discourse about the topic. Based on a new dataset collecting the transparency disclosures for 16 US-based internet platforms and the national clearinghouse collecting legally mandated reports about CSE, this study seeks answers to two research questions: First, what does the data tell us about the growth of online CSE? Second, how reliable and trustworthy is that data? To answer the two questions, this study proceeds in three parts. First, we leverage a critical literature review to synthesize a granular model for CSE reporting. Second, we analyze the growth in CSE reports over the last 25 years and correlate it with the growth of social media user accounts. Third, we use two comparative audits to assess the quality of transparency data. Critical findings include: First, US law increasingly threatens the very population it claims to protect, i.e., children and adolescents. Second, the rapid growth of CSE report over the last decade is linear and largely driven by an equivalent growth in social media user accounts. Third, the Covid-19 pandemic had no statistically relevant impact on report volume. Fourth, while half of surveyed organizations release meaningful and reasonably accurate transparency data, the other half either fail to make disclosures or release data with severe quality issues.

Related papers

• Can Community Notes Replace Professional Fact-Checkers? [49.5332225129956]
  Policy changes by Twitter/X and Meta signal a shift away from partnerships with fact-checking organisations. Our analysis reveals that community notes cite fact-checking sources up to five times more than previously reported.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T22:26:39Z)
• Misinformation with Legal Consequences (MisLC): A New Task Towards Harnessing Societal Harm of Misinformation [24.936670177298584]
  We take a novel angle to consolidate the definition of misinformation detection using legal issues as a measurement of societal ramifications. We introduce a new task: Misinformation with Legal Consequence (MisLC), which leverages definitions from a wide range of legal domains. We advocate a two-step dataset curation approach that utilizes crowd-sourced checkworthiness and expert evaluations of misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:00:28Z)
• Differentially Private Data Release on Graphs: Inefficiencies and Unfairness [48.96399034594329]
  This paper characterizes the impact of Differential Privacy on bias and unfairness in the context of releasing information about networks. We consider a network release problem where the network structure is known to all, but the weights on edges must be released privately. Our work provides theoretical foundations and empirical evidence into the bias and unfairness arising due to privacy in these networked decision problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T08:37:37Z)
• AMMeBa: A Large-Scale Survey and Dataset of Media-Based Misinformation In-The-Wild [1.4193873432298625]
  We show the results of a two-year study using human raters to annotate online media-based misinformation. We show the rise of generative AI-based content in misinformation claims. We also show "simple" methods dominated historically, particularly context manipulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-19T23:05:53Z)
• The Trajectory of Romance Scams in the U.S [0.0]
  This study examines RS trends in the U.S. through a quantitative analysis of web searches, news articles, research publications, and government reports from 2004 to 2023. Results reveal increasing public interest and media coverage contrasted by a recent decrease in incidents reported to authorities. Findings suggest RS escalation despite declining official reports, which are likely obscured by low victim reporting rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T20:18:33Z)
• The Impact of Differential Feature Under-reporting on Algorithmic Fairness [86.275300739926]
  We present an analytically tractable model of differential feature under-reporting. We then use to characterize the impact of this kind of data bias on algorithmic fairness. Our results show that, in real world data settings, under-reporting typically leads to increasing disparities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T19:16:22Z)
• Into the LAIONs Den: Investigating Hate in Multimodal Datasets [67.21783778038645]
  This paper investigates the effect of scaling datasets on hateful content through a comparative audit of two datasets: LAION-400M and LAION-2B. We found that hate content increased by nearly 12% with dataset scale, measured both qualitatively and quantitatively. We also found that filtering dataset contents based on Not Safe For Work (NSFW) values calculated based on images alone does not exclude all the harmful content in alt-text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T19:00:05Z)
• Exploring age-related patterns in internet access: Insights from a secondary analysis of New Zealand survey data [0.0]
  This paper aims to give an overview of New Zealand's Internet access trends and how they relate to age. It is based on secondary analysis of data from a larger online panel survey with 1,001 adult respondents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-05T02:03:28Z)
• ManiTweet: A New Benchmark for Identifying Manipulation of News on Social Media [74.93847489218008]
  We present a novel task, identifying manipulation of news on social media, which aims to detect manipulation in social media posts and identify manipulated or inserted information. To study this task, we have proposed a data collection schema and curated a dataset called ManiTweet, consisting of 3.6K pairs of tweets and corresponding articles. Our analysis demonstrates that this task is highly challenging, with large language models (LLMs) yielding unsatisfactory performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:40:07Z)
• Fighting Malicious Media Data: A Survey on Tampering Detection and Deepfake Detection [115.83992775004043]
  Recent advances in deep learning, particularly deep generative models, open the doors for producing perceptually convincing images and videos at a low cost. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the current media tampering detection approaches, and discusses the challenges and trends in this field for future research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-12T02:54:08Z)
• Having your Privacy Cake and Eating it Too: Platform-supported Auditing of Social Media Algorithms for Public Interest [70.02478301291264]
  Social media platforms curate access to information and opportunities, and so play a critical role in shaping public discourse. Prior studies have used black-box methods to show that these algorithms can lead to biased or discriminatory outcomes. We propose a new method for platform-supported auditing that can meet the goals of the proposed legislation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-18T17:32:35Z)
• Counter Hate Speech in Social Media: A Survey [2.8532545355403123]
  We review the most important research in the past and present with a main focus on CHS's impact on social media. The CHS generation is based on the optimistic assumption that any attempt to intervene the hate speech in social media can play a positive role in this context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T06:16:46Z)
• Two-Face: Adversarial Audit of Commercial Face Recognition Systems [6.684965883341269]
  Computer vision applications tend to be biased against minority groups which result in unfair and concerning societal and political outcomes. We perform an extensive adversarial audit on multiple systems and datasets, making a number of concerning observations. We conclude with a discussion on the broader societal impacts in light of these observations and a few suggestions on how to collectively deal with this issue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-17T14:21:23Z)
• 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)
• Trustworthy Transparency by Design [57.67333075002697]
  We propose a transparency framework for software design, incorporating research on user trust and experience. Our framework enables developing software that incorporates transparency in its design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-19T12:34:01Z)
• The COVID-19 Infodemic: Can the Crowd Judge Recent Misinformation Objectively? [17.288917654501265]
  We study whether crowdsourcing is an effective and reliable method to assess statements truthfulness during a pandemic. We specifically target statements related to the COVID-19 health emergency, that is still ongoing at the time of the study. In our experiment, crowd workers are asked to assess the truthfulness of statements, as well as to provide evidence for the assessments as a URL and a text justification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-13T05:53:24Z)
• ETHOS: an Online Hate Speech Detection Dataset [6.59720246184989]
  We present 'ETHOS', a textual dataset with two variants: binary and multi-label, based on YouTube and Reddit comments validated using the Figure-Eight crowdsourcing platform. Our key assumption is that, even gaining a small amount of labelled data from such a time-consuming process, we can guarantee hate speech occurrences in the examined material.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-11T08:59:57Z)
• Critical Impact of Social Networks Infodemic on Defeating Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic: Twitter-Based Study and Research Directions [1.6571886312953874]
  An estimated 2.95 billion people in 2019 used social media worldwide. The widespread of the Coronavirus COVID-19 resulted with a tsunami of social media. This paper presents a large-scale study based on data mined from Twitter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-18T15:53:13Z)
• Leveraging Multi-Source Weak Social Supervision for Early Detection of Fake News [67.53424807783414]
  Social media has greatly enabled people to participate in online activities at an unprecedented rate. This unrestricted access also exacerbates the spread of misinformation and fake news online which might cause confusion and chaos unless being detected early for its mitigation. We jointly leverage the limited amount of clean data along with weak signals from social engagements to train deep neural networks in a meta-learning framework to estimate the quality of different weak instances. Experiments on realworld datasets demonstrate that the proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art baselines for early detection of fake news without using any user engagements at prediction time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-03T18:26:33Z)

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.