Most large online communities have coordinated across multiple platforms for years. While quarantine/bans can disrupt recruitment, they just displace the core group elsewhere.
This piece by @alibreland shares a notable example of this. motherjones.com/politics/2020/…
This piece by @alibreland shares a notable example of this. motherjones.com/politics/2020/…
A few years ago, @TarletonG and I were talking about whether we need to see conten moderation through the concept of assembly as well as speech. It's high time.
By focusing on speech, people have mistaken social/cultural problems for a content problem. And here we are.
By focusing on speech, people have mistaken social/cultural problems for a content problem. And here we are.
In the 18th century, freedom of speech & assembly represented social functions that have now become un-bundled & repackaged online. To name a few:
- spreading ideas
- connecting/recruiting
- raising funds
- building relationships & group identity
- coordinating groups to act
- spreading ideas
- connecting/recruiting
- raising funds
- building relationships & group identity
- coordinating groups to act
I understand lawyers have reasons for bundling a lot of policy under content moderation & speech debates.
But communication/coordination are more fundamental social processes. If we don't acknowledge that, we won't be able to imagine workable and just digital social policies.
But communication/coordination are more fundamental social processes. If we don't acknowledge that, we won't be able to imagine workable and just digital social policies.
Quantitative research on what happens after a ban or quarantine have tended to look:
1) within the same platform
2) at behavior of user accounts that formerly participated in the banned community
For example, this great paper by @eshwar_chan & colleagues dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.114…
1) within the same platform
2) at behavior of user accounts that formerly participated in the banned community
For example, this great paper by @eshwar_chan & colleagues dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.114…
See also this helpful paper on what happens after a Reddit quarantine by @eshwar_chan, @shagunjhaver @asbruckman @eegilbert
In all of these cases, researchers were limited by methods that couldn't easily look at what behavior outside Reddit
arxiv.org/pdf/2009.11483…
In all of these cases, researchers were limited by methods that couldn't easily look at what behavior outside Reddit
arxiv.org/pdf/2009.11483…
Almost 10 years ago I still remember @schock giving me Franz Fanon's "This is the voice of Algeria," which described how evading radio censorship knit together Algerian national identity during the 1950s independence movement. We have much to learn from it carmichaelt.people.cofc.edu/articles/fanon…
Fanon describes colonial information control (including radio jamming) as actions that revealed the unease of colonial occupiers, convincing people (who came to think of themselves as Algerians) that change was possible, focusing them on a common enemy, and fostering common bonds
Quantitative attempts to evaluate quarantines and bans are akin to the French colonial occupiers testing the short-term effects of their radio jamming equipment:
Yes, fewer people are getting the messages. What else is happening, over time? Hard to say.
Yes, fewer people are getting the messages. What else is happening, over time? Hard to say.
While journalists & qualitative researchers are often faster & more timely than quant researchers, innovations in research methods can help us ask better questions. See this thread with research on community bans that has not yet been peer-reviewed
https://twitter.com/manoelribeiro/status/1319293535758082057
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
