Thread 1/ This is a thread on the hashtag 'Tunisia is safe', which has been trending in #Tunisia for the past two days or so, and was the top trend for some time. This thread highlights the contents of the hashtag, its influencers, its seeming purpose, and any potential anomalies
2/ The sample includes about around 7000 interactions involving around 3500 unique accounts (this number also includes accounts that did not tweet the term, but were mentioned or replied to) Sample ranges from 7pm 28th July to 6am 31st July. #Tunisia
3/ First, who was tweeting and who was the composition. The most influentional and retweeted account was popular Tunisian influencer Louay Cherni. Also influential and heavily RT's was Tunisian model and actress Azza Slimene. Cherni's tweet criticizing Ennahda was the most
4/ retweeted on the hashtag. Slimene's tweet expressing cautious but guarded optimism was the second most retweeted. A thematic analysis of all the tweets on the hashtag reveal that the predominant message was anti-Ennahda and anti-Islamism. 37% of interactions were tweets/RTs
5/ either criticizing Ennahda, Islamism or the Muslim Brotherhood. The most extreme forms of criticism was labelling Ennahda terrorists. Around 27% are tweets defending Kais. Around 6% express dismissal of narratives that don't support Kais or call the crisis a coup #Tunisia
6/ It is quite clear then that the hashtag predominantly focuses on adversarial narratives re Ennahdha, positioning them as the chief cause of the problem, and the main propagator of lies around events unfolding in #Tunisia. An interesting aspect of the campaign is the concerted
7/ effort to spread these messages and to 'explain' Tunisia to international news outlets & commentators. A striking aspect of the network is the no. of 'replies' versus retweets. While RTs make up the most content, there are a high number of replies. Why is this interesting?
8/ If you look at the graph there are two clear areas, green versus purple. Purple is retweets, while green represents replies with the hashtag 'tunisia is safe' - mostly to news channels and others. These include channels predominantly seen as critical of the selfcoup, including
9/ Al Jazeera Arabic, AlArabyTV, but also anyone potentially critical of Kais' actions, such as @IlhanMN - and Ennahda members @radwan_masmoudi . This high reply volume demonstrates a fairly clear attempt to try and shape the narrative around unfolding events in #Tunisia
10/ That's not necessarily surprising given the charged narrative around events. A potentially odd aspect of the trend which can be interpreted in two ways is also the volume of new accounts on the hashtag. 503 new accounts have been created in 3 days (28,29,30th July). This
11/ Compare this with the average number of accounts created per month on the sample, which is only 29. Such anomalies usually mean one of two things. First, extraordinary events drive people to Twitter to take part in the conversation or spread their opinions
12/ The alternative is manipulation, where new accounts are generated en masse by some entity to try and shape a narrative. It can also be a combination of both of those things, although it is hard to determine with great precision which is which in such cases.
13/ SOme may have noticed a similar spike in May. In 8 days 415 new accounts were created - most of these seem to have been set up to tweet about what was happening in Sheikh Jarrah in Palestine. Again, the same logic applies. A potentially interesting aspect too is that
14/ you don't see the same dramatic account creation in 2010/11, when the Jasmine Revolution really began. This can mean that at the time less people joined Twitter around that time (although that's likely not true). It could demonstrate that those who signed up in 10/11 did not
15/ engage to the same level on the tunisia is safe hashtag - for whatever reason (age, abandonment of Twitter account etc). Many of the new accounts after being set up see to reply directly to other accounts with the tunisia is safe hashtag - and don't do much else after sending
16/ that tweet. In sum, the contents of the thread emphasise support for KS and also single out attacking Ennahda. It's not a hashtag encouraging debate or conversation (hey this is Twitter!), but one propagating a specific message. - So that's it for now - some caveats
1) For those less familiar with soc-media analysis - it is not a public opinion poll 2) It is generally descriptive 3) FB is not relevant to this thread 4) It is not a comment on who supports whom and how many support KS's actions.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ THREAD: On populist gaslighting and the war on truth-tellers 🧵
2/ Something concerning is happening in our information ecosystem: populists aren't just spreading misinfo, they're systematically trying to undermine the very concept of verifiable truth
3/ When fact-checkers or experts present evidence contradicting false claims, they get labeled as "elitist manipulators" or 'censors' - effectively inverting reality
🧵 THREAD: Meta's disturbing new "free speech" announcement is a masterclass in how platforms enable digital harm under the guise of freedom 1/9 theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Meta announces it's getting rid of factcheckers & "restrictions" on gender/immigration content. This isn't about free speech - it's about platforming hate & disinformation under the guise of "mainstream discourse" 2/9
Key red flags: ❗️❗️❗️
Moving content teams to Texas "for less bias" (read: political motivation)
Replacing factcheckers with "community notes"
Framing basic content moderation as "censorship" 3/9
1/ 🧵This graph shows X posts by impressions in the first six hours after the Magdeburg attack. Specifically these are posts falsely attributing the attack to an Islamist terror attack or a Syrian, or using it as an opportunity to attack immigration or muslims #disinformation
2/ The usual suspects are there - that is, the anti-Islam disinfluencers (routine spreaders of disinformation). As you can see, one of the most widely viewed is @visegrad24 - who shared at least 6 posts falsely claiming the attacker was an Islamist
3/ The posts falsely claiming that the attacker was a Muslim or Islamist gained at least 38,000,000 views. False claims that he was Syrian resulted in around 8.4million views (remember this is just an approx 6 hour period).
🧵1/ I analysed the headline and lead paragraph of 536 English news articles including the terms "Maccabi" + "Amsterdam" and classified them using Claude 3.5 Sonnet to determine how many framed Israelis as victims or non-Israelis as primary victims (as well as both).
2/ The results are fairly striking. 65% of articles frame Israelis as the victim, while only 5% frame Non-Israelis as victims. 24% are neutral while 9% framed both groups as victims. Quite clear the media emphasised violence as anti-Israeli and antisemitic, especially early on
3/ There isn't much evidence too of corrective framing at this point, although a small increase in neutral framing a week after the incident. Israeli victimhood was categorised as emphasis of violence initiated by non-Israelis, and focus on anti-Israeli or antisemitic violence
🧵 1/ Part of understanding what is going on in Amsterdam is also to understand the coordinated anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant campaigns run with huge amounts of money targeting Europe. Here's a short private Eye article about an investigation I did with @SohanDsouza
2/ Here's a write-up by @karamballes on the campaign in @BylineTimes "Disinformation Campaign on Social Media Reached More Than 40 Million People – but Meta ‘Alarmingly’ Hasn't Revealed the Culprits' bylinetimes.com/2024/08/30/qat…
@karamballes @BylineTimes 3/ ...How a covert influence campaign helped Europe’s far right
Our findings about the shadowy multi-platform operation attacking Qatar and stoking Islamophobia to further its far-right agenda in Europe and beyond call for immediate action. aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/…
🧵🚨1/ This is nuts. After mysteriously deleting a package covering the Amsterdam protests, Sky News have put up a new version. The new version completely changes the thrust to emphasise that the violence was antisemitic. See the opening screenshot change below
2/Even the tweet accompanying the video has changed. It has explicitly shifted from mentioning anti-Arab slogans to removing the phrase "anti-Arab" and using antisemitism. It also removes mention of vandalism by Israeli fans. An extremely clear editorial shift!
3/ They have also inserted into the video, right after the opening footage of Dutch Prime Minister condemning antisemitsm. This was not in the original video.