Harmful Conspiracies in Temporal Interaction Networks: Understanding the Dynamics of Digital Wildfires through Phase Transitions
Authors:
Kaspara Skovli Gåsvær,
Pedro G. Lind,
Johannes Langguth,
Morten Hjorth-Jensen,
Michael Kreil,
Daniel Thilo Schroeder
Abstract:
Shortly after the first COVID-19 cases became apparent in December 2020, rumors spread on social media suggesting a connection between the virus and the 5G radiation emanating from the recently deployed telecommunications network. In the course of the following weeks, this idea gained increasing popularity, and various alleged explanations for how such a connection manifests emerged. Ultimately, a…
▽ More
Shortly after the first COVID-19 cases became apparent in December 2020, rumors spread on social media suggesting a connection between the virus and the 5G radiation emanating from the recently deployed telecommunications network. In the course of the following weeks, this idea gained increasing popularity, and various alleged explanations for how such a connection manifests emerged. Ultimately, after being amplified by prominent conspiracy theorists, a series of arson attacks on telecommunication equipment follows, concluding with the kidnapping of telecommunication technicians in Peru. In this paper, we study the spread of content related to a conspiracy theory with harmful consequences, a so-called digital wildfire. In particular, we investigate the 5G and COVID-19 misinformation event on Twitter before, during, and after its peak in April and May 2020. For this purpose, we examine the community dynamics in complex temporal interaction networks underlying Twitter user activity. We assess the evolution of such digital wildfires by appropriately defining the temporal dynamics of communication in communities within social networks. We show that, for this specific misinformation event, the number of interactions of the users participating in a digital wildfire, as well as the size of the engaged communities, both follow a power-law distribution. Moreover, our research elucidates the possibility of quantifying the phases of a digital wildfire, as per established literature. We identify one such phase as a critical transition, marked by a shift from sporadic tweets to a global spread event, highlighting the dramatic scaling of misinformation propagation.
△ Less
Submitted 9 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
Investigating the Validity of Botometer-based Social Bot Studies
Authors:
Florian Gallwitz,
Michael Kreil
Abstract:
The idea that social media platforms like Twitter are inhabited by vast numbers of social bots has become widely accepted in recent years. Social bots are assumed to be automated social media accounts operated by malicious actors with the goal of manipulating public opinion. They are credited with the ability to produce content autonomously and to interact with human users. Social bot activity has…
▽ More
The idea that social media platforms like Twitter are inhabited by vast numbers of social bots has become widely accepted in recent years. Social bots are assumed to be automated social media accounts operated by malicious actors with the goal of manipulating public opinion. They are credited with the ability to produce content autonomously and to interact with human users. Social bot activity has been reported in many different political contexts, including the U.S. presidential elections, discussions about migration, climate change, and COVID-19. However, the relevant publications either use crude and questionable heuristics to discriminate between supposed social bots and humans or -- in the vast majority of the cases -- fully rely on the output of automatic bot detection tools, most commonly Botometer. In this paper, we point out a fundamental theoretical flaw in the widely-used study design for estimating the prevalence of social bots. Furthermore, we empirically investigate the validity of peer-reviewed Botometer-based studies by closely and systematically inspecting hundreds of accounts that had been counted as social bots. We were unable to find a single social bot. Instead, we found mostly accounts undoubtedly operated by human users, the vast majority of them using Twitter in an inconspicuous and unremarkable fashion without the slightest traces of automation. We conclude that studies claiming to investigate the prevalence, properties, or influence of social bots based on Botometer have, in reality, just investigated false positives and artifacts of this approach.
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
