Finding Fake News Websites in the Wild
Authors:
Leandro Araujo,
Joao M. M. Couto,
Luiz Felipe Nery,
Isadora C. Rodrigues,
Jussara M. Almeida,
Julio C. S. Reis,
Fabricio Benevenuto
Abstract:
The battle against the spread of misinformation on the Internet is a daunting task faced by modern society. Fake news content is primarily distributed through digital platforms, with websites dedicated to producing and disseminating such content playing a pivotal role in this complex ecosystem. Therefore, these websites are of great interest to misinformation researchers. However, obtaining a comp…
▽ More
The battle against the spread of misinformation on the Internet is a daunting task faced by modern society. Fake news content is primarily distributed through digital platforms, with websites dedicated to producing and disseminating such content playing a pivotal role in this complex ecosystem. Therefore, these websites are of great interest to misinformation researchers. However, obtaining a comprehensive list of websites labeled as producers and/or spreaders of misinformation can be challenging, particularly in developing countries. In this study, we propose a novel methodology for identifying websites responsible for creating and disseminating misinformation content, which are closely linked to users who share confirmed instances of fake news on social media. We validate our approach on Twitter by examining various execution modes and contexts. Our findings demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology in identifying misinformation websites, which can aid in gaining a better understanding of this phenomenon and enabling competent entities to tackle the problem in various areas of society.
△ Less
Submitted 15 July, 2024; v1 submitted 9 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
A Comprehensive View of the Biases of Toxicity and Sentiment Analysis Methods Towards Utterances with African American English Expressions
Authors:
Guilherme H. Resende,
Luiz F. Nery,
FabrÃcio Benevenuto,
Savvas Zannettou,
Flavio Figueiredo
Abstract:
Language is a dynamic aspect of our culture that changes when expressed in different technologies/communities. Online social networks have enabled the diffusion and evolution of different dialects, including African American English (AAE). However, this increased usage is not without barriers. One particular barrier is how sentiment (Vader, TextBlob, and Flair) and toxicity (Google's Perspective a…
▽ More
Language is a dynamic aspect of our culture that changes when expressed in different technologies/communities. Online social networks have enabled the diffusion and evolution of different dialects, including African American English (AAE). However, this increased usage is not without barriers. One particular barrier is how sentiment (Vader, TextBlob, and Flair) and toxicity (Google's Perspective and the open-source Detoxify) methods present biases towards utterances with AAE expressions. Consider Google's Perspective to understand bias. Here, an utterance such as ``All n*ggers deserve to die respectfully. The police murder us.'' it reaches a higher toxicity than ``African-Americans deserve to die respectfully. The police murder us.''. This score difference likely arises because the tool cannot understand the re-appropriation of the term ``n*gger''. One explanation for this bias is that AI models are trained on limited datasets, and using such a term in training data is more likely to appear in a toxic utterance. While this may be plausible, the tool will make mistakes regardless. Here, we study bias on two Web-based (YouTube and Twitter) datasets and two spoken English datasets. Our analysis shows how most models present biases towards AAE in most settings. We isolate the impact of AAE expression usage via linguistic control features from the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software, grammatical control features extracted via Part-of-Speech (PoS) tagging from Natural Language Processing (NLP) models, and the semantic of utterances by comparing sentence embeddings from recent language models. We present consistent results on how a heavy usage of AAE expressions may cause the speaker to be considered substantially more toxic, even when speaking about nearly the same subject. Our study complements similar analyses focusing on small datasets and/or one method only.
△ Less
Submitted 23 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
