Showing posts with label WeVerify. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WeVerify. Show all posts

Thursday, 6 June 2019

Toxic Online Discussions during the UK European Parliament Election Campaign


The Brexit Party attracted the most engagement on Twitter in the run-up to the UK European Parliament election on May 23rd, their candidates receiving as many tweets as all the other parties combined. Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage was the most interacted-with UK candidate on Twitter, with over twice as many replies as the next most replied-to candidate, Andrew Adonis of the Labour Party.

We studied all tweets sent to or from (or retweets of or by) UK European Election candidates in the month of May, and classified them as abusive or not using the classifier presented here. It must be noted, in particular, that the classifier only identifies reliably whether a reply is abusive or not. It is not sufficiently accurate for us to reliably judge the target politician or party of this abusive reply. What this means is that we can only reliably identify which EP candidates triggered abuse-containing discussion threads on Twitter, but that often this abuse is actually aimed at other politicians or parties.

In addition to attracting the most replies, the Brexit Party candidates also triggered an unusually high level of abuse-containing Twitter discussions. In particular, we found that posts by Farage triggered almost six times as many abuse-containing Twitter threads than the next most replied to candidate, Gavin Esler of Change UK, during May 2019.

There is an important difference, however, in that that many of the abuse-containing replies to posts by Farage and the Brexit Party were actually abusive towards other politicians (most notably the prime minister and the leader of the Labour party) and not Farage himself. In contrast, abusive replies to Gavin Esler were primarily aimed at the politician himself, triggered by his use of the phrase "village idiot" in connection with the Leave Campaign.

Candidates from other parties that triggered unusually high levels of abuse-containing discussions were those from the UK Independence Party, now considered far right, and Change UK, a newly formed but unstable remain party. Change UK was the most active on Twitter, with candidates sending more tweets than other parties. Gavin Esler was the most replied-to Change UK candidate, and also received an unusually high level of abuse. The abuse often referred to his use of the phrase "village idiot" in connection with the leave campaign, which resulted in anger and resentment.

In contrast, MEP candidates from the Conservative and Labour Parties were not hubs of polarised, abuse-containing discussions on Twitter.

What these findings, unsurprisingly, demonstrate is that politicians and parties who themselves use divisive and abusive language, for example, to brand political opponents as “village idiots”, “traitors”, or as “desperate to betray”, are thus triggering the toxic online responses and deep political antagonism that we have witnessed.

After the Brexit Party, the next most replied-to MEP candidates were from the Labour partyAfter the Brexit Party, the next most replied-to party was Labour, according to the study, followed by Change UK.

MEP candidates from both the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party were also active on Twitter, with the Green MEP candidates second only to Change UK ones for number of tweets sent, but didn't get a lot of engagement in return. The Liberal Democrats in particular received a low number of replies. This may suggest that these parties became the choices of default for a population of discouraged remainers, as both made gains in the election. Both parties attracted a particularly civil tone of reply.

Brexit Party candidates were also the ones that replied most to those who tweeted them, rather than authoring original tweets or retweeting other tweets.

Acknowledgements: Research carried out by Genevieve Gorrell, Mehmet Bakir, and Kalina Bontcheva. This work was partially supported by the European Union under grant agreements No. 654024 SoBigData and No. 825297 WeVerify.

Thursday, 9 May 2019

GATE at World Press Freedom Day

GATE at World Press freedom day: STRENGTHENING THE MONITORING OF SDG 16.10.1


In her role with CFOM (the University's Centre for Freedom of the Media, hosted in the department of Journalism Studies), Diana Maynard travelled to Ethiopia together with CFOM members Sara Torsner and Jackie Harrison to present their research at the World Press Freedom Day Academic Conference on the Safety of journalists in Addis Ababa, on 1 May, 2019. This ongoing research aims to facilitate the comprehensive monitoring of violations against journalists, in line with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.10.1. This is part of a collaborative project between CFOM and the press freedom organisation Free Press Unlimited, which aims to develop a methodology for systematic data collection on a range of attacks on journalists, and to provide a mechanism for dealing with missing, conflicting and potentially erroneous information.

Discussing possibilities for adopting NLP tools for developing a monitoring infrastructure that allows for the systematisation and organisation of a range of information and data sources related to violations against journalists, Diana proposed a set of areas of research that aim to explore this in more depth. These include: switching to an events-based methodology, reconciling data from multiple sources, and investigating information validity.



Whereas approaches to monitoring violations against journalists traditionally uses a person-based approach, recording information centred around an individual, we suggest that adopting an events-based methodology instead allows for the violation itself to be placed at the centre: ‘by enabling the contextualising and recording of in-depth information related to a single instance of violence such as a killing, including information about key actors and their interrelationship (victim, perpetrator and witness of a violation), the events-based approach enables the modelling of the highly complex structure of a violation. It also allows for the recording of the progression of subsequent violations as well as multiple violations experienced by the same victim (e.g. detention, torture and killing)’.

Event-based data model from HURIDOCS Source:
Another area of research includes possibilities for reconciling information from different databases and sources of information on violations against journalists through NLP techniques. Such methods would allow for the assessment and compilation of partial and contradictory data about the elements constituting a given attack on a journalist. ‘By creating a central categorisation scheme we would essentially be able to facilitate the mapping and pooling of data from various sources into one data source, thus creating a monitoring infrastructure for SDG 16.10.1’, said Diana Maynard. Systematic data on a range of violations against journalists that are gathered in a methodologically systematic and transparent way would also be able to address issues of information validity and source verification: ‘Ultimately such data would facilitate the investigation of patterns, trends and early warnings, leading to a better understanding of the contexts in which threats to journalists can escalate into a killing undertaken with impunity’. We thus propose a framework for mapping between different datasets and event categorisation schemes in order to harmonise information.


In our proposed methodology, GATE tools can be used to extract information from the free text portions of existing databases and link them to external knowledge sources in order to acquire more detailed information about an event, and to enable semantic reasoning about entities and events, thereby helping to both reconcile information at different levels of granularity (e.g. Dublin vs Ireland; shooting vs killing) and to structure information for further search and analysis. 


Slides from the presentation are available here; the full journal paper is forthcoming.
The original article from which this post is adapted is available on the CFOM website

Wednesday, 17 April 2019

WeVerify: Algorithm-Supported Verification of Digital Content

Announcing WeVerify: a new project developing AI-based tools for computer-supported digital content verification. The WeVerify platform will provide an independent and community driven environment for the verification of online content, to be used to assist journalists in gathering and verifying quickly online content. Prof. Kalina Bontcheva will be serving as the Scientific Director of the project.

Online disinformation and fake media content have emerged as a serious threat to democracy, economy and society. Content verification is currently far from trivial, even for experienced journalists, human rights activists or media literacy scholars. Moreover, recent advances in artificial intelligence (deep learning) have enabled the creation of intelligent bots and highly realistic synthetic multimedia content. Consequently, it is extremely challenging for citizens and journalists to assess the credibility of online content, and to navigate the highly complex online information landscapes.

WeVerify aims to address the complex content verification challenges through a participatory verification approach, open source algorithms, low-overhead human-in-the-loop machine learning and intuitive visualizations. Social media and web content will be analysed and contextualised within the broader online ecosystem, in order to expose fabricated content, through cross-modal content verification, social network analysis, micro-targeted debunking and a blockchain-based public database of known fakes.



Add caption
A key outcome will be the WeVerify platform for collaborative, decentralised content verification, tracking, and debunking.

The platform will be open source to engage communities and citizen journalists alongside newsroom and freelance journalists. To enable low-overhead integration with in-house content management systems and support more advanced newsroom needs, a premium version of the platform will also be offered. It will be furthermore supplemented by a digital companion to assist with verification tasks.

Results will be validated by professional journalists and debunking specialists from project partners (DW, AFP, DisinfoLab), external participants (e.g. members of the First Draft News network), the community of more than 2,700 users of the InVID verification plugin, and by media literacy, human rights and emergency response organisations.

The WeVerify website can be found at https://weverify.eu/, and WeVerify can be found on Twitter @WeV3rify!

Friday, 8 February 2019

3rd International Workshop on Rumours and Deception in Social Media (RDSM)

June 11, 2019 in Munich, Germany
Collocated with ICWSM'2019

Abstract

The 3rd edition of the RDSM workshop will particularly focus on online information disorder and its interplay with public opinion formation.

Social media is a valuable resource for mining all kind of information varying from opinions to factual information. However, social media houses issues that are serious threats to the society. Online information disorder and its power on shaping public opinion lead the category of those issues. Among the known aspects are the spread of false rumours, fake news or even social attacks such as hate speech or other forms of harmful social posts. In this workshop the aim is to bring together researchers and practitioners interested in social media mining and analysis to deal with the emerging issues of information disorder and manipulation of public opinion. The focus of the workshop will be on themes such as the detection of fake news, verification of rumours and the understanding of their impact on public opinion.  Furthermore, we aim to put a great emphasis on the usefulness and trust aspects of automated solutions tackling the aforementioned themes.

Workshop Theme and Topics

The aim of this workshop is to bring together researchers and practitioners interested in social media mining and analysis to deal with the emerging issues of veracity assessment, fake news detection and manipulation of public opinion. We invite researchers and practitioners to submit papers reporting results on these issues. Qualitative studies performing user studies on the challenges encountered with the use of social media, such as the veracity of information and fake news detection, as well as papers reporting new data sets are also welcome. Finally, we also welcome studies reporting the usefulness and trust of social media tools tackling the aforementioned problems.


Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

  • Detection and tracking of rumours.
  • Rumour veracity classification.
  • Fact-checking social media.
  • Detection and analysis of disinformation, hoaxes and fake news.
  • Stance detection in social media.
  • Qualitative user studies assessing the use of social media.
  • Bots detection in social media.
  • Measuring public opinion through social media.
  • Assessing the impact of social media in public opinion.
  • Political analyses of social media.
  • Real-time social media mining.
  • NLP for social media analysis.
  • Network analysis and diffusion of dis/misinformation.
  • Usefulness and trust analysis of social media tools.
  • AI generated fake content (image / text)

Workshop Program Format


We will have 1-2 experts in the field delivering keynote speeches. We will then have a set of 8-10 presentations of peer-reviewed submissions, organised into 3 sessions by subject (the first two sessions about online information disorder and public opinion and the third session about the usefulness and trust aspects). After the session we also plan to have a group work (groups of size 4-5 attendances) where each group will sketch a social media tool for tackling e.g. rumour verification, fake news detection, etc. The emphasis of the sketch should be on aspects like usefulness and trust. This should take no longer than 120 minutes (sketching, presentation/discussion time).  We will close the workshop with a summary and take home messages (max. 15 minutes). Attendance will be open to all interested participants.

We welcome both full papers (5-8 pages) to be presented as oral talks and short papers (2-4 pages) to be presented as posters and demos.


Workshop Schedule/Important Dates
  • Submission deadline: April 1st 2019
  • Notification of Acceptance: April 15th 2019
  • Camera-Ready Versions Due: April 26th 2019
  • Workshop date: June 11, 2019  

 

Submission Procedure


We invite two kinds of submissions:

-  Long papers/Brief Research Report (max 8 pages + 2 references)
-  Demos and poster (short papers) (max 4 pages + 2 references)

Proceedings of the workshop will be published jointly with other ICWSM workshops in a special 
issue of Frontiers in Big Data.


Papers must be submitted electronically in PDF format or any format that is supported by the 
submission site through https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/9706 (click on "Submit your manuscript"). 
Note, submitting authors should choose one of the specific track organizers as their preferred Editor.

You can find detailed information on the file submission requirements here:
https://www.frontiersin.org/about/author-guidelines#FileRequirements

Submissions will be peer-reviewed by at least three members of the programme
committee. The accepted papers will appear in the proceedings published at 
 https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/9706



Workshop Organizers

Programme Committee (Tentative)

  • Nikolas Aletras, University of Sheffield, UK
  • Emilio Ferrara, University of Southern California, USA
  • Bahareh Heravi, University College Dublin, Ireland
  • Petya Osenova, Ontotext, Bulgaria
  • Damiano Spina, RMIT University, Australia
  • Peter Tolmie, Universität Siegen, Germany
  • Marcos Zampieri, University of Wolverhampton, UK
  • Milad Mirbabaie, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany
  • Tobias Hecking, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany 
  • Kareem Darwish, QCRI, Qatar
  • Hassan Sajjad, QCRI, Qatar
  • Sumithra Velupillai, King's College London, UK

 

Invited Speaker(s)

To be announced

Sponsors

This workshop is  supported by the European Union under grant agreement No. 654024, SoBigData.
 


And the EU co-funded horizon 2020 project that deals with algorithm-supported verification of digital content


WeVerify