Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday November 18 2021, @01:57AM   Printer-friendly
from the can't-we-all-just-get-along? dept.

From a recent Science Reports paper:

Online debates are often characterised by extreme polarisation and heated discussions among users. The presence of hate speech online is becoming increasingly problematic, making necessary the development of appropriate countermeasures. In this work, we perform hate speech detection on a corpus of more than one million comments on YouTube videos through a machine learning model, trained and fine-tuned on a large set of hand-annotated data.

Our analysis shows that there is no evidence of the presence of "pure haters", meant as active users posting exclusively hateful comments. Moreover, coherently with the echo chamber hypothesis, we find that users skewed towards one of the two categories of video channels (questionable, reliable) are more prone to use inappropriate, violent, or hateful language within their opponents' community.

Interestingly, users loyal to reliable sources use on average a more toxic language than their counterpart. Finally, we find that the overall toxicity of the discussion increases with its length, measured both in terms of the number of comments and time. Our results show that, coherently with Godwin's law, online debates tend to degenerate towards increasingly toxic exchanges of views.

Journal Reference:
M. Cinelli, A. Pelicon, I. Mozetič, et al. Dynamics of online hate and misinformation. [open] Sci Rep 11, 22083 (2021).
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01487-w


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Mykl on Thursday November 18 2021, @04:24AM (6 children)

    by Mykl (1112) on Thursday November 18 2021, @04:24AM (#1197308)

    I prefer Breitbart over the New York Times for in-depth journalism too.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Funny=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by Mockingbird on Thursday November 18 2021, @05:40AM (2 children)

    by Mockingbird (15239) on Thursday November 18 2021, @05:40AM (#1197329) Journal

    I prefer Breitbart over the New York Times for in-depth journalism too.

    Andrew Brietbart is dead. Steve Bannon is indicted. Milo Yankmyjunkalot is no longer gay. It's over, alt-right. It was a good run, but it is over. Time to reconsider your life, and adopt a sustainable political philosophy.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 18 2021, @03:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 18 2021, @03:27PM (#1197428)

      Join the Russian troll farms that inspired them. Hey at least Brexit was a success, right?! And Trump must be 50-50 for becoming the Great Dictator in Chief, at least until the train wreck finally comes to a halt and people will finally say... OMG it's a train wreck.

    • (Score: 2) by Captival on Friday November 19 2021, @03:32AM

      by Captival (6866) on Friday November 19 2021, @03:32AM (#1197644)

      Every Libtard on planet earth uses this exact same tactic and it never works.

  • (Score: 3, Offtopic) by Phoenix666 on Thursday November 18 2021, @03:55PM (2 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Thursday November 18 2021, @03:55PM (#1197445) Journal

    The New York Times lied to get us to invade Iraq. Remember their reporter Judith Miller, breathlessly confirming every lie the Bush Administration told?

    The New York Times let Jayson Blair fabricate stories whole cloth for years.

    The New York Times employs an editor who has made openly racist statements for years.

    The New York Times just published protected legal communications between a rival news organization and their lawyers, given to them by the FBI, which is a direct assault on the freedom of the press.

    Is that the New York Times you're referring to, or is there some other source that is not a farce?

    I'll give this one to you for free: if you want to read actual news from actual journalists who actually do their homework and don't give a crap who gets upset, read Glenn Greenwald on Substack or Matt Taibbi.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Thursday November 18 2021, @11:16PM (1 child)

      by Mykl (1112) on Thursday November 18 2021, @11:16PM (#1197603)

      Nobody's perfect, and I agree that mistakes have been made at the NYT, and all other new outlets/sources/aggregators including the Associated Press, Reporters without Borders etc. We're all human.

      It's important to look at intent when examining news outlets though. For example:

      • The purpose of News Corp is to further Rupert Murdoch's personal agendas (he has explicitly said as much multiple times in the past)
      • The purpose of Breitbart is to propagate culture wars and promote the far-right, regardless of positions and facts
      • The purpose of the New York Times is to provide in-depth reporting on US and world events
      • The purpose of Glenn Greenwald / Matt Taibbi is to highlight stories in the mass media that they feel are being mis-reported

      Some of these outlets have 'good' intentions, others not so much. I'm not going to stop reading a particular outlet because a few of their articles have been questionable, provided their overall mission and output remain worthwhile.

      • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday November 20 2021, @03:06AM

        by Phoenix666 (552) on Saturday November 20 2021, @03:06AM (#1197983) Journal

        I agree that mistakes have been made at the NYT, and all other new outlets/sources/aggregators including the Associated Press, Reporters without Borders etc. We're all human.

        Yes, we are all human. But that's not what the NYT and their confederates say. They arrogate to themselves the absolute truth and fact in the world. Maybe it once was true, but after all I have cited it is not true anymore; so they should enjoy no advantage from the redolence of what they once were.

        Read Glenn Greenwald. Read Matt Taibbi. Read Julian Assange. They all risked their lives and careers to report on what the elites are doing. Glenn and Matt are still out there, thank goodness, but we can all see what has been done to Julian to know the cost of truth and fact in today's world.

        If your own sacred cows are not in danger of BBQ, then you're not getting anything close to the truth. Mark this, and reflect. Human freedom has not been in this much danger for a century.

        --
        Washington DC delenda est.