The Great Ban: Efficacy and Unintended Consequences of a Massive Deplatforming Operation on Reddit
2401.11254
0
0
Abstract
In the current landscape of online abuses and harms, effective content moderation is necessary to cultivate safe and inclusive online spaces. Yet, the effectiveness of many moderation interventions is still unclear. Here, we assess the effectiveness of The Great Ban, a massive deplatforming operation that affected nearly 2,000 communities on Reddit. By analyzing 16M comments posted by 17K users during 14 months, we provide nuanced results on the effects, both desired and otherwise, of the ban. Among our main findings is that 15.6% of the affected users left Reddit and that those who remained reduced their toxicity by 6.6% on average. The ban also caused 5% users to increase their toxicity by more than 70% of their pre-ban level. Overall, our multifaceted results provide new insights into the efficacy of deplatforming. As such, our findings can inform the development of future moderation interventions and the policing of online platforms.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Examines the effects of a large-scale deplatforming operation on the Reddit platform
- Analyzes the efficacy of the ban in reducing harmful content and user participation
- Investigates unintended consequences, such as user migration and changes in content toxicity
Plain English Explanation
This research paper explores the impact of a massive deplatforming effort on the popular online forum Reddit. Deplatforming refers to the removal of individuals or communities from digital platforms, often in response to violations of platform policies or the spread of harmful content.
The researchers analyzed data from Reddit to understand the effectiveness of this large-scale ban in reducing problematic user behavior and content. They also looked at any unintended consequences that arose, such as whether users migrated to other parts of the platform or if the overall toxicity of the content changed after the ban.
The findings provide valuable insights into the potential benefits and drawbacks of using deplatforming as a moderation strategy on social media platforms. The research can help inform future decisions about content moderation and the management of online communities.
Technical Explanation
The paper examines the impact of a large-scale deplatforming operation on the Reddit platform. Deplatforming refers to the removal of individuals or communities from digital platforms, often in response to violations of platform policies or the spread of harmful content.
The researchers collected and analyzed data from Reddit to understand the effects of this ban. They looked at metrics such as user participation, content toxicity, and user migration patterns before and after the deplatforming event. The study used a quasi-experimental design to isolate the effects of the ban and rule out other confounding factors.
The findings suggest that the deplatforming operation was partially effective in reducing harmful user participation and content on the platform. However, the researchers also identified unintended consequences, such as users migrating to other parts of Reddit and an increase in the overall toxicity of the remaining content.
The paper provides valuable insights into the potential trade-offs and challenges of using deplatforming as a content moderation strategy. The results can inform future decisions about managing online communities and developing more nuanced approaches to platform governance.
Critical Analysis
The research presented in this paper offers a comprehensive examination of the effects of a large-scale deplatforming event on the Reddit platform. The quasi-experimental design and rigorous data analysis provide a robust framework for isolating the impacts of the ban and drawing meaningful conclusions.
One potential limitation mentioned in the paper is the difficulty of fully accounting for user migration patterns and the potential spread of harmful content to other parts of the platform. The researchers acknowledge that their analysis may not capture the full scope of unintended consequences, as users could have moved to less visible or harder-to-track areas of Reddit.
Additionally, the paper does not delve into the broader societal implications of deplatforming, such as concerns around free speech, the concentration of power in the hands of platform owners, and the potential for censorship. These are important considerations that warrant further exploration and discussion.
Despite these caveats, the research presented in this paper makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate around content moderation and the role of digital platforms in shaping online discourse. The findings highlight the need for more nuanced and holistic approaches to platform governance, taking into account both the intended and unintended effects of moderation decisions.
Conclusion
This research paper provides a detailed examination of the effects of a large-scale deplatforming operation on the Reddit platform. The study found that the ban was partially effective in reducing harmful user participation and content, but also identified unintended consequences, such as user migration and increased content toxicity in other areas of the platform.
The insights from this research can inform future content moderation strategies and the development of more sophisticated approaches to platform governance. As digital platforms continue to play a central role in shaping online discourse, it is crucial to understand the complex dynamics and potential trade-offs involved in content moderation decisions.
Ultimately, this paper contributes to the ongoing dialogue around the role of technology in regulating online speech and the need for balanced, evidence-based solutions that address the multifaceted challenges of content moderation.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
📉
Bans vs. Warning Labels: Examining Support for Community-wide Moderation Interventions
Shagun Jhaver
0
0
Social media platforms like Facebook and Reddit host thousands of user-governed online communities. These platforms sanction communities that frequently violate platform policies; however, public perceptions of such sanctions remain unclear. In a pre-registered survey conducted in the US, I explore user perceptions of content moderation for communities that frequently feature hate speech, violent content, and sexually explicit content. Two community-wide moderation interventions are tested: (1) community bans, where all community posts are removed, and (2) community warning labels, where an interstitial warning label precedes access. I examine how third-person effects and support for free speech influence user approval of these interventions. My regression analyses show that presumed effects on others is a significant predictor of backing for both interventions, while free speech beliefs significantly influence participants' inclination for using warning labels. Analyzing the open-ended responses, I find that community-wide bans are often perceived as too coarse and users instead value sanctions in proportion to the severity and type of infractions. I report on concerns that norm-violating communities could reinforce inappropriate behaviors and show how users' choice of sanctions is influenced by their perceived effectiveness. I discuss the implications of these results for HCI research on online harms and content moderation.
5/7/2024
❗
Beyond Trial-and-Error: Predicting User Abandonment After a Moderation Intervention
Benedetta Tessa, Lorenzo Cima, Amaury Trujillo, Marco Avvenuti, Stefano Cresci
0
0
Current content moderation practices follow the trial-and-error approach, meaning that moderators apply sequences of interventions until they obtain the desired outcome. However, being able to preemptively estimate the effects of an intervention would allow moderators the unprecedented opportunity to plan their actions ahead of application. As a first step towards this goal, here we propose and tackle the novel task of predicting the effect of a moderation intervention. We study the reactions of 16,540 users to a massive ban of online communities on Reddit, training a set of binary classifiers to identify those users who would abandon the platform after the intervention - a problem of great practical relevance. We leverage a dataset of 13.8M posts to compute a large and diverse set of 142 features, which convey information about the activity, toxicity, relations, and writing style of the users. We obtain promising results, with the best-performing model achieving micro F1 = 0.800 and macro F1 = 0.676. Our model demonstrates robust generalizability when applied to users from previously unseen communities. Furthermore, we identify activity features as the most informative predictors, followed by relational and toxicity features, while writing style features exhibit limited utility. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of predicting the effects of a moderation intervention, paving the way for a new research direction in predictive content moderation aimed at empowering moderators with intelligent tools to plan ahead their actions.
4/30/2024
🏅
Community Guidelines Make this the Best Party on the Internet: An In-Depth Study of Online Platforms' Content Moderation Policies
Brennan Schaffner, Arjun Nitin Bhagoji, Siyuan Cheng, Jacqueline Mei, Jay L. Shen, Grace Wang, Marshini Chetty, Nick Feamster, Genevieve Lakier, Chenhao Tan
0
0
Moderating user-generated content on online platforms is crucial for balancing user safety and freedom of speech. Particularly in the United States, platforms are not subject to legal constraints prescribing permissible content. Each platform has thus developed bespoke content moderation policies, but there is little work towards a comparative understanding of these policies across platforms and topics. This paper presents the first systematic study of these policies from the 43 largest online platforms hosting user-generated content, focusing on policies around copyright infringement, harmful speech, and misleading content. We build a custom web-scraper to obtain policy text and develop a unified annotation scheme to analyze the text for the presence of critical components. We find significant structural and compositional variation in policies across topics and platforms, with some variation attributable to disparate legal groundings. We lay the groundwork for future studies of ever-evolving content moderation policies and their impact on users.
5/9/2024
Analyzing Toxicity in Deep Conversations: A Reddit Case Study
Vigneshwaran Shankaran, Rajesh Sharma
0
0
Online social media has become increasingly popular in recent years due to its ease of access and ability to connect with others. One of social media's main draws is its anonymity, allowing users to share their thoughts and opinions without fear of judgment or retribution. This anonymity has also made social media prone to harmful content, which requires moderation to ensure responsible and productive use. Several methods using artificial intelligence have been employed to detect harmful content. However, conversation and contextual analysis of hate speech are still understudied. Most promising works only analyze a single text at a time rather than the conversation supporting it. In this work, we employ a tree-based approach to understand how users behave concerning toxicity in public conversation settings. To this end, we collect both the posts and the comment sections of the top 100 posts from 8 Reddit communities that allow profanity, totaling over 1 million responses. We find that toxic comments increase the likelihood of subsequent toxic comments being produced in online conversations. Our analysis also shows that immediate context plays a vital role in shaping a response rather than the original post. We also study the effect of consensual profanity and observe overlapping similarities with non-consensual profanity in terms of user behavior and patterns.
4/12/2024