'One Style Does Not Regulate All': Moderation Practices in Public and Private WhatsApp Groups
0
š
Sign in to get full access
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
š
0
'One Style Does Not Regulate All': Moderation Practices in Public and Private WhatsApp Groups
Farhana Shahid, Dhruv Agarwal, Aditya Vashistha
WhatsApp is the largest social media platform in the Global South and is a virulent force in global misinformation and political propaganda. Due to end-to-end encryption WhatsApp can barely review any content and mostly rely on volunteer moderation by group admins. Yet, little is known about how WhatsApp group admins manage their groups, what factors and values influence moderation decisions, and what challenges they face while managing their groups. To fill this gap, we interviewed admins of 32 diverse groups and reviewed content from 30 public groups in India and Bangladesh. We observed notable differences in the formation, members' behavior, and moderation of public versus private groups, as well as in how WhatsApp admins operate compared to those on other platforms. We used Baumrind's typology of 'parenting styles' as a lens to examine how admins enact care and control during volunteer moderation. We identified four styles based on how caring and controlling the admins are and discuss design recommendations to help them better manage problematic content in WhatsApp groups.
Read more7/16/2024
0
Conversational Agents to Facilitate Deliberation on Harmful Content in WhatsApp Groups
Dhruv Agarwal, Farhana Shahid, Aditya Vashistha
WhatsApp groups have become a hotbed for the propagation of harmful content including misinformation, hate speech, polarizing content, and rumors, especially in Global South countries. Given the platform's end-to-end encryption, moderation responsibilities lie on group admins and members, who rarely contest such content. Another approach is fact-checking, which is unscalable, and can only contest factual content (e.g., misinformation) but not subjective content (e.g., hate speech). Drawing on recent literature, we explore deliberation -- open and inclusive discussion -- as an alternative. We investigate the role of a conversational agent in facilitating deliberation on harmful content in WhatsApp groups. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 Indian WhatsApp users, employing a design probe to showcase an example agent. Participants expressed the need for anonymity and recommended AI assistance to reduce the effort required in deliberation. They appreciated the agent's neutrality but pointed out the futility of deliberation in echo chamber groups. Our findings highlight design tensions for such an agent, including privacy versus group dynamics and freedom of speech in private spaces. We discuss the efficacy of deliberation using deliberative theory as a lens, compare deliberation with moderation and fact-checking, and provide design recommendations for future such systems. Ultimately, this work advances CSCW by offering insights into designing deliberative systems for combating harmful content in private group chats on social media.
Read more8/20/2024
š
0
Bans vs. Warning Labels: Examining Support for Community-wide Moderation Interventions
Shagun Jhaver
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 bystander 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 on any platform. My regression analyses show that presumed effects on others are 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.
Read more9/10/2024
š
0
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
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.
Read more5/9/2024