Connect with us

Government

Deplatforming online extremists reduces their followers – but there’s a price

Online extremists may lose followers when removed from mainstream social media, but their remaining supporters can become even more toxic.

Published

on

Alex Jones claimed being deplatformed hurt his income. Vic Hinterlang/Shutterstock

Conspiracy theorist and US far-right media personality Alex Jones was recently ordered to pay US$45 million (£37 million) damages to the family of a child killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting.

Jones had claimed that being banned or “deplatformed” from major social media sites for his extreme views negatively affected him financially, likening the situation to “jail”. But during the trial, forensic economist Bernard Pettingill estimated Jones’s conspiracy website InfoWars made more money after being banned from Facebook and Twitter in 2018.

So does online deplatforming actually work? It’s not possible to measure influence in a scientifically rigorous way so it’s difficult to say what happens to a person or group’s overall influence when they are deplatformed. Overall, research suggests deplatforming can reduce the activity of nefarious actors on those sites. However, it comes with a price. As deplatformed people and groups migrate elsewhere, they may lose followers but also become more hateful and toxic.

Typically, deplatforming involves actions taken by the social media sites themselves. But it can be done by third parties like the financial institutions providing payment services on these platforms, such as PayPal.

Closing a group is also a form of deplatforming, even if the people in it are still free to use the sites. For example, The_Donald subreddit (a forum on the website Reddit) was closed for hosting hateful and threatening content, such as a post encouraging members to attend a white supremacist rally.

Stickied Post on The_Donald subreddit, August 2017.
A frame of the anti-CNN GIF tweeted by Donald Trump.

Does deplatforming work?

Research shows deplatforming does have positive effects on the platform the person or group was kicked out of. When Reddit banned certain forums victimising overweight people and African Americans, a lot of users who were active on these hateful subreddits stopped posting on Reddit altogether. Those who stayed active posted less extreme content.

Plots by Jhaver at al. Posting activity levels and severe toxicity scores of the supporters of three deplatformed Twitter celebrities pre- and post-deplatforming.

But the deplatformed group or person can migrate. Alex Jones continues to work outside mainstream social networks, mainly operating through his InfoWars website and podcasts. A ban from big tech may be seen as punishment for challenging the status quo in an uncensored manner, reinforcing the bonds and sense of belonging between followers.

Gab was created as an alternative social network in 2016, welcoming users who have been banned from other platforms. Since the US Capitol insurrection, Gab has been tweeting about these bans as a badge of honour, and said it’s seen a surge in users and job applications.

My team’s research looked at the subreddits The_Donald and Incels (a male online community hostile towards women), which moved to standalone websites after being banned from Reddit. We found that as dangerous communities migrated onto different platforms, their footprints became smaller, but users got significantly more extreme. Similarly, users who got banned from Twitter or Reddit showed an increased level of activity and toxicity upon relocating to Gab.

Timelines of creation, quarantining, and banning of the Incels and The_Donald subreddits.

Other studies into the birth of fringe social networks like Gab, Parler, or Gettr have found relatively similar patterns. These platforms market themselves as bastions of free speech, welcoming users banned or suspended from other social networks. Research shows that not only does extremism increase as a result of lax moderation but also that early site users have a disproportionate influence on the platform.

The unintended consequences of deplatforming are not limited to political communities but extend to health disinformation and conspiracy theory groups. For instance, when Facebook banned groups discussing COVID-19 vaccines, users went on Twitter and posted even more anti-vaccine content.

Alternative solutions

What else can be done to avoid the concentration of online hate that deplatforming can encourage? Social networks have been experimenting with soft moderation interventions that do not remove content or ban users. They limit the content’s visibility (shadow banning), restrict the ability of other users to engage with the content (replying or sharing), or add warning labels.

Examples of soft moderation on Twitter: warning labels and shadow banning.

These approaches are showing encouraging results. Some warning labels have prompted site users to debunk false claims. Soft moderation sometimes reduces user interactions and extremism in comments.

However, there is potential for popularity bias (acting on or ignoring content based on the buzz around it) about what subjects platforms like Twitter decide to intervene on. Meanwhile, warning labels seem to work less effectively for fake posts if they are right-leaning.

It is also still unclear whether soft moderation creates additional avenues for harassment, for example mocking users that get warning labels on their posts or aggravating users who cannot re-share content.

Looking forward

A crucial aspect of deplatforming is timing. The sooner platforms act to stop groups using mainstream platforms to grow extremist movements, the better. Rapid action could in theory put the brakes on the groups’ efforts to muster and radicalise large user bases.

But this would also need a coordinated effort from mainstream platforms as well other media to work. Radio talk shows and cable news play a crucial role in promoting fringe narratives in the US.

We need an open dialogue on the deplatforming tradeoff. As a society, we need to discuss if our communities should have fewer people exposed to extremist groups, even if those who do engage become ever more isolated and radicalised.

At the moment, deplatforming is almost exclusively managed by big technology companies. Tech companies can’t solve the problem alone, but neither can researchers or politicians. Platforms must work with regulators, civil rights organisations and researchers to deal with extreme online content. The fabric of society may depend upon it.


Emiliano De Cristofaro receives or has received funding from the EPSRC, UKRI, the EU Commission, the Royal Society, Xerox, Google, Amazon, Nokia, Microsoft Research.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Tesla rival Polestar reveals production plans for electric SUV

The Sweden-based electric vehicle maker completes key testing before launching production of its new SUV.

Published

on

Tesla's Model Y crossover, the best-selling vehicle globally, is the standard that electric vehicle makers strive to compete with. The Austin, Texas, automaker sold about 267,200 Model Y vehicles in the first three months of the year and continued leading the pack well into the second quarter.

It's no wonder that the Model Y is leading all vehicles in sales as it retails for about $39,390 after tax credits and estimated gas savings. Ford  (F) - Get Free Report hopes to compete with the Model Y about a year from now when it rolls out the new Ford Explorer SUV that is expected to start at $49,150.

Related: Honda unveils surprising electric vehicles to compete with Tesla

Plenty of competition in electric SUV space

Mercedes-Benz (MBG) however, has a Tesla rival model with its EQB all-electric compact sports utility vehicle with an estimated 245 mile range on a charge with 70.5 kWh battery capacity, 0-60 mph acceleration in 8 seconds and the lowest price of its EVs at a $52,750 manufacturers suggested retail price.

Tesla's Model X SUV has a starting price of about $88,490, while the Model X full-size SUV starts at $98,490 with a range of 348 miles. BMW's  (BMWYY) - Get Free Report xDrive50 SUV has a starting price of about $87,000, a range up to 311 miles and accelerates 0-60 miles per hour in 4.4 seconds.

Polestar  (PSNY) - Get Free Report plans to have a lineup of five EVs by 2026. The latest model that will begin production in the first quarter of 2024 is the Polestar 3 electric SUV, which is completing its development. The vehicle just finished two weeks of testing in extreme hot weather of up to 122 degrees in the desert of the United Arab Emirates to fine tune its climate system. The testing was completed in urban cities and the deserts around Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

“The Polestar 3 development and testing program is progressing well, and I expect production to start in Q1 2024. Polestar 3 is at the start of its journey and customers can now visit our retail locations around the world to see its great proportions and sit in its exclusive and innovative interior,” Polestar CEO Thomas Ingenlath said in a statement.

Polestar 3 prototype is set for production in the first quarter of 2024.

Polestar

Polestar plans 4 new electric vehicles

Polestar 3, which will compete with Tesla's Model X, Model Y, BMW's iX xDrive50 and Mercedes-Benz, has a starting manufacturer's suggested retail price of $83,000, a range up to 300 miles and a charging time of 30 minutes. The company has further plans for the Polestar 4, an SUV coupé that will launch in phases in late 2023 and 2024, as well as a Polestar 5 electric four-door GT and a Polestar 6 electric roadster that the company says "are coming soon." 

The Swedish automaker's lone all-electric model on the market today is the Polestar 2 fastback, which has a manufacturer's suggested retail price of $49,900, a range up to 320 miles and a charging time of 28 minutes. The vehicle accelerates from 0-60 miles per hour in 4.1 seconds. Polestar 2 was unveiled in 2019 and delivered in Europe in July 2020 and the U.S. in December 2020.

Polestar 1, the company's first vehicle, was a plug-in hybrid that went into production in 2019 and was discontinued in late 2021, according to the Polestar website.

The Gothenburg, Sweden, company was established in 1996 and was sold to Geely affiliate Volvo in 2015.

Get the smart plays to grow your portfolio. Join TheStreet® | SMARTS and take $10 OFF the original price!

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Polestar plans production date for its Tesla rival electric SUV

The Sweden-based electric vehicle maker completes key testing before launching production of its new SUV.

Published

on

Tesla's Model Y crossover, the best-selling vehicle globally, is the standard that electric vehicle makers strive to compete with. The Austin, Texas, automaker sold about 267,200 Model Y vehicles in the first three months of the year and continued leading the pack well into the second quarter.

It's no wonder that the Model Y is leading all vehicles in sales as it retails for about $39,390 after tax credits and estimated gas savings. Ford  (F) - Get Free Report hopes to compete with the Model Y about a year from now when it rolls out the new Ford Explorer SUV that is expected to start at $49,150.

Related: Honda unveils surprising electric vehicles to compete with Tesla

Plenty of competition in electric SUV space

Mercedes-Benz (MBG) however, has a Tesla rival model with its EQB all-electric compact sports utility vehicle with an estimated 245 mile range on a charge with 70.5 kWh battery capacity, 0-60 mph acceleration in 8 seconds and the lowest price of its EVs at a $52,750 manufacturers suggested retail price.

Tesla's Model X SUV has a starting price of about $88,490, while the Model X full-size SUV starts at $98,490 with a range of 348 miles. BMW's  (BMWYY) - Get Free Report xDrive50 SUV has a starting price of about $87,000, a range up to 311 miles and accelerates 0-60 miles per hour in 4.4 seconds.

Polestar  (PSNY) - Get Free Report plans to have a lineup of five EVs by 2026. The latest model that will begin production in the first quarter of 2024 is the Polestar 3 electric SUV, which is completing its development. The vehicle just finished two weeks of testing in extreme hot weather of up to 122 degrees in the desert of the United Arab Emirates to fine tune its climate system. The testing was completed in urban cities and the deserts around Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

“The Polestar 3 development and testing program is progressing well, and I expect production to start in Q1 2024. Polestar 3 is at the start of its journey and customers can now visit our retail locations around the world to see its great proportions and sit in its exclusive and innovative interior,” Polestar CEO Thomas Ingenlath said in a statement.

Polestar 3 prototype is set for production in the first quarter of 2024.

Polestar

Polestar plans 4 new electric vehicles

Polestar 3, which will compete with Tesla's Model X, Model Y, BMW's iX xDrive50 and Mercedes-Benz, has a starting manufacturer's suggested retail price of $83,000, a range up to 300 miles and a charging time of 30 minutes. The company has further plans for the Polestar 4, an SUV coupé that will launch in phases in late 2023 and 2024, as well as a Polestar 5 electric four-door GT and a Polestar 6 electric roadster that the company says "are coming soon." 

The Swedish automaker's lone all-electric model on the market today is the Polestar 2 fastback, which has a manufacturer's suggested retail price of $49,900, a range up to 320 miles and a charging time of 28 minutes. The vehicle accelerates from 0-60 miles per hour in 4.1 seconds. Polestar 2 was unveiled in 2019 and delivered in Europe in July 2020 and the U.S. in December 2020.

Polestar 1, the company's first vehicle, was a plug-in hybrid that went into production in 2019 and was discontinued in late 2021, according to the Polestar website.

The Gothenburg, Sweden, company was established in 1996 and was sold to Geely affiliate Volvo in 2015.

Get the smart plays to grow your portfolio. Join TheStreet® | SMARTS and take $10 OFF the original price!

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Why are killer whales harassing and killing porpoises without eating them?

For decades, fish-eating killer whales in the Pacific Northwest have been observed harassing and even killing porpoises without consuming them—a perplexing…

Published

on

For decades, fish-eating killer whales in the Pacific Northwest have been observed harassing and even killing porpoises without consuming them—a perplexing behavior that has long intrigued scientists.

Credit: Wild Orca

For decades, fish-eating killer whales in the Pacific Northwest have been observed harassing and even killing porpoises without consuming them—a perplexing behavior that has long intrigued scientists.

A study published today in Marine Mammal Science, co-led by Deborah Giles of Wild Orca and Sarah Teman of the SeaDoc Society, a program of the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, looked at more than 60 years of recorded interactions between Southern Resident killer whales and porpoises in the Salish Sea to better understand why they exhibit this behavior.

Southern Resident killer whales are an endangered population, numbering only 75 individuals. Their survival is intimately tied to the fortunes of Chinook salmon — also an endangered species. Without enough Chinook salmon, these whales are in danger of extinction.

“I am frequently asked, why don’t the Southern Residents just eat seals or porpoises instead?” said Giles. “It’s because fish-eating killer whales have a completely different ecology and culture from orcas that eat marine mammals — even though the two populations live in the same waters. So we must conclude that their interactions with porpoises serve a different purpose, but this purpose has only been speculation until now.”

Three plausible explanations

While scientists have recorded instances of Southern Resident killer whales engaging in porpoise harassment as early as 1962, reasons for this behavior have long remained a mystery. Giles, Teman, and a team of collaborators analyzed 78 documented incidents of porpoise harassment from 1962 to 2020. The study suggests three plausible explanations:

  • Social play: Porpoise harassment may be a form of social play for killer whales. Like many intelligent species, these whales sometimes engage in playful activities to bond, communicate, or simply enjoy themselves. This behavior might benefit group coordination and teamwork.
  • Hunting practice: Another hypothesis suggests that porpoise harassment might hone their salmon-hunting skills. Southern Resident killer whales could view porpoises as moving targets to practice their hunting techniques, even if they do not intend to consume them.
  • Mismothering behavior: This theory suggests that the whales may be attempting to provide care for porpoises they perceive as weaker or ill–a manifestation of their natural inclination to assist others in their group. Females have been witnessed carrying their deceased calves and have been seen similarly carrying porpoises.

“Mismothering behavior — also known as ‘displaced epimeletic behavior’ to scientists— might be due to their limited opportunities to care for young,” Giles explained. “Our research has shown that due to malnutrition, nearly 70% of Southern Resident killer whale pregnancies have resulted in miscarriages or calves that died right away after birth.”

Salmon specialists

Despite these intriguing insights, Giles, Teman, and their collaborators acknowledge that the exact reason behind porpoise harassment may never be fully understood. What is clear, however, is that porpoises are not a part of the Southern Resident killer whale diet. Southern Resident killer whale diets are highly specialized for salmon, making the idea of eating porpoises highly unlikely.

“Killer whales are incredibly complex and intelligent animals. We found that porpoise-harassing behavior has been passed on through generations and across social groupings. It’s an amazing example of killer whale culture,” Teman says. “Still, we don’t expect the Southern Resident killer whales to start eating porpoises. The culture of eating salmon is deeply ingrained in Southern Resident society. These whales need healthy salmon populations to survive.”

This research underscores the importance of conserving salmon populations in the Salish Sea and throughout the whales’ entire range. Maintaining an adequate supply of salmon is vital for the survival and well-being of Southern Resident killer whales and the overall health of the Salish Sea ecosystem.

Affinity for play

This study comes at a time when a separate population of killer whales on the Iberian Peninsula has drawn international headlines for interacting with, and on three occasions, sinking boats off the coast of Portugal and Spain. Ultimately, the Southern Resident killer whales and the Iberian Peninsula orcas are two different populations with distinct cultures. One thing the two might have in common is their affinity for play behavior.

The study was funded by Wild Orca and SeaDoc Society. Additional partners include the University of Exeter, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Orca Behavior Institute, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Cascadia Research, The Whale Museum, Center for Whale Research, Ocean Research College Academy (ORCA) at Everett Community College, Bay Cetology, North Gulf Oceanic Society, George Mason University, and Marine-Med.


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending