text: Concerns have reached the mainstream about how social media are affecting political outcomes. One trajectory for this is the exposure of politicians to online abuse. In this paper we use 1.4 million tweets from the months before the 2015 and 2017 UK general elections to explore the abuse directed at politicians. This collection allows us to look at abuse broken down by both party and gender and aimed at specific Members of Parliament. It also allows us to investigate the characteristics of those who send abuse and their topics of interest. Results show that in both absolute and proportional terms, abuse increased substantially in 2017 compared with 2015. Abusive replies are somewhat less directed at women and those not in the currently governing party. Those who send the abuse may be issue-focused, or they may repeatedly target an individual. In the latter category, accounts are more likely to be throwaway. Those sending abuse have a wide range of topical triggers, including borders and terrorism.
  @cite_14: Since the textual contents on online social media are highly unstructured, informal, and often misspelled, existing research on message-level offensive language detection cannot accurately detect offensive content. Meanwhile, user-level offensiveness detection seems a more feasible approach but it is an under researched area. To bridge this gap, we propose the Lexical Syntactic Feature (LSF) architecture to detect offensive content and identify potential offensive users in social media. We distinguish the contribution of pejoratives profanities and obscenities in determining offensive content, and introduce hand-authoring syntactic rules in identifying name-calling harassments. In particular, we incorporate a user's writing style, structure and specific cyber bullying content as features to predict the user's potentiality to send out offensive content. Results from experiments showed that our LSF framework performed significantly better than existing methods in offensive content detection. It achieves precision of 98.24 and recall of 94.34 in sentence offensive detection, as well as precision of 77.9 and recall of 77.8 in user offensive detection. Meanwhile, the processing speed of LSF is approximately 10msec per sentence, suggesting the potential for effective deployment in social media.
  @cite_9: Detection of abusive language in user generated online content has become an issue of increasing importance in recent years. Most current commercial methods make use of blacklists and regular expressions, however these measures fall short when contending with more subtle, less ham-fisted examples of hate speech. In this work, we develop a machine learning based method to detect hate speech on online user comments from two domains which outperforms a state-of-the-art deep learning approach. We also develop a corpus of user comments annotated for abusive language, the first of its kind. Finally, we use our detection tool to analyze abusive language over time and in different settings to further enhance our knowledge of this behavior.
  @cite_1: The damage personal attacks cause to online discourse motivates many platforms to try to curb the phenomenon. However, understanding the prevalence and impact of personal attacks in online platforms at scale remains surprisingly difficult. The contribution of this paper is to develop and illustrate a method that combines crowdsourcing and machine learning to analyze personal attacks at scale. We show an evaluation method for a classifier in terms of the aggregated number of crowd-workers it can approximate. We apply our methodology to English Wikipedia, generating a corpus of over 100k high quality human-labeled comments and 63M machine-labeled ones from a classifier that is as good as the aggregate of 3 crowd-workers, as measured by the area under the ROC curve and Spearman correlation. Using this corpus of machine-labeled scores, our methodology allows us to explore some of the open questions about the nature of online personal attacks. This reveals that the majority of personal attacks on Wikipedia are not the result of a few malicious users, nor primarily the consequence of allowing anonymous contributions from unregistered users.
  @cite_0: The use of “Big Data” in policy and decision making is a current topic of debate. The 2013 murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich, London, UK led to an extensive public reaction on social media, providing the opportunity to study the spread of online hate speech (cyber hate) on Twitter. Human annotated Twitter data was collected in the immediate aftermath of Rigby's murder to train and test a supervised machine learning text classifier that distinguishes between hateful and or antagonistic responses with a focus on race, ethnicity, or religion; and more general responses. Classification features were derived from the content of each tweet, including grammatical dependencies between words to recognize “othering” phrases, incitement to respond with antagonistic action, and claims of well-founded or justified discrimination against social groups. The results of the classifier were optimal using a combination of probabilistic, rule-based, and spatial-based classifiers with a voted ensemble meta-classifier. We demonstrate how the results of the classifier can be robustly utilized in a statistical model used to forecast the likely spread of cyber hate in a sample of Twitter data. The applications to policy and decision making are discussed.
  @cite_20: Cyberbullying (harassment on social networks) is widely recognized as a serious social problem, especially for adolescents. It is as much a threat to the viability of online social networks for youth today as spam once was to email in the early days of the Internet. Current work to tackle this problem has involved social and psychological studies on its prevalence as well as its negative effects on adolescents. While true solutions rest on teaching youth to have healthy personal relationships, few have considered innovative design of social network software as a tool for mitigating this problem. Mitigating cyberbullying involves two key components: robust techniques for effective detection and reflective user interfaces that encourage users to reflect upon their behavior and their choices. Spam filters have been successful by applying statistical approaches like Bayesian networks and hidden Markov models. They can, like Google’s GMail, aggregate human spam judgments because spam is sent nearly identically to many people. Bullying is more personalized, varied, and contextual. In this work, we present an approach for bullying detection based on state-of-the-art natural language processing and a common sense knowledge base, which permits recognition over a broad spectrum of topics in everyday life. We analyze a more narrow range of particular subject matter associated with bullying (e.g. appearance, intelligence, racial and ethnic slurs, social acceptance, and rejection), and construct BullySpace, a common sense knowledge base that encodes particular knowledge about bullying situations. We then perform joint reasoning with common sense knowledge about a wide range of everyday life topics. We analyze messages using our novel AnalogySpace common sense reasoning technique. We also take into account social network analysis and other factors. We evaluate the model on real-world instances that have been reported by users on Formspring, a social networking website that is popular with teenagers. On the intervention side, we explore a set of reflective user-interaction paradigms with the goal of promoting empathy among social network participants. We propose an “air traffic control”-like dashboard, which alerts moderators to large-scale outbreaks that appear to be escalating or spreading and helps them prioritize the current deluge of user complaints. For potential victims, we provide educational material that informs them about how to cope with the situation, and connects them with emotional support from others. A user evaluation shows that in-context, targeted, and dynamic help during cyberbullying situations fosters end-user reflection that promotes better coping strategies.
summary: Work exists regarding accurately identifying abusive messages automatically @cite_0 @cite_9 @cite_14 @cite_20 @cite_1 . The work of has been described as the state of the art, with precision recall of 0.63 being reported as equivalent to human performance. report a human interannotator agreement of only 0.69 in annotating racial slurs, and report a human agreement of 0.8 with a Krippendorf's alpha of 0.25 on UK data, demonstrating that the limiting factor is the complexity of the task definition. Burnap and Williams particularly focus on hate speech with regards to protected characteristics such as race, disability and sexual orientation. Waseem and Hovy also focus on hate speech, and share a gold standard UK Tweet corpus. seek to identify the problem accounts rather than the problem material. Schmidt and Wiegand provide a review of prior work and methods.