Bots are social media accounts that automate interaction with other users, and they are active on the StrongerIn-Brexit conversation happening over Twitter. These automated scripts generate content through these platforms and then interact with people. Political bots are automated accounts that are particularly active on public policy issues, elections, and political crises. In this preliminary study on the use of political bots during the UK referendum on EU membership, we analyze the tweeting patterns for both human users and bots. We find that political bots have a small but strategic role in the referendum conversations: (1) the family of hashtags associated with the argument for leaving the EU dominates, (2) different perspectives on the issue utilize different levels of automation, and (3) less than 1 percent of sampled accounts generate almost a third of all the messages.
FROM SOCIAL BOTS TO POLITICAL BOTSA growing number of political actors and governments worldwide are employing both people and bots to engage in political conversations online.[1]-[3] Bots can perform tasks that range from legitimate, like generating a large amount of benign tweets that deliver news or update feeds, to more malicious, like spreading spam by delivering appealing text content with the link-directed malicious content. Whatever their uses, all bots share the property of being able to deploy messages and replicate themselves. [4] Networks of such bots are called "botnets," a term combining "robot" with "networks" and describing a collection of connected computers with programs that communicate across multiple devices to perform some task. There are legitimate botnets, like the Carna botnet, which gave us our first real census of device networks,[5] and there are malicious botnets, like those that are created to launch spam and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and to engineer theft of confidential information, click fraud, cyber-sabotage, and cyberwarfare.
Social media is an important source of news and information in the United States. But during the 2016 US presidential election, social media platforms emerged as a breeding ground for influence campaigns, conspiracy, and alternative media. Anecdotally, the nature of political news and information evolved over time, but political communication researchers have yet to develop a comprehensive, grounded, internally consistent typology of the types of sources shared. Rather than chasing a definition of what is popularly known as "fake news," we produce a grounded typology of what users actually shared and apply rigorous coding and content analysis to define the phenomenon. To understand what social media users are sharing, we analyzed large volumes of political conversations that took place on Twitter during the 2016 presidential campaign and the 2018 State of the Union
Voters increasingly rely on social media for news and information about politics. But increasingly, social media has emerged as a fertile soil for deliberately produced misinformation campaigns, conspiracy, and extremist alternative media. How does the sourcing of political news and information define contemporary political communication in different countries in Europe? To understand what users are sharing in their political communication, we analyzed large volumes of political conversation over a major social media platform—in real-time and native languages during campaign periods—for three major European elections. Rather than chasing a definition of what has come to be known as “fake news,” we produce a grounded typology of what users actually shared and apply rigorous coding and content analysis to define the types of sources, compare them in context with known forms of political news and information, and contrast their circulation patterns in France, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Based on this analysis, we offer a definition of “junk news” that refers to deliberately produced misleading, deceptive, and incorrect propaganda purporting to be real news. In the first multilingual, cross-national comparison of junk news sourcing and consumption over social media, we analyze over 4 million tweets from three elections and find that (1) users across Europe shared substantial amounts of junk news in varying qualities and quantities, (2) amplifier accounts drive low to medium levels of traffic and news sharing, and (3) Europeans still share large amounts of professionally produced information from media outlets, but other traditional sources of political information including political parties and government agencies are in decline.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.