The anti-vaccine movement has gained traction in many countries since the COVID-19 pandemic began. However, their aggressive behaviour through replies on Twitter—a form of directed messaging that can be sent beyond follow-follower relationships—is less understood, and even less is known about the language use differences of this behaviour. We conducted a comparative study of anti-vaxxers’ aggressive behaviours by analysing a longitudinal dataset of COVID-19 tweets in English and Japanese. We found two common features across these languages. First, anti-vaxxers most actively transmit targeted messages or replies to users with different beliefs, especially to neutral accounts, with significantly toxic and negative language, and these replies are often directed to posts about vaccine operations. Second, influential users with many followers and verified accounts are more likely to receive the most toxic replies from the anti-vaxxers. However, pro-vaccine accounts with a few followers receive highly toxic replies in English, which is different from the Japanese case. These results provide insights into both language-dependent and independent countermeasures against anti-vaxxers’ aggressive behaviour.

The anti-vaccine movement has been gaining traction in many countries since the COVID-19 pandemic began. However, their aggressive behaviour in replies—the form of directed messaging that can be sent beyond follow-follower relationships—is still less understood, and even less so about their differences in languages. We conducted a comparative study of anti-vaxxers’ aggressive behaviours by analysing a longitudinal dataset of COVID-19 tweets in English and Japanese. We found two common features across these languages. First, anti-vaxxers most actively transmit targeted messages or replies to users with different beliefs, especially to neutral accounts, with significantly toxic and negative languages; these replies are often directed to posts about vaccine operations. Second, the influential users with many followers and/or with titles are more likely to receive the most toxic replies from the anti-vaxxers. However, pro-vaccine accounts with a few followers even receive highly toxic replies in English, which calls for a special aid different from the Japanese case. These results provide insights into both language dependent and independent countermeasures against anti-vaxxers’ aggressive behaviour.

No abstract

No abstract

Although the online campaigns of anti-vaccine advocates, or anti-vaxxers, severely threaten efforts for herd immunity, their propaganda strategies remain poorly understood, as does their reply behavior, which constitutes the most direct form of outreach on social media. Therefore, we empirically analyzed the strategy of anti-vaxxers' reply behavior on Twitter in terms of interaction frequency, content, and targets. Among the results, anti-vaxxers more frequently conducted reply behavior to other clusters, especially to neutral accounts, and the content of their replies was significantly toxic and emotional. Furthermore, the most-targeted users were so-called "decent" accounts with large numbers of followers, including accounts related to health care or representing scientists, policymakers, or media figures or outlets. We discussed and evaluated the effectiveness of these reply strategies, as well as the possible countermeasures to them. Those findings should prove useful for developing guidelines for pro-vaxxers and fact-checkers in online communities.

No abstract

False information spreads on social media, and fact-checking is a potential countermeasure. However, there is a severe shortage of resources of fact-checkers, and an efficient way to scale fact-checking is desperately needed, especially in pandemics like COVID-19. In this study, we focus on spontaneous debunking by social media users, which has been missed in existing research despite its indicated usefulness for fact-checking and countering false information. Specifically, we characterize the fake tweets that tend to be debunked and Twitter users who often debunk fake tweets. For this analysis, we create a comprehensive dataset of responses to tweets with false information, annotate a subset of them, and build a classification model for detecting debunking behaviors. We find that most fake tweets are left undebunked and spontaneous debunking is slower than other forms of responses, and exhibits partisanship in political topics. These results provide actionable insights into utilizing spontaneous debunking to scale conventional fact-checking, thereby supplementing existing research from a new perspective.

Social media is not only a place for people to communicate on a daily matter but also a virtual venue to transmit and exchange various ideas. Such ideas are known as the raw voices of potential consumers, which come from a wide range of people who may not participate in consumer surveys, and therefore their opinions may contain high value to companies. However, how users share their ideas on social media is still underexplored. This study investigates a spontaneous ideation contest about a generic term for new Big Tech companies, which occurred when Facebook changed its name to Meta. We constructed a comprehensive dataset of tweets containing candidates and examined how they were suggested, spread, and exchanged by social media users. Our findings indicate that different ideas are better on different metrics. The ranking of ideas was not decided immediately after the idea contest started. The first people to post ideas have smaller followers than those who post secondarily or who only share the idea. We also confirmed that replies accumulate unique ideas, but most of them are added in the first depth in reply trees. This study would promote the use of social media as a part of open innovation and co-creation processes in the industry.