The dark side of news community forums: opinion manipulation trolls

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the dark side of news community forums: the proliferation of opinion manipulation trolls. In particular, it explores the idea that a user who is called a troll by several people is likely to be one. It further demonstrates the utility of this idea for detecting accused and paid opinion manipulation trolls and their comments as well as for predicting the credibility of comments in news community forums. Design/methodology/approach The authors are aiming to build a classifier to distinguish trolls vs regular users. Unfortunately, it is not easy to get reliable training data. The authors solve this issue pragmatically: the authors assume that a user who is called a troll by several people is likely to be such, which are called accused trolls. Based on this assumption and on leaked reports about actual paid opinion manipulation trolls, the authors build a classifier to distinguish trolls vs regular users. Findings The authors compare the profiles of paid trolls vs accused trolls vs non-trolls, and show that a classifier trained to distinguish accused trolls from non-trolls does quite well also at telling apart paid trolls from non-trolls. Research limitations/implications The troll detection works even for users with about 10 comments, but it achieves the best performance for users with a sizable number of comments in the forum, e.g. 100 or more. Yet, there is not such a limitation for troll comment detection. Practical implications The approach would help forum moderators in their work, by pointing them to the most suspicious users and comments. It would be also useful to investigative journalists who want to find paid opinion manipulation trolls. Social implications The authors can offer a better experience to online users by filtering out opinion manipulation trolls and their comments. Originality/value The authors propose a novel approach for finding paid opinion manipulation trolls and their posts.

A Systematic Review on Fake News Themes Reported in Literature

“…Studies debating the trustworthiness of information and veracity analytics of online content have increased recently due to the rise in fake news stories [37]. Social media has become a useful way for individuals to share information and opinions about various topics [3].…”

SemEval-2019 Task 8: Fact Checking in Community Question Answering Forums

“…Yet, in the context of cQA and general QA, there has been work on credibility assessment, which has been modelled primarily at the feature level, with the goal of improving GOOD answer identification. A notable exception are Mihaylov et al, 2018), where credibility was a task on its own right. However, credibility is different from veracity (our focus here) as it is a subjective perception about 2 http://portal.moi.gov.qa/wps/portal/MOIInternet/departmentcommittees/visasentrypermeits/ whether a statement is credible, rather than actually truthful.…”

Multi-Task Ordinal Regression for Jointly Predicting the Trustworthiness and the Leading Political Ideology of News Media

“…The trustworthiness of Web sources has also been studied from a Data Analytics perspective, e.g., Dong et al (2015) proposed that a trustworthy source is one that contains very few false claims. In social media, there has been research targeting the user, e.g., finding malicious users (Mihaylov and Nakov, 2016;Mihaylov et al, 2018), sockpuppets (Maity et al, 2017, Internet water army (Chen et al, 2013), and seminar users (Darwish et al, 2017).…”