Social media platforms provide people all over the world with an unprecedented ability to organize around social and political causes. However, these same platforms enable organized actors to engineer fabricated social movements to advance their agenda. Such movements leverage a variety of tools and techniques, ranging from simple spam operations to sophisticated efforts involving numerous orchestrated accounts coordinated across linguistic and cultural clusters. While the former category is straightforward to analyze via data mining methods, campaigns in the latter category are engineered to mask their true nature from the public. We build on existing work to formalize a framework to detect coordination phenomena in the second category, based on anomalies in three key dimensions of participant behavior: network, temporal, and semantic. We test this framework on three case studies and find that, in all three cases, the framework enables us to detect coordination as behavioral anomaly.
BailCAGuayBMaloneyE, et al. (2020) Assessing the Russian Internet Research Agency’s impact on the political attitudes and behaviors of American Twitter users in late 2017. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America117(1): 243–250.
2.
BarashVCameronCMacyM (2012) Critical phenomena in complex contagions. Social Networks34(4): 451–461.
BenklerY (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
BennettLW (2012) The personalization of politics: political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science644: 20–39.
7.
BennettLWSegerbergA (2013) The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Borge-HolthoeferJRiveroAGarcíaI, et al. (2011) Structural and dynamical patterns on online social networks: the Spanish May 15th movement as a case study. PLoS ONE6: e23883.
CaulfieldTMarconARMurdochB, et al. (2020) Health misinformation and the power of narrative messaging in the public sphere. Canadian Journal of Bioethics2(2): 52–60. Available at: https://cjb-rcb.ca/index.php/cjb-rcb/article/view/141 (accessed 15 September 2020).
13.
CentolaDMacyM (2007) Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American Journal of Sociology113(3): 702–734.
ColleoniERozzaAArvidssonA (2014) Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. Journal of Communication64(2): 317–332.
DavisCAVarolOFerraraE, et al. (2016) BotOrNot: a system to evaluate social bots. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference companion on World Wide Web, Montréal, QC, Canada, 11–15 April 2016, pp. 273–274. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2889302
DeckerBTDonovanJGreenhillKM (2018) Political disruptions: combating disinformation and fake news. In: 2018 college and university educators workshop, council on foreign relations, New York, 19–20 April.
20.
EntmanRM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication43(4): 51–58.
FarkasJSchouJ (2019) Post-truth, Fake News and Democracy Mapping the Politics of Falsehood. Abingdon: Routledge.
23.
FerraraEVarolODavisC, et al. (2016) The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM59(7): 96–104.
24.
FinkCSchmidtABarashV, et al. (2016) Complex contagions and the diffusion of popular Twitter hashtags in Nigeria. Social Network Analysis and Mining6(1): 1–19.
25.
FreelonDBossettaMWellsC, et al. (2020) Black trolls matter: racial and ideological asymmetries in social media disinformation. Social Science Computer Review. Epub ahead of print 7 April. DOI: 10.1177/0894439320914853.
GuilbeaultDBeckerJCentolaD (2017) Complex Contagions: A Decade in Review. Spreading Dynamics in Social Systems, vol. 3, no. 25. Cham: Springer.
29.
GuilbeaultDBeckerJCentolaD (2018) Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America115(39): 9714–9719.
30.
HopfHKriefAMehtaG, et al. (2019) Fake science and the knowledge crisis: ignorance can be fatal. Royal Society Open Science6: 190161.
IyengarSMasseyDS (2019) Scientific communication in a post-truth society. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America116(16): 7656–7661.
33.
KahanDLandrumACarpenterK, et al. (2017) Science curiosity and political information processing. Political Psychology38: 179–199.
34.
KellyJ (2014) Toward cybersocial geography: meeting the analytic challenge of social media. In: TomesRRTuckerCK (eds) Human Geography: Socio-Cultural Dynamics and Challenges to Global Security. pp. 125–132. Herndon, VA: United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation.
35.
KingGPanJRobertsM (2017) How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, Not Engaged Argument. American Political Science Review111(3): 484–501
36.
LazerDMJBaumMABenklerY, et al. (2018) The science of fake news. Science359(6380): 1094–1096.
37.
LeskovecJBackstromLKleinbergJ (2009) Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, Paris, 28 June–1 July 2009, pp. 497–506. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/1557019.1557077
McHaleJP (2019) Mass media, social control, and political authority in a post-truth environment. In: Rabe-HempCELindNS (eds) Political Authority, Social Control and Public Policy (Public Policy and Governance, Vol. 31). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 259–273. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2053-769720190000031017
40.
McLuhanM (1964) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
41.
McQuillanLMcAweeneyEBargarA, et al. (2020) Cultural convergence: insights into the behavior of misinformation networks on Twitter. Arxiv. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.03443 (accessed 15 September 2020).
MønstedBSapieżyńskiPFerraraE, et al. (2017) Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: an experiment using Twitter bots. PLoS ONE12(9): e0184148.
45.
NewmanMEJ (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review45: 167–256.
46.
NikanCHosseinHMueenA (2016) Identifying Correlated Bots in Twitter. Social Informatics LNCS 10047, pp. 14–21.
47.
NyhanB (2010) Why the “Death Panel” myth wouldn’t die: misinformation in the health care reform debate. The Forum8(1): 5.
48.
PennycookGRandDG (2019) Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America116(7): 2521–2526.
49.
PollettaFCallahanJ (2017) Deep stories, nostalgia narratives, and fake news: storytelling in the Trump era. American Journal of Cultural Sociology5: 392–408.
SanovichSStukalDPenfold -BrownD, et al. (2015) Turning the virtual tables: government strategies for addressing online opposition with an application to Russia. In: Proceedings of 9th annual conference of the international society for new institutional economics, Cambridge, MA, 18–20 June.
53.
SmithMMcAweeneyERonzaudL (2020) The COVID-19 “Infodemic”: A preliminary analysis of the online conversation surrounding the coronavirus pandemic. Available at: https://graphika.com/reports/the-covid-19-infodemic/ (accessed 15 September 2020).
54.
TheocharisY (2015) The conceptualization of digitally networked participation. Social Media and Society1(2): 1–14.
55.
ThomasKGrierCPaxsonV (2012) Adapting social spam infrastructure for political censorship. In: LEET’12 proceedings of the 5th USENIX conference on large-scale exploits and emergent threats, San Jose, CA, 24 April.
56.
ToskaS (2014) Protest mobilization in the age of Twitter. In: Al-SumaitFLenzeNHudsonMC (eds) The Arab Uprisings: Catalysts, Dynamics, and Trajectories. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 135–154.
WangYMcKeeMTorbicaA, et al. (2019) Systematic literature review on the spread of health-related misinformation on social media. Social Science & Medicine240: 112552.
WoolleySHowardP (2016) Automation, algorithms, and politics| political communication, computational propaganda, and autonomous agents—introduction. International Journal of Communication10: 9. Available at: http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6298/1809
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
