skip to main content
research-article

Online Harassment and Content Moderation: The Case of Blocklists

Published:22 March 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Online harassment is a complex and growing problem. On Twitter, one mechanism people use to avoid harassment is the blocklist, a list of accounts that are preemptively blocked from interacting with a subscriber. In this article, we present a rich description of Twitter blocklists – why they are needed, how they work, and their strengths and weaknesses in practice. Next, we use blocklists to interrogate online harassment – the forms it takes, as well as tactics used by harassers. Specifically, we interviewed both people who use blocklists to protect themselves, and people who are blocked by blocklists. We find that users are not adequately protected from harassment, and at the same time, many people feel that they are blocked unnecessarily and unfairly. Moreover, we find that not all users agree on what constitutes harassment. Based on our findings, we propose design interventions for social network sites with the aim of protecting people from harassment, while preserving freedom of speech.

References

  1. Zahra Ashktorab and Jessica Vitak. 2016. Designing cyberbullying mitigation and prevention solutions through participatory design with teenagers. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’16). ACM, New York, NY, 3895--3905. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Associated Press. 2017. Unreal When It Targets You: Faceless Trolls Attack Online. Retrieved from http://molawyersmedia.com/2017/04/14/unreal-when-it-targets-you-faceless-trolls-attack-online-2/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. David Auerbach. 2016. If Only AI Could Save Us from Ourselves. Retrieved from https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603072/if-only-ai-could-save-us-from-ourselves/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Steven Bird, Ewan Klein, and Edward Loper. 2009. Natural Language Processing with Python: Analyzing Text with the Natural Language Toolkit. O’Reilly Media, Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Lindsay Blackwell, Jill Dimond, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Cliff Lampe. 2018. Classification and its consequences for online harassment: Design insights from heartmob. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW’18 Online First).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. The BlockBot. 2016. The Block Bot. Retrieved from http://www.theblockbot.com. Accessed: 2017-09-04.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Danah Boyd. 2008. Why youth heart social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning -- Youth, Identity, and Digital Media (2008). 119--142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Kathy Charmaz. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. Sage Publications Ltd, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Danielle Keats Citron. 2014. Hate Crimes in Cyberspace. Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Robyn M. Cooper and Warren J. Blumenfeld. 2012. Responses to cyberbullying: A descriptive analysis of the frequency of and impact on LGBT and allied youth. Journal of LGBT Youth 9, 2 (2012), 153--177.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Kate Crawford and Tarleton Gillespie. 2016. What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint. New Media 8 Society 18, 3 (March 2016), 410--428.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Munmun De Choudhury, Shagun Jhaver, Benjamin Sugar, and Ingmar Weber. 2016. Social media participation in an activist movement for racial equality. In Proceedings of the 10th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jill P. Dimond, Michaelanne Dye, Daphne Larose, and Amy S. Bruckman. 2013. Hollaback! The role of storytelling online in a social movement organization. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW’13). ACM, New York, NY, 477. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Judith S. Donath. 1999. Identity and deception in the virtual community. In Communities in Cyberspace, Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollock (Eds.). Psychology Press, 1996, 29--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Maeve Duggan. 2014. Online harassment. Pew Internet Project.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Maeve Duggan. 2017. Online harassment. Pew Internet Project.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Andrea Forte and Amy Bruckman. 2008. Scaling consensus: Increasing decentralization in wikipedia governance. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’08). IEEE, 157--157. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. GamerGate Wiki. 2016. The Block Bot. (2016). Retrieved from http://thisisvideogames.com/gamergatewiki/index.php?title=The_Block_Bot. Accessed: 2018-01-10Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. GamerGate Wiki. 2017. GGAutoBlocker—GamerGate Wiki. Retrieved from http://thisisvideogames.com/gamergatewiki/index.php?title=GGAutoBlocker. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. R. Stuart Geiger. 2016. Bot-based collective blocklists in twitter: The counterpublic moderation of harassment in a networked public space. Information, Communication 8 Society 19, 6 (2016), 787--803.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Ralph Gross and Alessandro Acquisti. 2005. Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, 71--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Amanda Hess. 2014. Twitter Harassment: User-Created Apps Block Together, Flaminga, and the Block Bot Crack Down on Twitter Abuse. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/blogs/future. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Zachary Jason. 2015. Game of Fear. Retrieved from http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2015/04/28/gamergate/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Shagun Jhaver, Larry Chan, and Amy Bruckman. 2018. The view from the other side: The border between controversial speech and harassment on Kotaku in action. First Monday 23, 2 (2018). http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/8232.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Sara Kiesler, Robert Kraut, and Paul Resnick. 2012. Regulating behavior in online communities. In Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Travis Kriplean, Jonathan Morgan, Deen Freelon, Alan Borning, and Lance Bennett. 2012. Supporting reflective public thought with considerit. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW’12). ACM, Seattle, Washington, 265--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Cliff Lampe and Paul Resnick. 2004. Slash(dot) and burn: Distributed moderation in a large online conversation space. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 543--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Amanda Lenhart, Michele Ybarra, Kathryn Zickuhr, and Myeshia Price-Feeney. 2016. Online Harassment, Digital Abuse, and Cyberstalking in America. Retrieved from https://datasociety.net/output/online-harassment-digital-abuse-cyberstalking/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Gilad Lotan, Erhardt Graeff, Mike Ananny, Devin Gaffney, Ian Pearce, and Others. 2011. The Arab spring -- The revolutions were tweeted: Information flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. International Journal of Communication 5 (2011), 2--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. David Malki. 2014. The Terrible Sea Lion. (2014). Retrieved from http://wondermark.com/1k62/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. J. Nathan Matias, Amy Johnson, Whitney Erin Boesel, Brian Keegan, Jaclyn Friedman, and Charlie DeTar. 2015. Reporting, reviewing, and responding to harassment on Twitter. Double-blind peer review committee chaired by Zeynep Tufekci.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Sharan B. Merriam. 2002. Introduction to qualitative research. In Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass Inc Pub.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Elise Moreau. 2016. The Top 25 Social Networking Sites People Are Using. Retrieved from https://www.lifewire.com/top-social-networking-sites-people-are-using-3486554. Accessed: 2017-08-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Torill Elvira Mortensen. 2016. Anger, fear, and games: The long event of #Gamergate. Games and Culture.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Elinor Ostrom. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Patreon. 2017. Randi Harper is Creating Online Activism and Open Source Anti-Harassment Tools | Patreon. Retrieved from https://www.patreon.com/freebsdgirl. Accessed: 2017-08-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Whitney Phillips. 2015. This is Why We Can’t have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship Between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Dan Pine. 2016. Anti-Semitic Emails, Tweets Hit Candidates and Journalists. Retrieved from http://www.jweekly.com/2016/06/17/anti-semitic-emails-tweets-hit-candidates-and-journalists/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. RationalWiki. 2016. Atheism Plus. Retrieved from http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Rebecca Ruiz. 2014. When Your Job Is to Moderate the Internet’s Nastiest Trolls. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2014/09/28/moderating-the-trolls/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Jodi Schneider, Tudor Groza, and Alexandre Passant. 2013. A review of argumentation for the social semantic web. Semantic Web 4, 2 (2013), 159--218. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Sjwomble. 2016. The Problem With Personal Block Lists. Retrieved from https://sjwomble.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/the-problem-with-personal-block-lists/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Todd Spangler. 2017. IMDb Shuts Down Discussion Boards | Variety. Retrieved from http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/imdb-message-boards-shut-down-1201977581/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Statista. 2017. Twitter: Number of Active Users 2010--2017. Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users/. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Nitasha Tiku and Casey Newton. 2015. Twitter CEO: ‘We suck at dealing with abuse’ -- The Verge. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/4/7982099/twitter-ceo-sent-memo-taking-personal-responsibility-for-the. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. S. Turkle. 2006. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. Retrieved from http://www.citeulike.org/group/48/article/949801. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Twitter. 2016. Blocking Accounts on Twitter. Retrieved from https://support.twitter.com/articles/117063. Accessed: 2017-05-01.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Twitter. 2016. What are Replies and Mentions? (2016). Retrieved from https://support.twitter.com/articles/14023. Accessed: 2017-05-01.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Marshall van Alstyne and Erik Brynjolfsson. 1996. Electronic communities: Global villages or cyberbalkanization? In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS’96). http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis1996/5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Theresa Velden and Carl Lagoze. 2013. The extraction of community structures from publication networks to support ethnographic observations of field differences in scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64, 12 (2013), 2405--2427.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Jessica Vitak, Kalyani Chadha, Linda Steiner, and Zahra Ashktorab. 2017. Identifying women’s experiences with and strategies for mitigating negative effects of online harassment. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 8 Social Computing (CSCW’17). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Kyle Wagner. 2012. The Worst Job at Google: A Year of Watching Beastiality, Child Pornography, and Other Terrible Internet Things. Retrieved from http://gizmodo.com/5936572/the-worst-job-at-google-a-year-of-watching-beastiality-child-pornography-and-other-terrible-internet-things. Accessed: 2017-05-01.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Charlie Warzel. 2016. “A Honeypot For Assholes”: Inside Twitter’s 10-Year Failure To Stop Harassment. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel/a-honeypot-for-assholes-inside-twitters-10-year-failure-to-s. Accessed: 2018-01-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Online Harassment and Content Moderation: The Case of Blocklists

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
        ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction  Volume 25, Issue 2
        April 2018
        188 pages
        ISSN:1073-0516
        EISSN:1557-7325
        DOI:10.1145/3200181
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 22 March 2018
        • Accepted: 1 January 2018
        • Revised: 1 October 2017
        • Received: 1 February 2017
        Published in tochi Volume 25, Issue 2

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader