Increased social media anti-refugee activity was correlated to increased anti-refugee crime.
There is linkage between social media and hate crime. In Germany, the recently emerged right-wing party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has developed a major social media presence. Right-wing anti-refugee sentiment on Facebook predicts violent crimes against refugees in otherwise similar municipalities with higher social media usage. To further establish causality, we exploit exogenous variation in major internet and Facebook outages, which fully undo the correlation between social media and hate crime. We further find that the effect decreases with distracting news events; increases with user network interactions; and does not hold for posts unrelated to refugees. Our results suggest that social media can act as a propagation mechanism between online hate speech and real-life violent crime.
Myanmar violence and Facebook
Some 700,000 members of the Rohingya community had recently fled the country amid a military crackdown and ethnic violence.
Facebook was used make accusations of rape and other crimes against those in the Rohingya community which caused mobs to attack them. This was used as justification for the military to crack down and chase out the Rohinga in Myanmar.
Whatsapp used in India
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
Pizzagate”? Didn’t you get the memo? It turned out that there WERE conspiracies of rich and powerful sexual molesters. Including several political figures. Being a molestation denialist has switched from “woke” to “choke” several months ago. #metoo or some such thing.
Pizzagate””? Didn’t you get the memo? It turned out that there WERE conspiracies of rich and powerful sexual molesters. Including several political figures. Being a molestation denialist has switched from “”””woke”””” to “”””choke”””” several months ago. #metoo or some such thing.”””
Clearly we urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies, even shut them down if necessary. This regress can no longer be tolerated
Clearly with urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies, even shut them down if necessary
Clearly we urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies even shut them down if necessary. This regress can no longer be tolerated
Clearly with urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies even shut them down if necessary
Ape man knows that this is pointing directly at the right. Therefore he can’t accept it. Simple.
Bad behaviors and ill intentions get amplified by social networks. What once were rumors between a few gossipers in local settings, something that was temporarily diminished in relative social impact on urban settings, now has returned with a vengeance and can become country wide moral panic crusades. Social networks are like going back to the times of town rumors and gossip resulting in destroyed reputations, witch hunts and tarrings/featherings
Yeah, so? What is the difference between that and people printing flyers/pamphlets to accomplish the same thing?
Ape man knows that this is pointing directly at the right.Therefore he can’t accept it.Simple.
Bad behaviors and ill intentions get amplified by social networks.What once were rumors between a few gossipers in local settings something that was temporarily diminished in relative social impact on urban settings now has returned with a vengeance and can become country wide moral panic crusades.Social networks are like going back to the times of town rumors and gossip resulting in destroyed reputations witch hunts and tarrings/featherings
Yeah so?What is the difference between that and people printing flyers/pamphlets to accomplish the same thing?
How about the fact that Facebook, Google, and Twitter “Are Left Wing” outfits that regularly blacklist conservatives and actively assists the Democratic Committee during election cycles, as well as turning a blind-eye to the Left regularly organizing goon squads to harass Republican and Conservative events. One look at the Google news page shows the extreme Left-Leaning-Bias. And lets not forget Facebook and Twitter throttling…
How about the fact that Facebook Google and Twitter Are Left Wing”” outfits that regularly blacklist conservatives and actively assists the Democratic Committee during election cycles”””” as well as turning a blind-eye to the Left regularly organizing goon squads to harass Republican and Conservative events. One look at the Google news page shows the extreme Left-Leaning-Bias. And lets not forget Facebook and Twitter throttling…”””
Correlation is not causality. This “study” like so many others has no controls, no statistical adjustment and no scientific credibility. Propagandists and demagogues have used everything from rumor to Twitter to “inflame the mob”. The problem isn’t “hate speech” it is ignorance and fear. Cracking down on arbitrary words will not change the behavior of mobs.
Even the use of the word “refugees” is misleading and biased. Most of these “new Europeans” (another disingenuous term I’ve seen used) are economic migrants, the majority of whom are young, fit, aggressive men, not mostly women or children like you would expect from a genuine refugee crisis. It’s a slow-motion invasion but anyone who speaks out against their historical homelands being gradually overtaken and occupied by foreigners from other continents is “racist” and “far right”.
The source and fanning flames for anti-refugees sentiment is refugees behavior.
That’s why this research is utter trash, junk science. It reeks of confirmation bias and cherry-picked data. The researchers obviously started with their conclusion and worked backwards. If this study had cited examples from across the political spectrum, it would have much more credibility.
Duh. If you focus only on “the right”, you will find only violence committed by “the right”. It would be like focusing only on rape committed by blacks and not whites or all men, then concluding “this is pointing directly at the blacks.
Correlation is not causality. This study”” like so many others has no controls”””” no statistical adjustment and no scientific credibility. Propagandists and demagogues have used everything from rumor to Twitter to “”””inflame the mob””””. The problem isn’t “”””hate speech”””” it is ignorance and fear. Cracking down on arbitrary words will not change the behavior of mobs.”””
Even the use of the word refugees”” is misleading and biased. Most of these “”””new Europeans”””” (another disingenuous term I’ve seen used) are economic migrants”” the majority of whom are young fit aggressive men”” not mostly women or children like you would expect from a genuine refugee crisis. It’s a slow-motion invasion but anyone who speaks out against their historical homelands being gradually overtaken and occupied by foreigners from other continents is “”””racist”””” and “”””far right””””.”””
The source and fanning flames for anti-refugees sentiment is refugees behavior.
That’s why this research is utter trash junk science. It reeks of confirmation bias and cherry-picked data. The researchers obviously started with their conclusion and worked backwards. If this study had cited examples from across the political spectrum it would have much more credibility.
Duh. If you focus only on the right”””” you will find only violence committed by “”””the right””””. It would be like focusing only on rape committed by blacks and not whites or all men”””” then concluding “”””this is pointing directly at the blacks.”””””””
It’s a feedback effect like putting a microphone too close to a speaker.
That’s like saying “What’s the difference between a firecracker and an H-bomb, they both explode, right?” Social media has an amplifying effect, that’s the difference and if used correctly that effect can be immense.
It’s been clear to me for a couple of years that social media is the scourge of humanity. It aught to be stamped out while we still can do it.
Who said anything about focusing on the right? Nobody
It’s a feedback effect like putting a microphone too close to a speaker.
That’s like saying What’s the difference between a firecracker and an H-bomb they both explode” right?””Social media has an amplifying effect”””” that’s the difference and if used correctly that effect can be immense.”””
It’s been clear to me for a couple of years that social media is the scourge of humanity. It aught to be stamped out while we still can do it.
Who said anything about focusing on the right? Nobody
Simple.” Yes…and no. I explain the ‘no’ part in my response to Gary Oblock (above). Yes, in that the effect is to clamp down on the right. But as the Bernie/Ocasio nutjobs take over the Democrat party, expect them to get hit too.
You still don’t seem to get my point. Social Networks are being used as the excuse to crack down on dissent. Just like guns are for gun control (It ain’t because some kids occiasionally mowed down via the de facto Head Shots for Tots Program schools run otherwise known as ‘gun free zones’). In the past, they governments cracked down on printing press companies providing the flyers/pamphlets. Also, social media is just an easier/cheaper/faster form of promoting dissent. If it weren’t there, the flyers/pamphlets would still be used.
Simple.””Yes…and no. I explain the ‘no’ part in my response to Gary Oblock (above).Yes”” in that the effect is to clamp down on the right. But as the Bernie/Ocasio nutjobs take over the Democrat party”” expect them to get hit too.”””
You still don’t seem to get my point.Social Networks are being used as the excuse to crack down on dissent. Just like guns are for gun control (It ain’t because some kids occiasionally mowed down via the de facto Head Shots for Tots Program schools run otherwise known as ‘gun free zones’). In the past they governments cracked down on printing press companies providing the flyers/pamphlets. Also social media is just an easier/cheaper/faster form of promoting dissent. If it weren’t there the flyers/pamphlets would still be used.
Social media belongs to companies that have the right and probably the responsibility to their shareholders to shutdown abusive use of their platforms. Now, if it was dissent that was being targeted (like in China and other authoritarian countries) then you maybe you’d have a concern. I say maybe because they don’t belong to the public. Note, I don’t consider professional hate mongers with toxic conspiracy theories like Pizzagate dissenters.
Social media belongs to companies that have the right and probably the responsibility to their shareholders to shutdown abusive use of their platforms. Now if it was dissent that was being targeted (like in China and other authoritarian countries) then you maybe you’d have a concern. I say maybe because they don’t belong to the public. Note I don’t consider professional hate mongers with toxic conspiracy theories like Pizzagate dissenters.
More leftist globalist liberal propaganda.
More leftist globalist liberal propaganda.
Clearly we urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies, even shut them down if necessary. This regress can no longer be tolerated
Clearly with urgently need a new global organism to impose regulation on these companies, even shut them down if necessary
“Pizzagate”?
Didn’t you get the memo? It turned out that there WERE conspiracies of rich and powerful sexual molesters. Including several political figures.
Being a molestation denialist has switched from “woke” to “choke” several months ago. #metoo or some such thing.
More leftist globalist liberal propaganda.
Social media belongs to companies that have the right and probably the responsibility to their shareholders to shutdown abusive use of their platforms. Now, if it was dissent that was being targeted (like in China and other authoritarian countries) then you maybe you’d have a concern. I say maybe because they don’t belong to the public. Note, I don’t consider professional hate mongers with toxic conspiracy theories like Pizzagate dissenters.
“Simple.”
Yes…and no.
I explain the ‘no’ part in my response to Gary Oblock (above).
Yes, in that the effect is to clamp down on the right. But as the Bernie/Ocasio nutjobs take over the Democrat party, expect them to get hit too.
You still don’t seem to get my point.
Social Networks are being used as the excuse to crack down on dissent. Just like guns are for gun control (It ain’t because some kids occiasionally mowed down via the de facto Head Shots for Tots Program schools run otherwise known as ‘gun free zones’).
In the past, they governments cracked down on printing press companies providing the flyers/pamphlets. Also, social media is just an easier/cheaper/faster form of promoting dissent. If it weren’t there, the flyers/pamphlets would still be used.
It’s a feedback effect like putting a microphone too close to a speaker.
That’s like saying “What’s the difference between a firecracker and an H-bomb, they both explode, right?”
Social media has an amplifying effect, that’s the difference and if used correctly that effect can be immense.
It’s been clear to me for a couple of years that social media is the scourge of humanity. It aught to be stamped out while we still can do it.
Who said anything about focusing on the right? Nobody
Correlation is not causality. This “study” like so many others has no controls, no statistical adjustment and no scientific credibility. Propagandists and demagogues have used everything from rumor to Twitter to “inflame the mob”. The problem isn’t “hate speech” it is ignorance and fear. Cracking down on arbitrary words will not change the behavior of mobs.
Even the use of the word “refugees” is misleading and biased. Most of these “new Europeans” (another disingenuous term I’ve seen used) are economic migrants, the majority of whom are young, fit, aggressive men, not mostly women or children like you would expect from a genuine refugee crisis. It’s a slow-motion invasion but anyone who speaks out against their historical homelands being gradually overtaken and occupied by foreigners from other continents is “racist” and “far right”.
The source and fanning flames for anti-refugees sentiment is refugees behavior.
That’s why this research is utter trash, junk science. It reeks of confirmation bias and cherry-picked data. The researchers obviously started with their conclusion and worked backwards. If this study had cited examples from across the political spectrum, it would have much more credibility.
Duh. If you focus only on “the right”, you will find only violence committed by “the right”. It would be like focusing only on rape committed by blacks and not whites or all men, then concluding “this is pointing directly at the blacks.”
How about the fact that Facebook, Google, and Twitter “Are Left Wing” outfits that regularly blacklist conservatives and actively assists the Democratic Committee during election cycles, as well as turning a blind-eye to the Left regularly organizing goon squads to harass Republican and Conservative events. One look at the Google news page shows the extreme Left-Leaning-Bias. And lets not forget Facebook and Twitter throttling…
Ape man knows that this is pointing directly at the right.
Therefore he can’t accept it.
Simple.
Bad behaviors and ill intentions get amplified by social networks.
What once were rumors between a few gossipers in local settings, something that was temporarily diminished in relative social impact on urban settings, now has returned with a vengeance and can become country wide moral panic crusades.
Social networks are like going back to the times of town rumors and gossip resulting in destroyed reputations, witch hunts and tarrings/featherings
Yeah, so?
What is the difference between that and people printing flyers/pamphlets to accomplish the same thing?