Online Library

Social media platforms are popular for expressing personal views, emotions and beliefs. Social media platforms are influential for propagating extremist ideologies for group-building, fund-raising, and recruitment. To monitor and control the outreach of extremists on social media, detection of extremism in social media is necessary. The existing extremism detection literature on social media is limited by specific ideology, subjective validation methods, and binary or tertiary classification. A comprehensive and comparative survey of datasets, classification techniques, validation methods with online extremism detection tool is essential. The systematic literature review methodology (PRISMA) was used. Sixty-four studies on extremism research were collected, including 31 from SCOPUS, Web of Science (WoS), ACM, IEEE, and 33 thesis, technical and analytical reports using Snowballing technique. The survey highlights the role of social media in propagating online radicalization and the need for extremism detection on social media platforms. The review concludes lack of publicly available, class-balanced, and unbiased datasets for better detection and classification of social-media extremism. Lack of validation techniques to evaluate correctness and quality of custom data sets without human interventions, was found. The information retrieval unveiled that contemporary research work is prejudiced towards ISIS ideology. We investigated that deep learning based automated extremism detection techniques outperform other techniques. The review opens the research opportunities for developing an online, publicly available automated tool for extremism data collection and detection. The survey results in conceptualization of architecture for construction of multi-ideology extremism text dataset with robust data validation techniques for multiclass classification of extremism text.

While the radical right is relatively successful on social media, only a fraction of its supporters become activists offline. Why do some individuals become offline activists in radical right organizations, while others prefer to limit their support to online spaces? Following an inductive analysis of interviews with activists and supporters of a radical right organization, this study points to the importance of going beyond classical explanations for activism by focusing on the impact of, and relationship between, group identification and stigma for mobilization. It shows that activists who identify with the organization and consider it stigmatized are motivated to participate in protest actions to speak out in front of this perceived injustice. By contrast, supporters who question the organization’s legitimacy in the face of stigma engage with the organization on social media and are motivated by a desire to keep a low profile and to avoid being openly associated with stigmatized actors.

While the radical right is relatively successful on social media, only a fraction of its supporters become activists offline. Why do some individuals become offline activists in radical right organizations, while others prefer to limit their support to online spaces? Following an inductive analysis of interviews with activists and supporters of a radical right organization, this study points to the importance of going beyond classical explanations for activism by focusing on the impact of, and relationship between, group identification and stigma for mobilization. It shows that activists who identify with the organization and consider it stigmatized are motivated to participate in protest actions to speak out in front of this perceived injustice. By contrast, supporters who question the organization’s legitimacy in the face of stigma engage with the organization on social media and are motivated by a desire to keep a low profile and to avoid being openly associated with stigmatized actors.

VOX-Pol Blog post.

The opportunities afforded by the Internet greatly overshadow the challenges. While not forgetting this, we can nevertheless still address some of the problems that arise. Hate speech online is one such problem. But what exactly is hate speech online, and how can we deal with it effectively? As with freedom of expression, on- or offline, UNESCO defends the position that the free flow of information should always be the norm. Counter-speech is generally preferable to suppression of speech. And any response that limits speech needs to be very carefully weighed to ensure that this remains wholly exceptional, and that legitimate robust debate is not curtailed. A typology of responses is elaborated in this study.

Following Sahana Udupa and Matti Pohjonen’s (2019) invitation to move the debate beyond a normative understanding of hate speech, this article seeks to build a foundation for conceptual and empirical inquiry of speech commonly considered deviant and disturbing. It develops in three stages. It first maps the public lives of terms that refer to online vitriol and how they have been used by different communities of researchers, politicians, advocacy groups, and national organizations. Second, it shows how different types of “haters” have been interpreted as parts of “swarms” or “armies,” depending on whether their violent potential emerges around critical incidents or whether they respond to longer-term strategies through which communities and their leaders tie their speech acts to explicit narratives. The article concludes by locating “extreme speech” within this broader conceptual tapestry, arguing that the paternalistic the gaze that characterizes a lot of research on online hate speech is tied to what Chantal Mouffe has referred to as the “moralization of politics,” a phenomenon that cannot be matched by responses that are themselves moral.