Online Library

To accentuate which platform characteristics particularly foster radicalization and extremist dynamics, this contribution investigates the affordances of social media as delineated in contemporary literature, conducting a platform comparison encompassing Telegram, WhatsApp, and X (formerly Twitter). Based on a scoping review, 17 affordances identified from studies researching radicalization dynamics on social media were extracted and categorized. The most frequently mentioned affordances—anonymity, visibility, and collectivity—were then further analyzed concerning their contribution to radicalization and the radicalization potential of these specific platforms. The platform-comparative affordance discussion shows that, although, in principle each of the three compared platforms can foster an environment conducive to radicalization depending on user intention and usage context, the specific characteristics of each platform necessitate a nuanced consideration. On one hand, it is imperative to discern affordances differentially along various dimensions when assessing their implications (e.g., internal vs. external visibility). On the other hand, it is beneficial to consider which affordances emerge from the actualization of other affordances. For instance, collectivity can result from the interplay of several affordances, such as interactivity and anonymity, and can be referred to as a meta-affordance. Furthermore, the analysis shows that platform branding and self-presentation not only affect platform architecture and affordances but also shape users’ perceptions of the platform, thereby influencing the actualization of affordances. This was particularly noted in the literature for Telegram and increasingly for X. Specific assertions, nevertheless, are hindered by the conceptual diffusion of the affordance approach and a lack of empirical analyses directly and systematically examining platform affordances in conjunction with radicalization dynamics.

Digital integration and the emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) are providing new tools for insurgents to use in spreading their propaganda through violent extremism. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has come to represent a conduit for insurgents in planning and carrying out their extreme agendas. This article provides a deeper understanding of the double-edged sword effect of AI in relation to violent extremism in the ASEAN context. It reveals that, even though AI has been very important in countering violent extremism, it has simultaneously facilitated terrorists in spreading their propaganda in more innovative and covert ways. The legal framework governing AI is still in its infancy and challenges such as the doubleedged sword effect in the use of the technology require specific guidelines or legislation for use in effective governance.

This study tracked, recorded and coded the content recommended to 10 experimental or ‘sockpuppet’ accounts on 10 blank smartphones, 5 on YouTube Shorts and 5 on TikTok. On each platform, we set up 5 types of accounts: one 16-year old boy and one 18-year old boy who sought out content typically associated with gender-normative young men (e.g. gym content, sports, video games), one 16-year old boy and one 18-year old boy who actively sought out content associated with the manosphere (e.g. Andrew Tate, anti-feminist), and one blank control account that did not deliberately seek out or engage with any particular content. The purpose of this research was to simulate and explore the digital reality of boys and young men using TikTok and YouTube Shorts, who are most likely to be targeted by the manosphere.

Fan practices and behaviours have increasingly moved beyond fan communities into the political, economic and cultural structures of every day life. The proliferation of social media platforms has allowed both the progressive and reactionary aspects of fandom to converge in the public sphere, drawing on similar techniques, pleasures, and practices in order to interpret the world in a culture where the boundaries between popular and political communication are blurrier than they have ever been. This special issue of Convergence explores the synergies, tensions and conflicts at play in this new cultural terrain. It explores how ‘fan studies can be used to make sense of the seeming growth of conspiracy theory communities and right-wing movements, examines political participation as a form of fandom, and the ways in which social media can be used to organize against discriminatory cultures.

A review of relevant empirical literature shows that many features of social media platforms actively promote or encourage hate speech. Key factors include algorithmic recommendations, which frequently promote hateful ideologies; social affordances which let users encourage or disseminate hate speech by others; anonymous, impersonal environments; and the absence of media ‘gatekeepers’. In mandating faster content deletion, NetzDG only addresses the last of these, ignoring other relevant factors. Moreover, reliance on individual user complaints to trigger platforms’ obligations means hate speech will often escape deletion. Interviews with relevant civil society organisations confirm these flaws of the NetzDG model. From their perspectives, NetzDG has had little impact on the prevalence or visibility of online hate speech, and its reporting mechanisms fail to help affected communities.

Hate speech, harassment, and an increasing prevalence of right-wing extremism in online game spaces are of growing concern in the United States. Understanding trends in how and to what extent extremist groups utilize online gaming spaces is vital in taking action to protect players. To synthesize the current state of extant research and suggest future directions, we conduct a systematic review of the literature on right-wing extremism in videogames. We detail our search protocol, selection criteria, and analysis of the collected work, and then summarize the findings. Important themes include how and why extremists’ targeting of online game communities began, the role of Gamergate in this process, and the industry and market context in which such activities emerged. We describe the current nature of the problem, with extremist language and ideology providing a kind of on-ramp for radicalizing disenfranchised gamers. We conclude with a summary of responses from industry and legislators.