Reconstruction of the socio-semantic dynamics of political activist Twitter networks—Method and application to the 2017 French presidential election

Background Digital spaces, and in particular social networking sites, are becoming increasingly present and influential in the functioning of our democracies. In this paper, we propose an integrated methodology for the data collection, the reconstruction, the analysis and the visualization of the development of a country’s political landscape from Twitter data. Method The proposed method relies solely on the interactions between Twitter accounts and is independent of the characteristics of the shared contents such as the language of the tweets. We validate our methodology on a case study on the 2017 French presidential election (60 million Twitter exchanges between more than 2.4 million users) via two independent methods: the comparison between our automated political categorization and a human categorization based on the evaluation of a sample of 5000 profiles descriptions; the correspondence between the reconfigurations detected in the reconstructed political landscape and key political events reported in the media. This latter validation demonstrated the ability of our approach to accurately reflect the reconfigurations at play in the off-line political scene. Results We built on this reconstruction to give insights into the opinion dynamics and the reconfigurations of political communities at play during a presidential election. First, we propose a quantitative description and analysis of the political engagement of members of political communities. Second, we analyze the impact of political communities on information diffusion and in particular on their role in the fake news phenomena. We measure a differential echo chamber effect on the different types of political news (fake news, debunks, standard news) caused by the community structure and emphasize the importance of addressing the meso-structures of political networks in understanding the fake news phenomena. Conclusions Giving access to an intermediate level, between sociological surveys in the field and large statistical studies (such as those conducted by national or international organizations) we demonstrate that social networks data make it possible to qualify and quantify the activity of political communities in a multi-polar political environment; as well as their temporal evolution and reconfiguration, their structure, their alliance strategies and their semantic particularities during a presidential campaign through the analysis of their digital traces. We conclude this paper with a comment on the political and ethical implications of the use of social networks data in politics. We stress the importance of developing social macroscopes that will enable citizens to better understand how they collectively make society and propose as example the “Politoscope”, a macroscope that delivers some of our results in an interactive way.

[1]  Hilla Peretz,et al.  Ju n 20 03 Schrödinger ’ s Cat : The rules of engagement , 2003 .

[2]  Karen Sparck Jones A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval , 1972 .

[3]  Mauricio Barahona,et al.  Community detection and role identification in directed networks: understanding the Twitter network of the care.data debate , 2015, ArXiv.

[4]  F. Guerrero-Solé Community Detection in Political Discussions on Twitter , 2017 .

[5]  Ana-Maria Popescu,et al.  A Machine Learning Approach to Twitter User Classification , 2011, ICWSM.

[6]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[7]  Philip N. Howard,et al.  Social Media, News and Political Information during the US Election: Was Polarizing Content Concentrated in Swing States? , 2018, ArXiv.

[8]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Misinformation and Its Correction , 2012, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[9]  Bart Selman,et al.  Tracking evolving communities in large linked networks , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Guillaume Cleuziou,et al.  Mapping General-Specific Noun Relationships to WordNet Hypernym/Hyponym Relations , 2008, EKAW.

[11]  Rajeev Motwani,et al.  The PageRank Citation Ranking : Bringing Order to the Web , 1999, WWW 1999.

[12]  Darko Cherepnalkoski,et al.  A Retweet Network Analysis of the European Parliament , 2015, 2015 11th International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (SITIS).

[13]  Jean-Philippe Cointet,et al.  Multi-level science mapping with asymmetrical paradigmatic proximity , 2008, Networks Heterog. Media.

[14]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  The science of fake news , 2018, Science.

[15]  Pablo Barberá Birds of the Same Feather Tweet Together: Bayesian Ideal Point Estimation Using Twitter Data , 2015, Political Analysis.

[16]  Glenn Greenwald,et al.  No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State , 2014 .

[17]  Aristides Gionis,et al.  Quantifying Controversy in Social Media , 2015, WSDM.

[18]  Dong Zhou,et al.  Translation techniques in cross-language information retrieval , 2012, CSUR.

[19]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[20]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Co-word Maps and Topic Modeling: A Comparison from a User's Perspective , 2015, ArXiv.

[21]  M. Jacomy,et al.  ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm for Handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software , 2014, PloS one.

[22]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  Community detection in networks: A user guide , 2016, ArXiv.

[23]  Pablo Barberá,et al.  Understanding the Political Representativeness of Twitter Users , 2015 .

[24]  A. Arvidsson,et al.  Echo Chamber or Public Sphere? Predicting Political Orientation and Measuring Political Homophily in Twitter Using Big Data , 2014 .

[25]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Measuring User Influence in Twitter: The Million Follower Fallacy , 2010, ICWSM.

[26]  A. J. Morales,et al.  Measuring Political Polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of Venezuela , 2015, Chaos.

[27]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter , 2011, WSDM '11.

[28]  Antoine Boutet,et al.  What’s in Twitter, I know what parties are popular and who you are supporting now! , 2012, Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[29]  Wagner Meira,et al.  Antagonism Also Flows Through Retweets: The Impact of Out-of-Context Quotes in Opinion Polarization Analysis , 2017, ICWSM.

[30]  Mathieu Bastian,et al.  Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks , 2009, ICWSM.

[31]  S. Koseki The geographic evolution of political cleavages in Switzerland: A network approach to assessing levels and dynamics of polarization between local populations , 2018, PloS one.

[32]  Karen Spärck Jones A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval , 2021, J. Documentation.

[33]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: divided they blog , 2005, LinkKDD '05.

[34]  Panagiotis Takis Metaxas,et al.  What Do Retweets Indicate? Results from User Survey and Meta-Review of Research , 2015, ICWSM.

[35]  Joshua A. Tucker,et al.  Is Online Political Communication More Than an Echo Chamber? , 2022 .

[36]  B. Morton Fake news. , 2018, Marine pollution bulletin.

[37]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Quantifying social group evolution , 2007, Nature.

[38]  XieJierui,et al.  Overlapping community detection in networks , 2013 .

[39]  M. Callon,et al.  From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis , 1983 .

[40]  Myra Spiliopoulou,et al.  Community dynamics mining , 2006, ECIS.

[41]  Lyle H. Ungar,et al.  Beyond Binary Labels: Political Ideology Prediction of Twitter Users , 2017, ACL.

[42]  Igor Mozetic,et al.  Retweet networks of the European Parliament: evaluation of the community structure , 2016, Applied Network Science.

[43]  Anders Olof Larsson,et al.  Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign , 2012, New Media Soc..

[44]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[45]  Rushed Kanawati,et al.  Seed-Centric Approaches for Community Detection in Complex Networks , 2014, HCI.

[46]  E. Gallic,et al.  Recovering the French Party Space from Twitter Data , 2015 .

[47]  Derek Ruths,et al.  Classifying Political Orientation on Twitter: It's Not Easy! , 2013, ICWSM.

[48]  Hollyn M. Johnson,et al.  Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. , 1994 .

[49]  G. Tarde Les lois de l'imitation , 1903 .

[50]  Danah Boyd,et al.  Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter , 2010, 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[51]  M. Tomasello The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition , 2000 .

[52]  David Darmon,et al.  Followers Are Not Enough: A Multifaceted Approach to Community Detection in Online Social Networks , 2014, PloS one.

[53]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Predicting the Political Alignment of Twitter Users , 2011, 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Social Computing.

[54]  Sinan Aral,et al.  The spread of true and false news online , 2018, Science.

[55]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and coping with the post-truth era , 2017 .

[56]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  Overlapping community detection in networks: The state-of-the-art and comparative study , 2011, CSUR.

[57]  M. Huberty Can we vote with our tweet? On the perennial difficulty of election forecasting with social media , 2015 .

[58]  L’imitation humaine: Une synthèse de 50 années de recherche en psychologie sociale. , 2016 .