Characterizing the 2016 Russian IRA influence campaign

Until recently, social media were seen to promote democratic discourse on social and political issues. However, this powerful communication ecosystem has come under scrutiny for allowing hostile actors to exploit online discussions in an attempt to manipulate public opinion. A case in point is the ongoing U.S. Congress investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election campaign, with Russia accused of, among other things, using trolls (malicious accounts created for the purpose of manipulation) and bots (automated accounts) to spread propaganda and politically biased information. In this study, we explore the effects of this manipulation campaign, taking a closer look at users who re-shared the posts produced on Twitter by the Russian troll accounts publicly disclosed by U.S. Congress investigation. We collected a dataset of 13 million election-related posts shared on Twitter in the year of 2016 by over a million distinct users. This dataset includes accounts associated with the identified Russian trolls as well as users sharing posts in the same time period on a variety of topics around the 2016 elections. We use label propagation to infer the users’ ideology based on the news sources they share. We are able to classify a large number of the users as liberal or conservative with precision and recall above 84%. Conservative users who retweet Russian trolls produced significantly more tweets than liberal ones, about 8 times as many in terms of tweets. Additionally, trolls’ position in the retweet network is stable overtime, unlike users who retweet them who form the core of the election-related retweet network by the end of 2016. Using state-of-the-art bot detection techniques, we estimate that about 5% and 11% of liberal and conservative users are bots, respectively. Text analysis on the content shared by trolls reveal that conservative trolls talk about refugees, terrorism, and Islam, while liberal trolls talk more about school shootings and the police. Although an ideologically broad swath of Twitter users were exposed to Russian trolls in the period leading up to the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, it is mainly conservatives who help amplify their message.

[1]  P. Metaxas,et al.  Social Media and the Elections , 2012, Science.

[2]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Bots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory content in online social systems , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Réka Albert,et al.  Near linear time algorithm to detect community structures in large-scale networks. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[4]  Philip N. Howard,et al.  Automation, Algorithms, and Politics| Automation, Big Data and Politics: A Research Review , 2016 .

[5]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Recognizing Contextual Polarity in Phrase-Level Sentiment Analysis , 2005, HLT.

[6]  Philip N. Howard,et al.  Bots and Automation over Twitter during the Second U.S. Presidential Debate , 2016 .

[7]  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.

[8]  R. Gibson,et al.  Does Cyber‐Campaigning Win Votes? Online Communication in the 2004 Australian Election , 2005 .

[9]  Piotr Sapiezynski,et al.  Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots , 2017, PloS one.

[10]  Arun Sundararajan,et al.  Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Detection of Promoted Social Media Campaigns , 2016, ICWSM.

[12]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Analyzing the Digital Traces of Political Manipulation: The 2016 Russian Interference Twitter Campaign , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[13]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Online Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization , 2017, ICWSM.

[14]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  BotOrNot: A System to Evaluate Social Bots , 2016, WWW.

[15]  David G. Rand,et al.  The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings , 2019, Manag. Sci..

[16]  David A. Shamma,et al.  Characterizing debate performance via aggregated twitter sentiment , 2010, CHI.

[17]  Damon Centola,et al.  The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment , 2010, Science.

[18]  Juliet E. Carlisle,et al.  Is Social Media Changing How We Understand Political Engagement? An Analysis of Facebook and the 2008 Presidential Election , 2013 .

[19]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Measuring social spam and the effect of bots on information diffusion in social media , 2017, ArXiv.

[20]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Social Bots Distort the 2016 US Presidential Election Online Discussion , 2016, First Monday.

[21]  AbdulMalik S. Al-Salman,et al.  Twitter turing test: Identifying social machines , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[22]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  'Senator, We Sell Ads': Analysis of the 2016 Russian Facebook Ads Campaign , 2018, Advances in Data Science.

[23]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Deep Neural Networks for Bot Detection , 2018, Inf. Sci..

[24]  Max Nanis,et al.  Socialbots: voices from the fronts , 2012, INTR.

[25]  Sara El-Khalili,et al.  Social media as a government propaganda tool in post-revolutionary Egypt , 2013, First Monday.

[26]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook , 2015, Science.

[27]  M. Bekafigo,et al.  Who Tweets About Politics? , 2013 .

[28]  Cameron Marlow,et al.  A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization , 2012, Nature.

[29]  B. Loader,et al.  NETWORKING DEMOCRACY? , 2011 .

[30]  Yamir Moreno,et al.  The Dynamics of Protest Recruitment through an Online Network , 2011, Scientific reports.

[31]  Sune Lehmann,et al.  SensibleSleep: A Bayesian Model for Learning Sleep Patterns from Smartphone Events , 2016, PloS one.

[32]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  Geographic and Temporal Trends in Fake News Consumption During the 2016 US Presidential Election , 2017, CIKM.

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

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

[35]  Zeynep Tufekci,et al.  Big Questions for Social Media Big Data: Representativeness, Validity and Other Methodological Pitfalls , 2014, ICWSM.

[36]  A. Bruns,et al.  The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics , 2011 .

[37]  Damon Centola An Experimental Study of Homophily in the Adoption of Health Behavior , 2011, Science.

[38]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Early detection of promoted campaigns on social media , 2017, EPJ Data Science.

[39]  Zeynep Tufekci,et al.  Social Media and the Decision to Participate in Political Protest: Observations From Tahrir Square , 2012 .

[40]  Christopher M. Danforth,et al.  Positivity of the English Language , 2011, PloS one.

[41]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Detecting and Tracking the Spread of Astroturf Memes in Microblog Streams , 2010, ArXiv.

[42]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  The rise of social bots , 2014, Commun. ACM.

[43]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  The Digital Evolution of Occupy Wall Street , 2013, PloS one.

[44]  Clay Shirky The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change , 2011 .

[45]  Tobias Höllerer,et al.  Botivist: Calling Volunteers to Action using Online Bots , 2015, CSCW.

[46]  Jos van Hillegersberg,et al.  Social Media and Political Participation: Are Facebook, Twitter and YouTube Democratizing Our Political Systems? , 2011, ePart.

[47]  P. Howard New Media Campaigns and the Managed Citizen , 2005 .

[48]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Disinformation and Social Bot Operations in the Run Up to the 2017 French Presidential Election , 2017, First Monday.

[49]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Evolution of online user behavior during a social upheaval , 2014, WebSci '14.

[50]  Joshua A. Tucker,et al.  The Critical Periphery in the Growth of Social Protests , 2015, PloS one.

[51]  D. Paulhus,et al.  Trolls just want to have fun , 2014 .

[52]  Fabrício Benevenuto,et al.  You followed my bot! Transforming robots into influential users in Twitter , 2013, First Monday.

[53]  Damon Centola Damon Centola Behavior An Experimental Study of Homophily in the Adoption of Health , 2011 .

[54]  Amos Azaria,et al.  The DARPA Twitter Bot Challenge , 2016, Computer.

[55]  Yamir Moreno,et al.  Broadcasters and Hidden Influentials in Online Protest Diffusion , 2012, ArXiv.

[56]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Truthy: mapping the spread of astroturf in microblog streams , 2010, WWW.

[57]  Philip N. Howard,et al.  Automation, Algorithms, and Politics| Political Communication, Computational Propaganda, and Autonomous Agents — Introduction , 2016 .

[58]  Fabrício Benevenuto,et al.  Reverse engineering socialbot infiltration strategies in Twitter , 2014, 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[59]  G. Enli,et al.  PERSONALIZED CAMPAIGNS IN PARTY-CENTRED POLITICS , 2013 .

[60]  J. Bollen,et al.  More Tweets, More Votes: Social Media as a Quantitative Indicator of Political Behavior , 2013, PloS one.

[61]  Owen Rambow,et al.  Sentiment Analysis of Twitter Data , 2011 .

[62]  Amy Beth Warriner,et al.  Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[63]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Detecting and Tracking Political Abuse in Social Media , 2011, ICWSM.

[64]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  The Geospatial Characteristics of a Social Movement Communication Network , 2013, PloS one.

[65]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  Political Polarization on Twitter , 2011, ICWSM.

[66]  Sinan Aral,et al.  Identifying Influential and Susceptible Members of Social Networks , 2012, Science.

[67]  Gábor Csárdi,et al.  The igraph software package for complex network research , 2006 .