On Twitter Purge: A Retrospective Analysis of Suspended Users

Abuse and spam in Twitter have long been a pressing issue, and in response, Twitter regularly purges (i.e., suspends in mass) accounts that violate Twitter Rules. However, there is no available information about the characteristics and activities of these regularly purged users. We have developed a novel and comprehensive measurement mechanism to identify millions of purged Twitter users and collect their tweets. We have identified 2.4M purged users and collected 1M tweets made by them over eight months. Using our dataset, we perform a retrospective analysis to characterize their account properties and behavioral activities. We analyze their tweet content to identify their role and abuse strategy over-time. Our analysis shows that the abuse on Twitter is pervasive globally and not confined in mere spamming. Alarmingly, more than 60% of the purged users survived on Twitter for more than two years. We observe that politics is a major theme among the purged users irrespective of language and location, and these politically motivated users spread controversial content consistently over time. However, the spammers reorient their agenda across time to participate in multiple marketing campaigns. We also discover interaction and associated communities among purged users. Our analysis sheds new light on the evolving nature of abuse in Twitter that can help researchers understanding the characteristics and behavior of emerging malicious users to develop an effective defense system.

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

[2]  Danai Koutra,et al.  BotWalk: Efficient Adaptive Exploration of Twitter Bot Networks , 2017, 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[3]  Eric Gilbert,et al.  The Internet's Hidden Rules , 2018, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction.

[4]  Svitlana Volkova,et al.  Identifying Effective Signals to Predict Deleted and Suspended Accounts on Twitter Across Languages , 2017, ICWSM.

[5]  Yongdong Zhang,et al.  Detection and Analysis of 2016 US Presidential Election Related Rumors on Twitter , 2017, SBP-BRiMS.

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

[7]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  B. Lewis,et al.  Ethical research standards in a world of big data , 2014, F1000Research.

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

[10]  M. Gentzkow,et al.  Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election , 2017 .

[11]  Brooke Foucault Welles,et al.  #GirlsLikeUs: Trans advocacy and community building online , 2018, New Media Soc..

[12]  Abdullah Mueen,et al.  BotCamp: Bot-driven Interactions in Social Campaigns , 2019, WWW.

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

[14]  Juan Echeverria,et al.  Discovery, Retrieval, and Analysis of the 'Star Wars' Botnet in Twitter , 2017, ASONAM.

[15]  Hossein Hamooni,et al.  DeBot: Twitter Bot Detection via Warped Correlation , 2016, 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM).

[16]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Twitter: who gets caught? observed trends in social micro-blogging spam , 2014, WebSci '14.

[17]  Huan Liu,et al.  The fragility of Twitter social networks against suspended users , 2015, 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[18]  Dawn Xiaodong Song,et al.  Suspended accounts in retrospect: an analysis of twitter spam , 2011, IMC '11.

[19]  Gianluca Stringhini,et al.  Who Let The Trolls Out?: Towards Understanding State-Sponsored Trolls , 2018, WebSci.

[20]  Padmini Srinivasan,et al.  A Postmortem of Suspended Twitter Accounts in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election , 2019, 2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

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

[22]  Munmun De Choudhury,et al.  Tie Formation on Twitter: Homophily and Structure of Egocentric Networks , 2011, SocialCom/PASSAT.

[23]  Qiang Cao,et al.  Uncovering Large Groups of Active Malicious Accounts in Online Social Networks , 2014, CCS.

[24]  Kate Starbird,et al.  Acting the Part , 2018, Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact..

[25]  Po-Ching Lin,et al.  A study of effective features for detecting long-surviving Twitter spam accounts , 2013, 2013 15th International Conference on Advanced Communications Technology (ICACT).

[26]  Guofei Gu,et al.  Analyzing spammers' social networks for fun and profit: a case study of cyber criminal ecosystem on twitter , 2012, WWW.

[27]  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).

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