Keywords: Radicalisation, Incubation, Extremist, Recruitment, Anonymity, Hate Speech
Abstract
It is the versatility of current social media applications and their overall compatibility with a large and varied range of mobile Internet devices, which has seen them become a popular and influential medium for sharing information in the current era. It is also one of the many reasons why social media applications are used in the recruitment of radicalised individuals for extremist organisations, which essentially drives the content of this paper. However, there is one other important purpose of this paper, and that is to help readers understand how social media is able to have such a formidable influence on online populations, and how radicalised groups are able to gauge radicalised behaviour in individuals in order to successfully lure them to their radicalised organisations.
It is the convenience and the accessibility to such a wide-range of mobile Internet devices, as well as a solid stream of Internet data throughout most parts of the world, that many experts like Dr Robin Thompson believe exacerbates the power of social media (Thompson, 2011). Thompson (2011) also states that it is the relentless and fluent streaming of ungoverned information in such an engaging, however, relatively anonymous space that make extremist regimes almost impenetrable, and the construction of radicalised groups unavoidable. Thompson (2011) believes, it is the ability organisations and individuals have to access social media every minute of every day, that makes it the perfect space to present anonymously radicalised opinions and theories on a global scale. In this conference paper, l will present the argument that: Social media platforms have the capacity to influence online users and propagate the gradual incubation of radicalised networks.
Radicalism is a phenomenon mainly projected as an extreme form of expression that many associate with extreme political, social and religious opposition (Galland and Muxel, 2020). Many experts insist that radicalised and extremist groups are often political offshoots, unable to attain democratic political standing. And furthermore, they are groups that feed from negative political imbalances with the ultimate desire of eventually breaking down political, social and cultural barriers (Thompson, 2011). To achieve this, radicalised groups will often form politically motivated movements in an attempt to spark upheaval within communities with strategically organised protests, and other extreme forms of anti-social behaviours (Galland and Muxel, 2020). These movements are largely propelled by propaganda and other forms of provocative broadcast through various forms of media organisations like the once controversial Aljazeera network, and extremist magazines like ‘Inspire’, which had once been widely circulated by al-Qaeda to manipulate and lure members from the English-speaking world into their extremist organisations (El-Kikhia and Jasperson, 2013; Thompson, 2011).
Since the start of the twenty-first century, the incubation and recruitment of radicalised individuals by extremist organisations like al-Qaeda and Islamic State (IS) had swollen profoundly due to the introduction of varied social media applications (Yasin, 2017; Thompson, 2011). Online recruitment masterminds like Muhammad Wanndy Mohamed Jedi (Wanndy) are known as ‘jihadist-celebrities’ in Malaysian radicalised circles due to their success in recruiting members online for terrorist cells all over the world (Haziq bin Jani, 2016, p. 15). Wanndy — a self-radicalised individual — who was initially recruited online by IS, has been profoundly recognised for his involvement in the ‘lone wolves’ movement: A movement where online individuals are recruited to commit sole acts of violence all over the world, ranging from low level street violence and robberies, to suicide bombings (Haziq bin Jani, 2016, p. 16). Wanndy, along with other well know radicalised individuals and organisations, would use social media platforms such as Facebook to recruit and incubate future terrorists. Haziq bin Jani (2016) suggests that social media profiles of radicalised individuals and groups would often be shut down due to the illicit and graphic content being displayed. However, he also claims that this was no deterrent due to a lacking of online security and the ease of which radicalised individuals and groups were able to re-invent themselves on new accounts; enabling them to again amass substantial following in a short period of time (Yasin, 2017; Haziq Bin Jani, 2016).
Jarred Prier suggests that social media platform, Twitter, is one of the latest weapons in the modern-day recruitment and incubation process for radicalised groups (Prier, 2017). This is mainly due to the social media giant’s ability to break down the parameters of distance and time, allowing users to communicate information more effectively at much greater speeds, and to wider audience (Mustafa and Hamzah, 2011 & Thompson, 2011). Prier (2017) also explains that radicalised organisations elect to use Twitter as their priority electronic medium to incubate and influence people into their organisations, because of its capacity to spread messages quickly around multiple networks with its powerful trending function. This particular function allows for the dissemination of such information over a multitude of social media platforms simultaneously using hyperlinks, links and hashtags (Prier, 2017). Many academics like Thomas Zeitzoff refer to the ease in which people can deliver and receive content and data so quickly as “Going viral” (Zeitzoff, 2017, p. 1972). This is one of the many attributes that sets social media platforms such as Twitter, apart from its mainstream predecessors. It is also why radicalised organisations, politicians and world leaders have become so dependent on social media platforms to proliferate their political agendas and ideologies (Thompson, 2011 & Zeitzoff, 2017). Some academics like Prier (2017) and Zeitzoff (2017, p. 1975), go as far as saying that the importance of Twitter’s advanced trending and microblogging capabilities, were seemingly as important to Trump’s political advances and achievements as his wealth: Particularly, when referring to his presidential victory in 2016. Because of this fact, some experts are referring to the current online era, as the “Twitter Revolution”.
Radicalised individuals and extremist organisations often use social media platforms to pursue users that are susceptible to believing suggestive and propagandist information. Users including children or those with underlying mental health issues or ‘Process disorders’ (a term coined by psychology experts referring to: Internet and social media addictions; computer gaming and gambling, and various other common addictions), are mostly at risk (Thompson, 2011; Hagedorn and Young, 2011, p. 251). Terrorist networks such as al-Qaeda use many forms of manipulated information to insight hatred in children and adolescents, from the screening of radicalised cartoons, and other methods like hate speech (Thompson, 2011; Chen et al., 2020). Hate speech is a term referred to by academics, for the specific classifications of negatively insighted utterance on social media platforms. Hate speech is just one of many linguistic tools used on social media platforms to propagate cause, and cultivate specific personnel for certain membership or qualification criteria needed, in order to carry out precise practices within radicalised organisations (Chen et al., 2020). Thompson (2011) explains that there is an articulated ability that coincides with the adoption and promotion of various ideologies, which provide subsequent recruits with an inherent feeling of importance, and in some cases, stature or identity amongst their peer members: A stature that is initially thrived upon in the normal social context. Some radicalised groups such as QAnon, which Ethan Zuckerman (2019) refers to as the Emergence of the Unreal – from his paper entitled (QAnon and the Emergence of the Unreal), will flood social media platforms with misleading and propagandist information to create bazaar and convoluted conspiracies, in order to encourage curiosity and intrigue as a way of luring potential members to their dogmatic regimes (Hannah, 2021).
In recent past, anonymity of such radicalised individuals and extremist groups has been sought in various ways, particularly in the online reality. Radicalised recruitment experts like Muhammad Wanndy Mohamed Jedi (Wanndy), who l have referred to earlier in this paper (like many other extremist and radicalised organisations), would use decentralised offline cells to avoid being detected, or to minimise the potential impact to the regime’s overall plans if a single cell happened to be detected or infiltrated by the authorities (Haziq bin Jani, 2016). Online, radicalised groups and individuals like Wanndy, would scope and heavily scrutinise the credibility of followers and friendships on social media platforms (like Facebook and Twitter), then invite suitable recruits to better encrypted social media platforms to avoid spies and other form of infiltration (Yasin, 2017). Yasin (2017) explains how radicalised groups would use a funnelling system as a way of measuring the vulnerability of individuals, and their likelihood of radicalisation. He also suggests that this same system allows radicalised organisations to gauge current levels of radicalisation and, if there is potential for recruits to become radicalised further (Yasin, 2017). It has been suggested by academics like Bodle (2013), that in more recent times — due to crackdowns by various governments on all social media platforms — online anonymity is slowly becoming a thing of the past. Social media giants such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, are being pressured to accumulate real-time user identification, and come down hard on those that don’t abide by the rules (Bodle, 2013). Facebook boss, Mark Zuckerberg, has stepped up the social media giant’s security by enforcing a nothing to hide – real name only policy, which many academics and human rights experts insist, is in complete violation of the (online participants) human rights, and that anonymity is needed to protect potential on and offline victims (Bodle, 2013). Others will argue that anonymity is a mask for radicalised individuals and groups to hide behind whilst spreading potentially harmful propaganda, planning attacks, inciting riots, and recruiting followers to their organisations (Kim et al., 2019; Chen et al., 2020).
Throughout this paper, l have been able to underline through detailed research, the potential radicalised groups have to grow online. I have given examples of both recruitment strategies and online incubation methods, as well as an example of one of the world’s most notorious online radicals, and how he was able to target particular online individuals. In the process of achieving all this we have been able to learn how influential social media is in a networking context, and how — not just radicalised groups — but various governments and world leaders have also been able to exploit various social media tools to propagate their own political agendas, and entice followers to their regimes. We touched on anonymity, and the methods radicalised groups use to continually stay anonymous long enough in the online environment, enabling them to incubate and screen recruits using what is referred to as the funnelling process. We have been able to learn about the various levels in the recruitment processes of radicalised individuals, and how radicalised groups were able to use social media, not only to develop and incubate individuals, but measure the resistance and potential or their recruits. This comprehensive and detailed analysis has led me to re-evaluate my thinking when it comes to social media platforms and their potential to generate and manipulate information, which is by no means restricted or governed to keep online users safe. Security on the Internet, whether you are cautious or not, has its potential pitfalls; Anonymity, as a form of security, can be potentially dangerous in itself. My prognosis is that regardless of whether or not you are communicating in an online or offline environment, understanding your surroundings, as well as being well educated on the potential dangers is what needs to be reflected. Likened to the methods of some radicalised groups — screening and choosing your friends and followers wisely is the first big step to online and offline safety. As for anonymity, (as in fake names and avatars) now becoming more and more obsolete due to government pressure on social media platforms, choosing your friends wisely in both online and offline worlds is seemingly your greatest defence.
References:
Bodle, R. (May 2013). The Ethics of Online Anonymity or Zuckerberg vs. “Moot”. Computers and Society, 43(1), 22-35.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2505414.2505417
Chen, R.-C., Hendry, Iriani, A., & Manongga, D. H. F. (2020). Mining Public Opinion on Radicalism in Social Media via Sentiment Analysis. International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control, 16(5), 1787-1800.
DOI: 10.24507/ijicic.16.05.1787
El-Kikhia, M. O., & Jasperson, A. E. (2012, March). The changing Face of Aljazeera – From “media Rogue” to “mainstream Voice” in Today’s social media- dominated Global World [paper presentation]. In Communiquer dans un monde de normes. L’information et la communication dans le enjeux contemporains de la “mondialisation”, France.
https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-00840616
Galland, O., & Muxel, A. (2020). “Chapter1 Radicalism in Question”. In Radical Thought among the Young: A Survey of French Lycée Students. Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004432369_002
Hagedorn, W. B., & Young, T. (APRIL 2011). Identifying and Intervening with Students Exhibiting Signs of Gaming Addiction and other Addictive Behaviors: Implications for Professional School Counselors. Professional School Counseling, 14(4), 250-260. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42732906
Hamzah, A., & Mustafa, S. E. (2011). Online Social Networking: A New Form of Social Interaction. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(2), 96-104.
DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2001.V1.17
Hannah, M. (2021). QAnon and the information dark age. First Monday, 26(2).
https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i2.10868
Haziq bin Jani, M. (November 2016). Malaysia’s ‘Jihadist – Celebrity’: Muhammad Wanndy Mohamed Jedi. Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses, 8(11), 15-19. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26351468
Jackson, N. A., & Lilleker, D. G. (2009). Building an Architecture of Participation? Political Parties and Web 2.0 in Britain. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(3-4), 232-250. DOI:10.1080/19331680903028438
Kim, K. K., Lee, A. R., & Lee, U.-K. (2019). Impact of anonymity on roles of personal and group identities in online communities. Information & Management, 56(1), 109-121.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.07.005
Prier, J. (WINTER 2017). Commanding the Trend: Social Media as Information Warfare. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 11(4), 50-85.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26271634
Thompson, R. L. (Winter 2011). Radicalization and the Use of Social Media. Journal of Strategic Security, 4(4), 167-190.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.4.4.8
Yasin, N. A. M. (July 2017). The Evolution of Online Extremism in Malaysia. Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses, 9(7). https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26351534
Zeitzoff, T. (2017). How Social Media Is Changing Conflict. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(9), 1970-1991.
DOI: 10.1177/0022002717721392
Zuckerman, E. (2019). QAnon and the Emergence of the Unreal. Journal of Design and Science, (6):Unreal, 1-14. DOI: 10.21428/7808da6b.6b8a82b9
Hey Nathan,
I am not a big or regualry gaming and neither am l frequently active on social media platfroms. However, l found this papaer to be very insightful where the thought of radicalisation online can be a confronting thought where l was totally unaware of it because of my lack of usage online. I feel that the idea of keeping people accountale online for their actions either spoken or physically demostarted to be of the upmost importance with our technolgical advancements in society today, well at least espicallly compared to social media now and even 5, 10 or 20 years ago!
I do hear of reaclisation groups online but never really understand it, perphaps thats due to never being told or explained the full story or given the correct answer. I feel whenever there is a chance for social media uses to be anonymity, it will give them an opportunity to create problems and cause neagtive infleuces towards people and our general society where social media is soon becoming the most influenctial content, particluar for the growing future generations.
Thanks for your papaer, great read!
Hey Nathan,
Great conference and examples being employed within to further demonstrate your argument!
I believe that social media and the many different applications are quite extreme and radical in how they function. Since the innovation and updates of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 within the applications have, the reach and the amount of usage of social media an individual can be broken down into different categories, the lack of privacy within social media and the supposable implements that have been placed to prevent from this from occurring. The security implements do not stop criminals or felons from downloading the app and wreaking harassment and havoc within, with the possibility of uploading confront and upsetting content. Another a crucial point to why social media itself a radical innovation is that all your data and content is saved, uploaded and secured online and it under constant scrutiny of other opinions and under the terms and conditions within this platform they actually hold the right to use your content in order to promote and update their services, it is quite confronting and scary if we review this. In order to put this in perspective, that is the equivalent of you creating a project and the owner of materials of the project stating that they own the project even though you had bought and based it all on your ideals and are able to destroy the project without your approval if it does not suit the right category. It leads to the question as to why do social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram not have security in place to stop questionable and chaotic individuals from using these applications?
Hello Che-Anne,
Thankyou for your contribution to “Radicalisation and Social Media”. Che-Anne, I think the points you make are spot on, and the idea that all our information being stored as a part of further developing content is something that is very scary and should be highly illegal. This to me is as bad as somebody viewing people’s mail (Offline) before it is delivered without authorisation – It is a Federal offence. I guess we have to ask ourselves now: Why do we allow / give Social Media platforms the ability to dictate content to be saved and shared? Why is it almost impossible to delete information from a single platform? The postal services of the world do not have these powers, so why do most social media platforms?
When we allow ourselves to think of RADICALISATION and all the tools extremists need to develop networks of applicable individuals in order to create social unrest; especially in the time leading in September 11, 2001… It is hard to comprehend how well orchastrated the way in such traumatic events were abled to be carried out, yet, social media platforms at that stage were only in deveolopmental stages and had little to no influence on such events. My point l am trying to get at, which you also touched on, is that we have – with the implimentation of social media networks – have literally extended the arm of radicalism, without so much of thinking of consequence. People may argue that there are “governing bodies” all over the world that deal with online – counter terrorism, but the reality is… This technology is still in its progressional stages and the discovery of radicals online is somewhat driven by circumstance not knowledge. So how do social media platforms keep us as parents and our children safe from the various infiltrators that scan the web? The scary answer to this is they don’t. It is an unspoken requirement of each individual to be assertive and teach their children the fundimental truths about online practices. Online gaming, inparticular, where children often collaborate with networks of individuals discussing how to blow things up and to execute the perfect ambush, for instance; Call of Duty, is one that springs to mind. These games somehow escape the radar of importance when it comes to recruiting online radicals. The more l discuss it throughout this conference, l begin to recognise just how much information my paper lacks, but l guess it is sometimes about getting the conversation started.
Thankyou Che-Anne for your thoughts on this interesting issue.
Regards
Nathan
The last few years have definitely provided some harsh lessons on the impact of online radicalisation. Your discussion here focused on Islamic radicalisation. I wanted to ask whether you think that the same patterns which facilitate that radicalisation (such as attempts to stay anonymous) also apply to the far right. ASIO reported in 2020 that far-right extremists made up 30-40% of their workload (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/threats-from-far-right-extremists-have-skyrocketed-in-australia-with-asio-comparing-tactics-to-is), a big jump from a few years ago. They also said that many of the methods the far right are using to recruit are similar to those used to recruit for ISIS. However, it seems like there might be some crucial differences, too – our mainstream media in Australia seems far more willing to give people from the far right a platform, for example, and we have several politicians who have pretty openly allied themselves with right-wing extremism.
Hello Sky,
You make some great points. I know that the examples within my paper are Islamic State focused. However, while l was writing the paper, my ultimate goal wasn’t to target any particular group… In fact, it was more or less intended to target various forms of radicalisation and how Social Media has made it easier for extremist groups to infiltrate and even coerce the already radicalised or those vulnerable to becoming radicalised. I don’t think that my paper properly achieved this, which to me was really frustrating. Personally, as an answer to your question, l don’t believe radicalised groups believe in, or care too much about anonymity, it is more the members within these groups. Individual anonymity within these groups is important for their continued success, and so no one individual member can be catagorically linked to the many other members. They all work under the same regime and for the same purpose or cause, but some may never meet or even know each others names. Social media itself has made this particular process within the realms of radicalised groups easy, as now one can be recruited on a platform where anonymity is its fundimental purpose and disguise is normal. It is easy to understand why ASIO is so busy trying to unravel various identities, when we have social media platfroms that protect them and their identity. The only thing that is real in these particular social media platforms are the dangers they breed and bring to society.
I agree with what you say about our mainstream media and politicians. Again, we hear about politicians aligning themselves to far-right organisations all the time, though as l mentioned earlier it is normally done trough an online space that cannot be traced back to any one individual. This is why Mark Zuckerberg’s idea to make anonymity a thing of the past is really important for public safety because it makes users accountable.
I hope l was able to answer the question you asked properly Sky. Thanyou for the attached article it is very interesting.Check-out this artical also.
Cheers,
Nathan
Hey Nathan,
I found your paper to be very interesting! To be honest as a heavy social media user I never really paid attention nor looked into the fact that there are radicalised groups on our social media applications. Through my research I have also found that social media platforms have brought on extensive changes to our lives and what we consume but taking the fact that the internet plays a role as a tool of radicalisation can create these extensive changes to be dangerous. I did question your section on the fact that Twitter has become the latest tool in the recruitment and incubation of these radicalised groups, this led me to do further research. I actually was surprised to find in their general guidelines and policies an article on the violent organisations policy which definitely confirmed to me that extremist groups have utilised twitter to pursue these violent processes (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/violent-groups). Though in my experience social media sites such as YouTube has promoted a network of radicals and international propagandists that is equally troubling which has only recently led to YouTube ramping up their community guidelines. All in all, I agree with the points you have covered especially with the fact that our media platforms a flooded with users, many of those who are underage and become susceptible to the information that extremists may produce, its quite the scary realisation!
Hello Em,
Thankyou for taking an interest in my paper. Em, l would have to say that at one point in time i was an avid user of social media. These days l have minimalised to the extent in which l do use these various sharing platforms, mainly due to laziness more than anything – They just don’t interest me – Or maybe the novalty has warn-off! However, Em, the more confrence papers l read, l am beginning to understand that social media is purposeful on so many levels and not just for “updating your status or write on a timeline”. There seems to be many groups and communities on social media platforms that have a legitimacy to connecting people for the right reasons. Something l had overlooked in the past.
Yes, l was also really surprised to learn about Twitter. (Thankyou for the link by the way, it is very interesting!) I really think though, that radicalised organisations are very clever in their recruiting stratergies, some of which l outlined in my paper such as the “Funneling system” whereby minimal information is actually given on less-encrypted sites like Twitter and Facebook. These particular platforms actually play more of an information gathering purpose, where individuals are then catagorised or guaged to their susceptability of be radicalised. Some may be very susceptable, some not so much… But, judging from research, these groups don’t need much of an indication to initiate a carefully strategised and evocative recruitment procedure.
You are correct in saying how scary this realisation is. We have to be realistic, understand and educate too Em, because if extremist groups like al-Qaeda can entice individuals through what was once a piece of media vision on say (The old) Aljezeera, or a magazine like “Inspire”… I can only imagine the persuasive impact they can have on individuals using social media.
It is very interesting though Em, and l do think that neccessary changes to the laws of anonymity may help curve this type of behaviour.
What do you think about the possible loss of anonymity online?
Cheers for your feedback.
Nathan
Hey Nathan,
I found your paper to be very interesting! To be honest as a heavy social media user I never really paid attention nor looked into the fact that there are radicalised groups on our social media applications. Through my research I have also found that social media platforms have brought on extensive changes to our lives and what we consume but taking the fact that the internet plays a role as a tool of radicalisation can create these extensive changes to be dangerous. I did question your section on the fact that Twitter has become the latest tool in the recruitment and incubation of these radicalised groups, this led me to do further research. I actually was surprised to find in their general guidelines and policies an article on the violent organisations policy which definitely confirmed to me that extremist groups have utilised twitter to pursue these violent processes (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/violent-groups). Though in my experience social media sites such as YouTube has promoted a network of radicals and international propagandists that is equally troubling which has only recently led to YouTube ramping up their community guidelines. All in all, I agree with the points you have covered especially with the fact that our media platforms a flooded with users, many of those who are underage and become susceptible to the information that extremists may produce, its quite the scary realisation!
Hey Nathan,
I found your paper to be very interesting! To be honest as a heavy social media user I never really paid attention nor looked into the fact that there are radicalised groups on our social media applications. Through my research I have also found that social media platforms have brought on extensive changes to our lives and what we consume but taking the fact that the internet plays a role as a tool of radicalisation can create these extensive changes to be dangerous. I did question your section on the fact that Twitter has become the latest tool in the recruitment and incubation of these radicalised groups, this led me to do further research. I actually was surprised to find in their general guidelines and policies an article on the violent organisations policy which definitely confirmed to me that extremist groups have utilised twitter to pursue these violent processes (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/violent-groups). Though in my experience social media sites such as YouTube has promoted a network of radicals and international propagandists that is equally troubling which has only recently led to YouTube ramping up their community guidelines. All in all, I agree with the points you have covered especially with the fact that our media platforms a flooded with users, many of those who are underage and become susceptible to the information that extremists may produce, its quite the scary realisation!
Hey Nathan,
This was an interesting read. You often hear spoken of in the media about how people are getting radicalised online, but never really gives any details or anything on how it actually happens, so I was interested to read more about that.
What are your thoughts on the loss of anonymity online these days? I mean we can definitely see it happening on Facebook, I had a friend who used to be called Genghis Khan on his profile but had to change it or lose it. Yet we can see on other platforms like Twitter where you don’t actually need to self-identify in order to share your thoughts. Do you think what Facebook is trying to do will actually help in stopping radicalisation online or just push it away to less-publicised platforms?
Hello Thomas,
Your question is one that many media commentators continue to debate, maybe not so much just in the area of radicalisation, but also within the confines of everyday public safety. I believe Thomas that we can have the best of both worlds. I think that we can reveal our true identities in an online space, but it is important to educate people how to correctly do so. I would have to say if l saw one of my children talking to Roger Rabbit online, l would be very concerned. However, l do believe there is a place for privacy, and we need to educate people so that we are able to find that balance. What Zuckerberg is doing is defying the boundaries of anonymity for the greater good. Losing anonymity will of coarse have its negatives, but as far as social practicality and safety is concerned, l think people need to be held accoutable for the misuse and their actions on such social media platforms. We only have to look at cyber bullying and the effect it is having on young children, as young as eight… Unfortunately, l don’t think social media is for children anyway, but that is purly my opinion only and hold no jugdement on those who think otherwise. However, having to prove identity online will eradicate of most these issues and lower the quantity of radicalised influences. And it would have to be accross the board… Not just Facebook alone, but right throughout the social media industry, so-to-speak.
Hope this has answered all of your questions. Hey, sorry it has taken time to get back to you. Feel free to let me know what you think about thoughts and opinions. Thanks again Thomas.
Cheers,
Nathan
I agree with you that there definitely needs to be accountability, I am just not sure whether it should be directed by the interests of a private company. Especially when it comes to Mark Zuckerberg, I think all we have seen is that he will respond to whatever he thinks is best in the interets of his company rather than what is better for the greater good. It is so tricky to know what the answer is, but I think it leans more towards an independent body/government oversight. Which also has it’s own problems but at least in a democratic country there should be a constant change and flow in ideas.
I also think children definitely should not be on social media. I have vague memories of there being a rule for at least 13 years old to be on Facebook, but I also know of people who get involved before that. But if we could just find a way to keep people off of social media until they can understand their own actions and what it means, it would make things so much easier.
I think the reason I ask about anonymity is because I am someone who goes to Reddit on a daily basis and a big idea of that platform unlike a lot of other places, is that everyone is anonymous and that is key to interacting there and I would hate to see that change.
And no worries on the reply, you got back with a day so you’re doing pretty good!
Hi Thomas,
Firstly, l agree that Mark Zuckerberg ultimate goal may not be in the best interest of mankind. However, l do like the idea of keeping people accoutable online for many reasons, not just radicalisation, but also bullying and the like.
It is interesting that you mention Reddit, which honestly l have had nothing to do with. I have recently read a conference paper written by Taj Powell “Social networking sites like Facebook and Reddit have amplified the voice of alt-right extremists and allowed for faster spread of misinformation.” It is definitely worth a read if you haven’t already.
I guess when it comes to anonymity, l think it has played a big part in the formation of social interaction on various platforms, which is absolutely okay. Each to their own, and some social media sites are going to view the effects or non-effects of anonymity in different ways. I do believe though where ever there is anonymity, there is a chance that people will exploit that and use it for the wrong reasons. I don’t necessarily think that anonymity should have to disappear all-together, though, maybe there could be a “compulsory” message that is displayed during the login process, of social media platforms, explaining the possible dangers of being in such an environment, then at least people are made more aware.
Cheers
Nathan
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for such a well-written paper on fascinating paper on such an interesting topic.
I don’t frequent Twitter much, but if I ever need to incubate and influence, I now know where to go! I do believe what Prier and Zeitzoff say; I think Trump was as surprised as any that he won his first election. He and many others underestimated the influence, reach, simplicity and low-cost effectiveness of Twitter. It suits his kind of rhetoric; he tends to make swift, sweeping, and concise claims about very complex subjects, which also serves the Twitter platform and the minds of his followers, in my opinion.
When you consider impressionable young people, who don’t fit into society or feel like they don’t belong, social media groups can satisfy a need for connection. Many immigrants feel this way because they are often treated as an outsider in their adopted country, but similarly, when they go ‘home’, they are treated as a foreigner there too. Even second-generation immigrant children grow up feeling a lack of connection to place. They, therefore, gravitate toward the homeland (that, in some cases, they have never visited) to find a place of belonging. And I think these feelings of a loss of identity and lack of home and belonging create fertile hunting grounds for radicalism. Did you find this mentioned in your research? The echo chambers of social media groups are worrying to consider from this perspective. As you have stated here, the sheer amount of content, the simplicity and instant access to information via devices are very alluring to people who feel alone.
Furthermore, radicalised groups have the digital nous and organisational skills (as most GenZs and younger do) to use gamification and curiosity tools to take advantage of ‘process disorders’ to spread (and drill in) their propaganda. If the kids are immersed in this day-in-day-out, it becomes normalised, and they will probably need interventions to undo such brainwashing.
Your paper does well to explain some of the tactics that radicals use, which is a valuable artifact to disseminate within the community. It also points out a paradox that digital communities face, when we all should have the right to free speech, anonymity if we prefer, but at the same time need platforms to be accountable, used for good and be safe for all users. Your conclusion and recommendations are excellent and well put. I agree that ‘choosing your friends wisely in both online and offline worlds is seemingly your greatest defence’.
Hopefully, more Internet users believe in freedom and truth than radicalisation or terrorism. We can band together to make the Web what we want it to be—rather than let the terrorists win by having our freedom regulated out of existence. The Internet has evolved so fast that academia, government and society has struggled to keep up. For me, there is still hope.
Cheers,
Eve
Thankyou Eve for your positive comments, and l apologise for the wait in reply. Believe it or not, it takes me time to figure these websites out. Ironic ha…
To tell you the truth, l was not really staisfied with the end result of my paper. It is a very interesting subject though, and l wasn’t sure whether l had done it enough justice. It is a topic definitely worth more conversation though of coarse.
I commend your points regarding loss of identity, and of course belonging being areas l could have probably honed in on a little further. I know that identity and belonging are certainly areas that impact and influence people in both reality streams, and these are areas, l would safely say, many associate with individuals when it comes to radicalisation. However, l probably have taken more to the impact radicalisation can have on those users that haven’t already inherited identity issues. Mainly, talking of those – like you mentioned – that are impacted more by the addiction side of social media and are suseptable to becoming alienated due to addiction rather than hatred. It is a mixture of curiousity + addiction + time, that may make some people more suseptable to change. I think all of these things combined can possibly also lead to identity issues, without already having identity issues due to displacement or sense of place, if that makes sense? You are most correct in saying that lack of home and belonging create fertile hunting grounds for radicalism (traditionally).
The powers of technology allow us to immerse ourselves very deeply in other realms or states of conscientiousness. The power video games have over our children, tv shows and movies, all take our children beyond the confines of reality and are able to keep them there, given the opportunity. We educate our children on what to believe and what not to believe, when it comes to television. But how often are we there when they use the internet?
People are suseptible to radicalism in so many ways, l guess sometimes it pays to look beyond the obvious.
Again Eve, sorry for the late response and thankyou for your contribution to this topic. You are amazingly insightful and generous with your kind words.
Cheers,
Nathan
No worries at all Nathan, you replied quicky as far as I’m concerned, so thank you!
I think you are being a little hard on yourself, I thought your paper was excellent. I wasn’t happy with mine either, but I think that it was mainly because for me, 2000 words aren’t enough to get all the points I wanted to make across thoroughly enough. Maybe you found the same?
I’m glad that you brought up the connection between radicalisation and addiction, curiosity and time, as it’s not something that I would have thought about before. I’m I have no experience with gaming culture whatsoever. And I agree, that these factors, and especially during a pandemic, can have serious impacts on impressionable people (or anyone really). Those who are struggling with a lack of identity can get sucked in by the radical’s tactics and even those who have a sense of identity, can lose it through the same type of grooming. And as you say, it’s not just individual radicals, or groups that can do harm, it is a cultural system of media, games and film that can also play a major role in forming ideas in people’s minds. So, the Internet, that has converged to include all these forms of media, as well as instant, cheap, easy and accessible communications, is a logical hub for radicals to harness.
I think your paper has scope to expand into a larger article about these issues, to highlight what you have found and how we do need to ‘look beyond’ the obvious when it comes to protecting our children. Is the area of forensic surveillance or counter terrorism an area of work that interests you?
Cheers,
Eve