Biased language commonly occurs around topics which are of controversial nature, thus, stirring disagreement between the different involved parties of a discussion. This is due to the fact that for language and its use, specifically, the understanding and use of phrases, the stances are cohesive within the particular groups. However, such cohesiveness does not hold across groups. In collaborative environments or environments where impartial language is desired (e.g. Wikipedia, news media), statements and the language therein should represent equally the involved parties and be neutrally phrased. Biased language is introduced through the presence of inflammatory words or phrases, or statements that may be incorrect or one-sided, thus violating such consensus. In this work, we focus on the specific case of phrasing bias, which may be introduced through specific inflammatory words or phrases in a statement. For this purpose, we propose an approach that relies on a recurrent neural networks in order to capture the inter-dependencies between words in a phrase that introduced bias. We perform a thorough experimental evaluation, where we show the advantages of a neural based approach over competitors that rely on word lexicons and other hand-crafted features in detecting biased language. We are able to distinguish biased statements with a precision of P=0.917, thus significantly outperforming baseline models with an improvement of over 30 . Finally, we release the largest corpus of statements annotated for biased language.
@cite_27 propose an unsupervised approach for determining the ideology of both users and content in a combined liberal-conservative latent space using Twitter data. They include features such as the surrounding network structure of users and information about content shared by users.
@cite_27
2768949389 2021715735 2538660910 68298479
People are shifting from traditional news sources to online news at an incredibly fast rate. However, the technology behind online news consumption promotes content that confirms the users» existing point of view. This phenomenon has led to polarization of opinions and intolerance towards opposing views. Thus, a key problem is to model information filter bubbles on social media and design methods to eliminate them. In this paper, we use a machine-learning approach to learn a liberal-conservative ideology space on Twitter, and show how we can use the learned latent space to tackle the filter bubble problem. We model the problem of learning the liberal-conservative ideology space of social media users and media sources as a constrained non-negative matrix-factorization problem. Our model incorporates the social-network structure and content-consumption information in a joint factorization problem with shared latent factors. We validate our model and solution on a real-world Twitter dataset consisting of controversial topics, and show that we are able to separate users by ideology with over 90 purity. When applied to media sources, our approach estimates ideology scores that are highly correlated(Pearson correlation 0.9) with ground-truth ideology scores. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of our model in real-world scenarios, by illustrating how the learned ideology latent space can be used to develop exploratory and interactive interfaces that can help users in diffusing their information filter bubble. This study integrates network and content analyses to examine exposure to cross-ideological political views on Twitter. We mapped the Twitter networks of 10 controversial political topics, discovered clusters - subgroups of highly self-connected users - and coded messages and links in them for political orientation. We found that Twitter users are unlikely to be exposed to cross-ideological content from the clusters of users they followed, as these were usually politically homogeneous. Links pointed at grassroots web pages e.g.: blogs more frequently than traditional media websites. Liberal messages, however, were more likely to link to traditional media. Last, we found that more specific topics of controversy had both conservative and liberal clusters, while in broader topics, dominant clusters reflected conservative sentiment. The widespread adoption of social media for political communication creates unprecedented opportunities to monitor the opinions of large numbers of politically active individuals in real time. However, without a way to distinguish between users of opposing political alignments, conflicting signals at the individual level may, in the aggregate, obscure partisan differences in opinion that are important to political strategy. In this article we describe several methods for predicting the political alignment of Twitter users based on the content and structure of their political communication in the run-up to the 2010 U.S. midterm elections. Using a data set of 1,000 manually-annotated individuals, we find that a support vector machine (SVM) trained on hash tag metadata outperforms an SVM trained on the full text of users' tweets, yielding predictions of political affiliations with 91 accuracy. Applying latent semantic analysis to the content of users' tweets we identify hidden structure in the data strongly associated with political affiliation, but do not find that topic detection improves prediction performance. All of these content-based methods are outperformed by a classifier based on the segregated community structure of political information diffusion networks (95 accuracy). We conclude with a practical application of this machinery to web-based political advertising, and outline several approaches to public opinion monitoring based on the techniques developed herein. Numerous papers have reported great success at inferring the political orientation of Twitter users. This paper has some unfortunate news to deliver: while past work has been sound and often methodologically novel, we have discovered that reported accuracies have been systemically overoptimistic due to the way in which validation datasets have been collected, reporting accuracy levels nearly 30 higher than can be expected in populations of general Twitter users. Using careful and novel data collection and annotation techniques, we collected three different sets of Twitter users, each characterizing a different degree of political engagement on Twitter - from politicians (highly politically vocal) to "normal" users (those who rarely discuss politics). Applying standard techniques for inferring political orientation, we show that methods which previously reported greater than 90 inference accuracy, actually achieve barely 65 accuracy on normal users. We also show that classifiers cannot be used to classify users outside the narrow range of political orientation on which they were trained. While a sobering finding, our results quantify and call attention to overlooked problems in the latent attribute inference literature that, no doubt, extend beyond political orientation inference: the way in which datasets are assembled and the transferability of classifiers.