In this paper, we propose an approach for the detection of clickbait posts in online social media (OSM). Clickbait posts are short catchy phrases that attract a user's attention to click to an article. The approach is based on a machine learning (ML) classifier capable of distinguishing between clickbait and legitimate posts published in OSM. The suggested classifier is based on a variety of features, including image related features, linguistic analysis, and methods for abuser detection. In order to evaluate our method, we used two datasets provided by Clickbait Challenge 2017. The best performance obtained by the ML classifier was an AUC of 0.8, an accuracy of 0.812, precision of 0.819, and recall of 0.966. In addition, as opposed to previous studies, we found that clickbait post titles are statistically significant shorter than legitimate post titles. Finally, we found that counting the number of formal English words in the given content is useful for clickbait detection.
Recently, @cite_11 identified hoaxes within Facebook based on the users who interacted with these hoaxes rather than the hoaxes' content. @cite_4 proposed a method for estimating the authenticity of online discussions based on several similarity functions of OSM accounts participating in an online discussion. They found that the similarity function with the best performance across all of the datasets was the bag-of-words.
@cite_4 @cite_11
2768563978 2607906563 2538541058 2039222427
In this paper, we propose an approach for estimating the authenticity of online discussions based on the similarity of online social media (OSM) accounts participating in the online discussion to known abusers and legitimate accounts. Our method uses similarity functions for the analysis and classification of OSM accounts. The proposed methods are demonstrated using Twitter data collected for this study and a previously published Arabic Honeypot dataset. The data collected during this study includes manually labeled accounts and a ground truth collection of abusers from crowdturfing platforms. Demonstration of the discussion topic's authenticity, derived from account similarity functions, shows that the suggested approach is effective for discriminating between topics that were strongly promoted by abusers and topics that attracted authentic public interest. In recent years, the reliability of information on the Internet has emerged as a crucial issue of modern society. Social network sites (SNSs) have revolutionized the way in which information is spread by allowing users to freely share content. As a consequence, SNSs are also increasingly used as vectors for the diffusion of misinformation and hoaxes. The amount of disseminated information and the rapidity of its diffusion make it practically impossible to assess reliability in a timely manner, highlighting the need for automatic hoax detection systems. As a contribution towards this objective, we show that Facebook posts can be classified with high accuracy as hoaxes or non-hoaxes on the basis of the users who "liked" them. We present two classification techniques, one based on logistic regression, the other on a novel adaptation of boolean crowdsourcing algorithms. On a dataset consisting of 15,500 Facebook posts and 909,236 users, we obtain classification accuracies exceeding 99 even when the training set contains less than 1 of the posts. We further show that our techniques are robust: they work even when we restrict our attention to the users who like both hoax and non-hoax posts. These results suggest that mapping the diffusion pattern of information can be a useful component of automatic hoax detection systems. There is an increasing amount of false claims in news, social media, and other web sources. While prior work on truth discovery has focused on the case of checking factual statements, this paper addresses the novel task of assessing the credibility of arbitrary claims made in natural-language text - in an open-domain setting without any assumptions about the structure of the claim, or the community where it is made. Our solution is based on automatically finding sources in news and social media, and feeding these into a distantly supervised classifier for assessing the credibility of a claim (i.e., true or fake). For inference, our method leverages the joint interaction between the language of articles about the claim and the reliability of the underlying web sources. Experiments with claims from the popular website snopes.com and from reported cases of Wikipedia hoaxes demonstrate the viability of our methods and their superior accuracy over various baselines. Display Omitted How 2.3 Facebook users consumed different information.Qualitatively different information is consumed in a similar way.Users more prone to interact with false claims are usually exposed to conspiracy rumors. In this work we study, on a sample of 2.3million individuals, how Facebook users consumed different information at the edge of political discussion and news during the last Italian electoral competition. Pages are categorized, according to their topics and the communities of interests they pertain to, in (a) alternative information sources (diffusing topics that are neglected by science and main stream media); (b) online political activism; and (c) main stream media. We show that attention patterns are similar despite the different qualitative nature of the information, meaning that unsubstantiated claims (mainly conspiracy theories) reverberate for as long as other information. Finally, we classify users according to their interaction patterns among the different topics and measure how they responded to the injection of 2788 false information. Our analysis reveals that users which are prominently interacting with conspiracists information sources are more prone to interact with intentional false claims.