Detecting Extremists Online: Examining Online Posting Behaviors of Violent and Non-Violent Right-Wing Extremists

Like most of us, violent extremists often leave a digital footprint behind. Researchers, practitioners, and policymakers raise questions about whether violent individuals can be identified online prior to their attacks offline based on their online posting behaviors. Despite ongoing concerns, few empirically grounded analyses have identified which online users have engaged in violent extremism offline and then assessed their digital footprints, and fewer analyses have identified differences in posting behaviors of those who share extreme ideological beliefs but are violent or non-violent in the offline world. This policy note highlights the importance of both identifying and examining the online behaviors of violent and non-violent extremists in preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) and provides researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with a number of recommendations for detecting and analyzing the online behaviors of violent and non-violent extremists in the future.

Who is the censor? Self-censorship of Russian journalists in professional routines and social networking

Today’s communicative environment, including the rise of social media, makes journalists perform publicly as both professionals and private citizens. In these circumstances, practices of self-limitation and self-censorship may extend to online behaviour. In this article, we analyse what makes journalists in public affairs media limit themselves in expression, both in editorial production and in online posting. We ask whether their self-censoring is related to personal, editorial, or external factors; whether political threats triumph over personal self-branding and professional/commercial reasons and whether these factors work differently in editorial and online behaviour; and whether journalists behave differently on different social networks. To formulate the answers, we use the results of a survey of 95 journalists from 51 Russian regions and seven in-depth interviews. Our results show that, in an organisationally weak journalistic community that operates in a restrictive environment, understanding of self-censorship differs significantly from that in Western democracies. It includes both self-limiting under pressures and personal-level ethical decisions that substitute professional codes of conduct. Moreover, for online posting and editorial work, there are different dominant ‘perceived censors’. Political threats remain the most significant of all external pressures both online and offline, but personal motives lead the decision-making in posting on social networks. Russia is characterised by platform-wide echo-chambering and high differentiation between users of Facebook and the Russia-based VK.com (formerly Vkontakte). We observe this difference in journalists’ descriptions of self-limitation on these networks.

Victimization in Cyberspace: Is It How Long We Spend Online, What We Do Online, or What We Post Online?

Prior research on cybercrime victimization has generally emphasized the linkage between the frequency or actual length of time individuals spend online engaging in certain activities and the risk of being victimized in cyberspace but has paid much less attention to what persons actually share or post online that increases the risk of online victimization. To address this gap, we appeal to the integrated lifestyle–routine activities theory in order to examine the relationships between the length of time one spends online (online frequency), specific activities or tasks one engages in while online (online activity), specific types of information one shares online (online posting), and seven specific forms of cybercrime victimization using a convenience sample of students. Results showed that one online frequency variable (internet hours), six online activity variables (banking, reading news, shopping, planning travel, socializing, and communicating with stranger), and three online posting variables (phone number, home address, and other info) were significantly related to five of the seven forms of cybercrime victimization (computer virus, harassment by nonstranger unwanted porn, sex solicitation, and phishing). Implications for our findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Digital self-harm: Prevalence, motivations and outcomes for teens who cyberbully themselves

This research report presents findings about the extent and nature of digital self-harm among New Zealand teens. Digital self-harm is broadly defined here as the anonymous online posting or sharing of mean or negative online content about oneself. The report centres on the prevalence of digital self-harm (or self-cyberbullying) among New Zealand teens (aged 13-17), the motivations, and outcomes related to engaging in this behaviour. The findings described in this report are representative of the teenage population of New Zealand by gender, ethnicity and age. Key findings are: Overall, 6% of New Zealand teens have anonymously posted mean or negative content online about themselves in the past year. Teenagers’ top reasons for this behaviour were: making a joke, wanting to show resilience, looking for friends’ sympathy, and seeking reassurance of friendship. By exploring the nature and extent of this behaviour, we are providing the online safety community, schools and parents with insights about a complex and, to some extent, hidden phenomenon involving New Zealand teens.

20 Years Later: Reflections on the CES Student Evaluation Case Competition

Since 1996 the Canadian Evaluation Society has held a case competition for college and university students. By 2016, a total of 1,132 students had participated. An online questionnaire was sent to 768 participants with available email addresses; eight additional participants entered the study after viewing an online posting. The questionnaire was completed by 112 former participants (response rate: 14%). Findings suggested that participating in the case competition was a positive experience that led to an appreciation of evaluation, increased teamwork skills and provided stronger resumes. Some indicated that participating influenced their choice of evaluation as a focus for their career.