BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Genevieve Gorrell

Genevieve Gorrell contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
cs.CYSocial and Information Networks

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Local Media and Geo-situated Responses to Brexit: A Quantitative Analysis of Twitter, News and Survey Data

Societal debates and political outcomes are subject to news and social media influences, which are in turn subject to commercial and other forces. Local press are in decline, creating a ``news gap''. Research shows a contrary relationship between UK regions' economic dependence on EU membership and their voting in the 2016 UK EU membership referendum, raising questions about local awareness. We draw on a corpus of Twitter data which has been annotated for user location and Brexit vote intent, allowing us to investigate how location, topics of concern and Brexit stance are related. We compare this with a large corpus of articles from local and national news outlets, as well as survey data, finding evidence of a distinctly different focus in local reporting. National press focused more on terrorism and immigration than local press in most areas. Some Twitter users focused on immigration. Local press focused on trade, unemployment, local politics and agriculture. We find that remain voters shared interests more in keeping with local press on a per-region basis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

MP Twitter Abuse in the Age of COVID-19: White Paper

As COVID-19 sweeps the globe, outcomes depend on effective relationships between the public and decision-makers. In the UK there were uncivil tweets to MPs about perceived UK tardiness to go into lockdown. The pandemic has led to increased attention on ministers with a role in the crisis. However, generally this surge has been civil. Prime minister Boris Johnson's severe illness with COVID-19 resulted in an unusual peak of supportive responses on Twitter. Those who receive more COVID-19 mentions in their replies tend to receive less abuse (significant negative correlation). Following Mr Johnson's recovery, with rising economic concerns and anger about lockdown violations by influential figures, abuse levels began to rise in May. 1,902 replies to MPs within the study period were found containing hashtags or terms that refute the existence of the virus (e.g. #coronahoax, #coronabollocks, 0.04% of a total 4.7 million replies, or 9% of the number of mentions of "stay home save lives" and variants). These have tended to be more abusive. Evidence of some members of the public believing in COVID-19 conspiracy theories was also found. Higher abuse levels were associated with hashtags blaming China for the pandemic.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Online Abuse toward Candidates during the UK General Election 2019: Working Paper

The 2019 UK general election took place against a background of rising online hostility levels toward politicians and concerns about its impact on democracy. We collected 4.2 million tweets sent to or from election candidates in the six week period spanning from the start of November until shortly after the December 12th election. We found abuse in 4.46\% of replies received by candidates, up from 3.27\% in the matching period for the 2017 UK general election. Abuse levels have also been climbing month on month throughout 2019. Abuse also escalated throughout the campaign period. Abuse focused mainly on a small number of high profile politicians. Abuse is "spiky", triggered by external events such as debates, or certain tweets. Abuse increases when politicians discuss inflammatory topics such as borders and immigration. There may also be a backlash on topics such as social justice. Some tweets may become viral targets for personal abuse. On average, men received more general and political abuse; women received more sexist abuse. MPs choosing not to stand again had received more abuse during 2019.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Partisanship, Propaganda and Post-Truth Politics: Quantifying Impact in Online Debate

The recent past has highlighted the influential role of social networks and online media in shaping public debate on current affairs and political issues. This paper is focused on studying the role of politically-motivated actors and their strategies for influencing and manipulating public opinion online: partisan media, state-backed propaganda, and post-truth politics. In particular, we present quantitative research on the presence and impact of these three `Ps' in online Twitter debates in two contexts: (i) the run up to the UK EU membership referendum (`Brexit'); and (ii) the information operations of Russia-backed online troll accounts. We first compare the impact of highly partisan versus mainstream media during the Brexit referendum, specifically comparing tweets by half a million `leave' and `remain' supporters. Next, online propaganda strategies are examined, specifically left- and right-wing troll accounts. Lastly, we study the impact of misleading claims made by the political leaders of the leave and remain campaigns. This is then compared to the impact of the Russia-backed partisan media and propaganda accounts during the referendum. In particular, just two of the many misleading claims made by politicians during the referendum were found to be cited in 4.6 times more tweets than the 7,103 tweets related to Russia Today and Sputnik and in 10.2 times more tweets than the 3,200 Brexit-related tweets by the Russian troll accounts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Vindication, Virtue and Vitriol: A study of online engagement and abuse toward British MPs during the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 has given rise to malicious content online, including online abuse and hate toward British MPs. In order to understand and contextualise the level of abuse MPs receive, we consider how ministers use social media to communicate about the crisis, and the citizen engagement that this generates. The focus of the paper is on a large-scale, mixed methods study of abusive and antagonistic responses to UK politicians during the pandemic from early February to late May 2020. We find that pressing subjects such as financial concerns attract high levels of engagement, but not necessarily abusive dialogue. Rather, criticising authorities appears to attract higher levels of abuse. In particular, those who carry the flame for subjects like racism and inequality, may be accused of virtue signalling or receive higher abuse levels due to the topics they are required by their role to address. This work contributes to the wider understanding of abusive language online, in particular that which is directed at public officials.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access