Paper detail

Analyzing the "Sleeping Giants" Activism Model in Brazil

In 2020, amidst the COVID pandemic and a polarized political climate, the Sleeping Giants online activist movement gained traction in Brazil. Its rationale was simple: to curb the spread of misinformation by harming the advertising revenue of sources that produce this type of content. Like its international counterparts, Sleeping Giants Brasil (SGB) campaigned against media outlets using Twitter to ask companies to remove ads from the targeted outlets. This work presents a thorough quantitative characterization of this activism model, analyzing the three campaigns carried out by SGB between May and September 2020. To do so, we use digital traces from both Twitter and Google Trends, toxicity and sentiment classifiers trained for the Portuguese language, and an annotated corpus of SGB's tweets. Our key findings were threefold. First, we found that SGB's requests to companies were largely successful (with 83.85\% of all 192 targeted companies responding positively) and that user pressure was correlated to the speed of companies' responses. Second, there were no significant changes in the online attention and the user engagement going towards the targeted media outlets in the six months that followed SGB's campaign (as measured by Google Trends and Twitter engagement). Third, we observed that user interactions with companies changed only transiently, even if the companies did not respond to SGB's request. Overall, our results paint a nuanced portrait of internet activism. On the one hand, they suggest that SGB was successful in getting companies to boycott specific media outlets, which may have harmed their advertisement revenue stream. On the other hand, they also suggest that the activist movement did not impact the online attention these media outlets received nor the online image of companies that did not respond positively to their requests.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.