Those with -set:
(1) Philippine Sharevski, DEPAUL UNIVERSITY;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
(2) Benjamin Kessell, DEPAUL UNIVERSITY.
Link
Abstract and introduction
2 Internet and Social Media Activism
2.1 Hashtag Activism
2.2 hacktivism
3 Internet activism and misinformation
3.1 Operations of Miscrown Grassroots
3.2 Mainstream Misinformation Operations
4 hacktivism and misinformation
4.1 Research Questions and 4.2 Sample
4.3 Methods and Instrumentation
4.4 Hacktivists profiles
5 incorrect concept information and 5.1 antecedents in incorrect information
5.2 mental models of misinformation
6 active counting misinformation and 6.1 leakage, doxing, and consuming
6.2 Anti-Misinformation “Ops”
7 evolution of misinformation and 7.1 counter-misinformation tactics
7.2 Misinformation Literacy
7.3 Misinformation hacktivism
8 Discussion
8.1 Implications
8.2 Ethical Considements
8.3 Limitations and 8.4 jobs in the future
9 conclusions and references
8.1 Implications
The brand new misinformation, our findings display, is taking hacktivists, reprehending the hijacked discourse for the political and propagandistic suggestions. The response “Fight-Fire-with-Fire” —The leaks, doxing, and exhaust-even the one by one used by some of the participants in our sample, has not yet been desired [48]. Early evidence outside of the US shows that this orchestra works while the IT army leaks data from Russian organizations in response to the narration of the disinformation of troll farms [23].
The stability of hacktivists to follow the misinformers will surely have implications for modding content/user on social media, user participation, and future activism on the Internet in general. Moderating and content users on social media are, and still have, the response of major platforms to misinformation and public health information [108]. Alternative platforms such as GAB, Gettt, and Parler, seen as seeding grounds for this misinformation [133]On the other hand, never made, or currently doing, use any user content/moderation [107]. While content/user modeling motivates a move from mainstream to alt-platform [133]It remains to be seen if the depletion will have the same effect. Mainstream Social Media has had a mixed response to leaks and doxing in the past (eg. Wikileaks allowed [114] and hinders the leakage of Hunter Biden's laptop [28]), so it also adds uncertainty about and how to allow, moderated, or perhaps forced to move completely out of social media space.
Trolling and memes can still maintain popularity amid false information, however, the latest modes of social media participation such as short videos in Tiktok have opened new “facade” for both misinformers and the hacktivists. Tiktok is increasingly tested as the next “battlefield” of alternative narratives with evidence of misinformation in health and abortion [8, 112] and an individual engagement of at least one of the participants. It is recalled that the #opjane of Hacktivists took place in response to the abortion laws in prohibition on Texas and called “Incorrect Information-(Incorrect) Information” [38]. Tiktok says it makes a moder of misinterpretation of abortion information [123]But the evidence shows that it is LAX and is largely ineffective [14]Adding an additional incentive for transferring disinformation campaigns to this platform.
Tiktok is also the next platform for being active on the internet where hashtag activism has been added to videos that expand the development of news narratives, such as the scope of the Black Lives Matter movement and the Capitol's riot [72]. Tiktok presents content not only from viral hashtags but also their differences (e.g. [112]) So the threat of hashtag hijacking, co-opting, and counter hash tagging is inevitable materialize here as well. This particular ability is likely to allow for Deepfakes weapons to attach the Hashtag War in the near future, as they have appeared in misinformation about Covid-19 Pandmia in Tiktok [106]. All of these developments will definitely need a dynamic adaptation in the way of doing, dripping, and exhausting are carried out to not only avoid the downfall of Internet activeness and hacktivism, but prevent another hope of action that has brought false information sponsored by the state state en masse on social media in the first place [42].
8.2 Ethical Considements
The purpose of our study is not to generalize a population; Instead, to explore the relationship of contemporary hacktivists with misinformation. To avoid misleading readers, we did not report the percentages, names, or tools, tactics, and methods mentioned in the interviews. A full moral analysis of the proposed countering and/or use of misinformation is not in the scope of this paper, although we condemn any action of leaks, doxing, exposure, or rumors that can result in an individual injury in any form. We are careful in our study not to violate hacktivist aesthetics or to cause any negative action to our findings.
However, we will point out that our interaction with, rather than a disavowal of, hacktivists will help refine and re-evaluate some of the over-simpistic hacktivism pictures of toxic vigilantism, nihilism, and crime [39]. As we maintain that every operation – related to hacktivism is relevant or not – needs to be morally rational separately, we see reasonable to distinguish ideas and suggestions that hacktivists release in our study, as they are in line with Levy's hacker ethos [65] and the democratic vision of the Internet [43]. We also accept and support the idea of the “Fight Fire with Fire” action identified in our findings, as they aim to fill in a void resistance derived from a scale mismatch between institutional regulation, LAX participation policies and bent incentives of all platforms, as well as the experience of living with our misconduct [105].
