Journal Home > Volume 4 , Issue 1

The rapid adoption of online social media platforms has transformed the way of communication and interaction. On these platforms, discussions in the form of trending topics provide a glimpse of events happening around the world in real-time. Also, these trends are used for political campaigns, public awareness, and brand promotions. Consequently, these trends are sensitive to manipulation by malicious users who aim to mislead the mass audience. In this article, we identify and study the characteristics of users involved in the manipulation of Twitter trends in Pakistan. We propose “Manipify”—a framework for automatic detection and analysis of malicious users in Twitter trends. Our framework consists of three distinct modules: (1) user classifier, (2) hashtag classifier, and (3) trend analyzer. The user classifier module introduces a novel approach to automatically detect manipulators using tweet content and user behaviour features. Also, the module classifies human and bot users. Next, the hashtag classifier categorizes trending hashtags into six categories assisting in examining manipulators behaviour across different categories. Finally, the trend analyzer module examines users, hashtags, and tweets for hashtag reach, linguistic features, and user behaviour. Our user classifier module achieves 0.92 and 0.98 accuracy in classifying manipulators and bots, respectively. We further test Manipify on the dataset comprising 652 trending hashtags with 5.4 million tweets and 1.9 million users. The analysis of trends reveals that the trending panel is mostly dominated by political hashtags. In addition, our results show a higher contribution of human accounts in trend manipulation as compared to bots.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Manipify: An Automated Framework for Detecting Manipulators in Twitter Trends

Show Author's information Soufia Kausar1Bilal Tahir1( )Muhammad Amir Mehmood1
Al-Khawarizmi Institute of Computer Science, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore 54890, Pakistan

Abstract

The rapid adoption of online social media platforms has transformed the way of communication and interaction. On these platforms, discussions in the form of trending topics provide a glimpse of events happening around the world in real-time. Also, these trends are used for political campaigns, public awareness, and brand promotions. Consequently, these trends are sensitive to manipulation by malicious users who aim to mislead the mass audience. In this article, we identify and study the characteristics of users involved in the manipulation of Twitter trends in Pakistan. We propose “Manipify”—a framework for automatic detection and analysis of malicious users in Twitter trends. Our framework consists of three distinct modules: (1) user classifier, (2) hashtag classifier, and (3) trend analyzer. The user classifier module introduces a novel approach to automatically detect manipulators using tweet content and user behaviour features. Also, the module classifies human and bot users. Next, the hashtag classifier categorizes trending hashtags into six categories assisting in examining manipulators behaviour across different categories. Finally, the trend analyzer module examines users, hashtags, and tweets for hashtag reach, linguistic features, and user behaviour. Our user classifier module achieves 0.92 and 0.98 accuracy in classifying manipulators and bots, respectively. We further test Manipify on the dataset comprising 652 trending hashtags with 5.4 million tweets and 1.9 million users. The analysis of trends reveals that the trending panel is mostly dominated by political hashtags. In addition, our results show a higher contribution of human accounts in trend manipulation as compared to bots.

Keywords: text classification, trend manipulation, bot classification, user analysis, manipulator detection

References(53)

[1]
[2]

A. Karami, L. S. Bennett, and X. He, Mining public opinion about economic issues: Twitter and the US presidential election, Int. J. Strateg. Decis. Sci., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 18–28, 2018.

[3]
T. Rosenstiel, J. Sonderman, K. Loker, M. Ivancin, and N. Kjarval, Twitter and the news: How people use the social network to learn about the world, https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/reports/survey-research/how-people-use-twitter-news/ , 2015.
[4]

O. Gencoglu and M. Gruber, Causal modeling of Twitter activity during COVID-19, Computation, vol. 8, no. 4, p. 85, 2020.

[5]
D. Assenmacher, L. Clever, J. S. Pohl, H. Trautmann, and C. Grimme, A two-phase framework for detecting manipulation campaigns in social media, in Proc. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2020, pp. 201–214.
DOI
[6]
N. Abu-El-Rub and A. Mueen, BotCamp: Bot-driven interactions in social campaigns, in Proc. World Wide Web Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2019, pp. 2529–2535.
DOI
[7]
E. Gallagher, Manipulating trends & gaming twitter, https://erin-gallagher.medium.com/manipulating-trends-\\gaming-twitter-6fd31714c06c, 2016.
[8]
B. Kollanyi, P. N. Howard, and S. C. Woolley, Bots and automation over Twitter during the US election, https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/posts/bots-and-automation-over-twitter-during-the-u-s-election/, 2016.
[9]

J. Uyheng and K. M. Carley, Bots and online hate during the COVID-19 pandemic: Case studies in the United States and the Philippines, Journal of Computational Social Science, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 445–468, 2020.

[10]
B. Nimmo, Measuring traffic manipulation on Twitter, https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/posts/measuring-traffic-manipulation-on-twitter, 2019.
[11]
T. Elmas, R. Overdorf, A. F. Özkalay, and K. Aberer, Ephemeral astroturfing attacks: The case of fake Twitter trends, in Proc. 2021 IEEE European Symp. on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), Vienna, Austria, 2021, pp. 403–422.
DOI
[12]

X. Dong and Y. Lian, A review of social media-based public opinion analyses: Challenges and recommendations, Technol. Soc., vol. 67, p. 101724, 2021.

[13]

S. Kausar, B. Tahir, and M. A. Mehmood, Push-to-trend: A novel framework to detect trend promoters in trending hashtags, IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 113005–113017, 2022.

[14]
A. Zubiaga, D. Spina, V. Fresno, and R. Martínez, Classifying trending topics: A typology of conversation triggers on Twitter, in Proc. 20th ACM Int. Conf. Information and Knowledge Management, Glasgow, UK, 2011, pp. 2461–2464.
DOI
[15]

Y. Zhang, X. Ruan, H. Wang, H. Wang, and S. He, Twitter trends manipulation: A first look inside the security of Twitter trending, IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 144–156, 2016.

[16]

H. U. Khan, S. Nasir, K. Nasim, D. Shabbir, and A. Mahmood, Twitter trends: A ranking algorithm analysis on real time data, Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 164, p. 113990, 2021.

[17]

R. Motamedi, S. Jamshidi, R. Rejaie, and W. Willinger, Examining the evolution of the Twitter elite network, Soc. Netw. Anal. Min., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1, 2020.

[18]
Z. Wood-Doughty, M. Smith, D. Broniatowski, and M. Dredze, How does Twitter user behavior vary across demographic groups? in Proc. Second Workshop on NLP and Computational Social Science, Vancouver, Canada, 2017, pp. 83–89.
DOI
[19]

U. Yaqub, S. A. Chun, V. Atluri, and J. Vaidya, Analysis of political discourse on Twitter in the context of the 2016 US presidential elections, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 613–626, 2017.

[20]
S. Kausar, B. Tahir, and M. A. Mehmood, Understanding the role of political micro-influencers in Pakistan, in Proc. 2021 Int. Conf. Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, Pakistan, 2022, pp. 31–36.
DOI
[21]

B. Tahir and M. A. Mehmood, Anbar: Collection and analysis of a large scale Urdu language Twitter corpus, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 4789–4800, 2022.

[22]

V. Gupta and R. Hewett, Real-time tweet analytics using hybrid hashtags on Twitter big data streams, Information, vol. 11, no. 7, p. 341, 2020.

[23]
D. M. Romero, B. Meeder, and J. Kleinberg, Differences in the mechanics of information diffusion across topics: Idioms, political hashtags, and complex contagion on Twitter, in Proc. 20th Int. Conf. World Wide Web, Hyderabad, India, 2011, pp. 695–704.
DOI
[24]
M. Jeon, S. Jun, and E. Hwang, Hashtag recommendation based on user tweet and hashtag classification on Twitter, in Proc. International Conference on Web-Age Information Management, Macau, China, 2014, pp. 325–336.
DOI
[25]
L. Posch, C. Wagner, P. Singer, and M. Strohmaier, Meaning as collective use: Predicting semantic hashtag categories on Twitter, in Proc. 22nd Int. Conf. World Wide Web, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013, pp. 621–628.
DOI
[26]
P. Ferragina, F. Piccinno, and R. Santoro, On analyzing hashtags in Twitter, in Proc. Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Oxford, UK, 2015, pp. 110–119.
DOI
[27]
S. Kausar, B. Tahir, and M. A. Mehmood, HashCat: A novel approach for the topic classification of multilingual Twitter trends, in Proc. 2021 Int. Conf. Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, Pakistan, 2022, pp. 212–217.
DOI
[28]
S. Needle, How does Twitter decide what is trending? https://rethinkmedia.org/blog/how-does-twitter-decide-what-trending, 2016.
[29]
Y. Hua, M. Naaman, and T. Ristenpart, Characterizing Twitter users who engage in adversarial interactions against political candidates, in Proc. 2020 CHI Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA, 2020, pp. 1–13.
DOI
[30]

Y. Hua, T. Ristenpart, and M. Naaman, Towards measuring adversarial Twitter interactions against candidates in the US midterm elections, Proc. Int. AAAI Conf. Web Soc. Media, vol. 14, pp. 272–282, 2020.

[31]

K. -C. Yang, O. Varol, C. A. Davis, E. Ferrara, A. Flammini, and F. Menczer, Arming the public with artificial intelligence to counter social bots, Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 48–61, 2019.

[32]
M. Mazza, S. Cresci, M. Avvenuti, W. Quattrociocchi, and M. Tesconi, RTbust: Exploiting temporal patterns for botnet detection on Twitter, in Proc. 10th ACM Conf. Web Science, Boston, MA, USA, 2019, pp. 183–192.
DOI
[33]
K. Makice, Twitter API: Up and Running: Learn How to Build Applications with the Twitter API. Sebastopol, CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, 2009.
[34]
T. Petersen, Mass scale manipulation of Twitter trends discovered, https://actu.epfl.ch/news/mass-scale-manipulation-of-twitter-trends-discov-2/, 2021.
[35]
[36]
M. Mazhar, Fake tweets, bots and molding narratives: A look into Pakistani Twitter, https://tribune.com.pk/story/2343627/1, 2022.
[37]
S. Popalzai and R. Jahangir, GrabYourKeyBoards: Inside Pakistan’s hashtag mills, https://www.dawn.com/news/1519963, 2019.
[38]
A. Baig, Misinformation warfare—#CivilWarinPakistan trends with 61% tweets coming from India; New Delhi contributes the highest number, https://digitalrightsmonitor.pk/misinformation-warfare-civilwarinpakistan-trends-with-61-tweets-coming-from-india-new-delhi-contributes-the-highest-number/, 2021.
[39]
A. Gotter, Best time to post on Twitter in 2021? https://adespresso.com/blog/best-time-to-post-on-twitter/, 2021.
[40]
Twitter’s platform manipulation and spam policy, https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/platform-manipulation, 2021.
[41]
P. Dangeti, Statistics for Machine Learning. Birmingham, UK: Packt Publishing Ltd, 2017.
[42]

P. G. Efthimion, S. Payne, and N. Proferes, Supervised machine learning bot detection techniques to identify social Twitter bots, SMU Data Science Review, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 5, 2018.

[43]

K. -C. Yang, O. Varol, P. -M. Hui, and F. Menczer, Scalable and generalizable social bot detection through data selection, Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 1096–1103, 2020.

[44]

F. Pérez-Hernández, S. Tabik, A. Lamas, R. Olmos, H. Fujita, and F. Herrera, Object detection binary classifiers methodology based on deep learning to identify small objects handled similarly: Application in video surveillance, Knowl. Based Syst., vol. 194, p. 105590, 2020.

[45]

T. Takenouchi and S. Ishii, Binary classifiers ensemble based on Bregman divergence for multi-class classification, Neurocomputing, vol. 273, pp. 424–434, 2018.

[46]
K. Lee, D. Palsetia, R. Narayanan, M. M. A. Patwary, A. Agrawal, and A. Choudhary, Twitter trending topic classification, in Proc. 2011 IEEE 11th Int. Conf. Data Mining Workshops, Vancouver, Canada, 2012, pp. 251–258.
DOI
[47]

P. Sheldon, E. Herzfeldt, and P. A. Rauschnabel, Culture and social media: The relationship between cultural values and hashtagging styles, Behav. Inf. Technol., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 758–770, 2020.

[48]
S. Cresci, R. D. Pietro, M. Petrocchi, A. Spognardi, and M. Tesconi, The paradigm-shift of social spambots: Evidence, theories, and tools for the arms race, in Proc. 26th Int. Conf. World Wide Web Companion, Perth, Australia, 2017, pp. 963–972.
DOI
[49]

R. Shukla, A. Sinha, and A. Chaudhary, TweezBot: An AI-driven online media bot identification algorithm for twitter social networks, Electronics, vol. 11, no. 5, p. 743, 2022.

[50]

V. S. Subrahmanian, A. Azaria, S. Durst, V. Kagan, A. Galstyan, K. Lerman, L. Zhu, E. Ferrara, A. Flammini, and F. Menczer, The DARPA Twitter bot challenge, Computer, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 38–46, 2016.

[51]
F. Abdulrahman and A. Subedar, How much to fake a trend on Twitter?—BBC news, https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-43218939, 2018.
[52]
H. K. Evans, S. Smith, A. Gonzales, and K. Strouse, Mudslinging on Twitter during the 2014 election, Soc. Media + Soc., doi: 10.1177/2056305117704408.
DOI
[53]
Z. Gilani, L. Wang, J. Crowcroft, M. Almeida, and R. Farahbakhsh, Stweeler: A framework for Twitter bot analysis, in Proc. 25th Int. Conference Companion on World Wide Web, Montréal, Canada, 2016, pp. 37–38.
DOI
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 16 November 2022
Revised: 23 February 2023
Accepted: 13 April 2023
Published: 30 March 2023
Issue date: March 2023

Copyright

© The author(s) 2023.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan and Ministry of Planning Development and Reforms under National Center in Big Data and Cloud Computing.

Rights and permissions

The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Return