Online trolls launch a personal attack on the author by following some of these steps: Call the author names, make fun of the author’s appearance, attempt to correct the author’s already correct grammar, accuse the author of nefarious motives, such as attention-seeking. Claim any studies are biased, especially when they’re comprehensive meta-analysis of every rigorous study ever done (designed to correct for bias), insult the author’s family for good measure.
Early incidents of trolling
[30] were considered to be the same as
flaming, but this has changed with modern usage by the news media to refer to the creation of any content that targets another person.
[31] The Internet dictionary NetLingo suggests there are four grades of trolling: playtime trolling, tactical trolling, strategic trolling, and domination trolling.
[32] The relationship between trolling and flaming was observed in open-access forums in California, on a series of modem-linked computers.
CommuniTree was begun in 1978 but was closed in 1982 when accessed by high school teenagers, becoming a ground for trashing and abuse.
[33] Some psychologists have suggested that flaming would be caused by
deindividuation or decreased self-evaluation:
the anonymity of online postings would lead to disinhibitionamongst individuals
[34] Others have suggested that although flaming and trolling is often unpleasant, it may be a form of normative behavior that expresses the
social identity of a certain user group
[35][36] According to Tom Postmes, a professor of social and organisational psychology at the universities of Exeter, England, and Groningen, The Netherlands, and the author of
Individuality and the Group, who has studied online behavior for 20 years, "Trolls aspire to violence, to the level of trouble they can cause in an environment. They want it to kick off. They want to promote antipathetic emotions of disgust and outrage, which morbidly gives them a sense of pleasure."
[33]
The practice of trolling has been documented by a number of academics as early as the 1990s. This included Steven Johnson in 1997 in the book, Interface Culture, and
Judith Donath in 1999. Donath's paper outlines the ambiguity of identity in a disembodied "
virtual community" such as
Usenet:
In the physical world there is an inherent unity to the self, for the body provides a compelling and convenient definition of identity. The norm is: one body, one identity ... The virtual world is different. It is composed of information rather than matter.
[37]
Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they – and the troll – understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group.
Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community. Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling – where the rate of deception is high – many honestly naïve questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations. Even if the accusation is unfounded, being branded a troll is quite damaging to one's online reputation.
[37]
Susan Herring and colleagues in "Searching for Safety Online: Managing 'Trolling' in a Feminist Forum" point out the difficulty inherent in monitoring trolling and maintaining freedom of speech in online communities: "harassment often arises in spaces known for their freedom, lack of censure, and experimental nature".
[38] Free speech may lead to tolerance of trolling behavior, complicating the members' efforts to maintain an open, yet supportive discussion area, especially for sensitive topics such as race, gender, and sexuality.
[38]
In an effort to reduce uncivil behavior by increasing accountability, many web sites (e.g.
Reuters,
Facebook, and
Gizmodo) now require commenters to register their names and e-mail addresses.
[39]
Corporate, political and special interest sponsored trolls
Investigative journalist
Sharyl Attkisson is one of several in the media who has reported on the increasing trend for organizations to utilize trolls to manipulate public opinion as part and parcel of an
Astroturfing initiative. Teams of sponsored trolls swarm a site to overwhelm any honest discourse and denigrate any who disagree with them.
[40] A 2012 Pew Center on the States presentation on
Effective Messaging included two examples of social media posts by a recently launched "rapid response team" dedicated to promoting fluoridation of community water supplies. That same presentation also emphasized changing the topic of conversation as a winning strategy.
[41]
A 2016 study for the
NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (NATO StratCom COE) on
hybrid warfare notes that the
Russian military intervention in Ukraine"demonstrated how fake identities and accounts were used to disseminate narratives through social media, blogs, and web commentaries in order to manipulate, harass, or deceive opponents."
[42](p3) The NATO report describes that a "
Wikipedia troll" uses a type of message design where a troll does not add "emotional value" to reliable "essentially true" information in re-posts, but presents it "in the wrong context, intending the audience to draw false conclusions." For example, information, without context, from
Wikipediaabout the
military history of the United States "becomes value-laden if it is posted in the comment section of an article criticizing Russia for its military actions and interests in Ukraine. The
Wikipedia troll is 'tricky', because in terms of actual text, the information is true, but the way it is expressed gives it a completely different meaning to its readers."
[42](p62) Unlike "classic trolls,"
Wikipedia trolls "have no emotional input, they just supply
misinformation" and are one of "the most dangerous" as well as one of "the most effective trolling message designs."
[42](pp70, 76) Even among people who are "emotionally immune to aggressive messages" and apolitical, "training in
critical thinking" is needed, according to the NATO report, because "they have relatively blind trust in
Wikipedia sources and are not able to filter information that comes from platforms they consider authoritative."
[42](p72) While Russian-language hybrid trolls use the
Wikipedia troll message design to promote
anti-Western sentiment in comments, they "mostly attack aggressively to maintain
emotional attachment to issues covered in articles."
[42](p75) Discussions about topics, other than
International sanctions during the Ukrainian crisis, "attracted very aggressive trolling" and became polarized according to the NATO report, which "suggests that in subjects in which there is little potential for re-educating audiences, emotional harm is considered more effective" for pro-Russian Latvian-language trolls.
[42](p76)
Psychological characteristics
Two studies published in 2013 and 2014 have found that people who are identified as trolls tend to have
dark personality traits and show signs of
sadism,
antisocial behavior,
psychopathy, and
machiavellianism.
[43][44] The 2013 study suggested that there are a number of similarities between anti-social and flame trolling activities
[43] and the 2014 study suggested that the noxious personality characteristics known as the "
dark triad of personality" should be investigated in the analysis of trolling, and concluded that trolling appears "to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism."
[44] Their relevance is suggested by research linking these traits to
bullying in both adolescents and adults. The 2014 study found that trolls operate as agents of chaos on the Internet, exploiting
hot-button issues to make users appear overly
emotional or
foolish in some manner. If an unfortunate person falls into their trap, trolling intensifies for further, merciless amusement. This is why novice Internet users are routinely admonished,
"Do not feed the trolls!" The 2013 study found that trolls often have a high expectation of what it means to be successful, which is higher than they are able to attain, and this results in them resenting others who think they are successful but who fall below their standards.
Concern troll
A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the troll claims to hold. The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sowfear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[45]
An example of this occurred in 2006 when Tad Furtado, a staffer for then-Congressman
Charles Bass (
R-
NH), was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass' opponent,
Democrat Paul Hodes, on several liberal
New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH". "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable.
[46][47] Hodes eventually won the election.
Although the term "concern troll" originated in discussions of online behavior, it now sees increasing use to describe similar behaviors that take place offline. For example, James Wolcott of
Vanity Fair accused a conservative
New York Daily News columnist of "concern troll" behavior in his efforts to downplay the
Mark Foley scandal. Wolcott links what he calls concern trolls to what
Saul Alinsky calls "Do-Nothings", giving a long quote from Alinsky on the Do-Nothings' method and effects:
These Do-Nothings profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change. They are known by their brand, 'I agree with your ends but not your means'.
[48]
The Hill published an op-ed piece by
Markos Moulitsas of the liberal blog
Daily Kos titled "Dems: Ignore 'Concern Trolls'". The concern trolls in question were not Internet participants but rather Republicans offering public advice and warnings to the Democrats. The author defines "concern trolling" as "offering a poisoned apple in the form of advice to political opponents that, if taken, would harm the recipient".
[49]
Troll sites
While many webmasters and forum administrators consider trolls a scourge on their sites[according to whom?], some websites welcome them. For example, a New York Times article discussed troll activity at 4chan and at Encyclopedia Dramatica, which it described as "an online compendium of troll humor and troll lore".[24] This site and others are often used as a base to troll against sites that their members can not normally post on. These trolls feed off the reactions of their victims because "their agenda is to take delight in causing trouble".[50]
Media coverage and controversy
Mainstream media outlets have focused their attention on the willingness of some Internet users to go to extreme lengths to participate in organized psychological harassment.
Australia
In February 2010, the Australian government became involved after users defaced the Facebook tribute pages of murdered children Trinity Bates and Elliott Fletcher. Australian communications minister
Stephen Conroy decried the attacks, committed mainly by 4chan users, as evidence of the need for greater Internet regulation, stating, "This argument that the Internet is some mystical creation that no laws should apply to, that is a recipe for anarchy and the wild west."
[51] Facebook responded by strongly urging administrators to be aware of ways to ban users and remove inappropriate content from Facebook pages.
[52] In 2012, the
Daily Telegraph started a campaign to take action against "Twitter trolls", who abuse and threaten users. Several high-profile Australians including
Charlotte Dawson,
Robbie Farah,
Laura Dundovic, and
Ray Hadley have been victims of this phenomenon.
[53][54][55]
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, contributions made to the Internet are covered by the
Malicious Communications Act 1988 as well as Section 127 of the
Communications Act 2003, under which jail sentences were, until 2015, limited to a maximum of six months.
[56] In October 2014, the UK's Justice Secretary,
Chris Grayling, said that "internet trolls" would face up to two years in jail, under measures in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill that extend the maximum sentence and time limits for bringing prosecutions.
[56][57] The House of Lords Select Committee on Communications had earlier recommended against creating a specific offence of trolling. Sending messages which are "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character" is an offence whether they are received by the intended recipient or not.
[58] Several people have been imprisoned in the UK for
online harassment.
[59]
Sean Duffy, who mocked the testimonial page of a dead teenager, was sentenced to eighteen weeks in prison and banned from using social networking sites for five years.
[60]Trolls of the testimonial page of Georgia Varley faced no prosecution due to misunderstandings of the legal system in the wake of the term trolling being popularized.
[61] In October 2012, a twenty-year-old man was jailed for twelve weeks for posting offensive jokes to a support group for friends and family of
April Jones.
[62] Later that month,
The Register said there was a viewpoint that "the
Crown Prosecution Service needs to reel in cops who are busily collaring trolls more or less at random ... usually responding to public pressure from media or social media".
[63]
United States
On March 31, 2010, the
Today Show ran a segment detailing the deaths of three separate adolescent girls and trolls' subsequent reactions to their deaths. Shortly after the suicide of high school student Alexis Pilkington, anonymous posters began performing organized psychological harassment across various message boards, referring to Pilkington as a "suicidal slut", and posting graphic images on her
Facebook memorial page. The segment also included an exposé of
a 2006 accident, in which an eighteen-year-old fatally crashed her father's car into a highway pylon; trolls emailed her grieving family the leaked pictures of her mutilated corpse.
[5]
In August 2012, the subject of trolling was featured on the
HBO television series The Newsroom. The character of
Neal Sampat encounters harassing individuals online, particularly looking at
4chan, and he ends up choosing to post negative comments himself on an
economics related forum. The attempt by the character to infiltrate trolls' inner circles attracted debate from media reviewers critiquing the series.
[6][7]
The publication of the 2015 non-fiction book
The Dark Net: Inside the Digital Underworld by
Jamie Bartlett, a journalist and a representative of the British
think tank Demos, attracted some attention for its depiction of misunderstood sections of the internet, describing interactions on encrypted sites such as those accessible with the software
Tor. Detailing trolling-related groups and the harassment created by them, Bartlett advocated for greater awareness of them and monitoring of their activities. Professor Matthew Wisnioski wrote for
The Washington Post that a "league of trolls, anarchists, perverts and drug dealers is at work building a digital world beyond the Silicon Valley offices where our era’s best and brightest have designed a Facebook-friendly" surface and agreed with Bartlett that the activities of trolls go back decades to the
Usenet 'flame wars' of the 1990s and even earlier.
[64]
India
Newslaundry covered the phenomena of "Twitter Trolling" in its
Criticles.
[65] It has also been characterizing twitter trolls in its weekly podcasts.
[66]
Examples
As reported on April 8, 1999, investors became victims of trolling via an online financial discussion regarding PairGain, a telephone equipment company based in California. Trolls operating in the stock's
Yahoo Finance chat room posted a fabricated
Bloomberg News article stating that an Israeli telecom company could potentially acquire PairGain. As a result, PairGain's stock jumped by 31%. However, the stock promptly crashed after the reports were identified as false.
[67]
So-called Gold Membership trolling originated in 2007 on
4chan boards, when users posted fake images claiming to offer upgraded 4chan account privileges; without a "Gold" account, one could not view certain content. This turned out to be a hoax designed to fool board members, especially newcomers. It was copied and became an
Internet meme. In some cases, this type of troll has been used as a scam, most notably on Facebook, where fake Facebook Gold Account upgrade ads have proliferated in order to link users to dubious websites and other content.
[68]
The case of
Zeran v. America Online, Inc. resulted primarily from trolling. Six days after the
Oklahoma City bombing, anonymous users posted advertisements for shirts celebrating the bombing on AOL message boards, claiming that the shirts could be obtained by contacting Mr. Kenneth Zeran. The posts listed Zeran's address and home phone number. Zeran was subsequently harassed.
[67]
courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
