Original citation: Webb, Helena, Jirotka, Marina, Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Housley, William, Edwards, Adam, Williams, Matthew, Procter, Robert N., Rana, Omer and Burnap, Pete. (2015) Digital wildfires : hyper-connectivity, havoc and a global ethos to govern social media. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 45 (3). pp. 193-201. Permanent WRAP url: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/75724 Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work of researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for- profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher statement: © 2015 This is the author’s version of the work. It is posted here for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2874239.2874267 A note on versions: The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the ‘permanent WRAP url’ above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/ Digital wildfires: hyper-connectivity, havoc and a global ethos to govern social media Helena Webb Bernd Carsten Stahl William Housley Marina Jirotka De Montfort University, Department of Adam Edwards University of Oxford, Department of Informatics Matthew Williams Computer Science Leicester, United Kingdom Cardiff University, School of Social Oxford, United Kingdom [email protected] Sciences [email protected] Cardiff, United Kingdom marina.jirotka.cs.ox.ac.uk [email protected] [email protected] Rob Procter Omer Rana [email protected] University of Warwick, Department of Pete Burnap Computer Science Cardiff University, School of Computer Science and Informatics Coventry, United Kingdom [email protected] Cardiff, United Kingdom [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT and describe four key mechanisms that currently govern social The last 5-10 years have seen a massive rise in the popularity of media content. As these mechanisms tend to be retrospective and social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr etc. individual in focus, it is possible that further governance practices These platforms enable users to post and share their own content could be introduced to deal with the propagation of content instantly, meaning that material can be seen by multiple others in proactively and as a form of collective behaviour. However ethical a short period of time. The growing use of social media has been concerns arise over any restrictions to freedom of speech brought accompanied by concerns that these platforms enable the rapid about by further governance. Empirical investigation of social and global spread of harmful content. A report by the World media practices and perspectives is needed before it is possible to Economic Forum puts forward the global risk factor of ‘digital determine whether new governance practices are necessary or wildfires’ – social media events in which provocative content ethically justifiable. spreads rapidly and broadly, causing significant harm. This provocative content may take the form of rumour, hate speech or inflammatory messages etc. and the harms caused may affect Categories and Subject Descriptors individuals, groups, organisations or populations. In this paper we K.4 [Computers and Society]: Public and Policy Issues – abuse draw on the World Economic Forum report to ask a central and crime involving computers, ethics, regulation. question: does the risk of digital wildfires necessitate new forms of social media governance? We discuss the results of a scoping exercise that examined this central question. Focusing on the UK General Terms context, we present short case studies of digital wildfire scenarios Management, Human Factors, Legal Aspects. Keywords Social media, governance, responsible research and innovation. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that 1. INTRODUCTION copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy The last 5-10 years have seen a massive rise in the popularity and otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, use of social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Instagram, Snapchat and Tumblr etc. A 2014 report prepared by ETHICOMP, September 2015, De Montfort University, Leicester, the UK’s independent regulator OFcom [1] found that over 80% United Kingdom. of British adults go online regularly and that 66% of these have a Copyright 2015 ACM 1-58113-000-0/00/0010 …$15.00. social media profile. Social media platforms enable users to post their own content – news, opinions, images etc. – which is then available to be seen instantly either publicly or by audiences selected by the user. Most of these platforms also have functions that allow users to forward some of the content they see, through shares or retweets etc. This content therefore has the capacity to be seen by multiple others across the globe in a short period of cause harm because it has negative consequences before there is time. an opportunity to correct it. For instance the spread of unverified This rapid spread of content via social media can offer undoubted content can damage the reputation of an individual – as in the societal benefits, such as the promotion of social cohesion false naming in 2012 of a senior UK politician in connection to through solidarity messages and humanitarian campaigns [2]. allegations of child abuse (see Case Study 1). It can also However as social media platforms have grown significantly in undermine the standing of commercial companies, organisations, popularity, concerns have also risen over their capacity to enable or institutions - such as in false reports of British Army failures in the rapid spread of harmful content. Reports of ‘cyber-bullying’, Iraq in 2009. Furthermore it can undermine social cohesion, for harassment and ‘shaming’ on social media have become instance by causing panic over apparent incidents of disease commonplace in popular media [3], whilst governments and other outbreaks and security threats or by reinforcing the ‘groupthink’ institutions have blamed platforms such as Twitter and Facebook of individuals who position themselves in networks separate from for enabling the spread of false rumours [4] and inciting violence the rest of society. [5] during times of tension. These concerns have led to calls for more effective regulation of digital social spaces [6] – for instance 2.2 Digital wildfires and the governance of through the criminalisation or restriction of certain kinds of user social media content. Inevitably however these calls are contradicted by other The WEF report describes digital wildfires as arising from the arguments that position the internet as a medium that supports and ‘misuse of an open and easily accessible system’. Social media encourages freedom of speech and therefore label any increased platforms are widely and freely available to many users across the regulation as unethical [7]. world and place relatively few constraints against provocative In this paper we take up these contemporary concerns over the content in the form of an unverified rumour, inflammatory propagation of content on social media and the appropriate message etc. Given the negative consequences that this spread of governance of digital social spaces. We draw on a 2013 report by provocative content can cause, the report asks whether digital the World Economic Forum (WEF) [8], which describes the wildfires can be prevented through effective governance. It notes global risk factor of ‘digital wildfires’ – social media events in that legal restrictions on freedom of speech are technically which provocative content of some kind spreads broadly and difficult to achieve internationally and ethically difficult to justify. rapidly, causing significant harm. We discuss the WEF’s report Instead it argues that as digital social spaces continue to evolve, further in Section 2 and highlight a central question arising from there is scope for the development of a ‘global digital ethos’ in it: does the risk of digital wildfires necessitate new forms of social which generators and consumers of social media adopt media governance? In Section 3 we present the findings of a responsible practices. The development and promotion of this scoping exercise conducted to begin addressing this central ethos are challenges that remain to be undertaken. question. Focusing on the UK context we present three short Case Studies of digital wildfire scenarios and then characterise the four 2.3 New practices towards a global ethos to key governance mechanisms relevant to the regulation of these govern social media? scenarios. We identify gaps within current governance and in The World Economic Forum’s description of digital wildfires Section 4 suggest potential further practices that might be adopted provides a useful means to conceptualise the risks posed by the to overcome them. We highlight ethical issues surrounding the propagation of provocative content on social media. Digital adoption and justification of any new governance mechanisms.