Discursive objection strategies in online comments: Developing a classification schema and validating its training

TL;DR

This study analyzes online comment responses to harmful speech, identifying seven objection strategies and highlighting the prevalence of reputational attacks, to better understand grassroots moderation efforts.

Contribution

Developed a comprehensive classification schema for discursive objection strategies in online comments and validated it through analysis of large comment datasets.

Findings

Reputational attacks are the most common objection strategy.

Seven distinct discursive objection strategies were identified.

People employ diverse strategies to oppose harmful speech online.

Abstract

Most Americans agree that misinformation, hate speech and harassment are harmful and inadequately curbed on social media through current moderation practices. In this paper, we aim to understand the discursive strategies employed by people in response to harmful speech in news comments. We conducted a content analysis of more than 6500 comment replies to trending news videos on YouTube and Twitter and identified seven distinct discursive objection strategies (Study 1). We examined the frequency of each strategy's occurrence from the 6500 comment replies, as well as from a second sample of 2004 replies (Study 2). Together, these studies show that people deploy a diversity of discursive strategies when objecting to speech, and reputational attacks are the most common. The resulting classification scheme accounts for different theoretical approaches for expressing objections and offers a comprehensive perspective on grassroots efforts aimed at stopping offensive or problematic speech on campus.