Trolljägarna
December 18, 2014 10:56 PM Subscribe
Swedish journalist Robert Aschberg, the television show Troll Hunter, Research Group and the ethics of exposing trolls.
The goal of Troll Hunter is not to rid the Internet of every troll. “The agenda is to raise hell about all the hate on the Net,” he says. “To start a discussion.” Back at the Troll Hunter office, a whiteboard organized Aschberg’s agenda. Dossiers on other trolls were tacked up in two rows: a pair of teens who anonymously slander their high school classmates on Instagram, a politician who runs a racist website, a male law student who stole the identity of a young woman to entice another man into an online relationship. In a sign of the issue’s resonance in Sweden, a pithy neologism has been coined to encompass all these forms of online nastiness: näthat (“Net hate”). Troll Hunter, which has become a minor hit for its brash tackling of näthat, is currently filming its second season.
"Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession."
George Washington
posted by clavdivs at 12:00 AM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
George Washington
posted by clavdivs at 12:00 AM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
I sort of feel that the true meaning of "Internet Troll" has been skewed too much as the media has attached it to what should more appropriately be called "Internet Assholes" or "Anonymous Harassers" (or something like that). I think we should take "Troll" back.
Honestly, this is one of those things like "it's not a vagina, it's a vulva!" where that ship dun sailed.
I've argued for not calling harassment/stalking/etc trolling on here before, and i think at this point it's just kind of too late. Harassment with the intent to harm not for the sake of amusement is just called the same thing as invading a furry messageboard and posting pictures of severed penises, or habbohotel, or whatever.
And it really sucks, i agree, because it gives cover to the malicious harassers who are out for blood, not just ragequits in an online game.
I guess i'd just rather people talk about it at all and let people draw their own conclusions of it being serious harassment and a serious problem, than have them not talk about it just because i'm disappointed in the language theyre using.
And hell, maybe this will change the meaning of troll to just mean the bad kind. Sort of like how gamergate and terrible neckbeards have made a lot of people not really want to call themselves gamers, online and off.
As of now though, this transitional period sucks. You get news stories and shit, and people googling "troll" getting the definition of it being "all for lulz" or whatever when that is very clearly not the case.
Basically, threatening to shoot up a school is not trolling. But if trolling starts to be associated with only that, i'm fine with it.
posted by emptythought at 1:45 AM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
Honestly, this is one of those things like "it's not a vagina, it's a vulva!" where that ship dun sailed.
I've argued for not calling harassment/stalking/etc trolling on here before, and i think at this point it's just kind of too late. Harassment with the intent to harm not for the sake of amusement is just called the same thing as invading a furry messageboard and posting pictures of severed penises, or habbohotel, or whatever.
And it really sucks, i agree, because it gives cover to the malicious harassers who are out for blood, not just ragequits in an online game.
I guess i'd just rather people talk about it at all and let people draw their own conclusions of it being serious harassment and a serious problem, than have them not talk about it just because i'm disappointed in the language theyre using.
And hell, maybe this will change the meaning of troll to just mean the bad kind. Sort of like how gamergate and terrible neckbeards have made a lot of people not really want to call themselves gamers, online and off.
As of now though, this transitional period sucks. You get news stories and shit, and people googling "troll" getting the definition of it being "all for lulz" or whatever when that is very clearly not the case.
Basically, threatening to shoot up a school is not trolling. But if trolling starts to be associated with only that, i'm fine with it.
posted by emptythought at 1:45 AM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
"troll" just means "anything I don't like" now. It's nearly meaningless.
posted by sidereal at 2:31 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by sidereal at 2:31 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
I think we should take "Troll" back.
Not worth the effort, and doomed to fail. See: hacker. But it is interesting to me that two words that started out with (to me, anyway) somewhat playful connotations got shifted towards the hateful over time.
I'm trying to find a way to say that this kind of doorstepping journalism is pretty low, without making it sound like I condone anonymous bullying. I guess I'd rather the police took it seriously than it became entertainment fodder.
posted by Leon at 2:31 AM on December 19, 2014
Not worth the effort, and doomed to fail. See: hacker. But it is interesting to me that two words that started out with (to me, anyway) somewhat playful connotations got shifted towards the hateful over time.
I'm trying to find a way to say that this kind of doorstepping journalism is pretty low, without making it sound like I condone anonymous bullying. I guess I'd rather the police took it seriously than it became entertainment fodder.
posted by Leon at 2:31 AM on December 19, 2014
The further you get into that article, the more interesting it becomes. It's not just about the low-hanging fruit of adults who bully kids:
One unlikely breakthrough came courtesy of -Hellekant’s habit of illegally parking his car all over Stockholm. Fredriksson’s team requested parking ticket records from the city. They were able to match the car’s location on certain days with time and GPS metadata on image files Hellekant posted under a pseudonym.
posted by Leon at 2:43 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
One unlikely breakthrough came courtesy of -Hellekant’s habit of illegally parking his car all over Stockholm. Fredriksson’s team requested parking ticket records from the city. They were able to match the car’s location on certain days with time and GPS metadata on image files Hellekant posted under a pseudonym.
posted by Leon at 2:43 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
I believe the problem lies in the regenerative attributes of the twenty sided die.
posted by clavdivs at 2:47 AM on December 19, 2014 [5 favorites]
posted by clavdivs at 2:47 AM on December 19, 2014 [5 favorites]
Ok, the lede's kinda buried here - TrollHunter's just the jumping-off point, the real meat is about researchgruppen.
Looking at Disqus' API, the Author record does indeed include an emailHash field ("Hashed email address of the user"). That's... appalling.
posted by Leon at 3:34 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Looking at Disqus' API, the Author record does indeed include an emailHash field ("Hashed email address of the user"). That's... appalling.
posted by Leon at 3:34 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Yup, it gets lots more interesting than troll hunting. The discussion about identifying users based on metadata is not new, but always worth visiting.
Research Group is currently deep into researching its next project, which is based on a huge database belonging to Flashback, Sweden’s largest general-interest forum….
Exposing Flashback users could prove to be even more explosive than outing Avpixlat commenters. Flashback users do not talk mainly about their hatred of immigrants (though some do) but about their love lives, video games, cooking, politics, drug habits—the whole spectrum of human interest. Last summer, Fredriksson sparked an online outcry when someone asked on Twitter if Research Group had the database and he replied in the affirmative. When asked why, he brusquely responded, “Because we can.”…
Research Group had “bragged about having stuff that would jeopardize vulnerable people’s secrets,” says Jack Werner, a journalist who covers online culture for the Swedish daily Metro and is a longtime Flashback user….
Fredriksson… says Flashback users can rest assured that Research Group is not interested in exposing anyone’s medical issues. “If they posted in the sex or drugs or health sections, then it’s just not interesting to us,” he says. “If they post in other parts of Flashback, where they put up slander about other people? It’s interesting to look at that.”
posted by Wilbefort at 6:29 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Research Group is currently deep into researching its next project, which is based on a huge database belonging to Flashback, Sweden’s largest general-interest forum….
Exposing Flashback users could prove to be even more explosive than outing Avpixlat commenters. Flashback users do not talk mainly about their hatred of immigrants (though some do) but about their love lives, video games, cooking, politics, drug habits—the whole spectrum of human interest. Last summer, Fredriksson sparked an online outcry when someone asked on Twitter if Research Group had the database and he replied in the affirmative. When asked why, he brusquely responded, “Because we can.”…
Research Group had “bragged about having stuff that would jeopardize vulnerable people’s secrets,” says Jack Werner, a journalist who covers online culture for the Swedish daily Metro and is a longtime Flashback user….
Fredriksson… says Flashback users can rest assured that Research Group is not interested in exposing anyone’s medical issues. “If they posted in the sex or drugs or health sections, then it’s just not interesting to us,” he says. “If they post in other parts of Flashback, where they put up slander about other people? It’s interesting to look at that.”
posted by Wilbefort at 6:29 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
This is the decision I made.: "I sort of feel that the true meaning of "Internet Troll" has been skewed too much as the media has attached it to what should more appropriately be called "Internet Assholes" or "Anonymous Harassers" (or something like that). I think we should take "Troll" back."
I was gonna say - we clearly need a new term, if they're going to co-opt the original meaning of "troll".
I propose: Imp.
Mischievous buggers - meaning no harm, maybe causing a little damage, but mostly just funning... The flame-war starters (but not the egregious evil ones could be Trimps (halfbreeds) or FlameImps or just FlameTrolls).
posted by symbioid at 7:44 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
I was gonna say - we clearly need a new term, if they're going to co-opt the original meaning of "troll".
I propose: Imp.
Mischievous buggers - meaning no harm, maybe causing a little damage, but mostly just funning... The flame-war starters (but not the egregious evil ones could be Trimps (halfbreeds) or FlameImps or just FlameTrolls).
posted by symbioid at 7:44 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
The actual article is much more interesting than the "what is the definition of troll?" discussion here. The researchers are serious about what they do, some of which seems legal (creating databases of comments and email addresses from publicly available information) and some of which seems not ("scraped data from a mobile payment platform with woefully inadequate security"), and seem to still be working out for themselves how best to present the information they put together.
This part is a bit depressing, though:
The stories came out a week before Sweden’s general election and had, by all appearances, no effect on the outcome. In fact, the Sweden Democrats won 13 percent of the vote, doubling their previous result to become the third-largest party in Sweden. Some even suggested that Expressen had helped the Sweden Democrats by making them seem like victims. Fredriksson says he’s simply happy to have helped push their public persona a little closer to what he believes they stand for in their heart of hearts: the ugly id that’s visible in Avpixlat’s comments sections every day. “I say, well, we just showed that they are racist, and people are apparently liking that,” he says. “So, good for them.”
posted by mediareport at 8:19 AM on December 19, 2014
This part is a bit depressing, though:
The stories came out a week before Sweden’s general election and had, by all appearances, no effect on the outcome. In fact, the Sweden Democrats won 13 percent of the vote, doubling their previous result to become the third-largest party in Sweden. Some even suggested that Expressen had helped the Sweden Democrats by making them seem like victims. Fredriksson says he’s simply happy to have helped push their public persona a little closer to what he believes they stand for in their heart of hearts: the ugly id that’s visible in Avpixlat’s comments sections every day. “I say, well, we just showed that they are racist, and people are apparently liking that,” he says. “So, good for them.”
posted by mediareport at 8:19 AM on December 19, 2014
I think we should take "Troll" back.
The problem is that for the general public, there is no meaningful difference between someone who is genuinely shitty and someone who is just really really good at pretending to be shitty for lulz.
Thinking on it, I'm not clear on the difference either.
posted by maxsparber at 8:21 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
The problem is that for the general public, there is no meaningful difference between someone who is genuinely shitty and someone who is just really really good at pretending to be shitty for lulz.
Thinking on it, I'm not clear on the difference either.
posted by maxsparber at 8:21 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Is it me, or is the rise of Neo-Nazi groups in so many EU countries even more troubling than what happened in the 1930s?
posted by tommasz at 8:27 AM on December 19, 2014
posted by tommasz at 8:27 AM on December 19, 2014
So they are sea-lioning trolls?
That's pure farmed gold that is.
posted by srboisvert at 8:36 AM on December 19, 2014
That's pure farmed gold that is.
posted by srboisvert at 8:36 AM on December 19, 2014
The stories came out a week before Sweden’s general election and had, by all appearances, no effect on the outcome. In fact, the Sweden Democrats won 13 percent of the vote, doubling their previous result to become the third-largest party in Sweden. Some even suggested that Expressen had helped the Sweden Democrats by making them seem like victims.
Political hit piece posing as journalism fails: film at 11:00.
posted by MikeMc at 10:52 AM on December 19, 2014
Political hit piece posing as journalism fails: film at 11:00.
posted by MikeMc at 10:52 AM on December 19, 2014
there is no meaningful difference between someone who is genuinely shitty and someone who is just really really good at pretending to be shitty for lulz.
Both groups are genuinely shitty. Being shitty for lulz is like being ironically racist.
posted by freecellwizard at 11:15 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Both groups are genuinely shitty. Being shitty for lulz is like being ironically racist.
posted by freecellwizard at 11:15 AM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
*Both groups are genuinely shitty. Being shitty for lulz is like being ironically racist.
I disagree to a point. Trolling can be thought of as a continuous spectrum that falls between bringing up topics that will purposefully derail a conversation, to being shitty for lulz. I feel that somewhere on this spectrum falls someone who is playing a devil's advocate in order to truly get a discussion going that will include some controversial viewpoints (maybe still for lulz but it has its merits).
I may be wrong though. As has been previously stated here, by myself and many others, the definition of troll has been stretched, skewed, and replaced over time.
posted by This is the decision I made. at 11:59 AM on December 19, 2014
I disagree to a point. Trolling can be thought of as a continuous spectrum that falls between bringing up topics that will purposefully derail a conversation, to being shitty for lulz. I feel that somewhere on this spectrum falls someone who is playing a devil's advocate in order to truly get a discussion going that will include some controversial viewpoints (maybe still for lulz but it has its merits).
I may be wrong though. As has been previously stated here, by myself and many others, the definition of troll has been stretched, skewed, and replaced over time.
posted by This is the decision I made. at 11:59 AM on December 19, 2014
> Trolling can be thought of as a continuous spectrum that falls between bringing up topics that will purposefully derail a conversation, to being shitty for lulz. I feel that somewhere on this spectrum falls someone who is playing a devil's advocate in order to truly get a discussion going that will include some controversial viewpoints
Trying to disentangle "trolling" from "harassment" based on the troll's motivation is futile. Trolling is a form of harassment, no matter what the troll's motivation may be, and has been so since at least the early 90's.
We all troll, to some extent, but the trolling spectrum is is much wider than just the range from malicious derails to lulz derails. For example, the person who stalks someone across multiple sites in order to harass and force them off the internet does not fall on that spectrum. Nor does the person who puts up a token fight in an online game with no intention of winning but simply to amuse themselves by forcing their opponent to expend resources overcoming them. Both are trolling.
You may prefer to draw a line and label one side "trolling" and the other "harassment" but there is actually no line to be drawn. Attempting to cordon off certain types of harassing interaction, e.g. "for the lulz" and define these as "trolling" and somehow OK simply creates endless edge cases.
That is why "I didn't mean any harm" is not a defense in workplace harassment cases. The offender does not get to specify whether or what injury was caused. How is it different if the harassment happens on the web?
I think that a lot of the ambivalence over trolling is simply because on the web you can't see the injuries you cause. It's just words on a screen.
From the FPP link, Flashback users can rest assured that Research Group is not interested in exposing anyone’s medical issues. “If they posted in the sex or drugs or health sections, then it’s just not interesting to us”.
I'm not reassured by this. My schadenfreude in seeing bigoted, racist trolls outed does not outweigh my suspicion that if they got hold of a juicy piece of sex, drug or health information on one of their targets, that information would be used somehow.
posted by Autumn Leaf at 3:29 PM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Trying to disentangle "trolling" from "harassment" based on the troll's motivation is futile. Trolling is a form of harassment, no matter what the troll's motivation may be, and has been so since at least the early 90's.
We all troll, to some extent, but the trolling spectrum is is much wider than just the range from malicious derails to lulz derails. For example, the person who stalks someone across multiple sites in order to harass and force them off the internet does not fall on that spectrum. Nor does the person who puts up a token fight in an online game with no intention of winning but simply to amuse themselves by forcing their opponent to expend resources overcoming them. Both are trolling.
You may prefer to draw a line and label one side "trolling" and the other "harassment" but there is actually no line to be drawn. Attempting to cordon off certain types of harassing interaction, e.g. "for the lulz" and define these as "trolling" and somehow OK simply creates endless edge cases.
That is why "I didn't mean any harm" is not a defense in workplace harassment cases. The offender does not get to specify whether or what injury was caused. How is it different if the harassment happens on the web?
I think that a lot of the ambivalence over trolling is simply because on the web you can't see the injuries you cause. It's just words on a screen.
From the FPP link, Flashback users can rest assured that Research Group is not interested in exposing anyone’s medical issues. “If they posted in the sex or drugs or health sections, then it’s just not interesting to us”.
I'm not reassured by this. My schadenfreude in seeing bigoted, racist trolls outed does not outweigh my suspicion that if they got hold of a juicy piece of sex, drug or health information on one of their targets, that information would be used somehow.
posted by Autumn Leaf at 3:29 PM on December 19, 2014 [1 favorite]
Trolling is a form of harassment, no matter what the troll's motivation may be, and has been so since at least the early 90's.
I'm not sure about this. Harassment, however widely defined, usually includes an act which is aggressive in nature. Trolling may, but not necessarily, be aggressive; it may also be done in a manner which provokes responses without attacking others or being forceful.
So I review my original spectrum analogy and propose a venn diagram visualization of the definition. :)
Upsetting someone by presenting an opposing viewpoint may cause them injuries (I've known people who get very upset and shut down when presented with facts which could be seen as emotional injuries) but this does not mean the action is harassment. That's why we have judges, juries, and dictionaries.
posted by This is the decision I made. at 6:27 PM on December 19, 2014
I'm not sure about this. Harassment, however widely defined, usually includes an act which is aggressive in nature. Trolling may, but not necessarily, be aggressive; it may also be done in a manner which provokes responses without attacking others or being forceful.
So I review my original spectrum analogy and propose a venn diagram visualization of the definition. :)
Upsetting someone by presenting an opposing viewpoint may cause them injuries (I've known people who get very upset and shut down when presented with facts which could be seen as emotional injuries) but this does not mean the action is harassment. That's why we have judges, juries, and dictionaries.
posted by This is the decision I made. at 6:27 PM on December 19, 2014
Honestly, that is a good take. differentiation of intention.
For example:
"Hey, Sweden!"
posted by clavdivs at 7:28 PM on December 19, 2014
For example:
"Hey, Sweden!"
posted by clavdivs at 7:28 PM on December 19, 2014
The Norwegian Trollhunter, Trolljegeren, is much, much more entertaining than the Swedish version.
posted by straight at 9:11 PM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
posted by straight at 9:11 PM on December 19, 2014 [2 favorites]
Interesting how much of this comes out of anti-fascism:
"Fredriksson is a member of a generation of Swedes known as “Generation 64,” who grew up tinkering with Commodore 64s in the 1980s and went on to revolutionize Sweden’s IT industry. His upbringing also coincided with the rise of a neo-Nazi movement in the 1990s, when he was a teenage punk rocker. He and his friends constantly clashed with a gang of skinheads in his small hometown in southern Sweden. “I was very interested in politics. I came to the conclusion that if I wanted to do politics I’d have to deal with the Nazi threat in some way,” he says."
So, there's a larger context here than just the American geek one.
Although, in my experience, geek communities have been easy for right-wing activists to "hack". For example, in the recent Gamergate fiasco, the movement got a second wind when a lot of right-wing extremists jumped in to help push it (e.g. James Delingpole).
The new generation of right-wing activists are often similar to internet trolls. For example, "journalists" like James O'Keefe, who use troll tactics to manufacture scandals and bully political enemies. And 4Chans /pol board was a breeding ground for neo-nazis for a long time (recently the founder of 4Chan kicked them out and they migrated to a new board - 8Chan, I think).
posted by lucien_reeve at 2:16 AM on December 20, 2014
"Fredriksson is a member of a generation of Swedes known as “Generation 64,” who grew up tinkering with Commodore 64s in the 1980s and went on to revolutionize Sweden’s IT industry. His upbringing also coincided with the rise of a neo-Nazi movement in the 1990s, when he was a teenage punk rocker. He and his friends constantly clashed with a gang of skinheads in his small hometown in southern Sweden. “I was very interested in politics. I came to the conclusion that if I wanted to do politics I’d have to deal with the Nazi threat in some way,” he says."
So, there's a larger context here than just the American geek one.
Although, in my experience, geek communities have been easy for right-wing activists to "hack". For example, in the recent Gamergate fiasco, the movement got a second wind when a lot of right-wing extremists jumped in to help push it (e.g. James Delingpole).
The new generation of right-wing activists are often similar to internet trolls. For example, "journalists" like James O'Keefe, who use troll tactics to manufacture scandals and bully political enemies. And 4Chans /pol board was a breeding ground for neo-nazis for a long time (recently the founder of 4Chan kicked them out and they migrated to a new board - 8Chan, I think).
posted by lucien_reeve at 2:16 AM on December 20, 2014
I suppose this might be the best place for these links :
59 International Organizations Call Upon UN to Remedy Human Rights Violations in Pre-Charge Detention of Wikileaks Publisher Julian Assange
UNHRC deeply critical of #Sweden's conduct in #Assange case (s. 36, 37, 38) (via)
BBC writer Thom Phipps advocates the murder of Julian Assange
Who's Afraid of Wikileaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research
posted by jeffburdges at 8:26 PM on January 9, 2015
59 International Organizations Call Upon UN to Remedy Human Rights Violations in Pre-Charge Detention of Wikileaks Publisher Julian Assange
UNHRC deeply critical of #Sweden's conduct in #Assange case (s. 36, 37, 38) (via)
BBC writer Thom Phipps advocates the murder of Julian Assange
Who's Afraid of Wikileaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research
posted by jeffburdges at 8:26 PM on January 9, 2015
« Older It ain't all bad | It's red, white, and hypnotic all over Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Beyond that though, this seems fairly interesting however with great power comes great responsibility. The subjects that are chosen to actively investigate may show some bias to certain issues while completely ignoring other issues that are just as, if not more, important.
I agree with this statement as well due to the influence public figures hold and the hypocrisy they may partake in anonymously.
"Research Group left it up to Expressen to choose what to report. If it had been his choice, he says, he would only have exposed politicians. “It could have been a much stronger story if they had stuck to public figures,” he says."
(Yay, my first comment on meta!)
posted by This is the decision I made. at 11:38 PM on December 18, 2014 [7 favorites]