Online manipulation is a pressing concern for democracies, but the actions and strategies of coordinated inauthentic accounts, which have been used to interfere in elections, are not well understood. We analyze a five million-tweet multilingual dataset related to the 2017 French presidential election, when a major information campaign led by Russia called "#MacronLeaks" took place. We utilize heuristics to identify coordinated inauthentic accounts and detect attitudes, concerns and emotions within their tweets, collectively known as socio-linguistic characteristics. We find that coordinated accounts retweet other coordinated accounts far more than expected by chance, while being exceptionally active just before the second round of voting. Concurrently, socio-linguistic characteristics reveal that coordinated accounts share tweets promoting a candidate at three times the rate of non-coordinated accounts. Coordinated account tactics also varied in time to reflect news events and rounds of voting. Our analysis highlights the utility of socio-linguistic characteristics to inform researchers about tactics of coordinated accounts and how these may feed into online social manipulation.

Abstract We present a visual computing framework for analysing moral rhetoric on social media around controversial topics. Using Moral Foundation Theory, we propose a methodology for deconstructing and visualizing the when, where and who behind each of these moral dimensions as expressed in microblog data. We characterize the design of this framework, developed in collaboration with experts from language processing, communications and causal inference. Our approach integrates microblog data with multiple sources of geospatial and temporal data, and leverages unsupervised machine learning (generalized additive models) to support collaborative hypothesis discovery and testing. We implement this approach in a system named MOTIV. We illustrate this approach on two problems, one related to Stay‐at‐home policies during the COVID‐19 pandemic, and the other related to the Black Lives Matter movement. Through detailed case studies and discussions with collaborators, we identify several insights discovered regarding the different drivers of moral sentiment in social media. Our results indicate that this visual approach supports rapid, collaborative hypothesis testing, and can help give insights into the underlying moral values behind controversial political issues. Supplemental Material: https://osf.io/ygkzn/?view_only=6310c0886938415391d977b8aae8b749

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of public policy measures have been developed to curb the spread of the virus. However, little is known about the attitudes towards stay-at-home orders expressed on social media despite the fact that social media are central platforms for expressing and debating personal attitudes. To address this gap, we analyze the prevalence and framing of attitudes towards stay-at-home policies, as expressed on Twitter in the early months of the pandemic. We focus on three aspects of tweets: whether they contain an attitude towards stay-at-home measures, whether the attitude was for or against, and the moral justification for the attitude, if any. We collect and annotate a dataset of stay-at-home tweets and create classifiers that enable large-scale analysis of the relationship between moral frames and stay-at-home attitudes and their temporal evolution. Our findings suggest that frames of care are correlated with a supportive stance, whereas freedom and oppression signify an attitude against stay-at-home directives. There was widespread support for stay-at-home orders in the early weeks of lockdowns, followed by increased resistance toward the end of May and the beginning of June 2020. The resistance was associated with moral judgment that mapped to political divisions.