skip to main content
research-article

Analyzing Genetic Testing Discourse on the Web Through the Lens of Twitter, Reddit, and 4chan

Published:25 August 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Recent progress in genomics has enabled the emergence of a flourishing market for direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. Companies like 23andMe and AncestryDNA provide affordable health, genealogy, and ancestry reports, and have already tested tens of millions of customers. Consequently, news, experiences, and views on genetic testing are increasingly shared and discussed on social media. At the same time, far-right groups have also taken an interest in genetic testing, using them to attack minorities and prove their genetic “purity.”

In this article, we set to study the genetic testing discourse on a number of mainstream and fringe Web communities. We do so in two steps. First, we conduct an exploratory, large-scale analysis of the genetic testing discourse on a mainstream social network such as Twitter. We find that the genetic testing discourse is fueled by accounts that appear to be interested in digital health and technology. However, we also identify tweets with highly racist connotations. This motivates us to explore the connection between genetic testing and racism on platforms with a reputation for toxicity, namely, Reddit and 4chan, where we find that discussions around genetic testing often include highly toxic language expressed through hateful and racist comments. In particular, on 4chan’s politically incorrect board (/pol/), content from genetic testing conversations involves several alt-right personalities and openly anti-semitic rhetoric, often conveyed through memes.

References

  1. Reddit. 2020. Reddit Metrics. Retrieved from https://redditmetrics.com/history.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sofiane Abbar, Yelena Mejova, and Ingmar Weber. 2015. You tweet what you eat: Studying food consumption through Twitter. In Proceedings of the CHI.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. ADL. 2019. Pepe the Frog. Retrieved from https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/pepe-the-frog.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. AncestryDNA. 2019. Ancestry Company Facts. Retrieved from https://www.ancestry.com/corporate/about-ancestry/company-facts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Euan A. Ashley. 2016. Towards precision medicine. Nature Rev. Genet. 17, 9 (2016), 507.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Doron M. Behar, Mait Metspalu, Yael Baran, et al. 2013. No evidence from genome-wide data of a Khazar origin for the Ashkenazi jews. Human Biol. 85, 6 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Anat Ben-David and Ariadna Matamoros-Fernandez. 2016. Hate speech and covert discrimination on social media: Monitoring the facebook pages of extreme-right political parties in spain. Int. J. Commun. 10 (2016), 1167--1193.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Michael Bernstein, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, Drew Harry, Paul André, Katrina Panovich, and Greg Vargas. 2011. 4chan and /b/: An analysis of anonymity and ephemerality in a large online community. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Joe Bish. 2016. Vice News. Examining the Right Wing British Blowhards Using YouTube to Prove Everybody Wrong. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2qN4SMG.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. David M. Blei, Andrew Y. Ng, and Michael I. Jordan. 2003. Latent dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3 (2003), 993--1022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Vincent D. Blondel, Jean-Loup Guillaume, Renaud Lambiotte, and Etienne Lefebvre. 2008. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Stat. Mech. 2008, 10 (2008), P10008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Eric Boodman. 2016. White Nationalists Are Flocking To Genetic Ancestry Tests—But Many Don’t Like Their Results. Retrieved from https://read.bi/2DEaQYY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Katie Sullivan Borrelli. 2018. PressConnects. DNA Tales: These People Found Long-Lost or Never-Known Relatives. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2FxDye2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. David A. Broniatowski, Amelia M. Jamison, SiHua Qi, Lulwah AlKulaib, Tao Chen, Adrian Benton, Sandra C. Quinn, and Mark Dredze. 2018. Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate. Amer. J. Public Health 108, 10 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Pete Burnap, Matthew L. Williams, Luke Sloan, Omer Rana, William Housley, Adam Edwards, Vincent Knight, Rob Procter, and Alex Voss. 2014. Tweeting the terror: Modelling the social media reaction to the Woolwich terrorist attack. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 4, 1 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Timothy Caulfield and Amy L. McGuire. 2012. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: Perceptions, problems, and policy responses. Ann. Rev. Med. 63 (2012), 23--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Patricia A. Cavazos-Rehg, Melissa J. Krauss, Shaina J. Sowles, and Laura J. Bierut. 2015. Hey everyone, I’m drunk. An evaluation of drinking-related Twitter chatter. JSAD 76, 4 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Umashanthi Pavalanathan, Anirudh Srinivasan, Adam Glynn, Jacob Eisenstein, and Eric Gilbert. 2017. You can’t stay here: The efficacy of Reddit’s 2015 ban examined through hate speech. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 1 (2017), 31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Mattia Samory, Anirudh Srinivasan, and Eric Gilbert. 2017. The bag of communities. In Proceedings of the CHI. 3175--3187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Despoina Chatzakou, Nicolas Kourtellis, Jeremy Blackburn, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Gianluca Stringhini, and Athena Vakali. 2017. Measuring #GamerGate: A tale of hate, sexism, and bullying. In Proceedings of the WWW 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Despoina Chatzakou, Nicolas Kourtellis, Jeremy Blackburn, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Gianluca Stringhini, and Athena Vakali. 2017. Mean birds: Detecting aggression and bullying on Twitter. In Proceedings of the WebSci. ACM, 13--22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Peter Chow-White, Stephan Struve, Alberto Lusoli, Frederik Lesage, Nilesh Saraf, and Amanda Oldring. 2018. “Warren buffet is my cousin”: Shaping public understanding of big data biotechnology, direct-to-consumer genomics, and 23andme on Twitter. Info. Commun. Soc. 21, 3 (2018), 448--464.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Emily Christofides and Kieran O’Doherty. 2016. Company disclosure and consumer perceptions of the privacy implications of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. New Genet. Soc. 35, 2 (2016), 101--123.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Matthew Claxton. 2017. Abbotsford News. Former Langley Libertarian candidate detained in Italy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2PUIQWC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. E. W. Clayton, C. M. Halverson, N. A. Sathe, and B. A. Malin. 2018. A systematic literature review of individuals’ perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the united states. PLoS ONE 13, 10 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Glen Coppersmith, Mark Dredze, and Craig Harman. 2014. Quantifying mental health signals in Twitter. In Proceedings of the CLPsych.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Nick Couldry and Jun Yu. 2018. Deconstructing datafication’s brave new world. New Media Soc. 20, 12 (2018), 4473--4491.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. B. F. Darst, L. Madlensky, N. J. Schork, E. J. Topol, and Cinnamon S. Bloss. 2013. Perceptions of genetic counseling services in direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing. Clin. Genet. 84, 4 (2013), 335--339.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Thomas Davidson, Dana Warmsley, Michael Macy, and Ingmar Weber. 2017. Automated hate speech detection and the problem of offensive language. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Munmun De Choudhury and Sushovan De. 2014. Mental health discourse on Reddit: Self-disclosure, social support, and anonymity. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Munmun De Choudhury, Michael Gamon, Scott Counts, and Eric Horvitz. 2013. Predicting depression via social media. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Fabio Del Vigna, Andrea Cimino, Felice Dell’Orletta, Marinella Petrocchi, and Maurizio Tesconi. 2017. Hate me, hate me not: Hate speech detection on facebook. In Proceedings of the CEUR Workshop. 86--95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. DNARomance. 2018. Online Dating Based on Science. Retrieved from https://www.dnaromance.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Martin Ester, Hans-Peter Kriegel, Jörg Sander, Xiaowei Xu, et al. 1996. A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In Proceedings of the KDD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. FDA. 2017. FDA allows marketing of first direct-to-consumer tests that provide genetic risk information for certain conditions. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/newsevents/newsroom/pressannouncements/ucm551185.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Ari Feldman. 2017. 23andMe Backpedals on Khazar Theory But The “Alt-Right” Eats It Up, Anyway. Retrieved from http://forward.com/news/national/381500/23andme-backpedals-on-khazar-theory-but-the-alt-right-eats-it-up-anyway/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Joel Finkelstein, Savvas Zannettou, Barry Bradlyn, and Jeremy Blackburn. 2018. A quantitative approach to understanding online antisemitism. CoRR abs/1809.01644.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Claudia Flores-Saviaga, Brian C. Keegan, and Saiph Savage. 2018. Mobilizing the trump train: Understanding collective action in a political trolling community. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Antigoni Maria Founta, Despoina Chatzakou, Nicolas Kourtellis, Jeremy Blackburn, Athena Vakali, and Ilias Leontiadis. 2019. A unified deep learning architecture for abuse detection. In Proceedings of the WebSci. ACM, 105--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Amanda Froelich. 2014. True Activist. This is What Americans Will Look like by 2050. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2vpAIEH.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. GEDmatch. 2019. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEDmatch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Genetics Home Reference. 2019. What is the Precision Medicine Initiative? Retrieved from https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/precisionmedicine/initiative.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Genomics England. 2019. Retrieved from https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Melissa Gymrek, Amy L. McGuire, David Golan, Eran Halperin, and Yaniv Erlich. 2013. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science 339, 6117 (2013), 321--324.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Katie E. J. Hann, Madeleine Freeman, Lindsay Fraser, Jo Waller, et al. 2017. Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic testing for cancer risk among ethnic minority groups: A systematic review. BMC Public Health 17, 1 (2017), 503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Liz Harley. 2016. White House hosts Precision Medicine Initiative Summit. Retrieved from http://www.frontlinegenomics.com/white-house-hosts-precision-medicine-initiative-summit/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Amy Harmon. 2018. New York Times. Why White Supremacists Are Chugging Milk (and Why Geneticists Are Alarmed). Retrieved from https://nyti.ms/2Afg4Ho.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Helix. 2017. DNA Technologies 101 Genotyping vs. Sequencing, and What They Mean for You. Retrieved from https://blog.helix.com/dna-technologies-genotyping-vs-sequencing/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Gabriel Emile Hine, Jeremiah Onaolapo, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Nicolas Kourtellis, Ilias Leontiadis, Riginos Samaras, Gianluca Stringhini, and Jeremy Blackburn. 2017. Kek, Cucks, and God Emperor Trump: A measurement study of 4chan’s politically incorrect forum and its effects on the web. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Homa Hosseinmardi, Sabrina Arredondo Mattson, Rahat Ibn Rafiq, Richard Han, Qin Lv, and Shivakant Mishra. 2015. Analyzing labeled cyberbullying incidents on the instagram social network. In Proceedings of the SocInfo.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Internet Live Stats. 2017. Internet Users by Country (2016). Retrieved from http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users-by-country/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Anna Kasunic and Geoff Kaufman. 2018. “At least the pizzas you make are hot”: Norms, values, and abrasive humor on the subreddit r/RoastMe. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Haewoon Kwak, Changhyun Lee, Hosung Park, and Sue Moon. 2010. What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In Proceedings of the WWW.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Eric S. Lander, Lauren M. Linton, Bruce Birren, Chad Nusbaum, Michael C. Zody, Jennifer Baldwin, Keri Devon, Ken Dewar, Michael Doyle, William FitzHugh, et al. 2001. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409, 6822 (2001), 860--921.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Kristina Lerman, Megha Arora, Luciano Gallegos, Ponnurangam Kumaraguru, and David Garcia. 2016. Emotions, demographics and sociability in Twitter interactions. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Stephen Marche. 2016. The Guardian. Swallowing the Red Pill: A Journey to the Heart of Modern Misogyny. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2Chey99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Adam Marcus, Michael S. Bernstein, Osama Badar, David R. Karger, et al. 2011. Twitinfo: Aggregating and visualizing microblogs for event exploration. In Proceedings of the CHI.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Medical Press. 2018. U.S. Craze for DNA “heritage” Tests May Bolster Racism, Critics Warn. Retrieved from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-10-craze-dna-heritage-bolster-racism.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S. Corrado, and Jeff Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Proceedings of the NIPS.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Richard A. Mills. 2018. Pop-up political advocacy communities on reddit.com: SandersForPresident and the donald. AI Soc. 33, 1 (2018), 39--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Vishal Monga and Brian L. Evans. 2006. Perceptual image hashing via feature points: Performance evaluation and tradeoffs. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 15, 11 (2006), 3452–3465.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Robert S. Mueller. 2019. Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election. U.S. Department of Justice.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. NHGRI. 2018. The Cost of Sequencing a Human Genome. Retrieved from https://www.genome.gov/sequencingcosts/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Daiva E. Nielsen, Sarah Shih, and Ahmed El-Sohemy. 2014. Perceptions of genetic testing for personalized nutrition: A randomized trial of DNA-based dietary advice. Lifestyle Genom. 7, 2 (2014), 94--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. NIH. 2017. All of Us. Retrieved from https://allofus.nih.gov/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. NIH. 2019. What Is Genetic Ancestry Testing? Retrieved from https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/dtcgenetictesting/ancestrytesting.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Alicia L. Nobles, Caitlin N. Dreisbach, Jessica Keim-Malpass, and Laura E. Barnes. 2018. “Is this an STD? please help!” online information seeking for sexually transmitted diseases on Reddit. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Alexandra Olteanu, Carlos Castillo, Jeremy Boy, and Kush R. Varshney. 2018. The effect of extremist violence on hateful speech online. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Raphael Ottoni, Evandro Cunha, Gabriel Magno, Pedro Bernadina, Wagner Meira, and Virgilio Almeida. 2018. Analyzing right-wing youtube channels: Hate, violence and discrimination. In Proceedings of the WebSci.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Aaron Panofsky and Joan Donovan. 2017. When Genetics Challenges a Racist’s Identity: Genetic Ancestry Testing among White Nationalists. Retrieved from https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/7f9bc/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Aaron Panofsky and Joan Donovan. 2019. Genetic ancestry testing among white nationalists: From identity repair to citizen science. Soc. Studies Sci. 49.5 (2019), 653–681.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Antonis Papasavva, Savvas Zannettou, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Gianluca Stringhini, and Jeremy Blackburn. 2020. Raiders of the lost kek: 3.5 years of augmented 4chan posts from the politically incorrect board. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Michael J. Paul and Mark Dredze. 2011. You are what you tweet: Analyzing Twitter for public health. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Perspective. 2019. Retrieved from https://www.perspectiveapi.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Andelka M. Phillips. 2018. Data on Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing and DNA Testing Companies. Retrieved from https://zenodo.org/record/1183565.XyV4UyhKiUk.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Nugroho Dwi Prasetyo, Claudia Hauff, Dong Nguyen, Tijs van den Broek, and Djoerd Hiemstra. 2015. On the impact of Twitter-based health campaigns: A cross-country analysis of movember. In Proceedings of the EMNPL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. 2012. Privacy and Progress in Whole Genome Sequencing. Retrieved from https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcsbi/node/764.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Reddit. 2020. Retrieved from https://www.redditinc.com/press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Elspeth Reeve. 2016. Vice News—White Nonsense: Alt-right trolls are arguing over genetic tests they think prove their whiteness. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2DhP90h.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Elspeth Reeve. 2016. Vice News. White Nonsense. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2DhP90h.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Radim Řehůřek and Petr Sojka. 2010. Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. In Proceedings of the NLPFrameworks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. David Reich. 2018. New York Times. How Genetics Is Changing Our Understanding of “Race.” Retrieevd from https://nyti.ms/2pUxFOw.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Pedro H. Calais, Yuri A. Santos, Virgílio A. F. Almeida, and Wagner Meira. 2018. Characterizing and detecting hateful users on Twitter. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Raphael Ottoni, Robert West, Virgílio A. F. Almeida, and Wagner Meira. 2019. Auditing radicalization pathways on youtube. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1908.08313.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. Caitlin M. Rivers and Bryan L. Lewis. 2014. Ethical research standards in a world of big data. F1000Res. 3 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. Wendy D. Roth and Biorn Ivemark. 2018. Genetic options: The impact of genetic ancestry testing on consumers’ racial. Amer. J. Sociol. 124, 1 (2018), 150--184.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. Tina Hesman Saey. 2018. What I Actually Learned About My Family After Trying 5 DNA Ancestry Tests. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2zaUIKy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  88. Suyash S. Shringarpure and Carlos D. Bustamante. 2015. Privacy risks from genomic data-sharing beacons. Amer. J. Hum. Genet. 97, 5 (2015), 631--646.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. Leandro Silva, Mainack Mondal, Denzil Correa, Fabricio Benevenuto, and Ingmar Weber. 2016. Analyzing the targets of hate in online social media. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. David Sims. 2016. The Battle Over Adult Swim’s Alt-Right TV Show. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2g06PPK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. SoccerGenomics. 2018. Unlock The Player Within You. Retrieved from https://www.soccergenomics.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  92. SPLC. 2017. Male Supremacy. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/male-supremacy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. SPLC. 2019. Atomwaffen Division. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/atomwaffen-division.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. Liam Stack. 2017. New York Times. Alt-Right, Alt-Left, Antifa: A Glossary of Extremist Language. Retrieved from https://nyti.ms/2uGOTV5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. Leo G. Stewart, Ahmer Arif, and Kate Starbird. 2018. Examining trolls and polarization with a retweet network. In Proceedings of the WSDM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. Mike Thelwall, Kevan Buckley, Georgios Paltoglou, Di Cai, and Arvid Kappas. 2010. Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. J. Assoc. Info. Sci. Technol. 61, 12 (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. Twitter. 2019. Hateful Conduct Policy. Retrieved from https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Onur Varol, Emilio Ferrara, Clayton A. Davis, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2017. Online human-bot interactions: Detection, estimation, and characterization. In Proceedings of the ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Chris Welch and Sara Ganim. 2016. CNN. White Supremacist Richard Spencer: ’We reached tens of millions of people’ with video. Retrieved from https://cnn.it/2T7z5D8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  100. Queenie Wong. 2019. Facebook’s Privacy Mishaps: Zuckerberg Could Be Held Accountable, Report Says. Retrieved from https://cnet.co/2VDJUlu.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Savvas Zannettou, Tristan Caulfield, Jeremy Blackburn, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Michael Sirivianos, Gianluca Stringhini, and Guillermo Suarez-Tangil. 2018. On the origins of memes by means of fringe web communities. In Proceedings of the IMC.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  102. Savvas Zannettou, Tristan Caulfield, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Nicolas Kourtellis, Ilias Leontiadis, Michael Sirivianos, Gianluca Stringhini, and Jeremy Blackburn. 2017. The web centipede: Understanding how web communities influence each other through the lens of mainstream and alternative news sources. In Proceedings of the IMC.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  103. Zephoria. 2020. Top 10 Twitter Statistics—Updated February 2020. Retrieved from https://zephoria.com/twitter-statistics-top-ten/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Analyzing Genetic Testing Discourse on the Web Through the Lens of Twitter, Reddit, and 4chan

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!