Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Reporting, Reviewing, and Responding to Harassment on Twitter

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1505.03359 v1 pith:IS5K4GUH submitted 2015-05-13 cs.SI cs.CY

classification cs.SIcs.CY
keywords harassmenttwitterreportscontentreportingaccountactionauthorized
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

When people experience harassment online, from individual threats or invective to coordinated campaigns of harassment, they have the option to report the harassers and content to the platform where the harassment has occurred. Platforms then evaluate harassment reports against terms of use and other policies to decide whether to remove content or take action against the alleged harasser--or not. On Twitter, harassing accounts can be deleted entirely, suspended (with content made unavailable pending appeal or specific changes), or sent a warning. Some platforms, including Twitter and YouTube, grant authorized reporters or trusted flaggers special privileges to identify and report inappropriate content on behalf of others. In November 2014, Twitter granted Women, Action, and the Media (WAM!) this authorized reporter status. In three weeks, WAM! reviewers assessed 811 incoming reports of harassment and escalated 161 reports to Twitter, ultimately seeing Twitter carry out 70 account suspensions, 18 warnings, and one deleted account. This document presents findings from this three-week project; it draws on both quantitative and qualitative methods. Findings focus on the people reporting and receiving harassment, the kinds of harassment that were reported, Twitter's response to harassment reports, the process of reviewing harassment reports, and challenges for harassment reporting processes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Inquisitorial to Adversarial: Using Legal Theory to Redesign Online Reporting Systems

    cs.HC 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Online reporting systems are characterized as inquisitorial, and a design space gives users adversarial-style control over evidence disclosure, authentication, and privacy during moderation.

Pith tools