Online hate speech could be contained like a computer virus, say Cambridge researchers

The spread of hate speech via social media could be tackled using the same "quarantine" approach deployed to combat malicious software, according to University of Cambridge researchers.

Definitions of hate speech vary depending on nation, law and platform, and just blocking keywords is ineffectual: graphic descriptions of violence need not contain obvious ethnic slurs to constitute racist death threats, for example.

As such, hate speech is difficult to detect automatically. It has to be reported by those exposed to it, after the intended "psychological harm" is inflicted, with armies of moderators required to judge every case.

This is the new front line of an ancient debate: freedom of speech versus poisonous language.

Now, an engineer and a linguist have published a proposal in the journal Ethics and Information Technology that harnesses cyber security techniques to give control to those targeted, without resorting to censorship.

Cambridge language and machine learning experts are using databases of threats and violent insults to build algorithms that can provide a score for the likelihood of an online message containing forms of hate speech.

As these algorithms get refined, potential hate speech could be identified and "quarantined". Users would receive a warning alert with a "Hate O'Meter" - the hate speech severity score - the sender's name, and an option to view the content or delete unseen.

This approach is akin to spam and malware filters, and researchers from the 'Giving Voice to Digital Democracies' project believe it could dramatically reduce the amount of hate speech people are forced to experience. They are aiming to have a prototype ready in early 2020.

"Hate speech is a form of intentional online harm, like malware, and can therefore be handled by means of quarantining," said co-author and linguist Dr Stefanie Ullman. "In fact, a lot of hate speech is actually generated by software such as Twitter bots."

"Companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google generally respond reactively to hate speech," said co-author and engineer Dr Marcus Tomalin. "This may be okay for those who don't encounter it often. For others it's too little, too late."

"Many women and people from minority groups in the public eye receive anonymous hate speech for daring to have an online presence. We are seeing this deter people from entering or continuing in public life, often those from groups in need of greater representation," he said.

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently told a UK audience that hate speech posed a "threat to democracies", in the wake of many women MPs citing online abuse as part of the reason they will no longer stand for election.

While in a Georgetown University address, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spoke of "broad disagreements over what qualifies as hate" and argued: "we should err on the side of greater expression".

The researchers say their proposal is not a magic bullet, but it does sit between the "extreme libertarian and authoritarian approaches" of either entirely permitting or prohibiting certain language online.

Importantly, the user becomes the arbiter. "Many people don't like the idea of an unelected corporation or micromanaging government deciding what we can and can't say to each other," said Tomalin.

"Our system will flag when you should be careful, but it's always your call. It doesn't stop people posting or viewing what they like, but it gives much needed control to those being inundated with hate."

In the paper, the researchers refer to detection algorithms achieving 60% accuracy - not much better than chance. Tomalin's machine learning lab has now got this up to 80%, and he anticipates continued improvement of the mathematical modeling.

Meanwhile, Ullman gathers more "training data": verified hate speech from which the algorithms can learn. This helps refine the "confidence scores" that determine a quarantine and subsequent Hate O'Meter read-out, which could be set like a sensitivity dial depending on user preference.

A basic example might involve a word like 'bitch': a misogynistic slur, but also a legitimate term in contexts such as dog breeding. It's the algorithmic analysis of where such a word sits syntactically - the types of surrounding words and semantic relations between them - that informs the hate speech score.

"Identifying individual keywords isn't enough, we are looking at entire sentence structures and far beyond. Sociolinguistic information in user profiles and posting histories can all help improve the classification process," said Ullman.

Added Tomalin: "Through automated quarantines that provide guidance on the strength of hateful content, we can empower those at the receiving end of the hate speech poisoning our online discourses."

However, the researchers, who work in Cambridge's Centre for Research into Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (CRASSH), say that - as with computer viruses - there will always be an arms race between hate speech and systems for limiting it.

The project has also begun to look at "counter-speech": the ways people respond to hate speech. The researchers intend to feed into debates around how virtual assistants such as 'Siri' should respond to threats and intimidation.

Toys for Tots top Marine always delivers

After 25 years, Robert “Bob” Harris will step down as local coordinator of Toys for Tots. During his time served, he provided the children of Stark County with more than a million toys.

MASSILLON If Robert Harris had a long white beard, you might call him Santa Claus.

Christmastime is Harris’ busiest season as local coordinator of Toys for Tots. He and his “elves” sort and distribute toys in a Massillon-based workshop.

All is calm when Christmas Day comes around. Each year, Harris starts the day by enjoying a cup of coffee with his wife in their Hartville home.

Though no one can hear them, the couple says a prayer for the families of Stark County.

“Merry Christmas,” they say with a smile.

The retired U.S. Marine has served as the local coordinator of Toys for Tots for 25 years and will have delivered more than a million toys to local children by the end of the season. The 78-year-old plans to step down from his duties in January after final paperwork is completed for the year.

“I love it because it helps so many children,” Harris said. “Without Toys for Tots, millions of children would not have a Christmas.”

Longtime coordinator

When Harris volunteered to be the Stark County coordinator of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve Toys for Tots in 1994, there weren’t many local chapters in Northeast Ohio.

Kari Harris, who has helped her grandfather with the organization for at least 15 years, said donated items were stored in her grandfather’s basement when the Stark County chapter began. Toys for Tots has had a number of homes since then and is now based in Massillon.

“It just went from there,” Bob Harris said. “I just stuck with it. I kept doing it because I love helping the children.”

Harris, who is nicknamed “The General,” works alongside his granddaughter, who has earned the nickname “The Little General.” The duo wore matching shirts with the titles printed in red glitter as they sorted toys earlier this month.

Kari Harris oversees the sorting of the toys in the warehouse while her grandfather handles all the paperwork, she said. A troop of women assist Harris to sort the toys by gender and age group.

“I figured it would bring us closer together,” Harris said. “We spend a lot of time together this part of the year.”

New leadership

Because Kari Harris is not a Marine, she cannot take over the local Toys for Tots from her grandfather, she said. However, she plans to continue her work with the organization by heading up the sorting as usual.

Jeff Weber, a Marine who served in Desert Storm, will take over the paperwork aspect from Bob Harris. The 1980 Jackson High School grad has been helping the Toys for Tots effort for the past five years.

Weber decided to join the Marine Corps League McKinley Detachment #277 with the vision of getting involved with Toys for Tots.

“I think that you get to the point in your life ... where you just want to do something that matters,” Weber said.

Weber credits three women — including Kari Harris — for organizing the toys at the warehouse.

Bob Harris will continue acting as the local coordinator until Jan. 15, which is the deadline to send the report to the foundation.

The season kicked off in September when Harris attended a conference in Leesburg, Va. and purchased $25,000 new toys for the children of Stark County. Collection began in October and ended Dec. 14.

Each year the toys are distributed to one of six nonprofit agencies, including Salvation Army and A Community Christmas, which Harris oversees and will continue to serve as president after his retirement from Toys for Tots.

“I’ve made a legacy that I didn’t even know I made in stark County,” Harris said. “I’m almost 80 years old. I think it’s time for the young people to step up and take over the responsibility.”

Times Apologizes for Publishing Anti-Semitic Cartoon

The New York Times on Sunday apologized for a cartoon published in the Opinion pages of its international edition that drew widespread condemnation for being anti-Semitic.

The cartoon, which was published on Thursday in the print newspaper, portrayed a blind President Trump, wearing a skullcap, being led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, drawn as a dog on a leash with a Star of David collar.

“The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it,” The New York Times said in an editors’ note that will be published in Monday’s international edition.

Eileen Murphy, a New York Times spokeswoman, said the paper was “deeply sorry” for publishing the cartoon.

“Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it’s all the more unacceptable,” Ms. Murphy said in a statement on behalf of the Opinion section. “We are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again.”

The cartoon drew hundreds of critical comments from people worldwide. The Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel, CNN, Fox News and others published articles about the cartoon.

“Apology not accepted,” the American Jewish Committee said in response to The Times’s editors’ note. “What does this say about your processes or your decision makers? How are you fixing it?”

The cartoon was drawn by the Portuguese cartoonist António Moreira Antunes and originally published by Expresso, a newspaper in Lisbon. It was then picked up by CartoonArts International, a syndicate for cartoons from around the world.

The New York Times Licensing Group sells content from CartoonArts and other publishers along with material from The New York Times to news sites and other customers.

The Times’s United States edition does not typically publish political cartoons and did not run this one, but the international edition frequently includes them. An editor from The Times’s Opinion section downloaded Mr. Antunes’s cartoon from the syndicate and made the decision to publish it, according to Ms. Murphy.

Ms. Murphy declined to identify the editor, who she said was “working without adequate oversight” because of a “faulty process” that is now being reviewed.

“We are evaluating our internal processes and training,” Ms. Murphy said. “We anticipate significant changes.”

James Bennet, the editor who oversees all content on The Times’s editorial pages, declined to comment in detail. “I’m going to let our statement speak for us at this point,” Mr. Bennet said.

Bret Stephens, an opinion columnist for The Times, wrote about the issue on Sunday and called on the newspaper to do “some serious reflection as to how it came to publish that cartoon,” which he called “an astonishing act of ignorance of anti-Semitism.”

And Vice President Mike Pence tweeted on Sunday, “We stand with Israel and we condemn antisemitism in ALL its forms.”

Sergio Florez, the managing editor for The Times’s Licensing Group, said the group took in 30 or more cartoons a week from CartoonArts through an automated feed to its website, where publishers can look through the cartoons and buy a license to reprint them. The group’s editors sporadically review the feed and remove work that is biased or racist, he said.

“Had we seen this cartoon in one of those sweeps, we definitely would have pulled it,” Mr. Florez said. The cartoon has been deleted from the Licensing Group’s collection, he said.

Nancy Lee, the executive editor of the Licensing Group, said the group would review its arrangement with CartoonArts.

The company’s licensing deal with The Times goes back several decades, Ms. Lee said. CartoonArts, based in New York, was founded in 1978 by the cartoonist Jerry Robinson to bring global cartoons to a wider audience. It is now run by his son, Jens Robinson.

“We receive and post cartoons from around the world of many shades of political opinion,” Mr. Robinson said by email. “The cartoon in question was viewed as political commentary. However, we understand the decision to remove it from the website.”

Expresso, the Portuguese newspaper, did not respond to requests for comment, and Mr. Antunes could not be reached. He has been a regular cartoonist for the paper since 1974, according to an online biography.

“The profession of cartoonist is a profession of risk,” Mr. Antunes said in an interview with the Portuguese Observer in 2015, after the fatal attack in Paris on the staff of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. “There is always fear, but there is no other option but to defend freedom of expression.”

Player, Nicklaus rail against the golf ball, green-reading books

Modern technology struggles to get inside the gates at Augusta National Golf Club. Cell phones will get you thrown out, and green-reading books can be left in players’ courtesy cars.

It’s an idyllic trip back in time for some, but for Jack Nicklaus and Gary Player, it’s simply a step in the right direction.

Nicklaus and Player reprised their annual role as honorary starters Thursday morning, kicking off the 83rd Masters with opening tee shots in front of thousands of eager patrons. The two men, who have combined to win nine green jackets, then went to the press building where they reminisced about decades spent together at the club as well as the state of technology in the modern game.

It was on that latter point that they formed a consensus.

“The golf ball has gotten ridiculous. I have so many things on that,” Nicklaus said. “The golf ball from 1930 to about ’95 gained about six yards. From 1995 to 2005, about 15 yards, and that’s a big difference. Probably the organizations won’t tell you that, but that’s exactly about what happened.”

It’s a familiar refrain from Nicklaus, who has railed against the technological advancements in the game for the last several years. He was joined in support by Player, who offered a warning that the governing bodies need to create a bifurcated ball of some sort, lest players begin driving the 445-yard first hole at Augusta National.

“We’d better start thinking. They are going to hit wedges to all the par-5s, and golf courses like St. Andrews, this marvelous golf course, is completely obsolete. They can drive probably six greens,” Player said. “So I don’t know where we’re going. And our leaders of such have got to get together now and form a ball for professionals that’s different to the amateurs. Let the amateurs have anything they’d like. … But we have got to stop this, otherwise it’s going to be a joke, in my opinion.”

Player didn’t just stop with his thoughts on the ball. The 83-year-old also expressed his distaste for green-reading books, which are not allowed at Augusta National and whose details was recently reined in by the USGA and R&A.

“Bobby Locke was the best putter that ever lived, and Tiger Woods was the best putter and so on. I never saw him take out a book to read the damn green,” Player said. “To read the green, you’ve got to look at a book. Well if you can’t read a green, you should be selling beans. It’s part of the game. Where are we going? Everything is so artificial.”

Ebooks are experiencing a crisis of confidence

A few weeks ago Microsoft closed their digital bookstore and customers have lost access to all of the ebooks they paid for. This is not a small startup, where people throw their hands up in the air and exclaim “oh well.” Microsoft is an established giant and the fact that they failed at ebooks  proves that Amazon dominates the entire US market and it is impossible to compete against them. Microsoft has also proved that customers do not have true ownership of an ebook, they are merely licensed.

Microsoft is just the latest in a longline of companies that have shuttered their bookstore and left readers in a larch. This includes  Blinkbox Books, Parable Books, Diesel e-books, Scholastic Storia, Sony Reader Store, the Barnes and Noble Nook UK store and a bunch of others have completely closed their doors and left customers with all sorts of questions and concerns when their apps stopped working and their library is deleted.

The vast majority of ebooks from major online retailers have digital rights management from Adobe or have developed their own DRM solution. If you buy an ebook Amazon, it is incompatible with your Kobo or Nook. The only way you can circumvent this is to illegally strip the DRM from your book. Opting into DRM basically is a matter of trust. You are trusting the company to send you the book and that they will provide access to it.

I believe that ebooks are suffering from a crisis of confidence.  It is beginning to be quite difficult to trust a retailer to not disappear overnight with your ebooks, no matter how big they are. You can literary spend thousands of dollars and they just disappear overnight. Microsoft is at least offering refunds, but most other retailers are there one minute and gone the next.

Maybe the crux of the ebook issue, is more psychological than anything.  People’s sense of psychological ownership is affected by three primary factors: whether they feel as if they have control over the object they own, whether they use the object to define who they are, and whether the object helps give them a sense of belonging in society. A recent study published in the journal Electronic Markets found that the vast majority of  people felt a constricted sense of ownership of ebooks versus physical books, based on the fact that they don’t have full control over the products. For example, they expressed frustration that they often could not copy a digital file to multiple devices. Along similar lines, many study participants lamented restrictions on sharing ebooks with friends, or gifting or selling the books, saying this made ebooks feel less valuable as possessions than physical books.

Sabrina Helm, a UA associate professor who researches consumer perceptions and behaviors. said “One of the conclusions of our research was that digital books and physical books are entirely different products,” she said. “ebooks feel like more of a service experience; overall, they seem to offer a more functional or utilitarian experience. You have much more richness if you deal with a physical book, where all your senses are involved.

Digital bookstores rise and fall and thousand of customers are left with nothing to show for the money they spent. This is likely the reason why every year, ebook sales fall a few percentage points and print is on the rise. Print is trustworthy, ebooks are not.