{"id":54,"date":"2019-03-07T14:37:28","date_gmt":"2019-03-07T13:37:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.arcigay.it\/accept\/?page_id=54"},"modified":"2019-03-21T15:27:52","modified_gmt":"2019-03-21T14:27:52","slug":"la-campaign","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.arcigay.it\/accept\/en\/la-campaign\/","title":{"rendered":"The campaign"},"content":{"rendered":"

We have gathered for about a year news and tw<\/b>eets potentially carrying homophobic hatred messages. <\/span>A group of evaluators and assessors then worked to classify tweets (positi<\/b>ve<\/strong> if they<\/b> showed an open and inclusive position towards LGBTI people, negative if exclu<\/span>ded, di<\/b>scriminatory and offensive, doubts whether<\/span> the<\/b> message was ambiguous or little decipherable).<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/h3>\n

Recurring words in negative tweets *<\/h3>\n

\"\"<\/a> * We asked a heterogeneous group of 7 people to analyse 5,189 real tweets, marking as negatives those who according to them showed a derisory, exclusionary, discriminatory, violent position against LGBTI issues<\/p>\n

Recurring words in positive tweets *<\/h3>\n

\"\"<\/a> * We asked a heterogeneous group of 7 people to analyse 5,189 real tweets, marking as positive those which according to them showed an open, respectful, inclusive position towards LGBTI issues<\/p>\n

Recurring words in doubtful tweets *<\/h3>\n

\"\"<\/a> * We asked a heterogeneous group of 7 people to analyse 5,189 real tweets, marking as doubts those who according to them showed a position not understandable, ambiguous, difficult to decipher against the LGBTI issues a total of 5,189 tweets examined that allowed us to make a series of data-based considerations: 1) Messages containing hatre<\/b>d <\/span>ca<\/b>n be divided into three clusters: showbiz, public debate and current affairs, ethical rights and themes 2) the words most Recurrin<\/span>g<\/b> in negative messages are: Ricchione, propaganda, order, nature, the most recurrent in positive messages are: Citizens, group, associations, social, in doubtful messages: privilege, joke, joke, opinion 3) The most polarising t<\/span>w<\/b>eets, That is, those in which the evaluators have been most disagreeing camouflage the words of hatred with sarcastic intent, 4) 1 person in<\/span> <\/b>10 expresses discriminatory positions when dealing with LGBTI topics, 5) 4 o<\/span>ut<\/b> of 10 people express ambiguous positions, at least in Half of the cases attributable to an ironic language in form, offensive in intent.<\/span><\/p>\n

The campaign VIDEO<\/h2>\n