X bomb
The term X bomb or post bomb (also spelled as one word) refers to posting numerous (pejoratively, "spamming") posts with the same hashtags and other similar content, including @messages, from multiple accounts, with the goal of advertising a certain meme, usually by filling people's post feeds with the same message, and making it a "trending topic" on X.[1][2][3] This may be done by individual users, fake accounts, or both.[4]
Advertising
[edit]X bombing may be used for commercial advertising. An early example from April 2005 referred to advertising a YouTube video series Ask a Ninja.[2]
Politics
[edit]X bombing is one of the tools used in Internet activism, both by mainstream politicians like Barack Obama and by groups like Anonymous.[1][5][6]
The earliest recorded usage of the X bomb is from August 2008, when it was used by bloggers Liza Sabater and Kenneth Quinnell in response to Republican use of the #dontgo hashtag relating to offshore oil drilling.[7] The term was used for other purposes in 2008, but the other meanings have since disappeared.[2]
An example of a X bomb was the campaign organized by online activists in response to a July 31, 2009 Washington Post article on Hillary Clinton that was deemed sexist.[8]
In 2011, it was used extensively by Barack Obama's campaign staff to encourage his followers to contact Congress and encourage them to reach a compromise during the United States debt-ceiling crisis of 2011. Shortly thereafter, @BarackObama lost about 37,000 followers.[4]
Positive impacts
[edit]X bombing/spamming can provide exposure to current events that are not being exposed enough from mainstream media. Dhiraj Murthy writes:
X has received significant media attention in its use to disseminate information during disasters, including the 2008 Mumbai bomb blasts (Dolnick, 2005) and the January 2005 crash of US Airways flight 1549 (Beaumont, 2009).[9]
Linking this with the use of hashtag, see hashtag activism, news and information can be spread around the internet at a rapid pace with the use of hashtags.
Comparison to online spam
[edit]The use of the X bomb tactics has been known to misfire, as people might be offended by spamming, or trolling.[2][10]
Spammers have several goals, which are phishing, advertising, or malware distribution. Unlike traditional online spamming, such as email, X has a limit of only 280 characters per post. Therefore, a X bomb often include URLs in their posts in order to send others users to their malicious pages online.[11]
Unlike email spam, X bombs may require participation from their targeted users. Fake accounts are a common source of X bombs. In order to avoid X's spam filters and to overcome their lack of followers, X bombs are often sent as a reply to existing posts about the same topic. This is done in hopes that the authors of the existing posts will repost the response to their own followers, spreading the X bomb before the fake account is deleted.[12]
With regards to numbers, an example of a X bomb analyzed in one research paper described how nine fake user accounts produced 929 posts in 138 minutes, all with a URL to a political website, presenting negative views on the U.S. politician Martha Coakley.[12] The message might have reached about 60,000 before being eliminated by X as spam.[13]
Criticism
[edit]Many X users find comfort in sharing their ideas and thoughts to the general public. Though X can be utilized to spread awareness of a variety of issues and causes, many can take advantage and post numerous posts that may be viewed as spam. X's rule page considers posts "spam" once a user displays multiple posts with unrelated hashtags to a certain topic, or continues to post multiple posts of the same content in one account. Some instances, these posts can be viewed as trolling once they begin to seek out other X users for arguments about controversial issues.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b Mary C. Joyce (30 April 2010). Digital Activism Decoded: The New Mechanics of Change. IDEA. p. 221. ISBN 978-1-932716-60-3. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
- ^ a b c d Ethan Zuckerman, "The Tweetbomb and the Ethics of Attention", April 20, 2012, Last accessed on April 30, 2012.
- ^ J. Ratkiewicz, M. D. Conover, M. Meiss, B. Gonçalves, A. Flammini, F. Menczer, "Detecting and Tracking Political Abuse in Social Media", Proc. 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media ICWSM (2011).
- ^ a b "37K Followers Ditch Obama After Twitter Bomb - @BarackObama tweets handles of GOP legislators, state by state". Newser. 30 July 2011. Retrieved 2012-04-30.
- ^ John Clifford Green; Daniel J. Coffey (1 September 2010). The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary American Parties. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 178. ISBN 978-0-7425-9954-3. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
- ^ Chris Richardson (2012-04-20). "Anonymous Plans "24 Hour Tweet Bomb" To Fight CISPA". WebProNews. Retrieved 2012-04-30.
- ^ Kenneth Quinnell, "Twitter Bomb", Florida Speaks blog, August 5, 2008, Last accessed on August 27, 2012.
- ^ Mary C. Joyce (30 April 2010). Digital Activism Decoded: The New Mechanics of Change. IDEA. pp. 155–156. ISBN 978-1-932716-60-3. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
- ^ Murthy, Dhiraj. "Twitter: Microphone for the masses?." Media, Culture & Society 33.5 (2011): 779.
- ^ "Social Media Activism and the (In)justice of the Mob". Partisans. 2012-04-26. Archived from the original on 2012-05-06. Retrieved 2012-04-30.
- ^ Song, Jonghyuk, Sangho Lee, and Jong Kim."Spam filtering in twitter using sender-receiver relationship." Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
- ^ a b P. Metaxas, E. Mustafaraj, "From Obscurity to Prominence in Minutes: Political Speech and Real-Time Search", In: Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending the Frontiers of Society On-Line, April 26-27th, 2010, Raleigh, NC: US (2010).
- ^ Neil Savage. 2011. "Twitter as Medium and Message", Communications of the ACM 54, no. 3 (March 2011), 18–20. DOI:10.1145/1897852.1897860