An official website of the United States government
Research suggests that marginalized social media users face disproportionate content moderation and removal. However, when content is removed or accounts suspended, the processes governing content moderation are largely invisible, making assessing content moderation bias difficult. To study this bias, we conducted a digital ethnography of marginalized users on Reddit’s /r/FTM subreddit and Twitch’s “Just Chatting” and “Pools, Hot Tubs, and Beaches” categories, observing content moderation visibility in real time. We found that on Reddit, a text-based platform, platform tools make content moderation practices invisible to users, but moderators make their practices visible through communication with users. Yet on Twitch, a live chat and streaming platform, content moderation practices are visible in channel live chats, “unban appeal” streams, and “back from my ban” streams. Our ethnography shows how content moderation visibility differs in important ways between social media platforms, harming those who must see offensive content, and at other times, allowing for increased platform accountability.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on April 25, 2026
The Virtual Jail: Content Moderation Challenges Faced by Chinese Queer Content Creators on Douyin
Queer users of Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, suspect that the platform removes and suppresses queer content, thus reducing queer visibility. In this study, we examined how Chinese queer users recognize and react to Douyin’s moderation of queer content by conducting interviews with 21 queer China-based Douyin content creators and viewers. Findings indicate that queer users actively explore and adapt to the platform’s underlying moderation logic. They employ creative content and posting strategies to reduce the likelihood of their expressions of queer topics and identities being removed or suppressed. Like Western platforms, Douyin’s moderation approaches are often ambiguous; but unlike Western platforms, queer users sometimes receive clarity on moderation reasons via direct communication with moderators. Participants suggested that Douyin’s repressive moderation practices are in!uenced by more than just platform policies and procedures – they also re!ect state-led homophobia and societal discipline. This study underscores the challenges Chinese queer communities face in maintaining online visibility and suggests that meaningful change in their experiences is unlikely without broader societal shifts towards queer acceptance.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1942125
- PAR ID:
- 10578795
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 979-8-4007-1394-1
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1-14
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Content moderation social media Chinese queer people Douyin user-generated content state-led homophobia heteronormativity folk theories LGBTQ+
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Yokohama, Japan
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Social media users create folk theories to help explain how elements of social media operate. Marginalized social media users face disproportionate content moderation and removal on social media platforms. We conducted a qualitative interview study (n = 24) to understand how marginalized social media users may create folk theories in response to content moderation and their perceptions of platforms’ spirit, and how these theories may relate to their marginalized identities. We found that marginalized social media users develop folk theories informed by their perceptions of platforms’ spirit to explain instances where their content was moderated in ways that violate their perceptions of how content moderation should work in practice. These folk theories typically address content being removed despite not violating community guidelines, along with bias against marginalized users embedded in guidelines. We provide implications for platforms, such as using marginalized users’ folk theories as tools to identify elements of platform moderation systems that function incorrectly and disproportionately impact marginalized users.more » « less
-
How social media platforms could fairly conduct content moderation is gaining attention from society at large. Researchers from HCI and CSCW have investigated whether certain factors could affect how users perceive moderation decisions as fair or unfair. However, little attention has been paid to unpacking or elaborating on the formation processes of users' perceived (un)fairness from their moderation experiences, especially users who monetize their content. By interviewing 21 for-profit YouTubers (i.e., video content creators), we found three primary ways through which participants assess moderation fairness, including equality across their peers, consistency across moderation decisions and policies, and their voice in algorithmic visibility decision-making processes. Building upon the findings, we discuss how our participants' fairness perceptions demonstrate a multi-dimensional notion of moderation fairness and how YouTube implements an algorithmic assemblage to moderate YouTubers. We derive translatable design considerations for a fairer moderation system on platforms affording creator monetization.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Content moderation is a critical service performed by a variety of people on social media, protecting users from offensive or harmful content by reviewing and removing either the content or the perpetrator. These moderators fall into one of two categories: employees or volunteers. Prior research has suggested that there are differences in the effectiveness of these two types of moderators, with the more transparent user-based moderation being useful for educating users. However, direct comparisons between commercially-moderated and user-moderated platforms are rare, and apart from the difference in transparency, we still know little about what other disparities in user experience these two moderator types may create. To explore this, we conducted cross-platform surveys of over 900 users of commercially-moderated (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube) and user-moderated (Reddit and Twitch) social media platforms. Our results indicated that although user-moderated platforms did seem to be more transparent than commercially-moderated ones, this did not lead to user-moderated platforms being perceived as less toxic. In addition, commercially-moderated platform users want companies to take more responsibility for content moderation than they currently do, while user-moderated platform users want designated moderators and those who post on the site to take more responsibility. Across platforms, users seem to feel powerless and want to be taken care of when it comes to content moderation as opposed to engaging themselves.more » « less
-
Social media users may perceive moderation decisions by the platform differently, which can lead to frustration and dropout. This study investigates users’ perceived justice and fairness of online moderation decisions when they are exposed to various illegal versus legal scenarios, retributive versus restorative moderation strategies, and user-moderated versus commercially moderated platforms. We conduct an online experiment on 200 American social media users of Reddit and Twitter. Results show that retributive moderation delivers higher justice and fairness for commercially moderated than for user-moderated platforms in illegal violations; restorative moderation delivers higher fairness for legal violations than illegal ones. We discuss the opportunities for platform policymaking to improve moderation system design.more » « less
