Detecting Online Firestorms in Social Media
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As social media has increased the reach and speed of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM), so it has intensified customers’ exposure to negative eWOM. Consequently, companies increasingly suffer from massive outbursts of negative eWOM, known as online firestorms. Because of their dynamics, it is nearly impossible to stop online firestorms if their emergence is not detected promptly. However, well-founded approaches that provide automated, real-time detection are missing. We design an Online Firestorm Detector that includes an algorithm inspired by epidemiological surveillance systems. Real-world data from a firestorm suffered by Coca-Cola is used to prove the utility and validity of the proposed approach. We show that online firestorms can be reliably detected shortly after the first piece of related negative eWOM has been generated, and that the number of false alarms is low. A comparison with competing artifacts shows that the Online Firestorm Detector is superior to approaches that could be alternatively used.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it