Early public responses to the zika-virus on YouTube: Prevalence of and differences between conspiracy theory and informational videos

Adina Nerghes, Peter Kerkhof, Iina Hellsten

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

124 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the content of the most popular videos posted on YouTube in the first phase of the Zika-virus outbreak in 2016, and the user responses to those videos. More specifically, we examine the extent to which informational and conspiracy theory videos differ in terms of user activity (number of comments, shares, likes and dislikes), and the sentiment and content of the user responses. Our results show that 12 out of the 35 videos in our data set focused on conspiracy theories, but no statistical differences were found in the number of user activity and sentiment between the two types of videos. The content of the user responses shows that users respond differently to sub-topics related to Zika-virus. The implications of the results for future online health promotion campaigns are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationWebSci 2018 - Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery, Inc
Pages127-134
Number of pages8
ISBN (Electronic)9781450355636
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018
Event10th ACM Conference on Web Science, WebSci 2018 - Amsterdam, Netherlands
Duration: 27 May 201830 May 2018

Publication series

NameACM Conference on Web Science Proceedings
PublisherACM

Conference

Conference10th ACM Conference on Web Science, WebSci 2018
Country/TerritoryNetherlands
CityAmsterdam
Period27/05/1830/05/18

Keywords

  • Conspiracy theory videos
  • Informational
  • Semantic networks
  • Topic modeling
  • YouTube
  • Zika-virus

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Early public responses to the zika-virus on YouTube: Prevalence of and differences between conspiracy theory and informational videos'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this