Ordinary citizens increasingly moderate online forums, blogs, & social media feeds, selectively removing opposing political viewpoints from online contexts even when opposing comments were inoffensive & courteous

Ashokkumar, Ashwini, Sanaz Talaifar, William T. Fraser, Rodrigo Landabur, Michael Burhmester, Ángel Gómez, Borja Paredes, et al. 2020. “Censoring Political Opposition Online: Who Does It and Why.” PsyArXiv. July 16. doi:10.31234/osf.io/r9c5z

Abstract: As ordinary citizens increasingly moderate online forums, blogs, and their own social media feeds, a new type of censoring has emerged wherein people selectively remove opposing political viewpoints from online contexts. In three studies of behavior on putative online forums, supporters of a political cause (e.g., abortion or gun rights) preferentially censored comments that opposed their cause. The tendency to selectively censor cause-incongruent online content was amplified among people whose cause-related beliefs were deeply rooted in or “fused with” their identities. Moreover, six additional identity-related measures also amplified the selective censoring effect. Finally, selective censoring emerged even when opposing comments were inoffensive and courteous. We suggest that because online censorship enacted by moderators can skew online content consumed by millions of users, it can systematically disrupt democratic dialogue and subvert social harmony.