Papers › #ArsonEmergency and Australia's "Black Summer": Polarisation and misinformation on social media
#ArsonEmergency and Australia's "Black Summer": Polarisation and misinformation on social media
Derek Weber, Mehwish Nasim, Lucia Falzon, Lewis Mitchell
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
During the summer of 2019-20, while Australia suffered unprecedented bushfires across the country, false narratives regarding arson and limited backburning spread quickly on Twitter, particularly using the hashtag #ArsonEmergency. Misinformation and bot- and troll-like behaviour were detected and reported by social media researchers and the news soon reached mainstream media. This paper examines the communication and behaviour of two polarised online communities before and after news of the misinformation became public knowledge. Specifically, the Supporter community actively engaged with others to spread the hashtag, using a variety of news sources pushing the arson narrative, while the Opposer community engaged less, retweeted more, and focused its use of URLs to link to mainstream sources, debunking the narratives and exposing the anomalous behaviour. This influenced the content of the broader discussion. Bot analysis revealed the active accounts were predominantly human, but behavioural and content analysis suggests Supporters engaged in trolling, though both communities used aggressive language.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections