Recent work on automated approaches to counterspeech have mostly focused on synthetic data but seldom look into how the public deals with abuse. While these systems identifying and generating counterspeech have the potential for abuse mitigation, it remains unclear how robust a model is against adversarial attacks across multiple domains and how models trained on synthetic data can handle unseen user-generated abusive content in the real world. To tackle these issues, this paper first explores the dynamics of abuse and replies using our novel dataset of 6,955 labelled tweets targeted at footballers for studying public figure abuse. We then curate DynaCounter, a new English dataset of 1,911 pairs of abuse and replies addressing nine minority identity groups, collected in an adversarial human-in-the-loop process over four rounds. Our analysis shows that adversarial attacks do not necessarily result in better generalisation. We further present a study of multi-domain counterspeech generation, comparing Flan-T5 and T5 models. We observe that handling certain abuse targets is particularly challenging.

Counterspeech offers direct rebuttals to hateful speech by challenging perpetrators of hate and showing support to targets of abuse. It provides a promising alternative to more contentious measures, such as content moderation and deplatforming, by contributing a greater amount of positive online speech rather than attempting to mitigate harmful content through removal. Advances in the development of large language models mean that the process of producing counterspeech could be made more efficient by automating its generation, which would enable large-scale online campaigns. However, we currently lack a systematic understanding of several important factors relating to the efficacy of counterspeech for hate mitigation, such as which types of counterspeech are most effective, what are the optimal conditions for implementation, and which specific effects of hate it can best ameliorate. This paper aims to fill this gap by systematically reviewing counterspeech research in the social sciences and comparing methodologies and findings with natural language processing (NLP) and computer science efforts in automatic counterspeech generation. By taking this multi-disciplinary view, we identify promising future directions in both fields.

Public figures receive disproportionate levels of abuse on social media, impacting their active participation in public life. Automated systems can identify abuse at scale but labelling training data is expensive and potentially harmful. So, it is desirable that systems are efficient and generalisable, handling shared and specific aspects of abuse. We explore the dynamics of cross-group text classification in order to understand how well models trained on one domain or demographic can transfer to others, with a view to building more generalisable abuse classifiers. We fine-tune language models to classify tweets targeted at public figures using our novel DoDo dataset, containing 28,000 entries with fine-grained labels, split equally across four Domain-Demographic pairs (male and female footballers and politicians). We find that (i) small amounts of diverse data are hugely beneficial to generalisation and adaptation; (ii) models transfer more easily across demographics but cross-domain models are more generalisable; (iii) some groups contribute more to generalisability than others; and (iv) dataset similarity is a signal of transferability.