Joe is Programme Director of Cyber Threats at Swansea University. His PhD analysed the online behaviours of Islamic State terrorists in the US from the years 2012-2018, conducted as a joint degree with Swansea University and Leiden University. He has also researched how social media platforms’ recommendation systems promote and amplify extreme far-right content, as well as publishing on topics such as counter-narratives and extremist video games.
This module introduces the basic concepts in criminology such as how the study of crime began; the prevalence of crime and how it is measured; explanations of crime causation; and patterns of crime amongst different groups in society.
This module will be centred around the work conducted by the School of Law¿s Cyberterrorism Project on the interface between terrorism and the internet. It will also introduce students to other contemporary approaches to understanding violent extremism online which will give them an opportunity to start exploring their own interests in this area further. The module will focus on four issues in particular: terrorist propaganda on the internet; radicalisation and the internet; counter campaigns and approaches to disrupting internet radicalisation; and approaches to researching and understanding the role of the internet in radicalisation. The module brings together expertise from a wide range of disciplines and geographical regions including Europe, the US, Canada and Australia and explores the various roles played by the Internet in radicalisation; the reasons why terroristic propaganda may or may not influence others to engage in violence; the role of political conflict in online radicalisation; and the future of research into terrorism and the internet. By covering this broad range of topics, the module will provide students with a detailed yet encompassing understanding in the area of extremist use of the internet.
This module tackles the key societal challenge of countering violent extremism online. The first part of the module introduces students to extremist propaganda, how it is designed, how it works and the role it plays in violent extremist overall strategy. Before exploring the specific threats and challenges that violent extremist propaganda presents in the on-line space, from speed of dissemination to echo-chambers and filter bubbles. The second part addresses the different approaches to countering violent extremism online from disruption, re-direction to counter-narratives. With a particular focus on understanding counter-narrative campaigns, and providing students with a practical introduction to communication strategy and campaign strategy, to be able to design and implement their own counter-narrative campaigns.
Students will write a dissertation on a topic related to the MA programme of their own choice. This will be supervised by a nominated supervisor within the School of Law and convened by the Module Coordinator.
The right to free speech remains one of our most important liberties, often acting as basis for other rights (such as freedom of religion or freedom of assembly). However, this right has always been limited and, as a result, fissures are created between free speech and competing public goods. These include: attempting to draw the line between hateful and political speech; the ways in which individuals display their religion; and how groups protest against governments. In recent years, these free speech issues have been compounded by the growth of the Internet, exacerbating these problems further. For example, how does one country¿s laws respond to a speech crime committed by an individual in another country on a social media platform in another jurisdiction? Or how does the proliferation of advanced video technology (such as deepfakes) affect our trust that the information we see is true? This module draws from philosophical theory which underpins free speech debates, as well as utilising numerous contemporary case studies to apply this knowledge. Although the primary focus is on the challenges that Britain faces, the module draws on comparisons with other countries (such as the US and mainland Europe) that have fundamentally different ways of regulating speech.
2017 - Present
