Tweets are forever: a large-scale quantitative analysis of deleted tweets
Abstract
This paper describes an empirical study of 1.6M deleted tweets collected over a continuous one-week period from a set of 292K Twitter users. We examine several aggregate properties of deleted tweets, including their connections to other tweets (e.g., whether they are replies or retweets), the clients used to produce them, temporal aspects of deletion, and the presence of geotagging information. Some significant differences were discovered between the two collections, namely in the clients used to post them, their conversational aspects, the sentiment vocabulary present in them, and the days of the week they were posted. However, in other dimensions for which analysis was possible, no substantial differences were found. Finally, we discuss some ramifications of this work for understanding Twitter usage and management of one's privacy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
About 2.4% of tweets posted during 1 week in 2013 by about 300 million users were later deleted, with about half of users deleting at least one tweet from that period.
“Almuhimedi et al. (2013) that about 2.4% of tweets posted during 1 week in 2013 by about 300 million users, were later deleted (with about half of users deleting at least one tweet from that period).”
From Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries (2019) · cites this paper as Almuhimedi et al., 2013
Cites
What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?
Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772751 · Cited by 6,652 · see citing works
Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook
Raynes-Goldie, K. (2010) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v15i1.2775 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries
Olteanu, A., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., & Kıcıman, E. (2019) · Frontiers in Big Data · doi:10.3389/fdata.2019.00013 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
- Authors
- Almuhimedi, H., Wilson, S., Liu, B., Sadeh, N., & Acquisti, A.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2013-02-23
- Pages
- 897-908
- OpenAlex
- W2032695641
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 20.40
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- European Commission
- King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology
- Army Research Office
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Keywords
- Twitter, social media privacy, retweets and replies, geotagging
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review