Australian Carbon Tax by DensityDesign

DIGITAL METHODS

the australian carbon tax

CONTENTS PART 1 - CONTROVERSY

INTRODUCTION

CONTROVERSY CHOICE

AUSTRALIAN CARBON TAX

RESEARCH QUESTION

PART 2 - PROTOCOL

INTRODUCTION

STEP 1 corpus determination

STEP 2 reading and categorization of articles

STEP 3 reading and counting of comments

STEP 4 semantic extraction and categorization

STEP 5 values consideration

PART 3 - VISUALIZATION

#1 POLARIZATION

#2 VARIETY

#2.1 VARIETY PEAKS

#3 RELEVANCE

#4 PROMINENCE

CASE-STUDY

CONCLUSIONS

PART 1

controversy

part 1 - controversy

INTRODUCTION The increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is one of the main causes of climate change. CO2 emissions are extremely harmful for both the environment and the human health: according to statistics of the WHO (World Health Organization) they directly increase cardiorespiratory diseases, and increasing temperature they intensify the proliferation of vector borne and water borne diseases (cholera, diarrhoea, dengue, malaria).

Many economists believe a tax on CO2 is the most efficient market approach to climate change because it has several advantages, particularly comparing it to other climate change oriented measures such as the cap-and–trade scheme: • Predictable carbon prices • Easier to understand • Revenue can be returned via tax cuts and/or used for public goods;

Several countries (such as Finland, Sweden, UK, New Zealand, Quebéc State, British Columbia), during the years adopted the carbon tax as a measure to ease the burden that human-caused pollution contribute to make. This taxation is a scheme of carbon pricing with the aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Since the early stages of the taxation design, it has always been subject to a big controversy, splitting the public opinion into a side of carbon tax-pro and another side of carbon tax-cons.

On the other side, it has some disadvantages: • there is no limit on the amount of carbon that can be emitted • tax revenues may end up being wasted in special interest spending, or priorities that are only peripheral to climate or sustainability (corn-based ethanol, nuclear., etc).

costs passed 3 Extra on to consumers by price increases

reduce pollution TAX 2 Industries paying the carbon tax 1 CARBON ESTABLISHMENT

PRICE RISE

CARBON TAX

COMPENSATION

part of the carbon tax revenue is used to compensate households for price rises

Small businesses and households have a price incentive to save energy and buy less pollution-intensive goods and services

demand rises for clean efficiency, products 5 Asenergy and investment becomes more attractive and affordable

intensive industries industries shift toward lower 6 Carbon emissions. Growth in cleaner

energy and carbonsequestering technology

7 Emissions fall

part 1 - controversy

CONTROVERSY CHOICE The field of research has been specified using digital tools that contribute to a more conscious view of the hot spot of the controversy. What at first has been pointed out is that the pattern of web research about this topic changed in the past years. The digital tool Google Trends, show how researches using the query “Carbon tax”, remained mostly constant in the span 2007-2010, while increasing dramatically in year 2011 and reaching a peak in the second half of the year. Comparing the queries “Carbon

tax” and the more general “Climate change” it can be seen that, quite surprisingly, the first overtook the second in July 2011. Looking at the bar chart that Google trends provides, it can be also seen a concentration of researches in Australia and specifically in the English language. This analysis has leaded to focus the research on the more specifical Australian area: in fact, it is in this country that a debate got heated during 2011 summer.

part 1 - controversy

AUSTRALIAN CARBON TAX Australia is a country where climate change has always been a very significant topic, mostly because, even if very less populated, it is proportionally the first CO2 pro capital producer in the world. In November 2011 the majority of the Australian Parliament, headed by the PM Julia Gillard (leader of Australian Labor Party) with the support of the Climate change and energy efficiency minister Greg Combet, approved the law that prices the CO2 emissions. Under this scheme, around 500 entities will be required to buy permits for each tonne of CO2 emitted: This cost will initially be set at $23, and increase gradually until 2015. Personal income tax will be reduced and the tax-free threshold increased. This politic measure generated a huge controversy throughout the country: most of the population consider this tax an excessive burden on the family outcomes, without a being real help for the environment. Among the main opposers of the tax, the large group of climate change deniers, that criticize the concept of global warming for itself and subsequently consider iniquous and irrelevant this kind of taxation. Other people consider the carbon tax as a possible contribution, even if not resolutive, to a global economy lead towards a better and cleaner planet . The debate soon turned out to be substantially political, because one of the point that Miss Gillardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s government programme focused on, was indeed not to establish the carbon tax. This change in the game in the matter of climate policies, subsequent to the alliance of the labors with the greens, has caused a huge discontent among the population that voted for her. The opposition, headed by Australian Liberal Partyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leader Mr. Tony Abbott, sided sharply against the carbon tax, preferring on the other side the emission trading scheme adopted also in Europe. 8

part 1 - controversy

RESEARCH QUESTION This research focuses on what web users thinks about carbon tax, specifically considering their response to public information sources. In the â&#x20AC;&#x153;sharing eraâ&#x20AC;? what counts the most is not only what people say, but particularly how they say it: the preliminary consideration is that if an idea many times is expressed (in a sort of binary code) just in a form of positive/negative, more often it is developed in slight and ambiguous ways. It is remarkable to consider, in addition to a mere statistic work based on the count of different opinions, how an idea can be expressed and supported in its different shades. The attempt is to experiment a sentimental analysis based of a combined work of both human judgment and scientific digital tools. The project questions can be summarized as follows [img 3]

1) What do web users think about Australian carbon tax?

2) How do they express their opinions?

3)Which are the main topics that people presents in support of their ideas?

11 links 55

POLITICAL DEBATE

197

155

PART 2

protocol

time range: last 3 months corpus size: 200 link query: “carbon tax” Australia

GOOGLE\NEWS

part 2- protocol

INTRODUCTION

DMI HARVESTER

MANUAL CLEANING

In the determination of a functional protocol, the first question to ask is which is the most suitable place to find materials. According to the aim of studying users’ point of view, at first they have been considered several different platforms, such as social networks, blogs and video-sharing websites, but they didn’t seem to respond to the basic requirements they had previously been established: clear argumentation and heterogeneity of opinions, pertinence to the input-topic and lack of vulgar language. Subsequently it has been chosen the way of expressing an opinion that most matched these criteria: the comments on articles found on online newspapers, both Australians and non Australians. The major factor that lead the research to focus on these particular field is that commenting an article most of the time implies a stronger interest in the topic discussed in the article itself.

removing links without comments

CORPUS DEFINITION

46 links

READING

CATEGORIZATION

political debate

political acts

non-political opinions

popoular reactions

N.R.

*.txt

extra-AU chronicles

*.html *.html

ALCHEMY API *.csv

*.csv

x 5 volte

MANUAL CLEANING manual process digital process

DIVISION BY TOPICS

tools manual steps 12

COUNT

RELEVANCE

WEIGHT

semantic variety polarization

relavance polarization

prominence by topic polarization

part 2- protocol

STEP 1_Corpus 1 2

The first step has been a research on news.google.com, with the query “Carbon tax” Australia. Results have been filtered considering a corpus of 200 links, in a time range of the last four months. With DMI Harvester, detection of these 200 links, checking the boxe “Exclude URLs from Google and Youtube”. This corpus made of 200 links, has been manually checked and cleaned following these criteria: 1) Exclusion of “Not found” links 2) Exclusion of links that diverted from the main topic 3) Exclusion of the news websites that didn’t allow comments The corpus has this way been reduced to a total of 46 links.

National abc.net.au news.com.au sbs.com.au

Perth perthnow.com.au

fw.farmonline.com.au

Goonellabah northernstar.com.au Adelaide

adelaidenow.com.au

Goulburn

Brisbane thechronicle.com.au Newcastle theherald.com.au

theaustralian.com.au Sidney dailytelegraph.com.au smh.com.au Canberra canberratimes.com.au

goulburnpost.com.au

Melbourne heraldsun.com.au

Dislocation of newspaper site in Australia 13

part 2- protocol

STEP 2_ reading and categorization of articles Each article has been read and inserted in a specific category. It has been possible to detect five categories according to the article typology: political debate, non political opinions, political acts, popular reactions and extra-australian chronicles. This subdivision is useful in order to achieve a more complete knowledge of the controversy dynamics: in fact depending on the input, the answer may vary considerably.

part 2- protocol

STEP 3_ reading, counting of comments Each comment has been read and divided according to its expression of a favourable opinion about carbon tax or a negative one. It has been introduced a third group of comments that for their particular characteristics couldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t fit in the mere judgement of pro/cons: the comments that have been considered not relevant because they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t express a clear and categorizable opinion, because they diverted from the main topic (in this case, particularly politic dissertations that didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t include carbon tax itself) or simply because they were a noise source. The result of this preliminary analysis is a spreadsheet that shows the distribution of the consent among the analysed categories. What at first can be seen, on a basis of about 1200 comments, is a sharp predominance of the cons above the pro.

197

NON-POLITICAL OPINIONS

155

239

5 links

POLITICAL ACTS

5 links

11 links

4 links

11 links 56

POLITICAL DEBATE

POPULAR REACTIONS

176

21 3

EXTRA-AU CHRONICLES

NOT RELEVANT 174

PRO 209 CONS 788

SEMANTIC EXTRACTION WITH ALCHEMY API

527

471 words

words

310 words

344 words 15

part 2- protocol

STEP 4_ semantic extraction and categorization At this point, each category was divided in the three sub-categories of pro, cons and not relevant: the last one has however been removed because it wasn’t made of significant data on which to build a semantic analysis. Afterwards, for each category they have been generated two html files containing respectively all the comments in favour and against the carbon tax. Using Alchemy API, it has been obtained a semantic analysis made by 10 csv files that considered concept, entities and keywords. The following step required an interpretation of the raw data the tool had given, and what at first seemed necessary was to consider all the data got from the extraction, not limiting it only to concept or entities. After a brief cleaning of the words detected by the tool but completely not relevant, such as sequences of random letters and numbers or lonely prepositions. They have also been removed the words “Australia” and “Carbon

tax”, that were contained in each csv because they were part of the original query. The process developed then into a further categorization ignoring the one proposed by the tool (that automatically detect some fields such, for example, City, People or Organizations). They were generated 12 categories that emerged in a physiological way from the reading of the extracted words, and once merged them in a color subdivision they have been checked and cleaned a second time, taking care of removing the equal words. In addition to these categories it has been added another one that included all the words that, even if pertinent to the carbon tax controversy, weren’t clearly attributable to one of the twelve previously determined. The purpose of this additional category is to show how in a pattern of similar topics what can make the difference is indeed the word that “doesn’t fit in”.

taxes Carbon tax and other taxation in Australia or not

majority party Prime Minister Giulia Gillard, Labour Party and all the majority line-up

opposition party Opposition leader Tony Abbott, Liberal Party all the minority line-up

geographical references Cities and Countries in Australia and all over the world

regulation Protocols (like Kyoto), tradings, carbon prices regulations

climate references All about climate change, global warming and the scientific references

fossil fuels Carbon fossil fuels, like coal, fuel and natural gas

pollutant Emissions of pollutant gases, like Co2 emission

energies Alternative or clean energies

money Micro economics issues, family income, bills, wage

business Macro economics issues, enterprises, multinationals company

istitutions State institutions or non governative organizations

Raw .csv data, uncleaned

Cleaned and categorized data

part 2- protocol

STEP 5_ value consideration Typically, an Alchemy analysis provides three different measures that can be used to visualize a controversy: count, (only for “entities”) relevance and the total count of the words shown in the csv, that give an idea of the semantic variety in the analysed category. For this research they have been used relevance and words count, used alone or weighted. The weighting is a particularly important factor because one of the main purposes of the analysis is to compare words and topics amongst the same category but also between different categories: in order to do it, it is necessary to convert all the values considered in a comparable base, in this case 100. This way the absolute value become relative and the comparison is possibile. The weighting process starts from the idea that, if both count and relevance can express a lot if considered individually, they have a greater visualizing potential if joined to express a more reliable value.

relevance 2° value

always use the average of relevance of topics relevance

count 1° value

use the percentage to compare counts between different topics count : tot count = x : 100

▼

count * 100 tot count

weight 3° value

(

)

percentage * average 100

try to weighting percentage and average in order to estimate topics prominence 19

0,2756675

0,31832367

0,42790175

0,348631

0,4922675

PART 3

visualization

part 3- visualization

#1 POLARIZATION In the attempt to perceive the predominant topics in the proside and in the cons-side, it has been visualized the polarization graph: in these three graphs it is expressed the polarization of the twelve topics (plus the discriminant category) between the two poles of pro and cons. The closeness of a topic to one of the two vertical axes, reflects the real closeness to the correspondent side. They have been proposed three versions (prominence, relevance, word count) to allow a comparison and an observation of the main patterns.

Count: this value express how many words belong to each topic. The highest value of each topic is used to set the position on the Y axe.

count 110

110

discriminate

geographic references

taxes

majority party 30

PRO

regulation opposition party money pollutants fossil fuels

clean energy business

institutions

climate references

CONS 23

Relevance: this value consider the relevance of each word extract with Alchemy. The highest value of each topic is used to set the position on the Y axe.

relevance 1

0,95

0,70

pollutants climate references 0,50

0,30

regulation fossil fuels

clean energy 0,50

taxes money business opposition party majority party discriminate

0,30

geographic references

PRO 24

CONS

Prominence: the value used in this graph considers the weighting of both relevance and count. The highest value of each topic is used to set the position on the Y axe .

prominence 110

110

discriminate 95

PRO

CONS 25

REACTIONS POPULAR

PRO

64 words

4 2

s ciet tem rs so cky at denie tri caust king olo hijac bility true ss dupa rnings ma rary wa t lite cial ben d spe limite e news mon usag com run long ic laughs ions man generat futurearbon people anti c work hard ergy Future Clean En medicarecivic council national NASA IPCC NOAA BOM stimulous payments in ation rate self funded retirees wage minimum wage higher income progressive tax tax tax free threshold huge tax cut high tax brack Tony Abbo et Christop tt just a on her Pyne Turnbul e trick pony Howard l emissi low ca on trading Kyoto rbon econ carb Protocol omy carb on pricing gree on dioxid car nhouse e glo bon footp gas emiss ion climbal warm rint Me ate ch ing Isr lbourn ange cle ael e fo an en Mc ssil fu ergy Gi Man els Gu llard sion Un y Pe gover en iver arce nment en ergy sity o li erg ef d Co fe bert y ciency lorado T der arian c ea P al pa ca J ons arty rliam to insi e tute A imm erv a n t l bra y C tive clo ong t ham arter radi om wn ime Lin col edi act a n 1

1 1 1

t en nm r ver te go nis te mi sta rime p oal l fuel ing c ossi min as f oal al g ts c ur an oal nat oal pl oal g c c NG lian c elchin city C stra ion b capa a u t nt u l pol al pla ly co el coal al supp fu inese an co oal ch trali ty c aus own dir otocol ng br oto pr tradi Ky ission treaty em ban e coal bon pric heme carbon car ding sc pricing strategy tra ulation duction reg ion re emisson dioxide carb GHG on emission carb am gas coal se oduction issions Co2 prdomestic em total China Victoria stralia South Au Europe lia Wstern Austra USA energy sources clean energy nuclear power renewable clean energy nance Rupert Murdoch australian coal exports mining australian coal coal exporters coal industry market a carbon tax coal tax domestic entire pa carbon tax Labor yroll tax green party nations prim al party Glob e minister J Clim al warmin ulia Gillard Ton ate chan g Obamy Abbott ge Bog a You an we tube ma alth red po rines istributi on de licy pu spera de re c te me dir spera tion asures fr ect a te m sc ee tra ction an pu eptic de Li re b s m bera elea T inor l pa gue R ony ity g rty o red v A eith Abbot overn f Aust oting t me rali T rth nt a r on ur S y r igh Ab ino ele ight wt wing bott c dinos cti in om on g n edy ac m utte pai rs gn Ab bo tt 7

S ONICLE U CHR A A EXTR 68 words 6 5

6 4

2 1

y s r teg and ade tra y st n le tt s rt tio gs t bo ral pa posi ratba nmen b A be op ng ver li ood wi go rt y g ight ition ent bor pa r oal nm n la r C over alia iste ent g ustr min rnm A rime gove bet p bor Com la regg G udd R x ate ax ta x cuts tax deb ution t ta rbon distrib ca lth re aln tax x wa tion p ts ta ac per pro su A US pe Euro ai Dub ney Syd hanistan Afg Iraq r pro ts supe it margins ness prot rbine busi gas tu ETS y n IR polic trading legislatio carbon sources Energy ine rb gas tu clean energy Natural gas els addition fossil fu Carbon dioxide capita carbon emission Global warming climate change pension increases oxygen world electricity bosses wealthies cou spoilt white ntries don’t offer alttrash long term ernatives don’t bel thinking high certaieve baby bo inty naked omers large d partisan igno istances bull rant victim tremeshit politics s Mur ndous utte doch-Ab boom signi r nonsensbott spin bett cant e litt er Aus display po le pigs tralia outswerful e bip tand nem sm artisa ing ex ies gr aller n sup ampl

The two graphs show the whole semantic corpus extracted with Alchemy after the operation of checking and cleaning, and it is clearly visible the subdivision in 12 different categories. The aim of these visualizations is to point out the semantic variability for each category. Linking the words that are equal in different categories clearly shows how, for different topics, users can express their ideas in a less heterogeneous way. It can be seen a so called “reticulate of variability”: more links correspond to a smaller vocabulary used to express the same concept. This is particularly significant in order to have a clear and complete view on users’ habits and to understand which are the topics that are closer to the person who’s speaking. As a matter of fact, topics more “official” such as politics or climate change related have a smaller semantic variations, whilst hotter topics such as money and household do actually have a more prominent semantic variability

ATE DEB L ICA ds LIT 61 wor PO

#2 SEMANTIC VARIETY part 3- visualization

POLI TICA LA 51 w ords CTS 4

3 3

66 words

NON POLITICAL OPINIO NS

2 1

ICLES N O R H -AU C ords A R T EX 68 w

am gh nin n un bo el C car icha shott M ake o I lson UN amue ze is S e ll s Sherad Co awkin ons ort B ob H acti supp B ct m cy direng ter e l ocri lo elfar schoo us hyp w ivate onio pr nctim sa ty mpt

l ng coa rmi ce wn wa cien e bro lobal ate s limat g lim er c d hol c old c TI care thres e A edi care oxid m edi n di ide m arbo er ox x tax c lph an ta bon su govi t car ce nt pi gges uran rnme bi e ins gove lif llard Gi ls UK ergy bil en nami tsu aner cle net bene t pla ligible neg d thing volution sultation goo ustrial re ublic con ind nsive p nces exte ty concie guil al ntage glob petitive advag com urable thin hono obfuscation little n dioxide carbo ission fuel emouse gas greenh n pollutio llution carbon po n dioxide lowest carbo emission capita carbon t carbon footprin China India Melbourne Singapore UK North America Japan Western Europe Miss Gillard Labor party Howard Howard g Gillard go overnment socialis vernment Breâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;r Abbt Mr No ott Tony LiberalAbbott Turn s Libe bull emissral policy emis ion stand car sions tr ard rangbon pricin ading car ing ca g cap bon pr rbon pri Ky -and-t icing la ce Globoto prot rade sch ws clim al w ocol eme cli ate armin gl mate chan g hip obal te disast ge p in oc mp ers em sura ket erature en plo nce p cle ergy yment remiu c an so s o m C lean ene urce pport s uni c lean ene rgy s ties minlimat ener rgy b c e e g i ll s arb ral cha y fu bu mall on ta s cou nge c ture sin tax x c nci om om ls mi ess ssi me on nt

c el co al s fu ese n co l chinstralia irty coa l au n d oco browoto prot trading Ky sion eaty emisal ban tr ice co on pr me rbon carbding schepricing ca strategy tra ation ction regulssion redude emi n dioxi carbo GHG emission carbosneam gas coal duction ions Co2 prdoomestic emiss total China Victoria tralia South Aus Europe alia Wstern Austr USA energy sources clean energy nuclear power renewable clean energy nance Rupert Murdoch australian coal exports mining australian coal coal exporters coal industry market a carbon ta coal tax x domestic entire p carbon tax Labor ayroll tax green party natio s prim nal party Glob e minister J Clim al warmin ulia Gillard Ton ate chan g Obamy Abbott ge Bog a You an we tube m alth r e a d po rines istributi on de licy pu spera de re c te me di spera tion asures fr rect a te m sc ee tra ction an pu epti de Li re b cs m bera elea T inor l pa gue R ony ity g rty o red v A eith Abbot overn f Aust oting t me rali T rth nt a r ony ur S rig ight Abb inod le e ht w wing ott co inos c t me ion ing n dy ca ut m pai ters gn A bb ott

le r r p lo eates clean port en w em t ren gene Ky ergy issio ewab rator em oto Pr ef cie n techn le reso s ca iss ot nt olog urces y tr rbo ion t ocol M adin n pr radi H urd g c ice ng ma azelw och oncep t Mu ssiv ood c rd e dir arbon och mmini tie edi ng co st p a mp ow ani er es sta ti o n

y s r teg stand leade a r t y n tt s rt tio gs t bo ral pa posi ratba nmen b A be op ng ver li ood wi go rt y g ight ition ent bor pa l r oa nm n la r C over alia iste ent g ustr min rnm A rime gove bet p bor Com la regg G udd R x ate ax ta x cuts tax deb bution t ta rbon distri ca lth re aln tax x wa tion p ts ta ac per pro su A US ope Eur ai Dub ney Syd hanistan Afg Iraq r pro ts supe it margins ess prot urbine busin g as t ETS cy on IR poli trading legislati carbon sources Energy ine gas turb gy clean ener s Natural ga els addition fossil fu Carbon dioxide capita carbon emission Global warming climate change pension increases oxygen world electricity bosses wealthies countrie spoilt white tra s sh

ATE B E LD s A C I d LIT 61 wor O P

NON P O L I T I C AL O P I N I ONS 64 wo rds

3 2

2 1

ing rm ge wa han bal e c glo at ne clim tha n me axatio ayers t ax t p s xide tax x cut n dio x ta bo ta car come stem in sy ars tax x doll tax ta pid stu w tax ne rate tax s tax intless earner p o me e inco incom low e me wag gle income sin inco e ers high r incom e earn lowe er incom rs high ket earne poc income family lowerle income sing ways bills r polluting ment Thei l govern al federaStreet Journ Wall rnaut Ross GFaC The G treasurcy disease chroni my wife distribution wealth re extremist rd Julia Gilla ent Gillard governm AL P Juliar Labor government Paul Keating Gillard party greens government Sidney Melbourne Europe India Brazil Greece Darwin Hong Ko top ten ng three e polluters Qantas co-crimilals bu s i n big bu ess big p siness Tony olluters liber Abbott Malc als Pete olm Turn Mr.N r Costello bull em o Ky ission t

minintax tax new tless carbon le g poin n tax bun x carbo er carbon ta x small led carbon ta so-cal taxes GST tax rbon tax wide ca arbon tax highest c nonsense carbon tax on tax idiotic carb n tax iniquous carbo carbon tax asco treasury parliament house senate pentagon Obama depression policy power station planet long time Comrad-Gillar left gover d greens nment Bob Bro labor partwn labor g y aussie government Kevin overnment Julia G India illard USA Euro Greecpe C an e Male berra Chi sia Indo na em nesia Kyot ission tr em o pro adin carb ission s tocol g ca on p tan carbrbon cr rice dard g on edit gre reenho dioxide s co enh use oil c 2 emi ouse g gas in om ssio as comdustr panie ns emissi ons s b c y win usines ars c d s lo lean turb Ton w ca ener ines P y rb g UN aulin Abbo on te y IMF e H tt chn olo ans gie on s

CONS 5

70 words

POPULAR REACTIONS

NON PO LIT I C A L OPINI ONS

64 wo rds

4 11

POPULAR REACTIONS 70 words

3 3 1

79 w

PO LIT ICA

d ent lar m al Gil ern ray tax lia r gov u J bo r ax bet arbon n tax la ulia in t s c rbo tax J arb ulou d ca bon nse c dic nte car nse ri nwa tful x no u ecei n ta ud d rbo x fra ca 2 ta co x ax tax s ta ining t super cheme tax m ining tax s rbon m rbon ss ca ca intle oot der po ny Ab n lea ment To positio overn op eral g ey lib e Hock rd Jo e Howa J o No ony Mr. rals ing T libe hful think wis party ty LNP ority par min on trade l carb o protoco ng Kyot sion tradi emis n credit carbo n pricing carbo ion standard emiss e change climat el sea lev tming global wamelting met ice gas greenhousexide carbon dio sion carbon emis emissions greenhouse gas business tax big business top ten polluters UN the parliament the besr thing electricity Alan Joyce censure motion international legislation measure manipulative manoeuvering dubious annuum reputation moral p increase considerrinciple unsavo able increase rocket ury deal polit science higheics al principle austr t of ce Kevin alian lab Julia Rudd or party Gill Gillard Mr. ard/Brow Bob BJenkins n govern ment Gil rown lab lard go Adamor goververnmen t n co Ba me so rrupte ndt nt Bo cialist d gover nme Bob b Hawk nt C Pr ar e ta ime M r tax x obse iniste ssed r mi n gov ri in ern sc dicu g tax men in am lous t car come tax tax car bon tax la b ta car bor t on tax x hig L b ax l hl J NP on t hi ie ights Me ohn H party ax co ke l B ow mp rou ar one gh d nt

nt me ott ern bb ov nt yn A rity g ision rnme To ino dec ove m NP al g key L ber oc ice y li oe H cho one J ork w DP yers msts ions s G x pa r co t opt sion ta ighe en pen h tirem ent se re tirem crea re ice in pr rica ajors Af ia m As ney Sid A US geria Ni ain rica Sp uth Af t So er pro rders sup nding o panies sta rol com ading pet ission tr it em on cred carb ane gas mething tax min tax tax new tless carbon le poin n tax bung carbo er carbon tax x l smal d carbon ta so-calle taxes GST tax rbon tax wide ca arbon tax highest c nonsense carbon tax on tax idiotic carb n tax iniquous carbo carbon tax asco treasury parliament house senate pentagon Obama depression policy power station planet long time Comrad-Gil left gover lard greens nment Bob Brown labor p labor goarty aussie vernment Kevin government Julia India Gillard USA Euro Gre pe C an e c e Male berra Chi sia Ind na emisonesia Kyo sion em to pro tradin carb ission s tocol g ca on p tan ca rbon c rice dard g rbon redit gre reenho dioxide s co enh use oi 2 em ouse gas in l com issio gas comdustr panie ns emissio s b c y ns w usin ars c ind ess lo lean turb Ton w ca ener ines P y rb g U au Ab on y IMF N line H bott techn olo ans gie on s 2

on s iat ter var l vo vity es foo ra lgi or g g du po yclin on in ese c arb hin c C the SA pe U uro ing nd E yom isla W urtis uver C co van dia In sia A UK o Ohi dney n lia Si chiga ustra Mi gin A Vir tas rgy s Qan in Ene r plant Orig nuclea MW group rs BG el make s ste try actor ustry indusopean ind nuclear re ower eur mercial nuclear p com mercial com r taxes higheon tax bill carb tax green e tax incom tax es tonne usehold expens extra ho t fuel cosousehold extra h ehold cost extra hous coal fossil fuels ants ef cient coal pl natural gas global warming climate change net ice melt a liar and turncoat Julia Gillard Robert Reich nuclear power nuclear plants civialian nuclear power carbon dioxide greenhouse gas co2 emissions IPCC Canadian enough government Obama courage treasu rainbo ry senat w government ppoli e blac cies gove k holes mass rnment sy sho ive debts srem stup w l eg i d foo islation ma ls ba ternity hy d polic leave Ch pocrite ies Me ina s Ca lbour Ja nada ne Go pan In ulbu A dia rne N sia C orthe C harlt rn E B alifo on nglan d A razil rnia c ustr th oali alia in e c tion n la w ep urr gre bor t or t go ent at pa e s pat ax ob t gov vernm prim st str rty he ses ern en e m eng tic se me t ini ht ste h g d o r ver gove nt nm rnm e n en t t

LES ONIC R H AU C RA- 62 words 9 EXT

ing rm ge wa han bal e c glo limat ane c eth tion rs m axa aye t ax t p s xide tax x cut n dio x ta arbo e ta c com stem in sy ars tax x doll tax ta upid x st w ta ne rate tax s tax intless earner po come me in inco low e me wag gle income sin h inco me rners hig er inco ome ea low er inc rs high ket earne poc er income e family low le incom sing ways bills r polluting ment Thei al govern rnal feder Street Jou Wall naut Ross GarC The GF ry treasu isease chronic d my wife distribution wealth re extremist Julia Gillard ent Gillard governm AL P Juliar Labor government Paul Keating Gillard party greens government Sidney Melbourne Europe India Brazil Greece Darwin Hong Ko top ten ng three ecpolluters Qantas o-crimilals bu s i n big bu ess big po siness Tony lluters libera Abbott Malc ls Pete olm Turn M r Costello bull r . N em o Kyo ission tr ETS to protocading ol car IPC bon cr me C rep edit IPC dicar ort CS C e ca IRO ca rbon gl rbon dioxid cl obal emis e Ro imat warm sion N ber e cha ing M avy t Reich nge M att R A iste idle S l Go r Re y E teve re vkin t lite n Lev itt e rain p xtra ed wo ext rime rke ra mi rs w n ra m ister ing en erg y 11

s ord

E AT EB D L 4

POL IT IC AL ACT 69 wor S ds 9

part 3- visualization

#3 SEMANTIC PEAKS This visualization is an integration of the previous one, in fact it provides a direct comparison between the two poles pro and cons, showing how the same topic can have a more considerable semantic variability in a pole more than in the other. It can also be easily seen a direct comparison between different topic in the same pole.

PRO

CONS

part 3- visualization

#4 RELEVANCE The second visualization points out categories inside pro and inside cons, in order to allow, varying the research question, the choice of the most suitable variables..

These graphs show, for each category, the fluctuation of relevance average of the topics, directly comparing pro and cons. The goal is to understand in which side the words extracted in the semantic analysis are more or less relevant.

0,2756675

0,31832367

0,48723133

0,42790175

0,348631

0,4922675 0,16664514

0,31139223

0,412604 0,26107815

0,60726233

0,688954

0,6130989 0,47307872 0,26706433

0,248339

0,248482

0,35867636

0,46255282

0,37627517

0,54954363 0

0,7656872

political debate

0,20339638

0,1947815

0,1773812

0,40439

0,36897017

0,700269

0,607876

0,525474

0,51259958

0,6171834

0,5397898

0,4541498

0,33848783

0,3709126

0,406082

0,575914

0,47842825

0,42151733

0,34689465

0,324357

0,335079

0,35172771

0,3556295

0,2904652

popular reactions

34 0

0,228636

0,5110175

0,3679915

0,324357 0,47582358

0,46621325

0,35444833

0,50519733

0,38833072

0,42183871

0,38440317

0,417701

0,39496575

0,29526854

0,22351122

0,25421021

0,43646356

0,3780886

0,308001

0,262268

extra-Au chronicles political acts

0,31012

0,41368663

0,327777 0,633552

0,5540624

0,58308775

0,602129

0,601539

0,48898613 0,40143775

0,29374333

0,299182

0,4255355

0,31723343

0,3344389

0,61993467

0,551673

0,476366

0,452245 0,33638767

0,30469

0,320386

0,2793702

0,199354

0,1652945

0,29821938

0,33772264

0,39077425

0,3334165

0,5644705

0,537889

0,33848783

0,33812038

0,311955

0,238675

0,3705923

non-political opinions

0,987159

political debate

non-political opinion

extra-Au chronicles

political acts

popular reaction

0,26107815

0,47582358

0,42151733

0,31723343

0,25421021

0,34689465

0,26706433

0,33638767

0,3780886

0,335079 0,46621325

0,35444833

0,35172771

0,30469

0,248482

0,50519733 0,43646356

0,3556295

0,35867636

0,320386

0,308001

0,47842825

0,37627517

0,29821938

0,262268

0,3679915

0,700269

relevance PRO 1

0,987159

0,406082

0,412604

0,4541498

0,41368663

0,42183871

0,31832367

0,327777

0,38440317

0,39077425

0,40439

0,42790175

0,6171834

0,61993467

0,551673

0,48898613

0,417701

0,348631

0,29374333

0,33848783

0,537889

0,4922675

0,4255355

0,39496575

0,3709126

0,2756675

0,16664514

0,299182

0,22351122

0,311955

0,31012

0,5110175

0,5644705

political debate

non-political opinion

extra-Au chronicles

political acts

popular reaction

0,575914

0,47307872

0,589291

0,601539

0,48795433

0,37625007 0,3344389

0,54954363

0,46255282

0,452245

0,324357 0,324357

0,248339

0,199354

0,1947815

0,323406

0,29526854

0,228636

0,1652945

0,1773812

0,33772264

0,473122

0,38833072

0,2904652

relevance CONS 1

0,35918658

0,448352

0,476366

0,633552

0,5397898

0,48723133

0,40143775

0,36652567

0,3334165

0,36897017

0,60726233

0,5540624

0,50598233

0,525474

0,7656872

0,688954

0,58308775

0,52075925

0,607876

0,6130989

0,602129

0,51259958

0,427515

0,33812038

0,31139223

0,2793702

0,238675

0,20339638

0,4385238

0,3705923

CONS

part 3- visualization

#5 PROMINENCE The importance of this graph is its being summarizing and double-readable. In fact, it allows a multiple comparison between the two poles pro and cons, topics and categories. If in the central bar it can be found the overall flows of topic, the polarity on the sides allows to understand how these flows are divided and, at the same time, to also have a singular vision inside the topics of one specific category, made more easily understandable with bar charts. This way, it can be considered a summary and a deepening of the previous visualizations. Is goal is to express the value of â&#x20AC;&#x153;prominenceâ&#x20AC;? of the topics inside categories, weightening word count and relevance.

69,8 62,6

political debate

38,8 47,3 26,2 46,8 12,3 23,1 3,1

32,9 10,9 38,6 12,7 17,4 37,4 6,3 31,7 14,2 5,6

popular reaction

90,5 33,2 30,8 23,2 17,4 12,7 31,6 80,6 15 8,3 52,3

non-political opinions

131,7 47,5 49,5 34,9 36,4 5,2 25,1 17,3 9,4 21,2 6,2 52,3

political act

48,3 84,4 13,8 24,2 34,2 19,3 34,3 3,3 75,2

extra-au chronicles

40,6 43,2 13,6 16,4 16,1 76,4 15,7 5,7 14 8,1 13,1 55,6

political debate

95,8

35,4 22,9 7,2 75,3 25,2 53,2 27,6 24,5 31,5 28,5 5,2 85

9,4 27,1 37,6 36,3 58 29,1 5 13,4 37 15 15,3 13,8 62,5

political debate popular reaction

32,9 10,9 38,6 12,7 17,4 37,4 6,3 31,7 14,2 5,6 5,2 38,5 140,9

non-political opinions

40,6 43,2 13,6 16,4 16,1 76,4 15,7 5,7 14 8,1 13,1 55,6

22,1 7,2 43,3

30,6 8,6 36,5

political act

6,1 21,1

29,7 36,6 20,8

30,1 15,4 43,4 19,7 34,8 9,1 28,3 12,3 83,4 27,8 52,3

PRO

extra-au chronicles

223,9

PART 4

case study

pension increase climate chang Global warmin capita carbon emissio Carbon dioxid e ti addi on fossilalfug Natur clean ener gas turb ur Energy siso la g le g in d a IR p carbon tr

CASE-STUDY

bine bu gas tur protit m supe

political debate’s topic

In order to reach the research goals, it will now be analysed a case-study with the attempt to verify if they are exhaustive and functionals. It has been chosen to consider only one category, specifically “Political debate” and analyse how it can be used as a basis to answer to the research questions.

1. What do users think about carbon tax? As the first graph shows, the analysed comments sharply express the opposition of users to carbon tax (197 vs 56), being them more than double of the users that on the other hand, are in favour to it. Corpus remains even bigger subsequently to the semantic analysis in which, after a manual cleaning of pointless words, they have been analysed 79 for cons and 61 for pros.

197

155

POLITICAL DEBATE

TE A B DE L ICA words T I OL 61

11 links

2. How and in which form (language) do users express their opinion? The categories (political debate_pro and political debate_cons) extracted from count graphs show the semantic variety inside categories. Summarized with cirles of different sizes according to the number of connection the word has, it is clear to point out how among the cons there is a less semantic variety: in fact, the words used are the same used in other categories. It can also be notices that in the cons group, even if it has a bigger number of words, there is a smaller number of topics: it results in a reduced semantic variation and a reduced topics amount.

pro

ele cti on c rig amp h t w aign Ton ing Ab yA Art bbo righ nutt bott hur tt c t w ers Sin ome ing Lib mino od d e T pur ral p rity g ony Re inos y e be arty ove Ab ith leag of A rnm bott uer ust ent ed ral sce voting ia d fre pti desp irect ae tradecs desp pu erate mction erat re fi an e me ctio asur n es weal p th re ma olicy distr rines ibu Youtution Canadia Boga b e enough cnogovernment n Obam Obama urage a treasury rainb senateow government polic black ieh s gove oles massirnment sys sho ve debts rem stupiw leg d foolsislation ma bad ternity l hy polic eave Chinpocrites ies Me a Can lbourn Ja ada e Gou pan In lbu Asi dia rne N a Chaorther C rlt n E Bra aliforn on nglan d A zi ia coa ustra l l t li ia in he c tion n la wo ept g urren grea bor p tax rst ove t p tes arty ob gov rnm rime t str ses ern e m eng sed me nt inis hth t er gov nt ern me nt

PO LIT I

TE EBA LD CA ords

nt me n r ve go nt te ic illard rnme h al at lia G gove ray on tax x t u e r J bo r x b arb n ta la ulia in ta s c rbo tax J arb lou d ca bon nse c dicu nte car nse ri nwa tful x no u ecei n ta ud d rbo x fra ca 2 ta co x ax tax s ta ining t super cheme tax m ining tax s bon m rbon ss car ca intle oot der po ny Ab on lea ent To positi overnm op eral g ey lib e Hock rd Jo e Howa Jo No y Mr. rals nking Ton libe hful thi wis party ty LNP ority par min on trade l carb o protoco g Kyot sion tradin emis n credit carbo n pricing carbo ion standard emiss e change climat el sea lev atming global w elting met ice m se gas greenhou xide carbon dio on carbon emissi emissions greenhouse gas business tax big business top ten polluters UN 11

es ge ng on de els gas rgy bine rces ation policy ETS usinesnss margifits er pro Iraq nistan Afgha Sydney i Dubape o r Eu SA U x s ta fi ro t ln tax p r e a sup tion p ion tax e ac ribut ebat s t edis tax d x cut x r alth carbon ta ta dd Ru bet om nt gg C me er Gre govern inist rty or e m pa t lab prim labor rnmenent an ve m gs rali go overn ratba der t s Au n g g lea ds itio ht win ition y stan tegy l a Co rig ppos part stra d o ral bott goo libe Ab

cons

1 link 2 link 3 link

4 link

that the main fields of the argumentation were about politics. With a further topic, for example the one about taxations, they can be pointed out the differences between words typologies: in the pro group prevail personal name, while among cons group prevail adjectives, used to negatively characterize an unpopular tax.

Observing the main topic for each category it can be inferred that generally in consâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; argumentations there are a lot of comparisons with other realities deeply involved in the carbon tax controversy, because geography is the prevailing topic. In the same way, it can be observed that in the pro group the biggest topic is the one referring to the opposition party, and subsequently it can be inferred

3 1

0,2756675

0,31832367

0,348631 0,16664514

0,42790175

0,4922675

0,412604 0,26107815

0,26706433

0,248482

0,35867636

0,37627517

political debate

3) Which are the topics users use on support to their thesis?

Whilst cons comments seem to be penalized, due to their reduces semantic variability, with an observation of the relevance graph the situation seem to favour them: in all the topics the cons comments are more relevant that the pro ones, particularly in the fields of emissions, climate change and protocols. It has, though, to be underlined their lack of topics such as energies and fuels, like argumentations seem to stop at a level of criticizing the emission problem without suggesting a solution.

CONS

69,8 62,6

political debate

38,8 47,3 26,2 46,8 12,3 23,1 3,1 95,8

40,6 43,2 13,6 16,4 16,1 76,4 15,7 5,7 14 8,1 13,1 55,6

PRO

political debate

To finally have a general vision on the problem and to compare the word count with their relevance, it can be seen the prominence graph in which, as expected, it can be seen in a more immediate way the comparison between pro and cons and, taking in consideration a single flow, compare the single values.

p des pu re fic

te ion ng a a i r t t e o p t ac e v trali s d e e c d d ire tra r s d ree tics eague of Au ent f cep bel arty rnm s ure al p gove p iber rity tt L ino bbo s dy o m ny A n i To eith Sinod t come R rthur bbot A ny A ing tters Abbott To ht w ing nu paign rig ht w cam y rig ection trateg ands r el bott s arty st n leade Ab eral p ositio gs lib od opp ratba ent go ht wing overnm rig lition g t Coa ernmen abor party gov tralian l ter Aus e minis ent prim r governm labo g Combet Greg Rudd tax ts tax cu n tax debate ax carbo edistribution t walth r aln tax action p ofits tax super pr USA Europe Dubai Sydney Afghanistan Iraq super profits protit margins gas turbine business ETS IR policy carbon trading legisla tion Energy sources gas turbine clean energy Natural gas addition

ATE L DEB TICA POLI 61 words

PART 5

conclusion

part 5 - conclusion

CONCLUSION According to the graphs the controversy pattern can be summarized as follows:

67,3% CONS

17,8

14,9

PRO

Among those who say yes to carbon tax, the most relevant topics are the ones related to the harmful effects of pollutants, to the political actions, and to the fossil fuels. In fact the supporters of this tax are very sensitive to environmental issues and global warming, and think that carbon tax is the first step to clean the planet from humanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pollution. Looking at the relevances of the topics of carbon tax Cons, it has been notice that people opposed to carbon tax would prefer an action about clean energy and incentives for it, rather than pay a tax that many persons can not afford. As itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s analyzed in the case study, it is interesting to see that the category Political Debate in the PRO side has a large number of words related to the opposition party, and the opposers to carbon tax have a large number of words linked to the government of Julia Gillard. Analyzing the topic Popular Reactions is easy to see the dissatisfaction related to tax and money: in many comments there examples of families who describe their economic situation and family size, and would not be able to support this tax.

Referring to the graph of the semantic variety, it has been noticed that in the comments PRO carbon tax this aspect hardly changes among the topics, but this that’s very different in the CONS part: the topic TAXES has a high number of words, because users of NO prefer to talk about the negativity of taxation in its varous aspects, writing a lot of impulsive and angry comments. There are many words also in the topic Majority Party, as many are the invectives against the government, Julia Gillard, and nicknames that users give to her. The category determinate (the one with words that can not be contained in any other category) is very remarkable in the topic Political Act in the YES side. Words such as “long term thinking”, “do not offer alternatives”, “better Australia”, “wealthiest countries” explain well the thoughts of users, who encourage to think to a better future of our children, and believe that a reduction of CO2 is only possible with a choice that does not offer alternatives: a political action requiring everyone to participate.