Search results

Niger Delta University (NDU) campus is located on the fringe of a Nun River Forest Reserve (NRFR) in Nigeria. The NRFR covers 97.15 km² of humid tropical rainforest characterized by torrential rains, seasonal flooding, and multi‐layered vegetation. This paper aims to conduct a wildlife study, to assess the effects of the NDU campus project on NRFR.

The assessment was preceded by “scoping” to determine key wildlife issues. Thereafter a mix of methods, including literature search, reconnaissance visits, field exercises, and interviews with hunters, was adopted to gather information. These were augmented with diurnal and nocturnal forest expeditions to find evidence(s) of wildlife species existence.

There is a rich assemblage of wildlife species; of which 12 are enlisted in the 2006 IUCN Red List of threatened species, while 14 are protected by Nigeria's statutes; and they are threatened by human activities. The NDU campus project shall have significant adverse impacts on the wildlife: directly through habitat loss/fragmentation, nuisance, influx of people; and indirectly by exacerbating the existing threats.

This work is limited to the NDU campus project and its impact on NRFR. The brevity of time spent in the field coupled with the generally inaccessible terrain and remote location of the NRFR constitute the limitations that must have influenced the findings in this paper.

This paper reports the results of an original work, discusses the impacts of NDU campus on NRFR, and highlights conservation‐friendly local beliefs/practices that could fit into a wildlife management plan, and fosters the debate on methodologies and field initiatives.

For many, the sole source for news content is social media, where passionate opinions are posted at an alarming speed. These opinions can cross the line from differing opinions shared in a public forum onto uncivil dialogue and even hate speech. Such online discourse threatens democratic values and creates a hostile environment. The purpose of this paper is to examine such incivility using the case of four congresswomen known as “The Squad”.

The authors conducted a content analysis examining 20,563 replies to tweets sent by the four congresswomen. The social media data analysis and library, Brandwatch, was used to aggregate tweets posted by the four representatives, as well as all the replies posted to these tweets. The replies were coded to understand the types of incivility against each of the four congresswomen, whether the topics of a tweet can predict the types of incivility received in response, and the impact of Trump's tweet against the congresswomen.

The study findings show that the majority of replies contained uncivil language. The most common types of incivility are related to name-calling, stereotypes, threats to individual rights and vulgarity. Tweets about immigration and the Muslim ban, as well as tweets with negative tones received more replies. Following Donald Trump's Twitter attack on the representatives, replies to the congresswomen's tweets almost doubled. Mainly two types of incivility were observed to have increased significantly – the use of stereotypes and threats to individual rights.

The study examines incivility on Twitter against four black, indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) congresswomen as an exploratory case to observe and understand the growing phenomenon of uncivil language which feeds a polarized society and threatens democratic values. “The Squad” is more than an isosteric case study. It captures key changes in American politics. In the context of democratic discourse, the attack by the former president on these congresswomen and the response on social media address key issues of gender, religion and race in the United States.