Othering, the act of portraying outgroups as fundamentally different from the ingroup, often escalates into framing them as existential threats--fueling intergroup conflict and justifying exclusion and violence. These dynamics are alarmingly pervasive, spanning from the extreme historical examples of genocides against minorities in Germany and Rwanda to the ongoing violence and rhetoric targeting migrants in the US and Europe. While concepts like hate speech and fear speech have been explored in existing literature, they capture only part of this broader and more nuanced dynamic which can often be harder to detect, particularly in online speech and propaganda. To address this challenge, we introduce a novel computational framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to quantify othering across diverse contexts, extending beyond traditional linguistic indicators of hostility. Applying the model to real-world data from Telegram war bloggers and political discussions on Gab reveals how othering escalates during conflicts, interacts with moral language, and garners significant attention, particularly during periods of crisis. Our framework, designed to offer deeper insights into othering dynamics, combines with a rapid adaptation process to provide essential tools for mitigating othering's adverse impacts on social cohesion.

How do algorithmic bias, our design tools, and bad habits contribute to the whitewashing of design? The everyday tools we use to navigate our daily lives and our design work drive us toward creating design solutions that are similar to those we already know and like. As a tech community that is largely driven by white people, we are constantly served images of white people. These white faces and stories end up in our personas and user-experience maps and drive our design decision making. Such bias will persist unless we acknowledge this is happening and stop the whitewashing of our design deliverables and our design solutions.

There's a lot of talk in this country about the federal deficit," then-Senator Barack Obama said in a 2006 commencement address at Northwestern University. "But I think we should talk more about our empathy deficit." What we need, he said, was the ability to "see the world through those who are different from us." Since Obama's speech, the phrase "empathy deficit" has gained a foothold, appearing everywhere from academic journals to mainstream media outlets. Among the varied responses to the 2016 United States presidential election were calls for a greater general empathy. Many liberals tried to peer across party lines to understand the motivations of Donald Trump voters, for instance interviewing Republican constituents and reading books about rural poverty (think J.D. Vance's Hillbilly Elegy or Arlie Hochschild's Strangers in Their Own Land). But these efforts didn't alleviate tension between parties, which might be because empathy-building efforts don't always work.