36 points

But they do fuel polarization in general. I’m sure of it.

permalink
report
reply
50 points

Actually one of the conclusions from both the Science and Nature articles were that they mostly fuel far right radicalisation, not so much polarisation (which implies both ends of the political spectrum). Which I guess means leftists are generally either more capable of spotting misinformation or less inclined to act on it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Also, there’s not a large, well-funded far-left movement in the US fighting to radicalize people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

All I’ve got to offer are unionisation pamphlets and a brick.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Which I guess means leftists are generally either more capable of spotting misinformation or less inclined to act on it.

Or are less likely to be on Facebook in general.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

The studies were percentage based, so yes, volume of posts could play an active role but likely more from an “activity” amount vs “presence”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

So this confirms all the studies and adages of conservative voters being less intelligent, more subject to scams and fraud, and less accepting of social norms.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You’ve got studies suggesting that conservatives are less accepting of social norms?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If it only drives the far-right, does that mean Facebook contributed shifting in window of discourse? (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window)

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not radicalization, just polarization, they are different. But overall, yes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I’ve watched someone I know who only gets their news through Facebook descend into qdom over the last 5 years. Whenever I hear about a new thing conservatives are doing or saying, I can be sure that person will be doing or saying it within a week… which then feeds right back into Facebook for others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Thanks for the confirmation. I bet they don’t even notice it happening. Though this could happen to anyone on any side of the spectrum. It’s sad that this is what the internet has become.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

“Yes” really isn’t complicated.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Yeah, doesn’t seem complicated to me at all. Their algorithm is programmed to keep people angry, engaged, and convinced 100% that their opinion is right. (no matter what that opinion is.)

Keeps people clicking on shitty ads and buying stupid crap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Sure it is. Is it Meta’s algorithm, is it user reach, is it paid ads, is it channels, is it memes, is it leaning, is it…

Meta is participating in a pretty big study with actual researchers here. I’m no Meta fan, and this is partly for PR I’m sure, but this is a really good thing that more social media companies should do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Those seem like “how” or “why” questions to me. More complicated. The big one is “how do we prevent” and I bet we won’t get an honest answer from big social themselves. That’s why there should be independent public research.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

The US 2020 Facebook and Instagram Election Study is a joint collaboration between a group of independent external academics from several institutions and Meta

Now we have the first results from this unusual collaboration, detailed in four separate papers—the first round of over a dozen studies stemming from the project.

“We also find that popular proposals to change social media algorithms did not sway political attitudes.”

“In other words, pages and groups contribute much more to segregation than users,”

Finally, the vast majority of political news that Meta’s third-party fact-checker program rated as false was viewed by conservatives, compared to liberals. That said, those false ratings amounted to a mere 0.2 percent, on average, of the full volume of content on Facebook. And political news in general accounts for just 3 percent of all posts shared on Facebook, so it’s not even remotely the most popular type of content.

This last bit is key. This means (up to) 15% of popitical posts werr misinformation (some nonpolitical), mostly viewed by conservatives. They do not state which way this information leans.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Or maybe, we know how they get people, but how do we de-radicalize people on a wider scale?

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@beehaw.org

Create post

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 3K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.3K

    Posts

  • 81K

    Comments