05-31-2024, 01:48 AM
This post was last modified 05-31-2024, 01:49 AM by Maxmars.
Edit Reason: grammar
Yup! Interesting research into misinformation propagation has led to a single culprit...
Reviewing posting activity on X (formerly Twitter) researchers found these villains' who while accounting for only 0.3% of users, were responsible for spreading 80% of the links to "fake news sites."
Who are these horrible people?... "Older women."
From ArsTechnica: Key misinformation “superspreaders” on Twitter: Older women
Misinformation is not a new problem, but there are plenty of indications that the advent of social media has made things worse. Academic researchers have responded by trying to understand the scope of the problem, identifying the most misinformation-filled social media networks, organized government efforts to spread false information, and even prominent individuals who are the sources of misinformation.
All of that's potentially valuable data. But it skips over another major contribution: average individuals who, for one reason or another, seem inspired to spread misinformation. A study released today looks at a large panel of Twitter accounts that are associated with US-based voters (the work was done back when X was still Twitter). It identifies a small group of misinformation superspreaders, which represent just 0.3 percent of the accounts but are responsible for sharing 80 percent of the links to fake news sites.
Needless to say, there are still many questions to be answered on how they determine what exactly is a "Fake News Site," because ever since COVID the designation has become the stereotypical trope of 'establishment support' journalism. But nevertheless, the assertion in the title of the article leaves little room for doubt. Furthermore, Twitter (X) does not represent the entire world of internet users.
I thought folks here might have some interest more mainstream characterization of the internet... and those who use it for sharing information of which they don't approve.
The work, done by Sahar Baribi-Bartov, Briony Swire-Thompson, and Nir Grinberg, relies on a panel of over 650,000 Twitter accounts that have been associated with voting registrations in the US, using full names and location information. Those voting records, in turn, provide information about the individuals, as well as location information that can be associated with the average demographics of that voting district. All of these users were active on the platform in the lead-up to the 2020 elections, although the study stopped before the post-election surge in misinformation.
Sigh - I have reservations about all this, their conclusions, and several things common to 'fake news site' they fail to address... but I'd expect you don't need me to point them out... except... a small hint... the "targeted marketing' experiences of undiscriminating users.
Well, enjoy the read.
Reviewing posting activity on X (formerly Twitter) researchers found these villains' who while accounting for only 0.3% of users, were responsible for spreading 80% of the links to "fake news sites."
Who are these horrible people?... "Older women."
From ArsTechnica: Key misinformation “superspreaders” on Twitter: Older women
Misinformation is not a new problem, but there are plenty of indications that the advent of social media has made things worse. Academic researchers have responded by trying to understand the scope of the problem, identifying the most misinformation-filled social media networks, organized government efforts to spread false information, and even prominent individuals who are the sources of misinformation.
All of that's potentially valuable data. But it skips over another major contribution: average individuals who, for one reason or another, seem inspired to spread misinformation. A study released today looks at a large panel of Twitter accounts that are associated with US-based voters (the work was done back when X was still Twitter). It identifies a small group of misinformation superspreaders, which represent just 0.3 percent of the accounts but are responsible for sharing 80 percent of the links to fake news sites.
Needless to say, there are still many questions to be answered on how they determine what exactly is a "Fake News Site," because ever since COVID the designation has become the stereotypical trope of 'establishment support' journalism. But nevertheless, the assertion in the title of the article leaves little room for doubt. Furthermore, Twitter (X) does not represent the entire world of internet users.
I thought folks here might have some interest more mainstream characterization of the internet... and those who use it for sharing information of which they don't approve.
The work, done by Sahar Baribi-Bartov, Briony Swire-Thompson, and Nir Grinberg, relies on a panel of over 650,000 Twitter accounts that have been associated with voting registrations in the US, using full names and location information. Those voting records, in turn, provide information about the individuals, as well as location information that can be associated with the average demographics of that voting district. All of these users were active on the platform in the lead-up to the 2020 elections, although the study stopped before the post-election surge in misinformation.
Sigh - I have reservations about all this, their conclusions, and several things common to 'fake news site' they fail to address... but I'd expect you don't need me to point them out... except... a small hint... the "targeted marketing' experiences of undiscriminating users.
Well, enjoy the read.
