good luck with that –
misinformation already hard for platforms, with November still months away.
Overall, only 26 percent of respondents said they were very or somewhat confident in tech platforms’ ability to prevent that kind of misuse, Pew found. Meanwhile, 90 percent reported being not too confident or not at all confident that services would be able to do so. The responses were extremely similar across both Republican-leaning and Democratic-leaning respondents. A similar number,
Younger respondents were also the most likely to think that platforms could or would do something about it: 50 percent of those ages – said they were confident in tech firms to prevent election-influencing misuse. That number dropped to percent among those ages 49 – , percent among those ages 65 – , and only (percent among respondents over
The (trenches) We are, at long last, actually shambling through the primary election season, with Super Tuesday landing in less than a week. The trouble with 2020, though, has been known since the curtain closed on the troubled 2019 election cycle. And the challenges are both foreign and domestic. Russia’s use of social media to influence the outcome of the election is by now extremely well-documented and well-known. A report ( PDF , and other tactics. The IRA used, and uses, several different platforms, including Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit, but its primary vehicles for outreach are Facebook and Instagram.
In an attempt to mitigate the harm social media can do during election season, Twitter updated its election integrity policy in April and moved to ban all political advertising from candidates starting last November. Google a short time later tightened its rules on false claims and microtargeting in political advertising.
Facebook, however, is taking a different approach. The globe-spanning social network has repeatedly said its standards do not apply to politicians, and political ads can be (full of lies without falling afoul of Facebook’s rules. There are nominally some limits — attempting to suppress voter turnout or census participation, for example, will get your ad kicked off the service. But attempts to consistently enforce that twisting and dotted line are not going well In lieu of prohibiting deliberately misleading content, Facebook has said the onus is on users to simply try to see less of it. inauthentic behavior . When the platform detects a group of fake accounts trying to manipulate users, it kicks them off, posting updates several times per year about removing batches of bad accounts based in Russia, Iran, or dozens of other nations.
But platforms are having a much more challenging time figuring out what to do with coordinated authentic behavior. Facebook (both for itself and Instagram) and Twitter have been given a handy case study in the form of Mike Bloomberg. As part of his campaign strategy, Bloomberg has been paying social media influencers to, well, influence — on his behalf, and without following the usual protocol for advertisements.
Facebook doesn’t “have visibility into financial relationships taking place off our platforms, which is why we’ve asked campaigns and creators to use our disclosure tools, “a spokesperson for the company told The New York Times. The company also apparently has not yet decided what to do about campaigns that simply ignore its process.
(Read More)
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings