Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#121

Post by jbullock35 »

From the article:

> A new preprint reports that in nearly one third of studies on social media appearing in major interdisciplinary journals, the authors have ties to industry that should be disclosed but aren’t. Some received funding from a social media company; others previously co-authored work with industry employees.

Note that last part. It makes this effort seem silly: there's no conflict of interest just because one of your past co-authors at one time worked for someone in the industry.

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#122

Post by themanmaran »

slg wrote: post #65
everdrive wrote: post #34

Social media itself is a grand experiment. What happens if you start connecting people from disparate communities, and then prioritize for outrage and emotionalism? In years prior, you would be heavily shaped by the people you lived near. TV and internet broke this down somewhat, but social media really blew the doors off. Now it's the case that almost no one seems to be able to explain all the woes we're facing toda…

>and then prioritize for outrage and emotionalism This isn’t inherent to social networks though. It is a choice by the biggest social media companies to make society worse in order to increase profits. Just give us a chronological feed of the people/topics we proactively choose to follow and much of this harm would go away. Social media and the world were better places before algorithmic feeds took over everything.

I think it's easy to blame the evil profit maximizing social media companies. But IMO even the most simple 'engagement' algorithm will produce negative externalities. Regardless of who's running it.

``` show_me_posts_people_like_me_have_liked()

- John saw 20 posts today and liked 9 of them.

- Cliff saw 20 posts today and liked 9 of them

- Jeff and Cliff had 6 overlapping likes

- Show Jeff the 2 extra posts Cliff liked; show Cliff the 2 extra posts Jeff liked

```

This seems like a simple / logical recommendation system. BUT the end result is that you make Jeff and Cliff closer to the same person over time. And times millions, you build echo chambers. And the biggest echo chambers (often those aligned with some identity politics) see they have a huge community and want to expand it. Making the whole platform worse as a byproduct.

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#123

Post by slg »

betty_staples wrote: post #109
dathinab wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn’t inherent to social networks though. It is a choice by the biggest social media companies and to make society worse in order to increase profits. going beyond social media it's IMHO the side effect of a initially innocent looking but dangerous and toxic monetization model which we find today not just in social media but even more so in news, apps and most digital markets

I will say I am strongly against what social media algorithms do. But I am fascinated by the black mirror element. They said "hey algorithm what gets likes, what gets views - look into human nature and report back" - "human nature shows polarization does! emotional charged divisive content!" - that's just fascinating. Not learning, philosphophy, growth, education, health, no, the naughty stuff, the bad stuff. That's…

We like to pretend that we aren't just dumb animals, prone to getting scared and angry in order to protect our pack. These algorithmic feeds almost dehumanize us with the way they play off our innate animalistic psychology. Big tobacco really does seem like the best analogy.

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#125

Post by anonymars »

terminalshort wrote: post #39
anonymars wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide evidence that [non-social] media companies have performed research specifically to see if they can make people sadder, similar to what was described above?

Turn on cable news for a minute and it's quite obvious that it is designed to make you angry. What difference does it make if they performed research or not?

Because it's the whole topic of this conversation

> "From history we know that research left unchecked and unrestricted can start leading to some really dark and horrible things. Right now I think it's a problem that social media companies can do research without answering to the same regulatory bodies that regular academics / researchers would. For example, they don't have to answer to independant ethics committees / reviews. They're free to experiement as they like on the entire population."

For example maybe next they decide to research whether they can influence body dysmorphia, or suicide

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#127

Post by brianpbeau »

trinsic2 wrote: post #118
betty_staples wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will say I am strongly against what social media algorithms do. But I am fascinated by the black mirror element. They said "hey algorithm what gets likes, what gets views - look into human nature and report back" - "human nature shows polarization does! emotional charged divisive content!" - that's just fascinating. Not learning, philosphophy, growth, education, health, no, the naughty stuff, the bad stuff. That's…

I kind of wonder if it creates it rather than shows us a mirror.

The Nature vs Nurture discussion is everywhere.

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#128

Post by brianpbeau »

frogpelt wrote: post #102
slg wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and then prioritize for outrage and emotionalism This isn’t inherent to social networks though. It is a choice by the biggest social media companies to make society worse in order to increase profits. Just give us a chronological feed of the people/topics we proactively choose to follow and much of this harm would go away. Social media and the world were better places before algorithmic feeds took over everything.

Before there was social media there was click bait headlines from supposedly reputable news agencies. Social media gave people easy ways to engage and share. And it turns out what people engage with and share is click bait/rage bait. So maybe not technically inherent but a natural consequence of creating networks for viral sharing of content.

Even before that we had "sweeps week" in broadcasting. This was the period of time where the big networks pushed out their biggest shows, miniseries and end of season episodes. This would lead into the nightly news which would also put together an extended expose on a headline-grabbing story. These stories would be heavily advertised during the prime time shows and would often be told over a period of nights. All of this was in service for high ratings that could be used to increase advertising rates.

So yes, all of this has happened before and will continue to happen as long as we live in a capitalist society.

Re: Nearly a third of social media research has undisclosed ties to industry

#130

Post by insane_dreamer »

brianpbeau wrote: post #128
frogpelt wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before there was social media there was click bait headlines from supposedly reputable news agencies. Social media gave people easy ways to engage and share. And it turns out what people engage with and share is click bait/rage bait. So maybe not technically inherent but a natural consequence of creating networks for viral sharing of content.

Even before that we had "sweeps week" in broadcasting. This was the period of time where the big networks pushed out their biggest shows, miniseries and end of season episodes. This would lead into the nightly news which would also put together an extended expose on a headline-grabbing story. These stories would be heavily advertised during the prime time shows and would often be told over a period of nights. All of…

Yes, such tactics have existed forever.

But the scale and speed are much different. Which is why social media is not "just more of the same".

Post reply on HN