Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Carl T. Bergstrom's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
Carl T. Bergstrom

This should be obvious, but having an algorithm that behaves that way is a DELIBERATE CHOICE.

It would be easy enough, for example, to implement basic sentiment analysis so that the algorithm doesn't boost content that you have reacted negatively to in the future.

Musk is playing it both ways. He keeps the algorithm that boosts inflammatory content and drives the online conflicts that draw views and clicks, while pushing the blame for this off onto the individuals involved.

That sucks.

17 Jan 2023 at 17:02 | Open on fediscience.org
10 comments
Carl T. Bergstrom

I've posted a slightly longer version of this thread to post.news. For those who are interested, here's the link. I've also attached the text below.

post.news/article/2KTDq7DXiMkp

Elon Musk and Twitter as a digital outrage engine. In our society's ongoing effort to understand and address the harms caused by social media, tech companies continue to deploy the same strategy that paid dividends for big oil and others. They aim to shift discussions on misinformation, polarization, harassment, and other pathologies away from the systems and structures that are inherently toxic, and toward questions of individual behavior. This way they can blame their own users for the problem, while steering clear of calls for systemic change. Yesterday on twitter, Elon Musk followed this playbook, but in his typical fashion he had to also say the quiet part out loud.
It should be obvious, but Twitter is not powerless here. Having an algorithm that shows people content that angers themβ€”that is a deliberate choice. Set aside, for the time being, the option of affording the user the power to select their own algorithm or simply to continuing seeing the just the posts from the people they follow, in the order they were posted. Even if Twitter insists on implementing their own algorithm, it would be easy enough to implement basic sentiment analysis so that this algorithm didn't boost content that has generated negative responses in the past. No, Twitter is deliberately engineered to be an outrage engine. Upsetting content generates engagement. That engagement generates angry responses. Angry responses lead to fights. Fights keep people clicking. It's like kids in a playground. Did you ever see your schoolmates clustered around, watching the group of children happily making daisy chains in the tall grass? No, because they were always circled up, shouting and jeering, around the two enemies punching it out back behind the equipment shed. etc etc.
17 Jan 2023 at 21:15 | Open on fediscience.org
FirefighterGeek :masto:

@ct_bergstrom Does this surprise anyone? To the algo, "Enragement" == "Engagement"

17 Jan 2023 at 21:17 | Open on masto.ai
Jody Schmid
John

@ct_bergstrom

Elon Musk is following the playbook of many corporations, shift responsibility to consumers and individuals who have the least information or knowledge.

Social media companies such Meta and YouTube do this, even though their algorithms curate feeds of users.

Fossil fuel companies do this on climate change, while they lobby law makers and push false messages

Firearm companies do this while they ensure they are protected from basic consumer protection law.

Cigarette companies did this.

Sadly many libertarian groups have latched onto this lie

@ct_bergstrom

Elon Musk is following the playbook of many corporations, shift responsibility to consumers and individuals who have the least information or knowledge.

Social media companies such Meta and YouTube do this, even though their algorithms curate feeds of users.

Fossil fuel companies do this on climate change, while they lobby law makers and push false messages

17 Jan 2023 at 21:36 | Open on mastodon.au
The Dark Tower

@jw π‘Ύπ’‰π’š when they π’‡π’Šπ’π’‚π’π’π’š began holding tobacco companies liable were they 𝒏𝒐𝒕 told to remove the chemical additives that make them more addictive & dangerous?
Unproccessed tobacco is 𝒏𝒐𝒕 addictive. π‘΅π’π’•π’‰π’Šπ’π’ˆ found in nature is. Not until humans screw with them.

17 Jan 2023 at 21:57 | Open on mastodon.world
HawthornFire πŸ³οΈβ€βš§οΈ

@ct_bergstrom I commented on post, but will repeat here - it seems like deliberately feeding white supremacist posts to Black Twitter users who have reported racist posts should be legally actionable. Algorithms are programmed by humans with human intentions.

17 Jan 2023 at 21:41 | Open on mastodon.lol
shadownlite

@ct_bergstrom probably why I do not see any of this. I weeded through my followers and who I followed in 2018. Got rid of those prone to posting anger inducing posts and retweeting crap that gets people upset...even if they were just retweeting to make people "aware."

Then focused on art and music follows...clicking on their posts and sharing if I really liked the content.

It makes for a better Twitter experience for me.

17 Jan 2023 at 22:05 | Open on mastodon.social
Gail Parenti

@ct_bergstrom So sticking around to call out the bullshit results in getting more bullshit directed to you, do I have that right? Seems like a great plan.

18 Jan 2023 at 2:20 | Open on mstdn.party
Leisureguy
TuxPhones.com

@ct_bergstrom
That " :unverified: βœ…" alone is an UX eyesore

18 Jan 2023 at 5:10 | Open on fosstodon.org
Go Up