A space for sharing and discussing news related to global current events, technology, and society.
69451 Members
We'll be adding more communities soon!
© 2020 Relevant Protocols Inc.
A space for sharing and discussing news related to global current events, technology, and society.
69451 Members
We'll be adding more communities soon!
© 2020 Relevant Protocols Inc.
Relevant
Hot
New
Spam
Relevant
Hot
New
Spam
0
18.7K
0
18.7K
"In 2018, Kevin Roose published a piece in the New York Times in which Caleb Cain, a liberal college dropout, described his experience of being radicalized by “a vortex of far-right politics on YouTube.” Caleb was a victim — as the theory goes — of the YouTube recommendation algorithm, which guides users down an “alt-right rabbit hole” of increasingly extreme far-right political content in order to maximize watch time and keep people glued to the site. This story is one of many penned by elitists in a battle over how we consume media, and we now have evidence that they are spectacularly wrong."
"In 2018, Kevin Roose published a piece in the New York Times in which Caleb Cain, a liberal college dropout, described his experience of being radicalized by “a vortex of far-right politics on YouTube.” Caleb was a victim — as the theory goes — of the YouTube recommendation algorithm, which guides users down an “alt-right rabbit hole” of increasingly extreme far-right political content in order to maximize watch time and keep people glued to the site. This story is one of many penned by elitists in a battle over how we consume media, and we now have evidence that they are spectacularly wrong."
A thread that critiques this paper: [https://threader.app/thread/1211262124724510721](https://threader.app/thread/1211262124724510721) (OT: [https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1211262124724510721](https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1211262124724510721) ) Notably: "They reached their sweeping conclusions by analyzing YouTube *without logging in*, based on sidebar recommendations for a sample of channels (not even the user’s home page because, again, there’s no user). Whatever they measured, it’s not radicalization."
A thread that critiques this paper: [https://threader.app/thread/1211262124724510721](https://threader.app/thread/1211262124724510721) (OT: [https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1211262124724510721](https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1211262124724510721) ) Notably: "They reached their sweeping conclusions by analyzing YouTube *without logging in*, based on sidebar recommendations for a sample of channels (not even the user’s home page because, again, there’s no user). Whatever they measured, it’s not radicalization."
Great find and agree there is concern over how applicable the data is to real users of youtube. Also interesting that many feel there isn't any meaningful way to research youtube algorithmic bias etc
Great find and agree there is concern over how applicable the data is to real users of youtube. Also interesting that many feel there isn't any meaningful way to research youtube algorithmic bias etc
Some low-ranking comments may have been hidden.
Some low-ranking comments may have been hidden.