Social Media
Since 2016, Social Media Misinformation Has Both Improved and Worsened, Say Panelists

WASHINGTON, January 28, 2020 – Are Americans better or worse off since the disinformation debacle on social media in the 2016 election year? The question is a tech-focused echo of the quadrennial refrain said by presidential candidates. It was asked by the moderator at a panel discussion of social media and democracy at the State of the Net on Tuesday.
Each panelist agreed that there have been both improvements and new challenges since the 2016 election.
Camille François, chief innovation officer for Graphika, said that since the United States recognized the Russian trolls four years ago, many more actors now engage with misinformation agendas, including domestic trolls.
Federal Election Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said the leading tech platforms have each taken a different approach to tackling misinformation. Twitter, she said, has decided to not allow political advertising. But there are still complicated nuances around Twitter’s staunch ban, said Weintraub.
Weintraub sees serious issues with Facebook’s microtargeting marketing approach. Weintraub’s concern is the elimination of counter speech through microtargeting. If a platform user cannot see the misinformation available, then the user cannot counter it, said Weintraub.
Weintraub believes microtargeting advertisements have “the potential to magnify and amplify misinformation” instead of dispelling or negating it.
Annenberg Public Policy Center Distinguished Fellow Susan Ness said that while the situation has improved on some levels, “people now have far less trust in their institutions.”
François said it was difficult to define misinformation and calculate it. Indeed, she said, recognizing the danger of misinformation in an election and knowing who the actors are and how they organize their pursuits is of the utmost importance.
Weintraub said that no single entity could be delegated with the task of defining truth. Rather, Weintraub said that there needs to be a system for dealing with the material that is “just egregiously untrue, egregiously harmful.”
Free Speech
Social Media Conspiracies Fuel Extremism, Says GWU Panel

WASHINGTON, January 28, 2020 – Are Americans better or worse off since the disinformation debacle on social media in the 2016 election year? The question is a tech-focused echo of the quadrennial refrain said by presidential candidates. It was asked by the moderator at a panel discussion of social media and democracy at the State of the Net on Tuesday.
Each panelist agreed that there have been both improvements and new challenges since the 2016 election.
Camille François, chief innovation officer for Graphika, said that since the United States recognized the Russian trolls four years ago, many more actors now engage with misinformation agendas, including domestic trolls.
Federal Election Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said the leading tech platforms have each taken a different approach to tackling misinformation. Twitter, she said, has decided to not allow political advertising. But there are still complicated nuances around Twitter’s staunch ban, said Weintraub.
Weintraub sees serious issues with Facebook’s microtargeting marketing approach. Weintraub’s concern is the elimination of counter speech through microtargeting. If a platform user cannot see the misinformation available, then the user cannot counter it, said Weintraub.
Weintraub believes microtargeting advertisements have “the potential to magnify and amplify misinformation” instead of dispelling or negating it.
Annenberg Public Policy Center Distinguished Fellow Susan Ness said that while the situation has improved on some levels, “people now have far less trust in their institutions.”
François said it was difficult to define misinformation and calculate it. Indeed, she said, recognizing the danger of misinformation in an election and knowing who the actors are and how they organize their pursuits is of the utmost importance.
Weintraub said that no single entity could be delegated with the task of defining truth. Rather, Weintraub said that there needs to be a system for dealing with the material that is “just egregiously untrue, egregiously harmful.”
Social Media
Transition Between White House Social Media Accounts More Complicated Than in 2016

WASHINGTON, January 28, 2020 – Are Americans better or worse off since the disinformation debacle on social media in the 2016 election year? The question is a tech-focused echo of the quadrennial refrain said by presidential candidates. It was asked by the moderator at a panel discussion of social media and democracy at the State of the Net on Tuesday.
Each panelist agreed that there have been both improvements and new challenges since the 2016 election.
Camille François, chief innovation officer for Graphika, said that since the United States recognized the Russian trolls four years ago, many more actors now engage with misinformation agendas, including domestic trolls.
Federal Election Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said the leading tech platforms have each taken a different approach to tackling misinformation. Twitter, she said, has decided to not allow political advertising. But there are still complicated nuances around Twitter’s staunch ban, said Weintraub.
Weintraub sees serious issues with Facebook’s microtargeting marketing approach. Weintraub’s concern is the elimination of counter speech through microtargeting. If a platform user cannot see the misinformation available, then the user cannot counter it, said Weintraub.
Weintraub believes microtargeting advertisements have “the potential to magnify and amplify misinformation” instead of dispelling or negating it.
Annenberg Public Policy Center Distinguished Fellow Susan Ness said that while the situation has improved on some levels, “people now have far less trust in their institutions.”
François said it was difficult to define misinformation and calculate it. Indeed, she said, recognizing the danger of misinformation in an election and knowing who the actors are and how they organize their pursuits is of the utmost importance.
Weintraub said that no single entity could be delegated with the task of defining truth. Rather, Weintraub said that there needs to be a system for dealing with the material that is “just egregiously untrue, egregiously harmful.”
Section 230
Crackdown on Online Conspiracy Speakers After January 6 Highlights Need for Platform Accountability

WASHINGTON, January 28, 2020 – Are Americans better or worse off since the disinformation debacle on social media in the 2016 election year? The question is a tech-focused echo of the quadrennial refrain said by presidential candidates. It was asked by the moderator at a panel discussion of social media and democracy at the State of the Net on Tuesday.
Each panelist agreed that there have been both improvements and new challenges since the 2016 election.
Camille François, chief innovation officer for Graphika, said that since the United States recognized the Russian trolls four years ago, many more actors now engage with misinformation agendas, including domestic trolls.
Federal Election Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said the leading tech platforms have each taken a different approach to tackling misinformation. Twitter, she said, has decided to not allow political advertising. But there are still complicated nuances around Twitter’s staunch ban, said Weintraub.
Weintraub sees serious issues with Facebook’s microtargeting marketing approach. Weintraub’s concern is the elimination of counter speech through microtargeting. If a platform user cannot see the misinformation available, then the user cannot counter it, said Weintraub.
Weintraub believes microtargeting advertisements have “the potential to magnify and amplify misinformation” instead of dispelling or negating it.
Annenberg Public Policy Center Distinguished Fellow Susan Ness said that while the situation has improved on some levels, “people now have far less trust in their institutions.”
François said it was difficult to define misinformation and calculate it. Indeed, she said, recognizing the danger of misinformation in an election and knowing who the actors are and how they organize their pursuits is of the utmost importance.
Weintraub said that no single entity could be delegated with the task of defining truth. Rather, Weintraub said that there needs to be a system for dealing with the material that is “just egregiously untrue, egregiously harmful.”
-
Artificial Intelligence1 month ago
U.S. Special Operations Command Employs AI and Machine Learning to Improve Operations
-
Broadband Roundup2 months ago
Benton on Middle Mile Open Access Networks, CENIC Fiber Route in California, Investors Buying Bitcoin
-
Section 2302 months ago
President Trump’s FCC Nominee Grilled on Section 230 During Senate Confirmation Hearing
-
#broadbandlive4 months ago
Broadband Breakfast Live Online on Wednesday, November 18, 2020 — Case Studies of Transformative 5G Apps in the Enterprise
-
Artificial Intelligence1 week ago
Artificial Intelligence Aims to Enhance Human Capabilities, But Only With Caution and Safeguards
-
Broadband Roundup2 months ago
Trump Signs Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence, How Not to Wreck the FCC, Broadband Performance in Europe
-
5G2 months ago
5G Stands to Impact Industry Before Consumers, Says Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg
-
#broadbandlive4 months ago
Broadband Breakfast Live Online on Wednesday, September 30, 2020 — Champions of Broadband: Sunne McPeak