A new paper has been making the rounds with the intriguing claim that YouTube has a *de-radicalizing* influence. https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.11211 Having read the paper, I wanted to call it wrong, but that would give the paper too much credit, because it is not even wrong. Let me explain.
-
-
If you’re wondering how such a widely discussed problem has attracted so little scientific study before this paper, that’s exactly why. Many have tried, but chose to say nothing rather than publish meaningless results, leaving the field open for authors with lower standards.
Prikaži ovu nit -
In our data-driven world, the claim that we don’t have a good way to study something quantitatively may sound shocking. The reality even worse — in many cases we don’t even have the vocabulary to ask meaningful quantitative *questions* about complex socio-technical systems.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Consider the paper’s definition of radicalization: "YouTube’s algorithm [exposes users] to more extreme content than they would otherwise." Savvy readers are probably screaming: There is no "otherwise"! There is no YouTube without the algorithm! There is no neutral!
Prikaži ovu nit -
That’s the note on which I’d like to end: a plea to consider that the available quantitative methods can’t answer everything. And I want to thank the journalists who’ve been doing the next best thing — telling the stories of people led down a rabbit hole by YouTube’s algorithm.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
How can we better disseminate this knowledge? This is real science which never saw the light of day for lack of an established publication route. We must know about attempts and not just successes!
-
Specifically, I wonder why it wouldn't make a good paper to making the case that we just can't know if YouTube has a radicalizing or deradicalizing algorithm, due to these limitations. I'd love for someone to publish that!
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I'm from the school that wants "failed" studies to also be published as I believe they contain value. Maybe not a peer-reviewed paper, maybe an article or essay? If someone else wants to continue the work, this offers a stepping stone instead of hiding the discovered traps.
-
This should be obvious. It's shocking that it is not done. It would also be a way to account for time spent in research and avoid others repeating the same mistakes.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Others have made this point but I’d just like to echo: it would be good for our understanding of radicalization for designs/data considered by you & students to be shared in some way. A “perils of” paper that doesn’t claim to solve the problem.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
We need more publications of "failed" attempts!
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.