Social media data may have natural experiments (when Facebook was testing what kind of news to promote: were there comparable groups we can test effects on?). Interaction between liking an RU-page and downstreat impact. Then impact of downgrading of content from liked pages. etc.
-
-
Amplification and reinforcing the message is where the troll factory came in. And that’s where the conspiracy is too, the bizarre immediate cohesion around nonsense stories to push an agenda.
-
Events could be staged or pop up on reddit and as long as they had their little
sign
posters like cernovich amplifying it, and their bot army yelling at anyone who tried to talk some sense they could vet for RT & Fox, who would them post their stories simultaneously
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I really don't know where this thread started or ends. I 've bookmarked it for further reading. On a methodological plane: there won't be the possibility of hypothesis testing. On a macro level, n=1; we have only one election. On a micro level, we have no information on 1/2
-
media reception and (change of) voting intent. We've to live with thick description. If this is not Nate's cup of regression, he's dismissed. .
@zeynep's point that media reception is interactive-constructive is state of the art to my knowledge. Basically Sunni v Shia. No war,pls.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
1/ I like that Nature article. The measured effects for changes in voter turnout are easily within the margin of what could have swung the election. They estimated an additional 270K voters on ~15 mil treatment size with only 1-2 treatments.
-
2/ Trump only won by about a 106K vote margin in 3 states and for certain there were more treatments that were more targeted.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
