Algorithms vs. Election’s Result


In “Facebook, Algorithms, and the 2016 Election”, Sierra Stone published on November 4, 2016, a SML research assistant, claimed advertisements about election on facebook are focusing on preferences to expand on user interest which includes lifestyle and culture. She worked with Cornell Social Media Lab and asked, “ When all you see is your party’s side of the story, are you really getting the most accurate or diverse information” (Stone). This is significant because individual’s feeds are mainly focusing on the user’s preferences. This includes identity in parties such as Democrat and Republican in order for individuals to see diverse information. Using this data, it changes people’s way of thinking and becomes even more biased. Algorithms are also caused by abusers to allow others to believe in rumors and favor the other candidates. I agree with this claim because my friends favor Joe Biden more since they’ve received a lot of ads about Donald Trump discriminating against a race. This includes memes, videos, or posts about Trump building a wall between Mexico and the United States of America or claiming to kick Chinese people out of the United States of America. As a result, these algorithms cause many people including my friends to favor Biden more.


In “Facebook’s algorithms fueled massive foreign propaganda campaigns during the 2020 election – here’s how algorithms can manipulate you” published on the platform the conversation in September 20, 2021, Flippo Menczer introduced posts such as election is based on popularity’s shares and likes. Menczer is a Luddy Distinguished Professor of Informatics and Computer Science in Indiana University and claims, “From lions on the savanna to likes on Facebook” (Menczer). He meant that social media such as facebook have the tendency of using algorithms of popularity to get the people to focus on the top feed. Menczer conducted an experiment with Fakey which contains fake news and he realized almost all individuals like and share the news which is amplified. As a result, more people tend to follow others that accurately depict Menczer’s statement. When you see someone running from a lion, you won’t hesitate to follow that person. Not only that, Menczer’s claim is neutral and has a different concept than Stone which made it more interesting how algorithms process during elections.


Stone’s claim about algorithms towards election correlates with my idea more. I expect social media to follow whatever personal interest through the rhythms of sweeping through social media. Unlike Menczer’s idea, his was more focused on the population and popularity as a whole which made more common sense. It’s less time consuming and puts individuals towards a certain group through their preferences and interests. However, Menczwer would considered much more well-known since Indiana University is ranked #76 in National Universities. Unlike Stone who is just a research assistant. Either way, without knowing this fact, Stone used more statistics, HTML, experts, and quotations to back up his claim allowing others to know it’s more reliable. Both articles develop my initial ideas but the second article went more in depth. This made me wonder what other methods social media uses algorithms during elections which will impact the votes.

Cites