Assessing enactment of content regulation policies: A post hoc crowd-sourced audit of election misinformation on YouTube

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.07836v1
• Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:20:15 GMT
• Title: Assessing enactment of content regulation policies: A post hoc crowd-sourced audit of election misinformation on YouTube
• Authors: Prerna Juneja, Md Momen Bhuiyan, Tanushree Mitra
• Abstract summary: We conduct a 9-day crowd-sourced audit on YouTube to assess the extent of enactment of election misinformation policies. We find that YouTube's search results contain more videos that oppose rather than support election misinformation. However, watching misinformative election videos still lead users to a small number of misinformative videos in the up-next trails.
• Score: 9.023847175654602
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: With the 2022 US midterm elections approaching, conspiratorial claims about the 2020 presidential elections continue to threaten users' trust in the electoral process. To regulate election misinformation, YouTube introduced policies to remove such content from its searches and recommendations. In this paper, we conduct a 9-day crowd-sourced audit on YouTube to assess the extent of enactment of such policies. We recruited 99 users who installed a browser extension that enabled us to collect up-next recommendation trails and search results for 45 videos and 88 search queries about the 2020 elections. We find that YouTube's search results, irrespective of search query bias, contain more videos that oppose rather than support election misinformation. However, watching misinformative election videos still lead users to a small number of misinformative videos in the up-next trails. Our results imply that while YouTube largely seems successful in regulating election misinformation, there is still room for improvement.

Related papers

• Election Polls on Social Media: Prevalence, Biases, and Voter Fraud Beliefs [5.772751069162341]
  This study focuses on the 2020 presidential elections in the U.S. We find that Twitter polls are disproportionately authored by older males and exhibit a large bias towards candidate Donald Trump. We also find that Twitter accounts participating in election polls are more likely to be bots, and election poll outcomes tend to be more biased, before the election day than after.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-18T02:29:35Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• Opinion Mining from YouTube Captions Using ChatGPT: A Case Study of Street Interviews Polling the 2023 Turkish Elections [0.0]
  We propose a novel approach for opinion mining, utilizing YouTube's auto-generated captions from public interviews as a data source. We introduce an opinion mining framework using ChatGPT to mass-annotate voting intentions and motivations. We report that ChatGPT can predict the preferred candidate with 97% accuracy and identify the correct voting motivation out of 13 possible choices with 71% accuracy based on the data collected from 325 interviews.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-07T01:25:22Z)
• Novelty in news search: a longitudinal study of the 2020 US elections [62.997667081978825]
  We analyze novelty, a measurement of new items that emerge in the top news search results. We find more new items emerging for election related queries compared to topical or stable queries. We argue that such imbalances affect the visibility of political candidates in news searches during electoral periods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-09T08:42:37Z)
• Subscriptions and external links help drive resentful users to alternative and extremist YouTube videos [7.945705756085774]
  We show that exposure to alternative and extremist channel videos on YouTube is heavily concentrated among a small group of people with high prior levels of gender and racial resentment. Our findings suggest YouTube's algorithms were not sending people down "rabbit holes" during our observation window in 2020. However, the platform continues to play a key role in facilitating exposure to content from alternative and extremist channels among dedicated audiences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-22T20:22:06Z)
• Shifting Polarization and Twitter News Influencers between two U.S. Presidential Elections [92.33485580547801]
  We analyze the change of polarization between the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections. Most of the top influencers were affiliated with media organizations during both elections. 75% of the top influencers in 2020 were not present in 2016, demonstrating that such status is difficult to retain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-03T20:08:54Z)
• Auditing the Biases Enacted by YouTube for Political Topics in Germany [0.0]
  We examine whether YouTube's recommendation system is enacting certain biases. We find that YouTube is recommending increasingly popular but topically unrelated videos. We discuss the strong popularity bias we identified and analyze the link between the popularity of content and emotions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-21T07:53:59Z)
• The Matter of Chance: Auditing Web Search Results Related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential Primary Elections Across Six Search Engines [68.8204255655161]
  We look at the text search results for "us elections", "donald trump", "joe biden" and "bernie sanders" queries on Google, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, and Yandex. Our findings indicate substantial differences in the search results between search engines and multiple discrepancies within the results generated for different agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-03T11:18:19Z)
• Examining the consumption of radical content on YouTube [1.2820564400223966]
  Recently, YouTube's scale has fueled concerns that YouTube users are being radicalized via a combination of biased recommendations and ostensibly apolitical anti-woke channels. Here we test this hypothesis using a representative panel of more than 300,000 Americans and their individual-level browsing behavior. We find no evidence that engagement with far-right content is caused by YouTube recommendations systematically, nor do we find clear evidence that anti-woke channels serve as a gateway to the far right.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-25T16:00:20Z)
• Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking [54.23273310155137]
  We propose using the political diversity of a website's audience as a quality signal. Using news source reliability ratings from domain experts and web browsing data from a diverse sample of 6,890 U.S. citizens, we first show that websites with more extreme and less politically diverse audiences have lower journalistic standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-16T02:13:55Z)
• Mi YouTube es Su YouTube? Analyzing the Cultures using YouTube Thumbnails of Popular Videos [98.87558262467257]
  This study explores culture preferences among countries using the thumbnails of YouTube trending videos. Experimental results indicate that the users from similar cultures shares interests in watching similar videos on YouTube.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-27T20:15:57Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.