Recommendation algorithms operated by social media giants TikTok and X have shown evidence of substantial far-right political bias in Germany ahead of a federal election that takes place Sunday, according to new research carried out by Global Witness.
The non-government organization (NGO) undertook an analysis of social media content displayed to new users via algorithmically sorted “For You” feeds — finding both platforms skewed heavily toward amplifying content that favors the far-right AfD party in algorithmically programmed feeds.
Global Witness’ tests identified the most extreme bias on TikTok, where 78% of the political content that was algorithmically recommended to its test accounts, and came from accounts the test users did not follow, was supportive of the AfD party. (It notes this figure far exceeds the level of support the party is achieving in current polling, where it attracts backing from around 20% of German voters.)
Anybody voting for anti-tax racist fascists is voting against their own interests, including anti-tax racist fascists themselves.
It’s fine if you think that, but you’re opening yourself up to controlling aspects of people’s lives you have no business controlling. You’re essentially taking on the role of their parent.
People would say similar things to “justify” the war on drugs. “Drug users are hurting themselves, so we’re doing a good thing by keeping them illegal!”
Research and Historic Examples both shows positive outcomes from voting against anti-tax racist fascists. The same is not true for the War on Drugs. What you’re attempting to describe is dogma and closed-mindedness which are present in every single political ideology. What you fail to understand is that identifying those individuals and trying to inform them is not dogmatic, it’s helping them make informed choices.
Also, the proof that far right is overrepresented on social media compared to their share of the population shows that the services are biased, not that this is “what people think.”
the war on drugs in the US, was an invention by nixon as a way to truncate/distract the public from his own problems when he was making scandal after scandal in office. NIXON, REAGAN, ,etc.
Neat
Right. And people can always point to “research” that says drugs are bad or “research” that says certain races are smarter than others.
The problem is you’re trying to be some grand arbiter of truth, or deciding who those arbiters are, when historically every argument you’ve made so far has also been used to perpetuate lies.
I recommend a different approach that we’ve actually been doing for decades. Teach people about citing. Don’t let them rely on other people deciding the truth for them, that’s how we end up with anti-vaxxers in the first place.
There is no perfect solution, and conditioning people that lies will always be hidden from them will cause them to believe whatever they see without thinking critically.
Drugs are bad, that was never in question
Your assertion, since you’ve forgotten, is that the War on Drugs was bad, which research would agree with
I’m sorry you’re struggling with this. I hope you get well soon.
Whew, glad you don’t get to decide what people put in their bodies.
Yes… and those who support the war on drugs can point to research saying drugs are bad. It’s sad this has to be spelled out for you.
Ironic, considering you’ve shown us you can’t comprehend what you’re reading.
And if somebody points to research saying drugs are bad as justification for war on drugs, you can point to research that war on drugs is bad. Then they would get confused and start quoting every line of your comment one at a time as if to make it talk slower for them.
are off your meds
Stay in school.