Instagram Displayed Negative Related Hashtags For Biden, But Hid Them For Trump (buzzfeednews.com) 242
An anonymous reader shares a report: For at least the last two months, a key Instagram feature, which algorithmically pushes users toward supposedly related content, has been treating hashtags associated with President Donald Trump and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in very different ways. Searches for Biden also return a variety of pro-Trump messages, while searches for Trump-related topics only returned the specific hashtags, like #MAGA or #Trump -- which means searches for Biden-related hashtags also return counter-messaging, while those for Trump do not. Earlier this week, a search on Instagram for #JoeBiden would have surfaced nearly 390,000 posts tagged with the former vice president's name along with related hashtags selected by the platform's algorithm. Users searching Instagram for #JoeBiden might also see results for #joebiden2020, as well as pro-Trump hashtags like #trump2020landslide and #democratsdestroyamerica.
A similar search for #DonaldTrump on the platform, however, provided a totally different experience. Besides showing 7 million posts tagged with the president's name, Instagram did not present any related hashtags that would have pushed users toward different content or promoted alternative viewpoints. The difference between these two results, which an Instagram spokesperson told BuzzFeed News was a "bug," prevented hashtags including #Trump and #MAGA from being associated with potentially negative content. Meanwhile, Instagram hashtags associated with the Democratic presidential candidate -- #JoeBiden and #Biden, for example -- were presented alongside content that included overtly pro-Trump content and attacks on the former vice president.
A similar search for #DonaldTrump on the platform, however, provided a totally different experience. Besides showing 7 million posts tagged with the president's name, Instagram did not present any related hashtags that would have pushed users toward different content or promoted alternative viewpoints. The difference between these two results, which an Instagram spokesperson told BuzzFeed News was a "bug," prevented hashtags including #Trump and #MAGA from being associated with potentially negative content. Meanwhile, Instagram hashtags associated with the Democratic presidential candidate -- #JoeBiden and #Biden, for example -- were presented alongside content that included overtly pro-Trump content and attacks on the former vice president.
"accident" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This may be a case where an 'accident' is likely what occurred. Specifically, they likely had implemented some kind of manual code around the high profile Trump stuff to block troll/spam content at some point in the last several years whereas Biden just really hasn't been that controversial... you know, ever... Biden has never been controversial in any way at any point or on any issue and honestly probably doesn't remember they invented the internet most of the time... or what he had for breakfast.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden not controversial I agree with. But that makes it all the more difficult to explain the alleged president and his sheep running around like chickens with their hair on fire over him.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not attempting to do that. I'm just saying it doesn't take a conspiracy to explain why a Trump account might have added filtering to clear off trolls drawn by flamebait.
Re:"accident" (Score:5, Insightful)
Comparing Biden's gaffe's and hair-sniffing to Mr. "grab'em by the pussy" is nonsensical.
Re: "accident" (Score:2)
But comparing their geriatric age and potential delirium is fair game i would think.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is dyslexic and holds books the wrong way around. I honestly think he can barely read.
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing I didn't do that, then.
Re:"accident" (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump has been accused of multiple rapes by one of Epstein's underage victims. He has 25 total sexual assault allegations against him. https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
Biden has Tara Reade, who is very credible in my book. I'm unaware of any other credible accusers, can you link to any unbiased source for your accusation?
It's a shit show all around. I would obviously have much preferred Bernie Sanders over a milquetoast moderate like Biden but the future of democracy itself is at stake here. Trump was not joking around when he said he wanted to be king. He was not joking around when he said he wanted to suspend the election. He has been urging his followers to greater heights of violence. I predict he will not leave peacefully when he loses. He will urge his rabid followers to kill people. I honestly fear what four more years of this sociopathic narcissistic con man would do to our country.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck with that. Most preppers die bitter and alone, still waiting for judgement day.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
She told people at the time. They corroborate the basics of the story. Details may change because memory does fade, but the basics are always the same.
I believe her. Biden's a creep. But he's fucking immeasurably better than Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
Who is covering for the violence in portland calling those pieces of shit -peaceful protestors-?
Those protesters go to the street to protest against police racism and brutality.
The US has 466 killings per 1m people by law enforcement. Just above fucking IRAQ who kills 451 and more than IRAN who kills 366 and is an Islamic dictatorship, more than MEXICO who kills 300 and is practically in a civil war with drug cartels. The US is right up there between African developing nations.
The figures for other developed nations:
Canada: 97 killings
France: 38
Germany: 13
Japan: 2
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Made an error above. The numbers for all countries are per 100m people, not 1m... that would be almost genocidal.
Re: "accident" (Score:2)
None of that condones rioting. None of that explains how making enemies out of fellow citizens, by destroying their stores, burning their cars, stealing from them, is in any way the correct response. That would be like me kicking the shit out of you, because Beckam missed a soccer goal. Covering for rioting and blatantly lying, calling it peaceful, is absolutely disgusting. I cannot believe I share the same air on this planet with you. The ultra-libs brought this shit on themselves. Their complete hatred f
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last actual riot, though, and who caused it? The guy who started it has been proved to be a white supremacist who wanted to spark a race war.
Don't you get it? You are the bad guys.
Re: (Score:2)
The protesters ARE peaceful. In fact, now that the provocateurs in unmarked uniforms have been chased out, there has been zero violence. Don't you wonder why your Fox News no longer shows you any images of Portland? Because the bad guys have gone home.
Trump was trying to get Americans fighting each other because images of manufactured violence sell to idiots like you.
Re: (Score:2)
according to multiple credible accusers.
Who?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Trump bragged about consensual activity
No, it was NONconsensual activity. That was kindof the whole point.
Biden sexually assaulted women, according to multiple credible accusers.
According to one accuser, who is not that credible.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations [wikipedia.org] - 25+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden_sexual_assault_allegation [wikipedia.org] - 1
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Just like your link proves. You should read your own links before posting them.
Re: (Score:2)
Always with the violence. Typical powerless fascist.
Re: (Score:3)
"Except when he was accused of sexual abuse, or all the many times he's made some gaffe that makes it clear that he suffers from dementia, like when he said he was running for congress while he was running for president, or when he went off on his rant about corn pop...
i.e. your argument is nonsensical."
Not really, none of that is especially controversial... that is just a bunch of things that happened. Now if he said "damn right I did that little girl, I've got another lined up for after this speech and a
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you and congratulations, drunkypoo! Your comment was exactly what I needed to make me stop wanting to read this discussion! Goodbye and good health to you!
Re: (Score:2)
This is not an airport. There is no need to announce your departure. Are you new?
Re: (Score:3)
makes it clear that he suffers from dementia
So perfectly fit to run an office. Honestly the worst 8 years were the Obama era where people who published "stupid shit the US president said" calendars had no material to work with.
Between Bush and Trump it's quite clear that a minimum requirement to run for president seems to be that you can't count to 10 and if you can then you mispronounce one of the numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
There are things I miss about the Obama administration. Having a president that made America look like a world nation was high on the list.
Re: (Score:2)
We all thought, oh well, at least they can get rid of him in 4 years, but no, you re-elected him.
Re: "accident" (Score:2)
Compared to what came later, Regan actual my looks pretty damn good. How scary is that?
Re: "accident" (Score:2)
Who gives a fuck. Only losers have instagram accounts. Mindless fucking sheep. Want to prove you arent a mindless troglodyte? Delete all you social media accounts. The Dodo bird does not need environmental protection. It was too stupid to prevent its own extinction. To hell with mindless millennials.
Re: (Score:2)
Delete all you social media accounts.
What is a "social media accounts" ?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
follow the link, witness the misrepresentation, remember who posted it
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This might be some sort of inherent problem with human beings.....
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"accident" (Score:5, Informative)
That refers to Facebook News, not Facebook proper.
Zuckerberg is not registered with either party. He primarily channels donations through his Facebook PAC which in 2016 and 2018 elections donated to candidates from both parties with republican candidates getting 54% of the total in 2016 IIRC. 2018 I don't have percentage on hand but I do recall it was vastly in favor of republican candidates.
Republican pundits like to try to sell the narrative that "obviously" Zuckerberg is a leftie but really there is no evidence in favor of that and more than a bit against (just starting with the above). Plus he comes from Westchester, NY and went to Harvard, both bastions of upper middle class Republicanism. They base their spin purely on the fact that he is a young Silicon Valley guy and surely all of them must be "liberals".
In practice, I think Zuckerberg is a "whatever makes me the most money" guy and like most international corp types that means he wants politicians of all stripes in his pocket but he would favor those on the right when they look likely to win. Now is he a true believer in the party line of Republicans/righties? Quite possibly not, but there is certainly no evidence that he's a true believer in the party line of Democrats/lefties either.
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, I think Zuckerberg is a "whatever makes me the most money" guy [...] Now is he a true believer in the party line of Republicans/righties?
You just answered your own question there.
Re: (Score:3)
Harvard is a bastion of old-money and upper upper class Republicans that also has some middle-class republicans. But Zuckerberg has never indicated he's a liberal, and instead his first associations in SV were with Peter Thiel
He's clearly a member of the profit-maximizing Republican variety.
Re: (Score:3)
"obviously" Zuckerberg is a leftie
Yes, historically, billionnaires have been such major fans of Marx and Lenin and nationalization of industries. That makes so much sense, I can't believe nobody noticed that before. /s
Re: "accident" (Score:2)
There are many liberal, social democratic shades of 'leftie' before you get to the Communists...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "accident" (Score:3)
Just like AT&T. Did you know in my area you cannot hire a good firm to sue AT&T? They keep all the decent-to-best firms on retainer just so its a conflict of interest. Cost of doing business.
Re:"accident" (Score:5, Insightful)
You're intentionally trying to mislead people by presenting donations from individual Facebook employees as donations from Facebook the organization. It's not a surprise that their employees would donate to Democrats since it's a demographic that skews younger and educated. But they are not the people who set company policy so it's irrelevant to the discussion.
Re:"accident" (Score:5, Informative)
Project Veritas is propaganda. Anyone who cites Project Veritas is spreading misinformation, and is part of the problem.
Inside the Project Veritas Plan to Steal the Election [newrepublic.com]
Source Watch: Project Veritas [sourcewatch.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"These videos they show. They're lies because of who provides them".
It doesn't matter who provides the video material. What matters is that video material is true and in context. In their case, it is.
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't matter who provides the video material.
This would be a nice principle, if there were any way to make it work in the real world. The trouble is you're talking about a guy who got famous for lying in exactly the way you're defending: by manipulating video footage to show clear falsehoods. In that case it was about Acorn. This wasn't established in court, but only because he capitulated completely: agreeing to a settlement in which he paid out $200k to one of his victims and giving a court-mandated public apology. Then he established a website, Pro
Re: (Score:3)
I welcome any evidence you can provide that PV footage is false.
Problem is, no one has any. Considering the sheer amount of people like yourself, who hate their point man to the point of claiming that one instance of wrongdoing is sufficient evidence that all of his productions after this are automatically lies, even when there is zero evidence to even imply this. If he was lying in any of his newer releases, we'd know. Someone would have come out. And that would have been blown up across the media that hat
Re: "accident" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That rich and well-documented history contains a grand total of ZERO items. The accusations are about their current point man having done this once long in the past, which he admitted to publicly. Ever since that event, there has been no documented wrongdoing, and large body of work that was completely on point.
Which is hated by media with burning passion, as exposing them for improper and downright fraudulent behaviour is one of his most popular work. Which is why media likes to pretend that PV's front man
Instagram is a gossip channel (Score:5, Insightful)
Kinda wish people wouldn't look to them for actual information on anybody important.
Re:Instagram is a gossip channel (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Whose property taxes were lowered? Mine certainly never decrease to pay for the local piss poor schools.
We used to give a ton of state & federal $$$ (Score:2)
And what do you know, the smart, well educated people were right. Not that we listened. I should've known something was wrong when the movie Armag
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment will remain exactly that: Wishfull thinking.
Google: Human nature.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think many people specifically go to social media for news, it's just there. Usually accompanied by a narrative from someone they know, someone with influence.
Re:Instagram is a gossip channel (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think many people specifically go to social media for news
Wrong [slashdot.org]
Wrong [slashdot.org]
Wrong [slashdot.org]
Don't believe me?
Donald Trump is president of the Untied States
More proof?
Trump v. Biden
The "information highway" is a gossipy demolition derby
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I mean they get their news from there but they don't specifically go there for news. They go there for other reasons, read the news (and accompanying bullshit) and then don't bother look at other sources because they have already seen it.
Re: Instagram is a gossip channel (Score:2)
Only millennials and strippers. Its a dumb fucking platform.
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda wish people wouldn't look to them for actual information on anybody important.
They don't. They stumble upon "actual information" or at least posts pretending to be.
Curse you liberal media! (Score:5, Insightful)
But Seth Meyers & Steve Colbert spend 10 minutes a night going after Trump and Hollywood & Video game publishers put a lot of Gays in TV (mostly attractive gay women.... ) so it's all fair & balanced, right?
Re: (Score:3)
Flip on CNN or MSNBC on any weekday evening. The entire evening on both channels is host after host ragging on Trump non-stop for hours. I think that most of that ragging is justified, but it still exists. Acting like Meyers and Colbert are the only major Trump critics out there is disingenuous. Further, Fox News averaged 3.2M viewers in July during Primetime. MSNBC averaged 2M with CNN at 1.5M. That means 3.5M viewers are tuned into non-stop Trump hate while 3.2M are tuned into non-stop Trump support
Re: (Score:2)
I think that most of that ragging is justified, but it still exists
Is "justified ragging" just another word for "journalism"?
Re: Curse you liberal media! (Score:3)
Tshirt quote:
I support gay marriage as long as both women are hot.
Re: Curse you liberal media! (Score:2)
Right, no left wing political radio. Except NPR. Almost as if there aren't enough lefties listening to radio in order for it to be profitable. Weird how when the only interface is non-visual lefties can't hack it.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget that it will also hit the front page of reddit via r/television, r/politics, etc. While links to the primary source are removed for being "off topic".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Curse you liberal media! (Score:5, Informative)
Bwha ha ha ha ha ha ha! (Score:3)
Seriously, NPR is _not_ left wing. They're an arm of the DNC. In other words, Mid 1980s moderate Republicans. You won't see them even pushing for Medicare for All (what moderates like me support) much less the left position of nationalized hospitals.
DN! is a left of center program on NPR. They're a good example of what I'm talking about. In 2016 when Hilary won the nomination they brought on Robert Reich to debate about why the left should unite behind
Re: (Score:2)
DN! is a left of center program on NPR. They're a good example of what I'm talking about. In 2016 when Hilary won the nomination they brought on Robert Reich to debate about why the left should unite behind her instead of voting Green.
TBH, supporting her instead of the Green candidate was the right move. I tried my best to find a candidate worth supporting in 2016, since I almost always vote third party, but both the Green and Libertarian candidates were actually BOTH DUMBER and more clueless than Donald Trump. It was a real perfect storm that year; by November there was no candidate even half-way qualified for the job other than Hillary Clinton, and I'm including all of the major AND minor candidates on the nationwide ballot. I ended up
Re: (Score:2)
Oh you sweet summer child.... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to... curate the program a bit, I enjoy some NPR-affiliated podcasts like This American Life (almost always excellent) and Fresh Air with Teri Gross (this requires the curation, since sometimes they have crazies).
Department of redundancy department? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Coding error perhaps? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I rather wonder if someone put some sort of search restriction on Trump related terms to try and reduce what people would see. So instead of organically building a graph of related topics to bring in they restricted it to a couple of topics. Thinking that if they blocked it outright then people would get upset. But, not realizing that they had also blocked content that might be critical of him.
They're probably doing a filter where if you search for #X you only see correlated terms with a positive sentiment like #XisAwesome rather than #Xsucks (based on context, more than the term itself).
As for why it was turned on for Trump but no Biden probably has to do with the freak-out Conservatives keep having over supposed censorship in social media. Trumppies were probably freaking out that Instragram was trying to brainwash them with them negative news when they looked for Trump content, so they got the
Simple reason (Score:2)
Ha ha... (Score:3, Interesting)
<SARCASM>
Fake News. We all know that every social media site is biased against our Fearless Leader! He has told us so himself!!!
</SARCASM>
In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, Sarcasm tags have been added for the sarcasm-impaired
So it's twitter (Score:2)
Republican shit-show (Score:2)
The American economy has crashed 33% on an annualized GDP basis, the largest drop in the history of the nation, because of this Republican shit-show.
The deficit and debt have ballooned at a record rate because of this Republican shit-show.
Millions of Americans are losing jobs, health insurance, and their homes, because of this Republican shit-show.
It's time for the Republican Party to go on the trash heap of history, and a
Re: (Score:2)
It's time to get our country back, and to get a government working for the citizens and not the largest donors.
I can support that. Shame that Biden doesn't.
Does it really matter? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't like it, don't bitch - leave. Your whining doesn't make the place better.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like it, don't bitch - leave. Your whining doesn't make the place better.
I tried telling that to Ilhan Omar and I got put in Internet Jail for racisms.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump supporters are quite capable at handling social media, and Biden supporters tend to be the type who can't figure out how to read their emails. There's no need to assume or suggest bias on Instagram/Facebook's part. It's easily explained by Trump and his supporters simply being more savvy at dealing with social media.
Welcome to our universe, my friend. Perhaps that is the case where you come from, but that's not the case here. I see Trump supporters all the time on Facebook reposting things from social media, usually Twitter, that are completely bonkers. If you mean that Trump supporters can click a repos button, yes, they can do that. If you mean that they are capable of passing on truthful information from social media, no, that is definitely not happening.
Here's a few things I've seen passed on from Twitt
Re: All the web-literate people supported Bernie (Score:2)
I thought Hydroxychloroquine was a cardiac risk?
I know that my university hospital did the antibody transfusions 3 months before the WH and Red Cross started encouraging it. I have NO idea what the fucking delay was at the fed level. The transfusion treatment was used in 1918 to deal with the spanish flu. Its a proven course of treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny stuff! Obviously Trump supporters are stupid - they voted for a reality TV buffoon with no political experience.
Re: All the web-literate people supported Bernie (Score:2)
Political experience is way overrated. Trump lies as well as the rest of them. FEW politicians ever actually DO anything. Esp if they are in the House of Representatives. Talk is cheap. Nobody does anything.
Re:All the web-literate people supported Bernie (Score:5, Insightful)
Where is Biden anyway? Has anyone seen him since March?
Ancient wisdom: When you enemy is making a mistake, do not interrupt them.
Re: (Score:3)
Trumps average voter age is like 60, so you're arguing a 70 year old trump voter is more savvy with the internet than the average Biden voter? Please at least TRY to be serious.
Obviously Twitter put in some special code to protect trump from criticism in an effort to get him to shut up about twitter. There is literally no other logical way that searching for those terms wouldn't pull up the trolling just like other people.
Personally I think twitter was stupid to try to appease Trump and they should delete t
Re: All the web-literate people supported Bernie (Score:2)
Why would you assume that former bernie supporters are pro biden? The DNC rigged this primary the same way they rigged the 2016 primary. Why support a system that calls themselves the DEMOCRATS while getting people to withdraw just so they can consolidate votes in order to prevent Bernie from getting the nomination. Exactly how democratic is that? You will know the tree by the fruit it produces.
Re: (Score:2)
Its amazing how if you only relied on Slashdot coverage you'd think Bay Area Social media companies are all balls to the wall MAGA supporters and the news media and corporations are all dominated by proTrump Republicans.
I haven't the foggiest how you would come to this conclusion.
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't ?
Re: Social Media is Protrump? (Score:2)
It sounds like youre worried that people on social media are mindless group-think trolls. They probably are. Is it because social media attracts mindless sheep? Or does social media use group think and fear to turn people to mindless sheep?
All I can say is slashdot is as close to social media as i get. Myspace was basically personal webpages, an extension of Geocities. Facefuck turned people into crack junkies playing farmville.
Re: (Score:3)
Find one speech by Biden where he doesn't mention Trump. The man can put out a single statement that doesn't have some negative point about Trump.
Now do the opposite. Trump can go for days or even weeks at a time without mentioning Biden. I mean, sure, Trump's a turd in the punch bowl, but his ego keeps him away from talking about his new opponent more than absolutely necessary.
Well, generally when running against an incumbent your primary message is "I can do it better than the guy that's there", while running as an incumbent your primary message is "look at everything I've done and am doing". Especially since Biden has so many issues to legitimately criticize Trump on. So they are going to talk about different things. And of course there's also the fact that Trump is almost pathologically unable to stay on message so his statements are going to jump around anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, now do the same thing for Mitt Romney in 2012 mentioning Obama.
When running against an incumbent, you're running against the incumbent. The entire point is the contrast between you and the incumbent. Which inevitably requires discussing the differences between you and that incumbent, which inevitably requires mentioning the incumbent.
Re: (Score:2)
Find one speech by Biden where he doesn't mention Trump. The man can put out a single statement that doesn't have some negative point about Trump.
Trump pretty successfully makes everything about him, even when doing so is completely inappropriate. When you have outrage over the incumbent on your side, you're a fool not to use it.