Politics

Facebook’s new research project will show how it influenced the 2020 election — after it's over

To study its impact on the 2020 election, Facebook will ask some people to stop using Facebook

Mark Zuckerberg standing in front of his own face on a screen

Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg once said argued it was a "pretty crazy idea" to think Facebook could influence an election

Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Facebook is teaming up with academics across the country to determine once and for all whether Facebook is in fact influencing the 2020 election. The only catch: They won't know the answer until well after it's over.

The new research project, which Facebook announced Monday, will study how the 2020 election is playing out on the world's largest social network, and how the platform affects things like political polarization, voter participation, trust in democracy and the spread of misinformation. A 17-person research team, which includes leading academics in the fields of media and politics, will work with some two dozen Facebook staffers to design the experiments.

Once users opt in to be part of the study, the research team will deidentify their data, split them into groups and begin tinkering with their News Feeds, switch up their ad experiences and, in some cases, even ask them to stop using Facebook temporarily, all while surveying participants to see how their experiences and viewpoints evolve and stack up against control groups. The findings, which Facebook will have no veto power over, will be published for free to the public beginning next summer.

In some ways, the undertaking demonstrates how far Facebook has come since 2016, when it eagerly courted political clients with the promise of influence, then, following President Trump's victory, just as eagerly denied that it had any influence at all. Mark Zuckerberg himself famously called it a "pretty crazy idea." But the fact that this sort of research is only now getting underway also demonstrates just how little we actually know four years later. So much of what regulators and the public have come to believe about how social media affects elections boils down to anecdotes and assumption, not data. This research could change that.

"We're in these really uncharted waters where you have two or three enormous companies that control the vast majority of the data we need to advance science," said Joshua Tucker, a professor of politics at New York University, who is leading the outside research team along with Talia Stroud, a professor of communications at the University of Texas at Austin. "This has been just an amazing opportunity to work with a platform, and so we have to try that."

Facebook has a spotty record when it comes to social science research, particularly as it pertains to elections. In 2010, the company performed a randomized controlled trial on 61 million users to see whether serving different iterations of its "I Voted" sticker to different groups of users would impact voter turnout. (It did, sparking outrage.) And of course there was the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where a Cambridge University professor used a Facebook app to scrape data from tens of millions of Facebook users, which he then sold to the now defunct and disgraced data analytics firm that powered the Trump campaign.

This time around, Facebook is being significantly more cautious. Facebook employees will be the only ones with access to the raw data, for one thing, and users will have to explicitly opt-in to participate. That said, Stroud, Tucker and the 15 other researchers they've selected will have maximum input on the research questions and the experiment design. They will preregister their study plans so anyone interested can see exactly what the researchers are setting out to find before they even begin and can compare those goals to whatever they ultimately deliver. Facebook won't have any say over what the researchers do or don't publish, and the researchers won't be paid by Facebook, either.

"The academic team really thought about what the key questions might be, and then in collaboration with Facebook, we've been thinking through what the designs would be, with us bringing the expertise as far as methodology and the statistical techniques involved, and the Facebook team really bring a lot of expertise about what the platform is able to do," Stroud said.

The researchers plan to recruit about 200,000 to 400,000 people across the U.S. to participate. Those who opt in might see fewer political ads or fewer news stories about certain topics in their News Feeds. They might be asked to download apps that monitor their online behavior, though Facebook said researchers won't have access to private messages. They might even be asked to stop using Facebook altogether. Some who will act as a control group won't see any changes at all.

Both the researchers and the Facebook executives are confident the experiment group is so small that these tweaks won't have a meaningful outcome on the election. Of course, that might not stop political operatives from claiming that it will; some, like President Trump's digital director, Gary Coby, have already speculated without evidence that Facebook will intentionally register more Democrats than Republicans as part of its voter registration push.

But the potential insights may be well worth the reputational risks. Researchers and regulators have been pushing Facebook and other tech companies to be more transparent for years. In 2018, Facebook helped launch an organization called Social Science One, through which it has been working to open up data to third-party researchers. In February, as part of that work, Facebook released 38 million URLs that were shared on Facebook between 2017 and 2019. That tranche of data was the result of a painstaking process that took years to come to fruition, as Facebook and the researchers sparred over the best way to share data without sacrificing user privacy.

With this design, the researchers are taking a less intensive route, in order to ensure the research could actually get underway before November. "It's not the ideal system, but it is going to be unprecedented in the degree of research we will be able to accomplish," said Nate Persily, a professor at Stanford University School of Law and one of the co-chairs of Social Science One. "If we didn't do something related to the 2020 election, then that would have been a problem. This is the thing we can do."

Persily as well as Tucker and Stroud, who co-chair committees within Social Science One, hope that if this project is successful, it can serve as a model for other social media giants like YouTube and Twitter to open up their black boxes, too.

Of course, whatever the researchers do find about Facebook's impact on the election, it won't come in time for Facebook to act on it before November. But Facebook's head of research and transparency, Chaya Nayak, said such a huge undertaking wouldn't have been possible two years ago, because the company needed time to figure out how to make it work. "There's going to be other elections, and it's really important for us, as a company, to understand the impact of our platform on both the election coming up as well as elections moving forward," she said. "It's never too late."

Policy

How I decided to go all-in on a federal contract — before assignment

Amanda Renteria knew Code for America could help facilitate access to expanded child tax credits. She also knew there was no guarantee her proof of concept would convince others — but tried anyway.

Code for America CEO Amanda Renteria explained how it's helped people claim the Child Tax Credit.

Photo: Code for America

Click banner image for more How I decided series

After the American Rescue Plan Act passed in March 2021, the U.S. government expanded child tax credits to provide relief for American families during the pandemic. The legislation allowed some families to nearly double their tax benefits per child, which was especially critical for low-income families, who disproportionately bore the financial brunt of the pandemic.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at hchitkara@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Climate

This carbon capture startup wants to clean up the worst polluters

The founder and CEO of point-source carbon capture company Carbon Clean discusses what the startup has learned, the future of carbon capture technology, as well as the role of companies like his in battling the climate crisis.

Carbon Clean CEO Aniruddha Sharma told Protocol that fossil fuels are necessary, at least in the near term, to lift the living standards of those who don’t have access to cars and electricity.

Photo: Carbon Clean

Carbon capture and storage has taken on increasing importance as companies with stubborn emissions look for new ways to meet their net zero goals. For hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel production, it’s one of the few options that exist to help them get there.

Yet it’s proven incredibly challenging to scale the technology, which captures carbon pollution at the source. U.K.-based company Carbon Clean is leading the charge to bring down costs. This year, it raised a $150 million series C round, which the startup said is the largest-ever funding round for a point-source carbon capture company.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol covering climate. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Workplace

Why companies cut staff after raising millions

Are tech firms blowing millions in funding just weeks after getting it? Experts say it's more complicated than that.

Bolt, Trade Republic, HomeLight, and Stord all drew attention from funding announcements that happened just weeks or days before layoffs.

Photo: Pulp Photography/Getty Images

Fintech startup Bolt was one of the first tech companies to slash jobs, cutting 250 employees, or a third of its staff, in May. For some workers, the pain of layoffs was a shock not only because they were the first, but also because the cuts came just four months after Bolt had announced a $355 million series E funding round and achieved a peak valuation of $11 billion.

“Bolt employees were blind sided because the CEO was saying just weeks ago how everything is fine,” an anonymous user wrote on the message board Blind. “It has been an extremely rough day for 1/3 of Bolt employees,” another user posted. “Sadly, I was one of them who was let go after getting a pay-raise just a couple of weeks ago.”

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Climate

The fight to define the carbon offset market's future

The world’s largest carbon offset issuer is fighting a voluntary effort to standardize the industry. And the fate of the climate could hang in the balance.

It has become increasingly clear that scaling the credit market will first require clear standards and transparency.

Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

There’s a major fight brewing over what kind of standards will govern the carbon offset market.

A group of independent experts looking to clean up the market’s checkered record and the biggest carbon credit issuer on the voluntary market is trying to influence efforts to define what counts as a quality credit. The outcome could make or break an industry increasingly central to tech companies meeting their net zero goals.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (ljenkins@protocol.com).

Latest Stories
Bulletins