Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

source-codesource codeauthorIssie LapowskyNoneWant your finger on the pulse of everything that's happening in tech? Sign up to get David Pierce's daily newsletter.64fd3cbe9f
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
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."

From Your Site Articles
Power

Google wants to (try to) make Google Glass cool again

Also this week: savvy virtual assistants, surveillance without violating people's privacy, and more patents from Big Tech.

Is making these cool even possible?

Image: Google

This week was so full of fun patent applications that I didn't know where to start. We've got a throwback to 2013, a virtual assistant that knows when I've stopped talking, and headphones that can determine a user's hearing abilities.

But as always, remember that the big tech companies file all kinds of crazy patents for things, and though most never amount to anything, some end up defining the future

Keep Reading Show less
Karyne Levy

Karyne Levy ( @karynelevy) is the West Coast editor at Protocol. Before joining Protocol, Karyne was a senior producer at Scribd, helping to create the original content program. Prior to that she was an assigning editor at NerdWallet, a senior tech editor at Business Insider, and the assistant managing editor at CNET, where she also hosted Rumor Has It for CNET TV. She lives outside San Francisco with her wife, son and lots of pets.

As President of Alibaba Group, I am often asked, "What is Alibaba doing in the U.S.?"

In fact, most people are not aware we have a business in the U.S. because we are not a U.S. consumer-facing service that people use every day – nor do we want to be. Our consumers – nearly 900 million of them – are located in China.

Keep Reading Show less
J. Michael Evans
Michael Evans leads and executes Alibaba Group's international strategy for globalizing the company and expanding its businesses outside of China.

Does Elon Musk make Tesla tech?

Between the massive valuation and the self-driving software, Tesla isn't hard to sell as a tech company. But does that mean that, in 10 years, every car will be tech?

You know what's not tech and is a car company? Volkswagen.

Image: Tesla/Protocol

From disagreements about what "Autopilot" should mean and SolarCity lawsuits to space colonization and Boring Company tunnels, extremely online Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his company stay firmly in the news, giving us all plenty of opportunities to consider whether the company that made electric cars cool counts as tech.

The massive valuation definitely screams tech, as does the company's investment in self-driving software and battery development. But at the end of the day, this might not be enough to convince skeptics that Tesla is anything other than a car company that uses tech. It also raises questions about the role that timeliness plays in calling something tech. In a potential future where EVs are the norm and many run on Tesla's own software — which is well within the realm of possibility — will Tesla lose its claim to a tech pedigree?

Keep Reading Show less
Becca Evans
Becca Evans is a copy editor and producer at Protocol. Previously she edited Carrie Ann Conversations, a wellness and lifestyle publication founded by Carrie Ann Inaba. She's also written for STYLECASTER. Becca lives in Los Angeles.
Protocol | Workplace

Apple isn’t the only tech company spooked by the delta variant

Spooked by rising cases of COVID-19, many tech companies delay their office reopening.

Apple and at least two other Silicon Valley companies have decided to delay their reopenings in response to rising COVID-19 case counts.

Photo: Luis Alvarez via Getty

Apple grabbed headlines this week when it told employees it would delay its office reopening until October or later. But the iPhone maker wasn't alone: At least two other Silicon Valley companies decided to delay their reopenings last week in response to rising COVID-19 case counts.

Both ServiceNow and Pure Storage opted to push back their September return-to-office dates last week, telling employees they can work remotely until at least the end of the year. Other companies may decide to exercise more caution given the current trends.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Protocol | Workplace

Half of working parents have felt discriminated against during COVID

A new survey found that working parents at the VP level are more likely to say they've faced discrimination at work than their lower-level counterparts.

A new survey looks at discrimination faced by working parents during the pandemic.

Photo: d3sign/Getty Images

The toll COVID-19 has taken on working parents — particularly working moms — is, by now, well-documented. The impact for parents in low-wage jobs has been particularly devastating.

But a new survey, shared exclusively with Protocol, finds that among parents who kept their jobs through the pandemic, people who hold more senior positions are actually more likely to say they faced discrimination at work than their lower-level colleagues.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Latest Stories