• colforge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m no fan of CCP policy or propaganda but the headline could also be “Non-peer reviewed institute publishes study making dubious claims by comparing one social media platform to another that likely has its own biases that are just as strong”

  • PugJesus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am shocked. Surely the CCP would never do such a thing. Use companies are a proxy for their national interests and play dumb all the while. Why, I think we should buy more telecommunications equipment from them. They’re trustworthy, unlike the Westoid ‘NBC’ news funded by the CIA.

    /s

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      They have different algorithms serving content within and outside the country. Outside the country, all the garbage, the thirst traps and sexualised shit and attention-span-fucking shit gets shown to children, while within the country all the content is about developing a strong work ethic and recognising some childs achievements and stuff like that.

      It’s a literal psyop and people just swallow it shaft and balls. Incomprehensible.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      A new report from the Network Contagion Research Institute says that TikTok likely promotes and demotes certain topics based on the perceived preferences of the Chinese government. 

      It’s not about what it hosts, it’s what it pushes and promotes. And this was research on politically sensitive subjects.

      • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        “The perceived preferences” as opposed to “the preferences” I think is an important choice of words for the article.

        • Copernican@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well I think the question they are asking is why some content is promoted or demoted, not a question of whether it is happening according to the article.

          • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think it’s less about asking a question than it is pushing a narrative. Now, I’m not claiming that it’s a false narrative, but we should at least be able to admit when something is probably propaganda.

            • Copernican@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah. But they are saying the data is demonstrating that for non controversial hash tags, there is a lot of similarity between Tik tok and Instagram. But when it comes to hash tags that are controversial from a CCP POV, there is a strange disparity between hash tag prevalence. So it appears that this is due to intervention from the tik tok platform. But the data can’t definitively say who is responsible for this censorship of hash tags or conversations on CCP controversial subjects.

  • no banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    With the way this is worded I’m just thinking “yeah and some content probably aligns with the Norwegian government”.

      • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The above reply could still be true. If you run this sort of hashtag analysis on other countries you could probably find a bunch that the platform is “favoring” .

        Hell you could uno reverse this whole argument and say meta is boosting western aligned content. Claiming Instagram is some sort of unbiased real base for social media is a bad premise.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but the things that are specifically being favored or silenced, as the article shows, are things that the CCP wants to be favored or silenced.

        • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.”

          Or in this case, if it looks like it’s owned by CCP, takes orders from the CCP, and promotes the views of the CCP, it’s probably a CCP intelligence operation.

  • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    ( sigh )

    Everybody, shut the fuck up.

    I read the NCRI-Rutgers report in question. You can, too.

    The report’s conclusion states…

    Given the research above, we assess a strong possibility that content on TikTok is either amplified or suppressed based on its alignment with the interests of the Chinese Government.

    …but the data they present doesn’t prove that statement at all.

    The report authors describe their data collection methodology at the top of Page 5 of the report. They state that they’re using each platform’s advertising management system to count the total number of posts/entries that feature a given hash tag, and comparing the counts on one platform to the counts on the other.

    Think about that for a second. Those numbers are just aggregates of tagged user posts. To assert that ByteDance is “amplifying” or “suppressing” a given topic, the data would need to show evidence of raw posts in a given category being edited or deleted en mass, or that perhaps the content feeds and searches that each platform provides to its users are being modified to hide or promote posts aligned with specific subjects. The data doesn’t address any of that.

    What the data DOES show is how many posts on each platform align with given topics that advertisers have access to. Taken at face value, this data can tell us a lot of interesting things about the users of these particular platforms. For example, TikTok seems to be a lot more into Shakira than Harry Styles. That’s interesting, I guess. Also, Instagram users are making more posts about Uyghurs than TikTok users. That’s also interesting, but that’s not necessarily evidence that ByteDance is suppressing content. What seems more likely is that people who give enough of a shit about Uyghurs to write posts about it aren’t using TikTok.

    So ok, fine, let’s get into some deep-data-fuckery hypotheticals:

    Could TikTok posts pertaining to topics that the Chinese government has expressed opinions about be being edited or deleted? Maybe. That should be easy enough to collect data on and test.

    Could the aggregation of TikTok posts for the advertising/marketing systems be deliberately fudging the numbers by under-counting posts for some topics and/or over-counting for others? Maybe. The data doesn’t prove it. But… why? The function of those advertising systems is to allow marketers to buy ads and figure out costs. Lying about those numbers would mean ByteDance was scamming advertisers. Admittedly, that would be quite a scandal if it were happening, but that’s nowhere near the same thing as the report’s conclusion.

    The report’s conclusion is a full-throated statement that ByteDance is tipping the scales in terms of what content is being served to TikTok’s users. This might actually be happening, and it’s absolutely worth investigating, but the evidence in this report does not back up that claim.

    Finally, a pro-tip: if you’re skimming a research report and spot the authors misusing the phrase “begging the question”, it’s time to crank up your bullshit detector to maximum.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think it’s a fair conclusion, and the conclusion is caveated saying more research is needed.

      Conclusion: Substantial Differences in Hashtag Ratios Raise Concerns about TikTok’s Impartiality. Given the research above, we assess a strong possibility that content on TikTok is either amplified or suppressed based on its alignment with the interests of the Chinese Government. Future research should aim towards a more comprehensive analysis to determine the potential influence of TikTok on popular public narratives. This research should determine if and how TikTok might be utilized for furthering national/regional or international objectives of the Chinese Government. Should such research determine that TikTok users exhibit attitudes and assessments of world events aligned with the information distortions that we have discovered, democracies will need to consider appropriate counter-measures to better protect information integrity and mitigate potential real-world impacts.

  • Xylight@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wow really?? Chinese social media app has Chinese political views? 🤯

  • HactaiiMiju@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meta’s content on some political subjects aligns with the American government, reality shows.

    Enjoy the internet of propaganda, kids 💖

  • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    China app shows global audience Chinese viewpoints! Bad!

    American app shows global audience American viewpoints! Good!

    Perhaps it is ok if humans don’t have one Borg Collective type hive mind and more than one opinion can coexist simultaneously.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      What do you think is a positive viewpoint expressed by the Chinese government that should be spread around to avoid a Borg Collective hive mind?

    • YeetPics@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The algorithm is different in China than it is in the US, this isn’t news. However we are waiting to hear what beneficial Chinese viewpoints we are lacking. Care to share?

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have Douyin as well and the content is completely different. Same person behind the little screen. It is a lot more news, or rather opinion pieces. Sort of like clipped interviews that you’d see with pundits on MSNBC or Fox.

        It’s also a lot more critical thinking and science and maths. For example it’s almost like the TV show How It’s Made where they tour a factory and show step by step. But it’s a fast narration showing all the steps. Math tricks on how to do basic and next level up math skills in a very different way than the west is taught.

        Exercise videos but not thirst traps. Translation and learn new language videos. Lots of that.

        There is some stupid fluff that is pure entertainment. The Asians love scripted funny scenes. There is some dancing and trending songs. But the ratio is completely flipped vs. Tiktok.

        • kpw@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Math tricks on how to do basic and next level up math skills in a very different way than the west is taught.

          As a math undergrad student I can tell you that if it doesn’t involve sitting down and thinking about it with pen and paper for a few hours it’s at best math related entertainment. No useful skills will be remembered.

          • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            As a professional that has completed multiple years of calculus, discrete math, etc, that isn’t true. If you’re doing real math, you’re sitting down and doing it.

            Most of daily adult math is 1st grader level addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. The tricks are for basics for children that you use as an adult.

  • trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Tiktok has a lot of serious problems associated with it but I doubt the CCP’s involvement is anywhere near as high as political morons who barely know how to use their phones are proposing.

    Especially given the statistics presented do not, in fact, paint a line as much as a number of random dots with a focus on the ones the ‘researchers’ don’t like. This is easily a type 1 error that these people are engaging in and absolutely failing at restricting. The point of research is to remove personal bias in an attempt to determine the truth of the matter, not disregard evidence to pursue your personal vendettas on the public stage using erroneous data

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you use TikTok properly you don’t see any of this shit at all, or even any politics at all, just saying.

    To anyone who would downvotes: my TikTok FYP is infinitely better than yours. Sorry, but I’m not sorry. Here’s random shit from my FYP right now

    Exhibit a: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT893xF2D/

    Exhibit b: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT893U9op/

    Exhibit c: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8932KJo/

    I could do this all day lol. These were just 3 back to back things.

    Just love on fun shit and don’t comment on the random political nonsense. It’s all stupid takes anyway