2020年11月3日 星期二

On Tech: Arm yourself for Election Day online

How to handle online voting misinformation or isolated cases of election problems.

Arm yourself for Election Day online

Lydia Ortiz

Election Day is filled with unknowns. One thing we can count on like clockwork is seeing some of the familiar flavors of false or misleading information circulating online.

My colleague Sheera Frenkel wrote that Americans on Tuesday may see misleading reports about trashed ballots, lies that people can vote by text message and other greatest hits of voting misinformation. She spoke with me about why election misinformation matters, and what we can do to stamp it out.

Shira: What’s your message to Americans about what they may see or read online about the election?

Sheera: My main message is that when you see posts, videos or photographs that report isolated cases of election problems or voting machines that aren’t working properly — and it will happen — do not extrapolate that as evidence of widespread botched voting or fraud. Look at the data. Voting fraud is extremely rare. Our election systems work fairly well.

But stuff will go wrong.

Yes. We’re voting in a pandemic, so voting machines will break down because of things like hand sanitizer building up on paper ballots or touch screen machines. Lines for voting might be long because polling stations have more limited capacity or fewer poll workers for pandemic safety.

ADVERTISEMENT

These things are all unfortunate, but we need to take a moment before we jump to conclusions that voter fraud is happening or the election system is broken.

Who is at fault for election-related misinformation?

All of us. People love a good story, especially one that confirms what they already believe.

Have you had to talk people out of misleading claims about the election?

People in two WhatsApp groups that I’m in got angry recently about a tweet from Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, where he said he was voting more than once. Huckabee later said that he was joking.

What did you tell them?

I calmly responded with facts: This is false. Election officials have security measures to make sure that people can only vote once. If someone receives a mail-in ballot, it has a unique voter identification number that is voided if a voter requests a replacement.

ADVERTISEMENT

It’s also important to understand why someone like Huckabee might be sharing false information. He seemed to be tweeting this to get a reaction from people.

Is it misguided to focus our advice — including this newsletter! — on how all of us can avoid spreading election misinformation? Shouldn’t influential people, including President Trump, get more blame for originating or widely circulating misleading information?

I would love it if everyone in a position of power found it in their hearts not to share misinformation. That’s not likely to happen. The next best thing is for all of us not to amplify it. I personally don’t have any control over what Huckabee and the president post or share online. I only have control over what I share online.

Is there a risk that we’re overstating the impact of misleading online information on people’s beliefs or political behavior?

ADVERTISEMENT

The internet companies have the best data on this, and they’re not sharing. But what we experience online does appear to change how we feel and behave. Facebook itself found that people’s moods improved when it showed people more positive posts, and vice versa. It’s anecdotal, but after my years of reporting on this subject, misinformation does appear to drive people further apart.

What do you want Americans to keep in mind over the next few days?

That everyone has a personal responsibility when sharing information to make sure that it is truthful and calming. That Americans are incredibly lucky to live in a country where we can vote and our votes matter. And that the most important things we can do are encourage people around us to vote, and when we see or hear fantastical stories online, take a moment to think.

Shameless plug: The New York Times will be bringing you reliable, responsible news about Election Day, including a special live broadcast of “The Daily” starting at 4 p.m. Eastern.

The Morning newsletter also had a helpful guide on what to pay attention to — and what to ignore — from election results. My colleague Davey Alba has a running Twitter thread in which she corrects false or misleading election information that’s spreading online.

YOUR LEAD

How internet companies are handling Election Day

Wow, readers, you emailed in great questions about technology and the election. I asked Davey Alba, who writes about online disinformation for The Times, to tackle a couple of them related to social media. They have been lightly edited:

My most pressing and serious concern is a candidate, for example Donald Trump, claiming an election victory before all votes are counted. If that happens, how will social media companies address this issue? — Barbara Sloan, Conway, S.C.

They have been preparing for this possibility. Facebook and Twitter will add prominent labels to posts if candidates declare victory before the election is called by authoritative sources, and they will direct people to official election information. YouTube is displaying information panels in all election videos featuring warnings that results may not be final. (Our colleagues have more details here.)

However — and I don’t want to be too much of a downer — we’ve seen repeatedly that misinformation can slip past these guardrails. And there are ways of getting around the internet companies’ rules.

Why can’t the tech companies employ many administrators to look over, hold back or remove false, fraudulent, uncivil or conspiracy-laden comments before they go viral? — Judy Cline, New Bern, N.C.

Judy, I assume you mean content moderators, or the people assigned to monitor what goes up and circulates on social media.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have thousands or more people looking at the material people post. But there’s not always agreement on what is false or potentially dangerous, or what to do about it. And when there is, efforts at content moderation are wildly disproportionate to the volume of material.

To give one example: On YouTube, more than 500 hours of video are uploaded every minute. Humans can’t screen all of it, so YouTube and companies like it tend to use triggers — certain keywords or reports from multiple users — to prioritize which videos might need review from the moderators.

Before we go …

  • Technology is not always the answer, example 3 zillion: Walmart has stopped using robots that roamed the aisles to make sure products were kept stocked on shelves, The Wall Street Journal reported. Walmart found that people were just as useful as the machines at the task.
  • Faxes might be involved when you Google “how to vote”: Giving people reliable information on their voting locations and list of candidates is tricky because of America’s decentralized voting process. Protocol explains how Google, Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat are relying on organizations like Ballotpedia and Democracy Works that are collecting and organizing messy voting information from hundreds of thousands of local election authorities.
  • Or, I could watch paint dry: To increase visibility and trust in the election, Nevada’s Washoe County is among the local election offices around the United States livestreaming election officials counting ballots for anyone to watch online, Bloomberg CityLab reported. Maricopa County’s ballot-counting feed in Arizona has 13 different angles!

Hugs to this

Real talk: People are feeling STRESSED. Why not watch a video of dolphins making faces for the camera? Or check out the weird and wonderful Election Distractor? I made a big batch of oatmeal raisin cookie batter so I will have fresh baked cookies for days. (Or possibly, just for one day.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

2020年11月2日 星期一

On Tech: Stopping online vitriol at the roots

With the election upon us, we’re awash in misleading and angry information. Here’s what we can do.

Stopping online vitriol at the roots

Leif Gann-Matzen

America, it’s one day before a pivotal election, and we’re awash in a lot of garbage information and online vitriol. It comes from strangers on the internet, scammers in our text messages, disreputable news organizations and even our friends and family.

Whitney Phillips, an assistant professor in the department of communication and rhetorical studies at Syracuse University and an author on polluted information, says that all of this is making our brains go haywire.

With the U.S. election ginning up misleading information and the nonstop political discussions online wearing many of us out, I spoke to her about how we can individually and collectively fight back. Here are edited excerpts from our discussion:

When our brains are overloaded, and we’re confronted constantly with upsetting or confusing information, it sends us into a state in which we’re less capable of processing information. We say things we probably shouldn’t. People get retweet happy. It’s not productive, even when people have good intentions and think they’re helping.

How do we stop that process?

I’ve been researching how mindfulness meditation processes can help us navigate this information hellscape. When you see or read something that triggers that emotional reaction, take a moment to breathe and try to establish some emotional space. It doesn’t mean you shouldn’t say the critical thing you’re thinking, but you should first reflect on the most constructive thing to do next.

ADVERTISEMENT

But we don’t tend to think that we’re the ones acting irresponsibly or irrationally. We think the people who disagree with us are irrational and irresponsible.

Most people think if they’re not setting out to do damage or don’t have hate in their hearts, then they don’t have to consider what they do. But even if we aren’t vicious ourselves, we’re still fundamentally a part of what information spreads and how.

We all affect the ecology around us. Bad actors like high-profile influencers can scar the land, but everyone else does, too. The more information pollution there is in the landscape, the less functional our democracy is. If you feel that everything is terrible and everyone lies, then people don’t want to engage in civic discourse.

This imposes a lot of personal responsibility on a problem that is much bigger than us as individuals.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yes, individual solutions are not enough. We all can make better choices, but that means nothing if we’re not also thinking about structural, systemic reasons that we’re forced to confront bad information in the first place.

What are those structural forces? What can be done to make the information environment better at the structural level?

For us to understand how bad information travels we have to think about all the forces that contributed to it — decisions made by the internet platforms, broader capitalist forces, local and national influences. And it includes you. All of them feed into each other.

Part of the problem is that people haven’t understood how information works or recommendation algorithms of social media companies that influence why we see what we do online. If people understand, they can imagine a different world and they can fight to change the system.

I’m tempted to unplug the internet and go live in a cave. Should I?

We need to find a way to balance between evacuating from the hurricane and running toward the hurricane. If we only evacuate, we’re not doing our part as citizens, and we force people on the informational front lines to bear that burden. If we only run toward the storm, we’ll burn out.

ADVERTISEMENT

SEND US YOUR QUESTIONS: We want to hear your election tech questions. What are you curious or concerned about related to how tech companies are handling election-related misinformation, or how secure America’s election technology is?

Send your questions to ontech@nytimes.com, and we’ll answer a selection. Please include your full name and location.

Tip of the Week

Beware of the fake meme

As Whitney Phillips said, all of us have a role to play in reducing the spread of garbage information. Brian X. Chen, a consumer technology columnist for The New York Times, talks us through how to avoid the particularly nefarious false or misleading meme:

Misinformation comes in many forms, but one big culprit to look out for this election season is the meme, which is typically a photo or screenshot with text superimposed over it.

Memes are dangerous because it takes only a few seconds for someone to create one and share it on social media. And it’s easy for images to be doctored and for quotes to be ripped out of context.

So think twice before you re-share a meme — and when in doubt, check the source. A quick way to do that is by looking at the origins of an image by using the reverse image search tool on Google.

Here’s how: On Google.com, click Images in the right hand corner of the page and upload the photo or paste the web address of the photo into the search bar. That will show where else the image has appeared on the web. This can help you verify whether the one you have seen has been manipulated.

Beyond that, keep these three questions in mind when you’re scrolling through news articles and social media posts related to the election:

  • Who is behind the information?
  • What is the evidence?
  • What do other sources say?

“The No. 1 rule is to slow down, pause and ask yourself, ‘Am I sure enough about this that I should share it?’” Peter Adams, a senior vice president at the News Literacy Project, a media education nonprofit, told me. “If everybody did that, we’d see a dramatic reduction of misinformation online.”

Before we go …

  • Holding back the misinformation tide: My colleagues write about what Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are doing during and after Election Day — like banning political ads or blaring that no presidential winner had been chosen until results are verified — to clamp down on election-related falsehoods and highlight accurate and helpful information.
  • Counterpoint: Fears about misinformation are overblown: Slate writes that while false or misleading information may entrench existing political and social divides, there’s not much evidence that it sways voters’ attitudes or behaviors. Instead, it states that people’s beliefs and choices at the polls are largely shaped by their social identities around race and class, gender, geographic location and religion.
  • Career development in 60-second video bites: Career coaches are offering advice about writing résumés, finding a job and more on TikTok. It’s a low-cost, accessible alternative to what’s often expensive consulting services, Yasemin Craggs Mersinoglu writes for The Times.

Hugs to this

Newborns in the intensive care unit at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia were dressed up in Halloween costumes as Apollo Creed from the “Rocky” movies, a Subway sandwich and a little pig in a blanket. The hospital said it organized this to give the families a moment of normalcy.

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/