Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University’s Post

As I don’t see many concrete solutions around, I will just take a first step and suggest a few (admittedly big) changes we could make to major social media platforms now, to make online discourse more democratic. This is just what I think and I would be happy to spur a discussion: 1. make feeds transparent: flexible sorting via a standardised set of signals, up- + downvotes, view-counts + -times, post-time, either only on posts from people I follow, they follow or the whole network, no black box sorting. 2. for influential content creators: prominent text boxes specifically for the provision of sources (and funding) and automatic links to cross-search results of stated claims/stories. 3. accessible content libraries: showing all public posts and their detailed spreading dynamics, for everyone but mostly researchers and journalists. 4. for slowing down and to avoid over representation of few voices: possibly limiting the total number of posts per person per minute, extra confirmation for sharing unclicked links.

Hi there! Have you ever wondered why you see certain comments in social media comment sections, and why they’re shown to you over others? In my master's thesis at the University of Cologne, I examined what influences the visibility and positioning of comments. Each ranking is determined by algorithms, which are often based on complex human-defined criteria. Yet, the scientific community as well as affected institutions lack to understand these implementations—leading to potentially harmful consequences. One example is the "Druking Scandal," where manipulators exploited comment sections to sway the political public opinion. Although this phenomenon has only been documented in South Korea, it's likely that similar tactics are at play elsewhere. Beyond manipulation, a large set of other important considerations is necessary. For instance, it matters whether an algorithm chooses to promote a homogeneous or diverse range of opinions. Multiple pychological effects, technical limitations, and sociological behaviors such as the Spiral of Silence can all influence the choices of comment ranking algorithm design, making it difficult to create fair, democratic, and engaging comment sections. Furthermore, the risk of unnotified “shadowbanning”—or systematically suppressing certain users or viewpoints—also raises substantial legal and ethical issues. So far, it took me 1.5 years to immerse myself in this topic, reading and analyzing thousands of often disturbing comment sections. Instead of finding all the answers, I’ve discovered more questions—paving the way for further research. All things considered, it’s clear that comment sections play a significant role. They’re the contemporary embodiment of Jürgen Habermas' concept of the public sphere—a crucial tool for participatory democracy. That’s why I encourage everyone to take part in online discussions. If these spaces don’t reflect a broad spectrum of society, they risk becoming uncivil and exclusionary. Many comment sections, even on news sites, remain closed today—a missed opportunity to strengthen our fragile democracies. I hope this post has sparked your interest in the topic. I’d love to hear your thoughts and questions—feel free to share!

Ok, so further research on the topic of what traditional media can learn from the rising influence of "creators" in the news (which aligns with some thoughts I've had for a while on this issue): Individual creators often work hard to demonstrate ability, benevolence, and integrity to build trust with their audiences. They narrate their expertise, respond to reader questions or suggestions, and interact with their critics — all tactics that help build trust. News institutions have put less effort into building trustworthy relationships with audiences, and journalists at large institutions do not always have the license to engage independently with audiences in ways that could increase trust. In addition, journalists’ interests are not always aligned with their employers, and they sometimes have a hard time overcoming the trust issues that audiences have with their employers. https://lnkd.in/ekQFk-Jt The Future of Trustworthy Information: Learning from Online Content Creators by Julia Angwin via Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School

Google’s $250M pledge to fund California journalism is making waves, but is it really a win for publishers, or just another strategic play to avoid regulation? 🤔 With AI-driven search reshaping the landscape and Big Tech under scrutiny, this move raises big questions about the future of news. Explore how this deal impacts local journalism, AI, and the power balance between tech and media. Discover the full story on AdMonsters and how it could affect the future of digital publishing. #AdTech #Publishing #Journalism #Google

[LIVE]: Misinformation on digital platforms has become a significant challenge in today’s media landscape. The ease of sharing information online, combined with the rise of social media, has created an environment where false or misleading content can spread rapidly, often outpacing factual reporting. This proliferation of misinformation can distort public perception, undermine trust in credible news sources, and contribute to societal confusion or polarisation. The role of the media is crucial in this context. Traditional media, with its established practices of fact-checking and editorial oversight, counterbalances the unchecked flow of information on digital platforms. Journalists are tasked with investigating, verifying, and presenting information responsibly, helping to ensure that the public receives accurate and reliable news. By adhering to ethical standards and providing in-depth analysis, the media plays a pivotal role in combating misinformation, holding power to account, and fostering informed public discourse. In the digital age, media professionals must adapt to these challenges while upholding the integrity of journalism. Their work is essential for promoting transparency, maintaining an informed society, and countering the negative impacts of false information online.

10 best onion sites available on the dark web 1 DuckDuckGo – The biggest search engine on the dark web that does not use trackers and collect your personal data. 2 The Hidden Wiki – It is the version of Wikipedia with the biggest directory of onion links to help you explore the dark web. 3 Daniel – Contain a wide range of onion links that are categorized to make it easier for you to navigate the dark web easily. 4 ProPublica – Investigative journalism platform that publishes provoking pieces on a wide range of topics from finance, politics, etc. 5 Sci-Hub – Allows you to access a collection of scientific papers by researchers and experts in various fields. 6 Hidden Answers – This is a platform of the dark web where you can ask any question you like without getting censored. 7 SearX – It is a search engine in the dark that allows you to search incredibly detailed queries. 8 Facebook – This is a version of Facebook on the dark web developed to help people in repressive regimes access it. 9 SecureDrop – Designed for whistleblowers to share information with journalists securely and anonymously. 10 BBC Tor Mirror – A special BBC .onion site to offer access to its content in countries with heavy online censorship.

"Today’s media landscape is in disarray — increasingly audiences are turning away from mainstream news and splitting their attention toward a growing number of content options. Advertising revenues are shifting to digital platforms. Governments have attempted to address the imbalance in market power in the advertising market by encouraging global digital platforms to support news. However, these platforms are rethinking their commitment to news. At the same time, the rapid emergence of generative AI poses new copyright, financial, and visibility challenges to news outlets that are still adjusting to the last wave of digital disruption." #News #NewsMedia #Journalism #Journalist https://lnkd.in/gFbhazqp

Care to learn how political dynamics and corporate decisions are reshaping content moderation, the importance of maintaining access to data for tracking disinformation, and the need to balance ethical considerations with practical challenges in reporting on online platforms? Check out this article from Columbia Journalism Review for insights into the evolving landscape of content moderation and its implications for journalism. https://lnkd.in/gj7pm4PX #Journalism #ContentModeration #Disinformation #EthicalReporting

This is an excellent submission to the Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society from the QUT Digital Media Research Centre. It begins by addressing a core issue: "We need to move away from a deficit model when considering children's engagement with the digital world. Our focus must shift from protecting children from the digital environment and more to protecting them within the digital environment. The Internet provides children with a multitude of positive and pleasurable opportunities, including entertainment, social connection, and learning opportunities. The Internet has enhanced children's lives in many ways and we need to recognise that it will continue to play an important role as they move through childhood, into their teen years and adulthood. Online experiences will continue to be central to how children learn, the careers they undertake and how they experience everyday life throughout the 21st century." Age restrictions are not the answer, and as the submission suggests: "Age assurance technologies are a serious diversion of resources that could be spent on proactive and effective measures to empower young people and meet their age-appropriate needs in the digital environment." This is a thoughtful, thorough, research-informed submission. 👏👏🙏🙏

Despite an incredibly short timeline, and overlap with a significant involvement in the International Communication Association conference on our shores, the QUT Digital Media Research Centre managed to pull together a comprehensive and thoroughly evidenced submission to the Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society. I'm superbly proud of all of my peers for the thought and care they put into this submission, drawing from decades of experience and insights that have emerged from multiple Australian Research Council fellowships and projects to argue for evidence-based interventions and policy that seek to empower and enrich the lives of Australians young and old. I encourage you to read the submission in full (link in the comments), our high-level recommendations include: Recommendation 1: Focus on protecting children within the digital environment rather than protecting children from the digital environment. One way to do this is by incentivising and investing in free, high-quality, age-appropriate, digital products and services for young people, co-designed with young people. Recommendation 2: Instead of the inherently flawed and unsustainable News Media Bargaining Code model, support Australian media companies in both the public-interest and corporate sectors of the industry that demonstrably engage in public-interest journalism activities with corporate tax from very large online platforms to boost their efforts. Recommendation 3: Create digital media literacy programs for media workers to minimise their instrumentalisation as amplifiers and disseminators of mis- and disinformation. Australian journalists must think more deeply about how they use information from digital and social media, and how this information could be amplified for problematic purposes. Recommendation 4: Improve democratic and social outcomes by addressing the lack of transparency and observability of computational advertising. This relatively straightforward regulatory intervention would enable insight into the mechanisms and cultural impacts of targeted advertising on platforms, which currently affords very little transparency. Recommendation 5: Linked to the above, there is a clear and present need in Australia to introduce more comprehensive platform data access provisions for critical, independent, public-interest research, similar to those created in Europe by the DSA. This move would allow greater transparency and support fit-for-purpose policy interventions were needed. Recommendation 6: The inquiry should carefully integrate and align with ongoing policy reforms and regulatory measures to avoid undermining or duplicating existing efforts. Overlooking these established processes risks marginalising their nuanced and evidence-based outcomes, while unnecessarily politicising and complicating the current policy landscape. https://lnkd.in/grTMuw8S QUT (Queensland University of Technology)