Four years later…they finally reveal the truth. https://t.co/oSudS8RDSL #theswampyoupayfor
This study (by @GregoryEady et al.) has it all: Exposure to Russian disinformation was highly concentrated in a tiny, ideological niche, but still outweighed by domestic news media. No effect on attitudes or voting. When will public discourse catch up? htt
RT @KimZetter: “only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposure…exposure was concentrated among users…identified as Republican [and] was ecl…
RT @CSMaP_NYU: Russia's foreign influence campaign in 2016 caused widespread concern. But how effective was it? Our new @NatureComms pape…
RT @gavinbwilde: 👀 "We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes…
Congrats to @GregoryEady @tpaskhalis @janzilinsky @RichBonneauNYC @Jonathan_Nagler and @j_a_tucker on this (long-awaited) paper! You can read it here: https://t.co/coMxO2JR3j 14/
Russia's foreign influence campaign in 2016 caused widespread concern. But how effective was it? Our new @NatureComms paper finds that exposure to Russia’s campaign on Twitter wasn’t linked to changes in attitudes, polarization, or voter behavior 🧵1/ ht
What did Russian #disinformation and #misinformation on #Twitter really achieve in the 2016 US elections? -Report by the New York University Center for Social Media and Politics https://t.co/1OSlCp9VRJ
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @JimHansonDC: But I was reliably informed by Media/Dems/DeepState Trump won cuz Russia
But I was reliably informed by Media/Dems/DeepState Trump won cuz Russia
RT @dov_levin: Interesting new study finds that social media campaign aspect of the 2016 Russian intervention was ineffective. As usual in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
Ok. But I wasn’t aware that anyone had considered Twitter to be a significant factor in 2016. Surely Facebook was the important one
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
“Maybe NOW people will distinguish between broad influence efforts and a more deliberate hack-and-leak operation,” thought Charlie Brown as Lucy set the football.
RT @KimZetter: “only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposure…exposure was concentrated among users…identified as Republican [and] was ecl…
«No evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior ». https://t.co/JSHZhWe3Mn
“only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposure…exposure was concentrated among users…identified as Republican [and] was eclipsed by content from…news media…we find no evidence of…meaningful relationship between exposure…and changes in attitude/polarizatio
RT @ target="_blank" href="mailto:gavinwilde[email protected]">@mstdn.social">[email protected] The mismatch between the theoretical vs actual efficacy of social media influence ops remains wide. The 2016 Russian op preached mostly to a small group of the already converted 👇 https://t.co/URzVnOAHty https://t.co/kF4gpve7ty
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
It is not my word, it is research published in @Nature https://t.co/bc8p5AahcG
RT @staillat: Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign influence campaign on Twitter in the 2016 US election and its relati…
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign influence ... - https://t.co/il76wWdb7g https://t.co/CqBmnhyxw7
RT @Bernstein: “We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in…
“We find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.”
Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign influence campaign on Twitter in the 2016 US election and its relationship to attitudes and voting behavior https://t.co/wLbv5lmRE5
Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign influence campaign on Twitter in the 2016 US election and its relationship to attitudes and voting behavior | Nature Communications https://t.co/fgoxEzmbN4