Solomon Messing

Last updated

Solomon Messing is a researcher and data scientist [1] known for his work on how algorithms and social information embedded in new technologies affect the way people understand the political world. He was the founding Director of Pew Research Center's Data Labs, [1] research scientist at Facebook and Twitter, [2] , chief scientist at Acronym, [3] [4] and is now Research Associate Professor at New York University.

Messing's work quantifying media polarization and filter bubbles was published in Science [5] and has been influential in the field of political communication [6] and sparked media commentary on the role of networks and algorithms in the media ecosystem. [7] [8] [9] [10] His work on how people understand election forecasting [11] was the subject of public debate about the role of election forecasting in the democratic process [12] [13] [14] [15] and was cited by FiveThirtyEight's Politics Podcast [16] as a reason for changing the forecast from percent change of winning to odds.

He also led the technical effort at Facebook to release perhaps the largest ever social media data set for research, which relied on a controversial technology, differential privacy, to protect data from malicious actors. [17] [18]

Messing earned his PhD in 2013 as well as a master's degree in Statistics from Stanford University. [19]

Most cited peer-reviewed journal articles

Related Research Articles

Disinformation is false information deliberately spread to deceive people. Disinformation is an orchestrated adversarial activity in which actors insert strategic deceptions and media manipulation tactics to advance political, military, or commercial goals. Disinformation is implemented through attacks that weaponize multiple rhetorical strategies and forms of knowing—including not only falsehoods but also truths, half-truths, and value judgements—to exploit and amplify culture wars and other identity-driven controversies."

Fact-checking is the process of verifying the factual accuracy of questioned reporting and statements. Fact-checking can be conducted before or after the text or content is published or otherwise disseminated. Internal fact-checking is such checking done in-house by the publisher to prevent inaccurate content from being published; when the text is analyzed by a third party, the process is called external fact-checking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social networking service</span> Online platform that facilitates the building of relations

A social networking service or SNS is a type of online social media platform which people use to build social networks or social relationships with other people who share similar personal or career content, interests, activities, backgrounds or real-life connections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Facebook</span> Social networking service owned by Meta Platforms

Facebook is a social media and social networking service owned by American technology conglomerate Meta Platforms. Created in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg with four other Harvard College students and roommates Eduardo Saverin, Andrew McCollum, Dustin Moskovitz, and Chris Hughes, its name derives from the face book directories often given to American university students. Membership was initially limited to Harvard students, gradually expanding to other North American universities. Since 2006, Facebook allows everyone to register from 13 years old, except in the case of a handful of nations, where the age limit is 14 years. As of December 2022, Facebook claimed 3 billion monthly active users. As of October 2023 Facebook ranked as the 3rd most visited website in the world with 22.56% of its traffic coming from the United States. It was the most downloaded mobile app of the 2010s.

Horse race journalism is political journalism of elections that resembles coverage of horse races because of the focus on polling data and public perception instead of candidate policy, and almost exclusive reporting on candidate differences rather than similarities. "For journalists, the horse-race metaphor provides a framework for analysis. A horse is judged not by its own absolute speed or skill, but rather by its comparison to the speed of other horses, and especially by its wins and losses." Horse race journalism dominates media coverage during elections in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Echo chamber (media)</span> Situation that reinforces beliefs by repetition inside a closed system

In news media and social media, an echo chamber is an environment or ecosystem in which participants encounter beliefs that amplify or reinforce their preexisting beliefs by communication and repetition inside a closed system and insulated from rebuttal. An echo chamber circulates existing views without encountering opposing views, potentially resulting in confirmation bias. Echo chambers may increase social and political polarization and extremism. On social media, it is thought that echo chambers limit exposure to diverse perspectives, and favor and reinforce presupposed narratives and ideologies.

Political forecasting aims at forecasting the outcomes of political events. Political events can be a number of events such as diplomatic decisions, actions by political leaders and other areas relating to politicians and political institutions. The area of political forecasting concerning elections is highly popular, especially amongst mass market audiences. Political forecasting methodology makes frequent use of mathematics, statistics and data science. Political forecasting as it pertains to elections is related to psephology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Filter bubble</span> Intellectual isolation involving search engines

A filter bubble or ideological frame is a state of intellectual isolation that can result from personalized searches, recommendation systems, and algorithmic curation. The search results are based on information about the user, such as their location, past click-behavior, and search history. Consequently, users become separated from information that disagrees with their viewpoints, effectively isolating them in their own cultural or ideological bubbles, resulting in a limited and customized view of the world. The choices made by these algorithms are only sometimes transparent. Prime examples include Google Personalized Search results and Facebook's personalized news-stream.

Social media and political communication in the United States refers to how political institutions, politicians, private entities, and the general public use social media platforms to communicate and interact in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social media analytics</span> Process of gathering and analyzing data from social media networks

Social media analytics or Social media monitoring is the process of gathering and analyzing data from social networks. It is commonly used by marketers to track online conversations about products and companies. One author defined it as "the art and science of extracting valuable hidden insights from vast amounts of semi-structured and unstructured social media data to enable informed and insightful decision-making."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cambridge Analytica</span> 2013–2018 British political consulting firm

Cambridge Analytica Ltd (CA), previously known as SCL USA, was a British political consulting firm that came to prominence through the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal. It was started in 2013, as a subsidiary of the private intelligence company and self-described "global election management agency" SCL Group by long-time SCL executives Nigel Oakes, Alexander Nix and Alexander Oakes, with Nix as CEO. The well-connected founders had contact with, among others, the British Conservative Party, royal family, and military. The firm maintained offices in London, New York City, and Washington, D.C. The company closed operations in 2018 in the course of the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal, although firms related to both Cambridge Analytica and its parent firm SCL still exist.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election</span> Overview of social media usage in the 2016 U.S. presidential election

Social media played an important role in shaping the course of events leading up to, during, and after the 2016 United States presidential election. It enabled people to have a greater interaction with the political climate, controversies, and news surrounding the candidates. Unlike traditional news platforms, such as newspapers, radio, and magazines, social media gave people the ability to comment below a candidate's advertisement, news surrounding the candidates, or articles regarding the policy of the candidates. It also allowed people to formulate their own opinions on public forums and sites and allowed for greater interaction among voters. The accessibility of information online enabled more voters to educate themselves on candidates' positions on issues, which in turn enabled them to form unique opinions on candidates and vote on those opinions, ultimately impacting the election's outcome.

Fake news websites are websites on the Internet that deliberately publish fake news—hoaxes, propaganda, and disinformation purporting to be real news—often using social media to drive web traffic and amplify their effect. Unlike news satire, fake news websites deliberately seek to be perceived as legitimate and taken at face value, often for financial or political gain. Such sites have promoted political falsehoods in India, Germany, Indonesia and the Philippines, Sweden, Mexico, Myanmar, and the United States. Many sites originate in, or are promoted by, Russia, North Macedonia, and Romania, among others. Some media analysts have seen them as a threat to democracy. In 2016, the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs passed a resolution warning that the Russian government was using "pseudo-news agencies" and Internet trolls as disinformation propaganda to weaken confidence in democratic values.

Fake news websites target United States audiences by using disinformation to create or inflame controversial topics such as the 2016 election. Most fake news websites target readers by impersonating or pretending to be real news organizations, which can lead to legitimate news organizations further spreading their message. Most notable in the media are the many websites that made completely false claims about political candidates such as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as part of a larger campaign to gain viewers and ad revenue or spread disinformation. Additionally, satire websites have received criticism for not properly notifying readers that they are publishing false or satirical content, since many readers have been duped by seemingly legitimate articles.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fake news</span> False or misleading information presented as real

Fake news or information disorder is false or misleading information presented as news. Fake news often has the aim of damaging the reputation of a person or entity, or making money through advertising revenue. Although false news has always been spread throughout history, the term "fake news" was first used in the 1890s when sensational reports in newspapers were common. Nevertheless, the term does not have a fixed definition and has been applied broadly to any type of false information presented as news. It has also been used by high-profile people to apply to any news unfavorable to them. Further, disinformation involves spreading false information with harmful intent and is sometimes generated and propagated by hostile foreign actors, particularly during elections. In some definitions, fake news includes satirical articles misinterpreted as genuine, and articles that employ sensationalist or clickbait headlines that are not supported in the text. Because of this diversity of types of false news, researchers are beginning to favour information disorder as a more neutral and informative term.

Internet manipulation refers to the co-optation of online digital technologies, including algorithms, social bots, and automated scripts, for commercial, social, military, or political purposes. Internet and social media manipulation are the prime vehicles for spreading disinformation due to the importance of digital platforms for media consumption and everyday communication. When employed for political purposes, internet manipulation may be used to steer public opinion, polarise citizens, circulate conspiracy theories, and silence political dissidents. Internet manipulation can also be done for profit, for instance, to harm corporate or political adversaries and improve brand reputation. Internet manipulation is sometimes also used to describe the selective enforcement of Internet censorship or selective violations of net neutrality.

Social media use in politics refers to the use of online social media platforms in political processes and activities. Political processes and activities include all activities that pertain to the governance of a country or area. This includes political organization, global politics, political corruption, political parties, and political values.

Social media was used extensively in the 2020 United States presidential election. Both incumbent president Donald Trump and Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden's campaigns employed digital-first advertising strategies, prioritizing digital advertising over print advertising in the wake of the pandemic. Trump had previously utilized his Twitter account to reach his voters and make announcements, both during and after the 2016 election. The Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden also made use of social media networks to express his views and opinions on important events such as the Trump administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the protests following the murder of George Floyd, and the controversial appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political polarization in the United States</span> Divisions among people with different political ideologies in the United States

Political polarization is a prominent component of politics in the United States. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization, both of which are apparent in the United States. In the last few decades, the U.S. has experienced a greater surge in ideological polarization and affective polarization than comparable democracies.

References

  1. 1 2 "Q&A with Solomon Messing of Pew Research Center's Data Labs | Pew Research Center". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  2. ↑ "Solomon Messing". Facebook Research. Facebook. Archived from the original on 2019-06-11. Retrieved 11 June 2019.
  3. ↑ Pasternack, Alex (2 November 2020). "This data expert helped Trump win. Now he's built a machine to take him down" . Retrieved 1 December 2021.
  4. ↑ "Election forecasts helped elect Trump in 2016. It could happen again in 2020". Yahoo News. Retrieved 2020-10-06.
  5. ↑ Bakshy, Eytan; Messing, Solomon; Adamic, Lada (2015-05-07). "Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook". Science. 348 (6239): 1130–2. Bibcode:2015Sci...348.1130B. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160 . ISSN   0036-8075. PMID   25953820. S2CID   206632821.
  6. ↑ "Google Scholar". scholar.google.com. Retrieved 2018-10-25.
  7. ↑ Manjoo, Farhad (2015-05-07). "Facebook Use Polarizing? Site Begs to Differ". New York Times. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  8. ↑ Mooney, Chris (May 7, 2015). "Facebook study says it's mainly your fault–not theirs–that you click on things you already agree with". Washington Post. Retrieved 2017-01-12.
  9. ↑ Webb, Jonathan (2015-05-07). "Facebook studies news feed balance". BBC News. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  10. ↑ "Does Facebook's News Feed control your world view?" . Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  11. ↑ Westwood, Sean; Messing, Solomon; Lelkes, Yphtach (2018). "Projecting Confidence: How the Probabilistic Horse Race Confuses and Demobilizes the Public". SSRN Working Paper Series. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3117054. ISSN   1556-5068. S2CID   102488084. SSRN   3117054.
  12. ↑ Bump, Philip. "Analysis | Clinton's Achilles' heel in 2016 may have been overconfidence". Washington Post. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  13. ↑ Kilgore, Ed. "Americans Don't Understand Election Predictions Expressed As Probabilities". Intelligencer. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  14. ↑ "Study Finds Election Forecasts Lower Voter Turnout". politicalwire.com. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  15. ↑ Uberti, David (2018-10-18). "Forecasting the midterms: Uncertainty with a chance of finger-pointing". Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  16. ↑ "Politics Podcast: What's So Wrong With Nancy Pelosi?". FiveThirtyEight. 2018-02-12. Retrieved 2018-10-24.
  17. ↑ Flamini, Daniela (11 October 2019). "What can researchers find among the 32 million URLs Facebook just released to Social Science One?". Poynter. Poynter.
  18. ↑ Aral, Sinan (Sep 14, 2021). The Hype Machine. Crown/Archetype. p. 276. ISBN   9780593240403.
  19. ↑ "SMaPP Global". New York University Social Media and Political Participation Lab. New York University.
  20. 1 2 3 4 "Google Scholar".
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.