
How 4chan and The_Donald Influence the Fake News Ecosystem - sjmurdoch
https://www.benthamsgaze.org/2017/10/04/how-4chan-and-the_donald-influence-the-fake-news-ecosystem/
======
rstoj
TLDR; snippets from the article:

A shocking amount of disinformation (“fake news”) is also created by and
spread from smaller, fringe Web communities that have relatively outsized
influence on the greater Web.

We set out to measure just how this influence flows in a systematic and
methodological manner, analyzing how URLs from 45 mainstream and 54
alternative news sources are shared across 8 months of Reddit, 4chan, and
Twitter posts. Highlights:

1\. Reddit and 4chan post mainstream news URLs at over twice the rate than
Twitter does

2\. Alternative news URLs spread much faster than mainstream URLs, perhaps an
artifact of automated bots

3\. 4chan was also the most successful at “reviving” old stories

We found that Twitter does have heavy influence on the spread of fake news.
The_Donald and /pol/ are responsible for around 6% of mainstream news URLs
over 4.5% of alternative news URLs on Twitter.

Whole story in the arxiv paper:
[https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.06947](https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.06947)

~~~
sogen
Surprised to see that unexpected amount of news generate over there _6%_ is a
huge number specially these years

------
alva
4chan can be extremely effective in shaping online conversation and mainstream
news coverage. The strategy is never explicitly stated and is most likely done
unconsciously, but is powerful.

A relatively small number of people shape the mainstream news and a large part
is done through gauging public interest. With Twitter, which journalists and
editors use extensively, as well as news sites comment sections, motivated
groups can storm the place using convincing messages and realistic profiles.

If the journalist perceives a story is going viral and not being covered, they
start to amplify. If the story is true, this may be in their interests. The
blue check mark networks are extremely influential and so the message spreads
rapidly. At this point the snowball has it's own momentum and 4chan can sit
back whilst the 'normies' discuss, argue and boost the signal.

Another aspect is 4chan friendly journalists. Not 'respectable' journalists,
but with blue checks, a reputation and a lot of followers. They are happy to
amplify these stories. Maybe about 10% of these are then picked up but the
standard lot, mostly to mock, but the signal is boosted nevertheless.

Basically the tactic is to get a respectable blue-check to amplify the message
(positive or negative, doesn't matter) to cause a massive chain reaction.

The journalists are getting played. Some will be aware and happy to partake,
many I do not think are aware how much of they perceive to be real public
opinion is.

/pol/ has enough latent energy to have an effect. Thousands of bored, qausi-
ideological young men. Many are skilled programmers. Government and other
psyop manuals are distributed and put into practice. The incentives for the
hive to work together for a goal is free. It is mostly for the lulz but with a
slant towards their ideology. How much money would it cost for an agency to
mobilise a few thousand workers to do a concentrated attack on a target from
all angles?

A fascinating group to study in regards to distributed, decentralised
mobilisation of people in order to complete a goal.

edit: The_Donald is downstream from 4chan

~~~
norikki
The important thing to note here is that the 'mainstream' news sources and
Blue Checkmarks have all that influence because their political adgenda is
aligned with advertisers and so they have tons of money to self-promote. (See
the adpocalypse on YouTube) They dont have all that influence because their
political slant is vastly more popular or more accurate than non-corperate
(aka alternative) news sources. That's why the niche for alternatives to them
exist.

Plenty of fake news on both 4chan and CNN, just different fake news. "Hands up
don't shoot!" vs. naming the wrong man as the Vegas shooter

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-
partisan/wp/2015/0...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-
partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-
brown/?utm_term=.a8d8223d81a8)

[https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2017/10/googl...](https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2017/10/google-admits-citing-4chan-to-spread-fake-vegas-shooter-
news/)

~~~
yahna
> Plenty of fake news on both 4chan and CNN

Ridiculous false equivalency.

~~~
Grue3
Yeah, 4chan doesn't really blackmail people anymore.

------
beager
This was a much meatier writeup than I expected from the premise, which
usually gets a pretty surface, opinionated treatment.

Maybe I misunderstand the capabilities of offered solutions, but I can't
imagine that ML would be a tremendously effective tool to gauge content
veracity, at least on its own. Maybe it would be a good supplement to a
headstrong human effort, but that headstrong human effort seems for major
gatekeepers of content (Google, Facebook, etc) like it would be an
underpowered cost-center to placate a concerned public at best, and a non-
starter at worst.

The final suggestion resonated with me a lot:

> Finally, we think the research community should continue to build up our
> understanding of how this content is created; a deep enough understanding
> could allow us to adapt the strategies of bad actors as a tool against them.
> It’s time to fight fire with fire.

This, to me, while maybe not the most tidy solution to the issue, acknowledges
the messy reality of the situation and gives one way to effectively approach
it: flood the zone. I think we did see tactical mimicry with things like
Correct the Record during the 2016 election cycle. However, I believe that
lacked the sort of ethical/factual ambivalence that got the 4chan/reddit
pipeline running as well as it did (and continues to do). Essentially, the
disseminators of propaganda operate asymmetrically, as they are governed by
more dire motivations and by fewer rules. Those who would respond to nullify
the effect of that propaganda can't half-ass it, they would need to match the
shrewdness and power of what continues to crop up. It's very Brave New World.

------
sysdyne
>Trusting whatever is said on 4chan

Are these people for real? As a 4chan user I always never trust it! Makes me
wonder who conducts these experiment since I don't think even the larger 4chan
community actually takes itself seriously.

------
daptaq
Much better written and researched that the title had me assume at first.

------
dingo_bat
Bullshit article. Not a single example of supposed "fake news" that these guys
were supposed to have used to influence the election.

~~~
beager
Interestingly enough, your comment contains two strategies commonly used by
witting or unwitting disseminators/consumers of disinformation to dispute
inconsonant reporting:

1\. Calling it "fake news" ("Bullshit article")

2\. Introducing a straw man

~~~
dingo_bat
> 1\. Calling it "fake news" ("Bullshit article")

Funny. That would apply on the article itself too.

> 2\. Introducing a straw man

I'm not sure what's the strawman in my comment.

------
vim_wannabe
For the love of God, don't feed the troll.

~~~
seattle_spring
By "the troll," I assume you mean The_Donald and 4chan?

