TechCentralTechCentral
    Facebook Twitter YouTube LinkedIn
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube
    TechCentral TechCentral
    NEWSLETTER
    • News

      Alviva shares leap higher on R3-billion take-private offer

      30 June 2022

      Datatec to sell Analysys Mason for as much as R4.1-billion

      30 June 2022

      Eskom ramps up load shedding as crisis deepens

      30 June 2022

      Signs Eskom crisis is creating diesel shortages

      30 June 2022

      Huawei, MTN to help build 5G-powered ‘smart mine’

      30 June 2022
    • World

      Graphics card prices plummet as crypto demand dries up

      30 June 2022

      Bitcoin just had its worst quarter in a decade

      30 June 2022

      The NFT party is over

      30 June 2022

      Samsung beats TSMC to 3nm chip production

      30 June 2022

      Napster plots crypto comeback

      29 June 2022
    • In-depth

      The great crypto crash: the fallout, and what happens next

      22 June 2022

      Goodbye, Internet Explorer – you really won’t be missed

      19 June 2022

      Oracle’s database dominance threatened by rise of cloud-first rivals

      13 June 2022

      Everything Apple announced at WWDC – in less than 500 words

      7 June 2022

      Sheryl Sandberg’s ad empire leaves a complicated legacy

      2 June 2022
    • Podcasts

      How your organisation can triage its information security risk

      22 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E06 – ‘Apple Silicon’

      15 June 2022

      The youth might just save us

      15 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E05 – ‘Nvidia: The Green Goblin’

      8 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E04 – ‘The story of Intel – part 2’

      1 June 2022
    • Opinion

      Has South Africa’s advertising industry lost its way?

      21 June 2022

      Rob Lith: What Icasa’s spectrum auction means for SA companies

      13 June 2022

      A proposed solution to crypto’s stablecoin problem

      19 May 2022

      From spectrum to roads, why fixing SA’s problems is an uphill battle

      19 April 2022

      How AI is being deployed in the fight against cybercriminals

      8 April 2022
    • Company Hubs
      • 1-grid
      • Altron Document Solutions
      • Amplitude
      • Atvance Intellect
      • Axiz
      • BOATech
      • CallMiner
      • Digital Generation
      • E4
      • ESET
      • Euphoria Telecom
      • IBM
      • Kyocera Document Solutions
      • Microsoft
      • Nutanix
      • One Trust
      • Pinnacle
      • Skybox Security
      • SkyWire
      • Tarsus on Demand
      • Videri Digital
      • Zendesk
    • Sections
      • Banking
      • Broadcasting and Media
      • Cloud computing
      • Consumer electronics
      • Cryptocurrencies
      • Education and skills
      • Energy
      • Fintech
      • Information security
      • Internet and connectivity
      • Internet of Things
      • Investment
      • IT services
      • Motoring and transport
      • Public sector
      • Science
      • Social media
      • Talent and leadership
      • Telecoms
    • Advertise
    TechCentralTechCentral
    Home»News»Yes, Russia abused Facebook, but did it work?

    Yes, Russia abused Facebook, but did it work?

    News By Leonid Bershidsky19 December 2018
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email

    Russia’s propaganda operations during the 2016 US presidential election were broader than previously thought, according to two recently published studies. But they don’t provide proof the influence campaign was as effective as the Kremlin may have hoped. Both reports, based on data provided by social networks, combine a distrust of the companies’ disclosures and a naive trust in the metrics they tout.

    Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google have handed over data on the activities of the Internet Research Agency, a Russian troll farm that’s the subject of an indictment obtained by special counsel Robert Mueller, to the US senate’s select committee on intelligence. Two teams, one from the University of Oxford’s Computational Propaganda Project and social network analysis firm Graphika, the other from disinformation protection outfit New Knowledge, have combed through this data. Both allege the social networks were selective in their disclosures when the Russian influence campaign first came to light.

    The content was seen by 126 million users on Facebook and 20 million on Instagram

    The initial controversy focused on the ads the Russian outfit bought on Facebook for about US$100 000. But the data show the “organic” posting of divisive content — material pandering to right-wing audiences, or posts aimed at stopping minorities from voting for Hillary Clinton — formed a much bigger part of the Russian agency’s work than the ads.

    The organic posts had the bigger reach, too, according to ComProp. The content was seen by 126 million users on Facebook and 20 million on Instagram, according to Facebook. New Knowledge says it suspects the latter number has been low-balled.

    Surprising

    It’s surprising that a large part of the activity was on Instagram, part of the Facebook empire almost completely overlooked in the controversy. The Russian group’s Instagram accounts generated 183 million likes and four million comments, according to New Knowledge. On Facebook, some 31 million users shared the content and almost 39 million liked it, ComProp said.

    The numbers suggest Facebook successfully restricted the scope of the initial debate to the paid ads on its main site as it attempted to limit the damage. The company’s first response to the exposure of the Russian group’s campaign was merely to make its political ad-sales practices more transparent. A crackdown on “inauthentic accounts” came later, and, as New Knowledge points out, some accounts linked to the agency still remain active.

    It’s always been difficult to measure the impact of propaganda in print, radio or television. Given that Donald Trump outspent Clinton on Facebook, despite spending half as much as she did on the entire campaign, it’s tempting to think that digital ads are far more effective than traditional ones. Certainly, the audience and engagement numbers unearthed by the studies look impressive.

    That’s not to say, however, that Russia’s campaign was highly efficient. According to ComProp, the methods the Russian campaign employed were lifted not from traditional political campaigns, but from digital marketing. And that provides the best metric by which to gauge their success.

    Many of the people exposed to an ad or an organic-looking post about a product would have bought it anyway

    In April, Brett Gordon and Florian Zettelmeyer of Northwestern University and two Facebook employees, Neha Bhargava and Dan Chapsky, published a paper on the efficiency of 15 Facebook advertising campaigns. Their most striking finding was that traditional observational methods — which look at how many people were exposed to an ad and how many bought a product — tend to overestimate grossly the true effect of ads.

    The main reason? Many of the people exposed to an ad or an organic-looking post about a product would have bought it anyway. It’s no different with candidates or causes.

    The Gordon paper uses a Facebook-devised measure of ad campaign success called “lift”, which doesn’t just observe how the targeted group buys, but sets up a control group and figures out how much of the audience would have bought anyway. That way, it can establish causality between ads and purchases better than traditional observational methods.

    ‘Lift’

    It can’t be applied to elections because there’s no way to track how people actually vote. But in the 15 commercial campaigns studied in the Gordon paper, “lift” — the additional business generated — varied between -3.5% and 153.2%; only eight of the campaigns generated “lift” statistically different from zero at the 5% confidence level.

    This suggests that for all the new evidence in the latest studies, it’s still unclear whether the Russian influence campaign worked as intended. It was certainly expensive — the Internet Research Agency’s monthly budget of $1.25-million for the US is comparable with the Clinton campaign’s Facebook spend. But until candidates in a future election ditch traditional advertising methods and go all in on social, it will be impossible to show how well online propaganda works. These crude audience and engagement numbers mean little and should be trusted less.  — (c) 2018 Bloomberg LP

    Facebook
    Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email
    Previous ArticlePinnacle highlights compliance urgency around upgrading from Windows 2008
    Next Article Trader who called the bitcoin top just covered his short

    Related Posts

    Alviva shares leap higher on R3-billion take-private offer

    30 June 2022

    Datatec to sell Analysys Mason for as much as R4.1-billion

    30 June 2022

    Eskom ramps up load shedding as crisis deepens

    30 June 2022
    Add A Comment

    Comments are closed.

    Promoted

    Billetterie simplifies interactions between law firms and clients

    30 June 2022

    Think herding cats is tricky? Try herding a cloud

    29 June 2022

    How your business can help hybrid workers effectively

    28 June 2022
    Opinion

    Has South Africa’s advertising industry lost its way?

    21 June 2022

    Rob Lith: What Icasa’s spectrum auction means for SA companies

    13 June 2022

    A proposed solution to crypto’s stablecoin problem

    19 May 2022

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    © 2009 - 2022 NewsCentral Media

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.