Studying online bad behavior was hard. It's going to get harder in Trump 2.0
Jan 6, 2025
auto_awesome
Renee DiResta, an academic and researcher specializing in online abuse and disinformation at Georgetown, dives deep into the evolving landscape of online speech and moderation. She shares insights on the challenges researchers face, likening current threats to McCarthyism. The discussion uncovers the implications of diminished moderation on public discourse, particularly leading into the 2024 Election. DiResta also highlights how foreign interference and the rise of peer-to-peer misinformation complicate trust in online platforms amidst heated political dynamics.
Major social media platforms are increasingly less inclined to moderate content, raising concerns about rising misinformation and chilling legitimate speech.
Researcher Renee DiResta faces backlash and harassment for her studies on disinformation, highlighting the dangers of political manipulation of academic work.
The emergence of alternative social media platforms reflects users' desire for tailored online experiences, emphasizing the importance of moderation and community values.
Deep dives
The Evolving Landscape of Online Speech
The discussion highlights the current issues surrounding online speech and content moderation, emphasizing how major platforms like Facebook and Twitter are becoming less inclined to moderate certain types of speech. This shift occurred amidst rising concerns about misinformation and disinformation, particularly during election cycles. The conversation underscores a paradox where reduced moderation may chill specific forms of legitimate speech, as people fear backlash for their opinions. This environment creates a complex landscape for researchers and users alike, complicating efforts to maintain balanced dialogue online.
The Impact of Political Narratives on Research
Renee DiResta shares her experiences as a researcher studying adversarial abuse and propaganda, highlighting how her work has drawn ire from powerful political figures. She explains that the anger directed at her is less about her research and more a response to the political climate, which has manipulated her findings into narratives that serve specific agendas. The adverse reactions she faces include harassment, investigations, and lawsuits, particularly as influential politicians leverage these narratives to mobilize their bases ahead of elections. This illustrates the potential dangers faced by researchers who aim to unveil the complexities of online discourse and misinformation.
The Chilling Effect on Free Expression
DiResta expresses concern about the chilling effect that the backlash against researchers can have on free expression within the broader societal context. She notes that the investigations and harassment faced by herself and others may deter future scholars from engaging in vital research on online misinformation and disinformation for fear of reprisals. This societal hesitance to engage critically with controversial topics can stifle important discourse and reduce the public's understanding of complex issues. DiResta emphasizes the need for institutions to support researchers and stand against undue intimidation to preserve an environment conducive to inquiry.
Moderation Policies and User Experience
The conversation explores how major social media platforms are responding to criticism of their content moderation policies, reflecting a tension between user expectations and operational realities. While some platforms previously acted to assuage concerns from their audiences about bias, ongoing public pressure continues to shape their moderation practices. As a result, there is a growing need for transparency in how moderation decisions are made, with users demanding fair treatment across the board regardless of the political implications. This dynamic emphasizes that users ultimately prefer moderated platforms to avoid harassment and misinformation while wanting fair treatment in their online interactions.
The Future of Social Media Platforms
The emergence of alternative social media platforms is reshaping the landscape of online communication, as users begin gravitating towards environments that align with their values. Platforms like Mastodon and Blue Sky allow users to choose their preferred environments, creating opportunities for niche communities to develop. However, renown figures in the discussion suggest that the traditional tension of left versus right continues to play out, as users migrate between platforms seeking varied interaction styles. This evolution highlights a growing desire among users for control over their interactions, where the balance of moderation and community engagement plays a pivotal role in the future of social media.
Hello, Nilay here. We’re still on winter break; we’ll be back with brand-new Decoder interviews next week, and with our Thursday shows later this month. I’m excited for what we’ve got in the pipeline. I think you’re going to love it.
For today, though, we’re sharing an episode of Peter Kafka’s new show Channels – he’s talking to disinformation researcher Renee DiResta about what’s going on with speech online in an era where platforms seem less inclined to moderate than ever. Peter’s an old friend and Renee is an expert on all this — there’s a lot of core Decoder themes in this one. Enjoy, and we’ll be back in a bit.
