repost, thanks Tadeáš ,)
How the internet flips elections and alters our thou...
https://aeon.co/essays/how-the-internet-flips-elections-and-alters-our-thoughts
Bylo provedeno nekolik studii s cilem zjistit, jak moc razeni vysledku vyhledavani ovlivnuje preference/rozhodovani/nazory. Masivne. Efekt byl pojmenovan SEME - Search Engine Manipulation Effect.
Vysledky vyhledavace, coz je v soucasnosti v naproste vetsine Google, jsou razene podle ruznych dostupnych kriterii (lokalita, jazyk, historie vyhledavani, profil uzivatele). Zaroven ale neni technicky problem podobnym zpusobem na zaklade zajmu poskytovatele vysledku urcite vysledky eliminovat nebo je radit takovym zpusobem, aby s vyuzitim SEME efektu podporili politickeho kandidata. Podle studie z r. 2015 a reportu z r. 2012 se tohle bezne deje a Google radi vysledky tak, aby podporil svoje financni a politicky (demokraticky) zajmy. Eric Schmidt, prezident Alphabetu, ktery vlastni Google, zalozil 2015 startup, ktery ma nejspis i timhle zpusobem pomoct H. Clinton k prezidentstvi.
Zaroven vysledky ukazuji, ze i pokud clovek primo o takovem preferencnim razeni vysledku vi, stejne to jeho finalni rozhodnuti neovlivni a muze ho to i podporit v zadanim danem smeru.
Jako nas tedy ty ruzne komunikacni platformy propojuji, tak nas zaroven vzdaluji tim, ze nam davaji moznost se uzavirat do informacnich bublin s tim, ze nekteri hraci maji celkem bezprecedentni nastroje obsah techle nasich bublin nastavovat. S tim se poji otazka, jak vlastne v soucasnosti strukturovat to, odkud k nam prichazeji podnety a ktere z nich povazovat za relevantni. (Ale mozna, ze vsechno, co k nam prichazi uz prave nejsou podnety ze skutecnyho sveta a od skutecnejch lidi, jsou to informace, ktere muzou byt pravdivy nebo nepravdivy, ale nakonec mozna ani nejsou dulezity, protoze co je dulezity je, aby se kolecka pracovne-produkcniho systemu otacela, zbytek jen jen takovy soukromy ornament, myslenky v mysli, obrazek v obejvaku, nic zasadniho, business as usual.) Myslim, ze v tomhle je klicovy opensource a v podstate by asi bylo potreba, aby cela ta komunikacni infrastruktura byla opensourceovana - od mobilnich operatoru po poskytovatele internetu a komunikacnich platforem, vcetne vyhledavacich platforem. K cemu je moznost cokoliv komunikovat, kdyz hlas uz se nenese vzduchem k usim posluchacu, ani vzduchem z repraku k usim posluchacu, ale je po prefiltrovani a vyhodnoceni jako "zajimavy" a "povoleny" zobrazen na cernym zrcadle :) ... A za nekolik vterin odswajpovan a odskrolovan pro nedostatek pozornosti a nemoznosti udrzet myslenku nekolik hodin nebo dnu. Podporuje elektronicka komunikace myslenkovou inkontinenci?
Výpisky: -- ale stoji za to precist cely clanek, jsou tam popsane ty studie a dalsi veci o FB platforme
Late in 2012, I began to wonder whether highly ranked search results could be impacting more than consumer choices. Perhaps, I speculated, a top search result could have a small impact on people’s opinions about things.
the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME), appeared to be one of the largest behavioural effects ever discovered.
Our randomised, controlled experiments tell us over and over again that when higher-ranked items connect with web pages that favour one candidate, this has a dramatic impact on the opinions of undecided voters, in large part for the simple reason that people tend to click only on higher-ranked items. This is truly scary: like subliminal stimuli, SEME is a force you can’t see; but unlike subliminal stimuli, it has an enormous impact
We now have evidence suggesting that on virtually all issues where people are initially undecided, search rankings are impacting almost every decision that people make. They are having an impact on the opinions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of internet users worldwide – entirely without people’s knowledge that this is occurring. This is happening with or without deliberate intervention by company officials; even so-called ‘organic’ search processes regularly generate search results that favour one point of view, and that in turn has the potential to tip the opinions of millions of people who are undecided on an issue. In one of our recent experiments, biased search results shifted people’s opinions about the value of fracking by 33.9 per cent.
We replicated our findings three more times, and the third time was with a sample of more than 2,000 people from all 50 US states. In that experiment, the shift in voting preferences was 37.1 per cent and even higher in some demographic groups – as high as 80 per cent, in fact.
By reducing the bias just slightly on the first page of search results – specifically, by including one search item that favoured the other candidate in the third or fourth position of the results – we could mask our manipulation so that few or even no people were aware that they were seeing biased rankings.
In 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and elsewhere showed that Google’s search results routinely favoured Democratic candidates. Are Google’s search rankings really biased? An internal report issued by the US Federal Trade Commission in 2012 concluded that Google’s search rankings routinely put Google’s financial interests ahead of those of their competitors, and anti-trust actions currently under way against Google in both the European Union and India are based on similar findings.
In April 2015, Clinton hired Stephanie Hannon away from Google to be her chief technology officer and, a few months ago, Eric Schmidt, chairman of the holding company that controls Google, set up a semi-secret company – The Groundwork – for the specific purpose of putting Clinton in office. The formation of The Groundwork prompted Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, to dub Google Clinton's ‘secret weapon’ in her quest for the US presidency.
K tomu:
The stealthy, Eric Schmidt-backed startup that's working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House -
http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/
Certainly, if Google set about to fix an election, it could first dip into its massive database of personal information to identify just those voters who are undecided. Then it could, day after day, send customised rankings favouring one candidate to just those people. One advantage of this approach is that it would make Google’s manipulation extremely difficult for investigators to detect.
By 2020, China will have put in place the most ambitious government monitoring system ever created – a single database called the Social Credit System, in which multiple ratings and records for all of its 1.3 billion citizens are recorded for easy access by officials and bureaucrats. At a glance, they will know whether someone has plagiarised schoolwork, was tardy in paying bills, urinated in public, or blogged inappropriately online.
A spriznena literatura:
When Google Met WikiLeaks - OR Books
http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/when-google-met-wikileaks/
Library Genesis
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/search.php?req=google+met+wikileaks&open=0&view=simple&phrase=1&column=def