TWITTER’S algorithms hand the Tories a significant boost over their competitors in UK politics, a new study has revealed.
The research studied tweets from elected legislators across seven countries and noted a “remarkably consistent trend”, namely that right-wing voices enjoyed greater amplification.
Twitter allows users to view tweets either on a “ranked timeline” - which has been adjusted by an algorithm - or on a chronological one. The study compared the likelihood of a particular post being seen by a user on these two timelines. If there was no difference, the score given was 0% amplification. A value of 100% means the ranked timeline doubles the post’s reach.
The study concluded that posts from Conservatives in the UK enjoy an amplification rate of 176% - compared to 112% for Labour.
READ MORE: Boost for SNP in Westminster poll as Tory and Labour support dips
The SNP scored similar to Labour, but the exact numbers have not been released, instead being shown only on a graphic. The LibDems’ amplification was lower still.
The research took the Twitter handles of MPs only, meaning that MSPs in Holyrood were not included in the results.
Along with right-wingers in Canada, the Tories’ advantage over the other parties is the "strongest" seen across the nations studied.
The study noted that the fact that Conservatives are currently in government in Westminster may have meant that their tweets are amplified more. However, they found that when top government officials and shadow cabinet members were excluded from the research, the results “remained qualitatively similar”.
It was noted that in countries where the right-wing is not in power, such as Canada, their voices were still amplified more by Twitter’s algorithm.
Germany was the only place where left-wing voices were amplified more than their opposition, and then to a much smaller degree than elsewhere.
Overall across all the nations studied - the UK, US, Germany, France, Spain, Canada, and Japan - all politicians saw their posts amplified by the algorithm. It was the extent to which they were boosted that favoured the right-wing.
The study looked at around 9.3 million different Twitter accounts - which its authors say is around 5% of the global total. However, when calculating amplification relating to lawmakers, the researchers only considered reach within their respective countries.
The study’s authors say their findings are “based on a massive-scale experiment involving millions of Twitter users [and] a fine-grained analysis of political parties in seven countries”.
They add that the research saw “the most comprehensive audit of an algorithmic recommender system and its effects on political content”.
The research was published in the peer-reviewed journal PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America). It was authored by Ferenc Huszár, Sofia Ira Ktena, Conor O’Brien, Luca Belli, Andrew Schlaikjer, and Moritz Hardt - who are variously affiliated with the University of Cambridge, the University of California, University College London, and Twitter’s own internal accountability team.
You can read the open-access study in full on the PNAS website here.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel