Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Paul Resnick
How We Define Harm Impacts Data Annotations: Explaining How Annotators Distinguish Hateful, Offensive, and Toxic Comments
[Submitted on 12 Sep 2023] Title:How We Define Harm Impacts Data Annotations: Explaining How Annotators Distinguish Hateful, Offensive, and Toxic Comments Download a PDF of the paper titled How We Define Harm Impacts Data Annotations: Explaining How Annotators Distinguish Hateful, Offensive, and Toxic Comments, by Angela Sch\"opke-Gonzalez and 4 other authors Download PDF Abstract:Computational social science research has made advances in machine learning and natural language processing that...
AppealMod: Inducing Friction to Reduce Moderator Workload of Handling User Appeals
Happy π Day! Pi Day is finally here – and so is Giving Day for arXiv! Donate today to directly support arXiv initiatives and help keep open science open. Infinite decimals. Infinite new ideas to discover. Infinite reasons to give.
Remove, Reduce, Inform: What Actions do People Want Social Media Platforms to Take on Potentially Misleading Content?
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
[2104.09560] Political Discussion is Abundant in Non-political Subreddits (and Less Toxic)
Please join the Simons Foundation and our generous member organizations in supporting arXiv during our giving campaign September 23-27. 100% of your contribution will fund improvements and new initiatives to benefit arXiv's global scientific community.
Last chance for input on state’s deficient ethnic studies plan – J.
California state Capitol building in Sacramento. (Photo/Wikimedia Commons) By Paul Resnick | September 24, 2020 Two days after Yom Kippur, the public commentary period will come to a close for the Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum for K-12 schools, though debate over the California educational plan is sure to continue. Ethnic studies education clearly is a powerful tool to advance justice for marginalized communities.
Algorithmic bias detection and mitigation: Best practices and policies to reduce consumer harms
Introduction The private and public sectors are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence (AI) systems and machine learning algorithms to automate simple and complex decision-making processes.1 The mass-scale digitization of data and the emerging technologies that use them are disrupting most economic sectors, including transportation, retail, advertising, and energy, and other areas.
The 4 Questions to Ask before You Unplug
More and more often, mental health professionals, religious leaders, educators, and even tech professionals are exhorting us to “unplug”—to disconnect from the internet and our beloved devices on a regular basis. But the more we’re pushed to unplug, the more we need to ask some very fundamental questions about this newly trendy form of self-care. Here are the four questions to ask whenever someone tells you to put your phone on ice. 1. What’s the problem we’re trying to address by unplugging?
Opinion/Commentary: Unlike 2016, this election cycle saw no spike in misinformation
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content — it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats — you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
US midterm polls: Thanks to FB, no spike in misinformation unlike in 2016
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
By Paul Resnick, for The Conversation The “Iffy Quotient” has been downright steady leading up to tomorrow’s midterm elections, and Facebook deserves some credit for it. A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content — it was shared by someone you know.
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
Social media misinformation rose significantly before the 2016 presidential election. Georgejmclittle/shutterstock.com A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? Somebody did. It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know.
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content — it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats — you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)(THE CONVERSATION) A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it?It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know.
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit . Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Unlike in 2016, there was no spike in misinformation this election cycle
A newsy photo of a public figure shows up on your social media feed, with a clickbait-y headline and a provocative comment, all linking to a site with juicy political content. Did you share it? It wasn’t a paid ad, or even recommended-for-you content – it was shared by someone you know. The link didn’t take you to InfoWars or Occupy Democrats – you would’ve noticed that. Maybe it went to Western Journal or another unfamiliar domain whose name sounds legit. Did you comment on it or retweet it?
Letter: Pesticides poisoning us
Paul Resnick Atrazine is a weed killer banned by the European Union since 2003, and a proven endocrine disruptor.Paraquat is another pesticide, again banned in the EU, which has been proven to be a direct cause of Parkinson's disease. Both poisons are heavily applied to central Illinois farmlands, much to the detriment of our health.Add to the mix Scott Pruitt, who Mr. Trump has nominated to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Letter: Going beyond political incorrect
Paul Resnick Re. Oct.
Recommender Systems: Beyond Matrix Completion
The use of recommender systems has exploded over the last decade, making personalized recommendations ubiquitous online. Most of the major companies, including Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft, Yahoo!, eBay, Pandora, Spotify, and many others use recommender systems (RS) within their services. These systems are used to recommend a whole range of items, including consumer products, movies, songs, friends, news articles, restaurants and various others.
What Social Media Data We Are Missing and How to Get It
Most electronic behavior traces available to social scientists offer a site-centric view of behavior. We argue that to understand patterns of interpersonal communication and media consumption, a more person-centric view is needed. The ideal research platform would capture reading as well as writing and friending, behavior across multiple sites, and demographic and psychographic variables.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Paul
Contact Paul, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack