Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Panich52

(5,829 posts)
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:06 AM Jul 2015

Yeah right! Sarcasm poses problem for computer algorithms in U.S. election

Reuters

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld same-sex weddings in the same week that South Carolina debated keeping a controversial Civil War battle flag, Twitter user @xTomatoez posted “Gay marriage and the Confederate flag going down everywhere. Tough week for your redneck uncle on Facebook.”

The poster had no idea his tweet was one of many scrutinized by an analytics firm, whose algorithm took his mocking message seriously and decided it was negative toward gay marriage.

In the race for the White House in 2016, election campaigns rely on such research to help them tailor advertising and other outreach to particular groups of voters. A candidate's ability to micro-target likely voters with ads on issues they care about is crucial in a modern American political campaign.

Understanding how voters talk about issues on Facebook and Twitter is key to this effort. But increasingly, data gatherers find themselves tripped up by basic social media conventions like sarcasm and mockery. (Graphic: http://reut.rs/1Dh9fgF)

. ...

Haystaq, a predictive analysis firm, examined Tweets containing the expression “classy” and found 72 percent of them used it in a positive way. But when used near the name of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, around three quarters of tweets citing "classy" were negative.

. ...

Almost all analysts caution against putting too much stock in social media, particularly Twitter given that only one fifth of U.S. adults use it, according to the Pew Research Center. But those that do tend to strike a sarcastic tone.

“There’s something about that 140 characters (limit) that encourages people to be more flippant,” Meyers of TargetPoint said. 

More
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0PR0C820150717?irpc=932

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yeah right! Sarcasm poses problem for computer algorithms in U.S. election (Original Post) Panich52 Jul 2015 OP
Great "process" article! I can see how a bot wouldn't get it! MADem Jul 2015 #1
Donald Trump is a wonderful person, a great American, and the absolute epitome of "classy". Nye Bevan Jul 2015 #2
Why do candidates have to "tailor" a message. WDIM Jul 2015 #3
Not just computers, from my experience. Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #4
Indeed. Igel Jul 2015 #5
Yep. Nye Bevan Jul 2015 #7
Who designed the algorithm? Sheldon Cooper? KamaAina Jul 2015 #6

MADem

(135,425 posts)
1. Great "process" article! I can see how a bot wouldn't get it!
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:10 AM
Jul 2015

The Donald is a YUUUUUUUGE success!!!

while the bot rates that comment as

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
2. Donald Trump is a wonderful person, a great American, and the absolute epitome of "classy".
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:11 AM
Jul 2015

Insert THAT into your computer algorithm and see what you get.

WDIM

(1,662 posts)
3. Why do candidates have to "tailor" a message.
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:19 AM
Jul 2015

Or "micro-target" a certain group.

They should just speak from the heart and say what they truly believe.

Igel

(35,383 posts)
5. Indeed.
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 12:14 PM
Jul 2015

You have to figure out intonation and pauses, and that requires a bit of good will and a desire to understand what was meant, not what you can get it to mean to fit preconceptions.

When I was learning Russian I was able to read fairly serious, academic stuff. As soon as it turned vaguely colloquial or included quoted speech (even quoted fictional speech) I had no idea what any of it meant. I'd look up every word, read it a dozen times ... Nothing. Then I took a class that wasn't primarily language instruction and which was taught entirely in Russian. The instructor was sometimes serious, sometimes jocular, sometimes formal and sometimes informal. But she was Russian, fresh off the plane from Moscow for a year-long exchange program and knew no English.

After that I tried reading colloquial-flavored Russian, still nothing. Until I tried reading it out loud, and had Lukyanova's speech "in my ear". Put in the intonation, put in pauses ...

Clear as a bell.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Yeah right! Sarcasm poses...