General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYeah 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.
Theres 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
MADem
(135,425 posts)The Donald is a YUUUUUUUGE success!!!
while the bot rates that comment as
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Insert THAT into your computer algorithm and see what you get.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)Or "micro-target" a certain group.
They should just speak from the heart and say what they truly believe.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Igel
(35,383 posts)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.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)(added the "sarcasm" smiley too late for the jury, unfortunately).