Kate Starbird

An article from the January 6th committee's "purple team" on content that got left on the cutting room floor (from their final report) about the role of social media in motivating and mobilizing the January 6 attack on the Capitol: https://www.justsecurity.org/84658/insiders-view-of-the-january-6th-committees-social-media-investigation/

"One clear conclusion from our investigation is that proponents of the recently released “Twitter Files,” who claim that platform suspensions of the former President are evidence of anti-conservative bias, have it completely backward.

Insiders’ View of the January 6th Committee’s Social Media Investigation

Former investigators from the January 6th Select Committee's Purple Team discuss their assessments.

Just Security
Jan 5, 2023 at 4:20pmWeb
Show threadKate StarbirdJan 5, 2023
Several great points in this article by the Jan 6th committee's "purple team", including: "The mainstreaming of far-right conspiracy theories and disinformation – which has been supercharged by years of inadequate content moderation efforts by platforms – existed long before Trump’s presidency and will exist long after he disappears from public life. Trump would not have been able to spread the Big Lie and mobilize thousands of his followers without social media platforms allowing him to do so."
Show threadMartha HowellJan 5, 2023
@katestarbird I am not saying social media played no role, but there were several large networks and mouthpieces (Fox, OAN, Bannon, etc.) amplifying the messaging, as well as the "both sides" press quoting their accusations. Imagine that world minus social media, and you can't say his message wouldn't have spread.
Show threadKate StarbirdJan 5, 2023
@MHowell I agree. I think we have to consider the entire media ecosystem. Modern media campaigns (including disinformation campaigns) leverage different platforms (including cable news) in complementary ways. Social media facilitate a more participatory model, with tighter feedback loops between audiences and elites, which IMO are one (but not the only) "cause" of some of the dynamics we saw leading up to January 6.
Show threadMartha HowellJan 5, 2023
@katestarbird In my experience with people in the loop, social media spreads the theories, but rw media holds the most weight by "certifying" them. Hence: "It's not crazy, they are saying it on the news."
Show threadDannyboyguymanJan 5, 2023

@katestarbird I'm still looking for any formal acknowledgement of how these grifters, zealots and creeps were using their various platforms, very much including social media and individuals near and in the white house, to help drive violent bigots to insurrection

https://icjs.org/charismatic-revival-fury/

Charismatic Revival Fury: Christian Extremism Podcast - ICJS

Charismatic Revival Fury: The New Apostolic Reformation An Audio-Documentary Series on the Christian Leaders and Ideas that Fueled the Capitol Riot "Charismatic Revival Fury: The New Apostolic Reformation" is a podcast series on the history of the New Apostolic Reformation with ICJS Protestant scholar Matthew D. Taylor. The series, which is part of the Straight

ICJS - Institute for Islamic, Christian, Jewish Studies
Show threadHelchoseJan 6, 2023
@katestarbird I can corroborate that, as an avid Twitter and Facebook user I witnessed it myself and I'm still working to counter misinformation where I see it by challenging those spreading it, even if it falls on deaf ears.
Show threadArena Cops 🇺🇦✌Jan 5, 2023
@katestarbird 👍👍👍 Unfortunately there's only one boost button!!!
Show threadJen Davies SchneiderJan 6, 2023
@katestarbird Worth reading this whole thing. Thanks for posting.
Show threadamincoJan 7, 2023

@katestarbird
A note re: one important statement in the article:

"there appears to be a legislative hyperfocus on regulating algorithms [...] algorithms are not always the boogeyman that the public and policymakers have attempted to position them as.".

Here's what's missing from that statement: >

Show threadamincoJan 7, 2023
It was not "the public and policymakers" who had "attempted to position" algorithms as boogeyman. Legislators talked about algorithms with Frances Haugen, a whistleblower from inside Facebook who showed them research. When WSJ said, "Facebook’s researchers have identified the platform’s ill effects" they referred to Haugen' internal research that empirically showed problems with the algorithm. >
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facebook-files-11631713039
The Facebook Files

A Wall Street Journal investigation

The Wall Street Journal
Show threadamincoJan 7, 2023
This was not an "attempt" at positioning something for fame or profit but an appropriate part of her work role. The algorithm was examined from inside – the only place where access existed, the same access that the authors rightfully wish for when they write: "If scholars, policymakers, and practitioners had access to more data from the platforms, they could generate more accurate empirical findings about the relationship between social media and extremism."