Digital Democracy: How Google and Facebook Can Reshape Elections

November 08, 2016

Angela Merkel has been articulate about a Internet a lot recently. Just final Tuesday, for instance, while addressing critical total from a TV and book industries, she discussed a energy of companies like Facebook and Google — some-more specifically, a tip algorithms they use to arrange hunt formula and to benefaction tradition news feeds to users. The problem, Merkel argued, was that no one outward of these amicable media giants knows what criteria they use to filter data. It’s not usually cryptic for domestic parties, she said, though for multitude as a whole.

The chancellor’s remarkable seductiveness in a nuances of IT process was compared to one thing: Germany’s arriving sovereign choosing campaign. Merkel knows that Facebook and Google could play an critical purpose in determining who’s going to lead a nation after a vote, that is approaching to take place in late 2017.

When it comes to digitalization, not usually German courtesy has had to reinvent itself — a business of politics has also been incited upside down, generally during debate season. But distant fewer people compensate courtesy when technologies interrupt a domestic landscape than when they change a economy.

Should we unequivocally be fearful of a energy of algorithms? Can Facebook and Google personally change a approach we form domestic opinions and impact a outcome of elections? Could Google’s elite possibilities be given an astray advantage?

The answers to these questions are unequivocal: Yes they can; and approbation they are.

Facebook’s far-reaching strech alone creates a amicable network an critical apparatus for shaping, or manipulating, other people’s opinions. With around 1.8 billion users, it is a tellurian mass middle of a era.

In Germany, Facebook has tighten to 29 million users, some-more than 22 million of whom deliberate it each day. That’s a entertain of a country’s whole population. Google’s numbers are usually as impressive. With over 90 percent of all hunt engine trade routed by a servers, a modern-day gatekeeper like Google has an historically rare change over a users’ lives. Even a sequence in that formula seem on a hunt page can have a outrageous impact, inspiring how good a product sells, for example, or creation or violation a candidate’s ranking in a polls.

These days, online platforms have poignant change on a domestic recognition and they don’t even repudiate this is true. They marketplace their energy utterly openly: Advertising income from domestic parties and possibilities is all partial of a business model, and Google and Facebook privately aim domestic leaders to win them over as customers. Facebook, for example, has hosted special workshops in Berlin for politically active Germans, and a amicable media network published a German-language “Guidebook for Politicians and Office Holders,” that advertises and explains “political campaigns on Facebook.”

In a many new edition, from Mar 2016, a authors use box studies to explain what data-driven debate strategies can accomplish. Facebook can be leveraged to aim users’ specific domestic interests. In Feb of this year, for example, there were 44,000 people in Germany between a ages of 25 and 50 meddlesome in a emanate of smallest wages. Depending on a distance of a promotion budget, some, many or even all Facebook users “who accommodate a tangible criteria” could be shown a party’s or candidate’s advertisement. Politicians, for example, can aim people who have “liked” their pages, as good as all of their friends — or all people in a certain age range, such as first-time electorate who live tighten to their electoral offices.

Great Power, Great Responsibility

Facebook is unapproachable of a success. In a “Guidebook,” it even touts a feat of a British Conservative Party in 2015 as justification of what a data-driven campaigns can do. The association says it played “a wilful role” by reaching out to aim groups about a issues they cared about, generally in districts with tighten margins. The four-month campaign, they claimed, was a initial time a celebration in Europe had “used Facebook ads in such a worldly and targeted manner.”

In Germany, many border groups and far-right domestic parties have used Facebook to attract and muster supporters. Even Pegida, a xenophobic criticism transformation that began in Dresden, started as a Facebook group.

But profitable to justice specific electorate online is usually one of many ways to strive domestic change — and not even a many problematic, given a similarities to choosing posters or TV commercials.

What bothers Merkel — and many other politicians around a universe — are a subtler forms of influence. At a media discussion in Munich, a chancellor criticized a fact that algorithms latched onto formerly articulated interests and simply presented some-more of a same. The effect, she said, usually exacerbates people’s entrenchment. Other critics fear that amicable media networks run a risk of apropos dark domestic actors, ones that not usually use their change to make income though also to change a march of whole elections — but anyone knowing. Since they courtesy their algorithms as business secrets, they are stable from a meddling eyes of regulators.

Facebook knows some of a users so good that it has intensely transparent notions of their domestic leanings. Characteristics such as age, friends, place of residence, pages visited, among many others, assistance a association to specify them politically. The “Like” symbol is also a large help. People who “like” a fan pages of Angela Merkel and her party, a Christian Democratic Union, aren’t really expected going to opinion for a Left Party. In a United States, Facebook plainly organizes people into one of 3 categories: “liberal,” “moderate” or “conservative.”

Some scientists are disturbed that Facebook could manipulate elections by intentionally mobilizing certain groups of voters. For years, a amicable networks have been promulgation a users’ reminders to go out and opinion before elections and plebiscites, job on them to make use of their right to opinion and take partial in democracy. But what if during a subsequent election, Facebook were to usually send such reminders to certain people who, formed on their interests, age or place of residence, were rarely expected to opinion a certain way? What if Facebook began usually mobilizing members of certain domestic movements?

During a US Congressional choosing in 2010, Facebook activated voting reminders on 61 million users’ newsfeeds. A corner research with researchers from a University of California suggested that a amicable network was directly obliged for boosting voter appearance by 340,000 people. In tighten races, that could be some-more than adequate to pitch a outcome.

Companies like Facebook could “flip an election,” a Internet researcher Kate Crawford told SPIEGEL ONLINE. But such “enormous power” also comes with “substantial reliable questions,” she added.

Neutral or Not?

A new US investigate questioning Google’s intensity change on electoral decisions came to a identical conclusion. For 20 percent of uncertain voters, Google’s hunt algorithm had a energy to change a approach they voted, a investigate found. The scientists spoke of a “search appurtenance strategy effect.” Both Google and Facebook insisted they were not driven by a domestic bulletin and confirmed neutrality.

“Facebook would never try to control elections,” a amicable network’s arch handling officer, Sheryl Sandberg, pronounced in 2014. Google, for a part, claims it has never altered hunt formula to force one electoral outcome or another. “If we were to wandering from that principle, people’s trust in a association would be undermined,” a association pronounced in a statement.

But even a probability of unintended or most wild change over a approved choosing is dangerous. It would also be naïve and inattentive for policymakers to rest wholly on a internet giants’ promises of neutrality.

There are legitimate doubts to be had about a networks’ self-proclaimed neutrality — and never before have they been so aloud projected as during a US choosing cycle that comes to an finish on Tuesday. The Trump stay in sold has bemoaned a magnanimous disposition for Hillary Clinton. One source of their disappointment was a leaked screenshot that showed a Facebook worker seeking Mark Zuckerberg: “What shortcoming does Facebook have to forestall a President Trump?” Obviously there was never a doubt as to a company’s ability for doing such a thing.

The change of Google and Facebook goes approach over choosing campaigns. Indeed, a people in assign of their algorithms are constantly creation decisions that are politically relevant. Politically argumentative material, for instance, is mostly “censored.” Recently, an fondness of some-more than 70 polite rights groups complained that Facebook was frequently deletion posts that documented tellurian rights violations.

The networks are also regulating their energy to foster their possess domestic concerns. Back in 2012, when Google launched a petition opposite a designed anti-piracy law, 4.5 million people sealed it in a singular day. The beginning was a shot opposite Washington’s bow, a uncover of Google’s power. Google and other opponents of a magnitude eventually got their way.

Is Germany about to have a first-ever data-driven choosing campaign? Every vital German celebration has sent observers to a US to learn from a Democrats’ and Republicans’ amicable media teams. Back in Germany, however, Facebook has an picture problem: It is, above all else, compared with hatred speech. Many lawmakers and ministers are faced with horrible online messages each day.

Now, Facebook is perplexing to fight a bad repute with a exemplary promotion campaign: in newspapers and on TV.

The essay we are reading creatively seemed in German in emanate 45/2016 (November 5, 2016) of DER SPIEGEL.
FAQ: Everything You Need to Know about DER SPIEGEL
Six Decades of Quality Journalism: The History of DER SPIEGEL
Reprints: How To License SPIEGEL Articles