moderation – Social Blog

No ratings yet.

Currently companies can apply online marketing in various ways. Ads are placed all around. Websites are constructed in ways that humans respond to best, as data informs of how consumers behave and how to improve statistics such as conversion and click-through rates (Fogden, 2023). Search engines form something of a marketplace for webpages where online auctions are used to determine what will be shown. Marketeers use search-engine optimization (SEO) and paid search-engine advertising (SEA) to win auctions and feature amongst the first results (Eology, n.d.). This is how it has been. Now, one development shows potential to change it all. Since February 2023 Bing is powered by Open AI’s GPT-4, an advanced AI that Bing uses to improve its search engine and to act as a copilot and chatbot (Mehdi, 2023). This approach can forever change the way we use search engines and how results are generated. It could even change the way we interact with the internet altogether.

Right now, marketeers target us directly. Their methods are based on getting information directly to their target audience in the most appealing way. The intervention of AI may change this. Granted, an AI like GPT-4 is trained on pre-existing datasets and does not have direct internet access, so its responses cannot be influenced so easily. I asked Bing AI, which connects to Bing’s search engine, whether its response is influenced by paid search advertising, and it still categorically rejects the possibility. According to it, Bing AI and even the search results it might draw on only try to use the most relevant and reliable sources to provide information. Additionally, it says that any ads and sponsored links are filtered out by its internal tools. Perhaps advertising does not influence it, but still search engine optimization can help websites appear more relevant and end higher up the results. In this way internet marketing already focuses on convincing the search algorithm of a website’s value, not the user directly.

Regardless, we might get to a point where we rely on AI assistants to get all our information, or where search engines are run entirely by an AI which browses the internet, filters through information, and presents us with the best results. AI certainly has a promising future in real-time content moderation (Darbinyan, 2022). And, according to Santiago (2023), marketeers can even use it to protect their brand. But when marketeers themselves are the ones who need to get information through an AI gatekeeper, how will they respond? Many current strategies can make content appeal to humans, but what will the AI respond to? If AI is the middle-man, marketing efforts might have to be constructed in such a way that AI filters and retells information in the way marketeers ultimately want to reach consumers. It becomes important to consider what the AI will respond to, what it will need to see the information’s value.

Perhaps AI ushers in the end of traditional online marketing to consumers. Perhaps AI will simply assess an offer at its true value, and recommend it only if there is a good fit with the consumers needs, be it a new chair, information, or entertainment. Think about recommendations on social media platforms such as TikTok, which use algorithms that carefully select content that a user will probably like. This might be a preview of how we will receive all information: moderated by AI, and it could be a win-win situation. Marketeers could rely on AI to do the work of targeting, personalizing, and distributing content to the right audience, while users can rest easy knowing the information is of utmost relevance. AI could moderate content better than either marketeers or consumers themselves ever could.

References

Darbinyan, R. (2022, June 14). The growing role of AI in content moderation. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2022/06/14/the-growing-role-of-ai-in-content-moderation/.

Eology. (n.d.). SEA know-how: How to use search engine advertising unerringly! Eology Magazine. Retrieved October 16, 2023, from https://www.eology.net/magazine/sea-know-how#jump_function.

Fogden, T. (2023, April 14). What makes a good website? 12 must-haves. Tech.co. https://tech.co/website-builders/what-makes-good-website.

Mehdi, Y. (2023, March 14). Confirmed: the new Bing runs on OpenAI’s GPT-4. Microsoft Bing Blogs. https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4.

Santiago, E. (2023, April 7). AI content moderation: How AI can moderate content + protect your brand. HubSpot. https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/ai-content-moderation.

No ratings yet.

It is easy to believe scientific evidence, but have you tried questioning everything around you? Conspiracy theories have been whispered through society for ages, yet believers seem more vocal in recent times. Through social media, such theories can be spread easily and quickly (Min, 2021). Believing in conspiracy theories and falling for misinformation has been associated with social media usage by many authors (Enders et al., 2021). The so-called “echo chamber” is often blamed, as it efficiently places individuals in silos of like-minded others, purposely feeding them information that suits their ideological beliefs (Sunstein, 2017). As such, social media has shamelessly promoted conspiracies and misinformation, facilitating it to spread substantially in the process (Enders et al., 2021).

Conspiracy theories have a top-down (e.g., covid is a hoax to vaccinate everyone with 5G-chips), bottom-up (e.g., capitol riots) or event-driven shape (e.g., the moon landing)(Stuttaford, 2021). While some theories seem harmless, others have real societal impacts. The “anti-vax” movement or the storming of the U.S. capitol at the beginning of 2021 are examples of those real-life repercussions (Min, 2021). Perhaps the most troubling development is the decreasing institutional trust through active social media usage (Mari et al., 2021). However, social media alone does not appear to be capable of starting a certain belief system, there has to be a hospitable environment beforehand (Enders et al., 2021).

Epistemic (understanding and certainty), existential (control), and social needs are argued as the forces behind believing in conspiracy theories (Douglas et al., 2017, Cherry, 2020). Lower levels of education have also been related to believing in conspiracy theories (Cherry, 2020), which may stem from epistemic needs. A higher level of uncertainty avoidance, feelings of disempowerment or anxiety and vulnerable population segments are ingredients for conspiracy development or acceptance (Mari et al., 2021). Enders et al. (2021) argue that when one sees conspiracy theories in all types of events, the likelihood increases for believing, or even seeking out, dubious ideas online.

Moderating conspiracy theories is argued as a mitigation strategy for social media platforms (Min, 2021). Auto-detection through machine learning is getting more accurate every day and is employed frequently on such platforms to combat the spread of conspiracies and misinformation (Marcellino, 2021). Even though platforms pledge to improve regulation and moderation, their effectiveness is doubted as theories and misinformation continue to dominate (Grimes, 2020). Social media regulation cannot be ignored longer and might require legal obligation as well as public pressure to oblige platforms to effectively combat this very real threat (Grimes, 2020).

Sources:

Cherry, K. (2020, September 19). Why Do People Believe in Conspiracy Theories? Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/why-people-believe-in-conspiracy-theories-4690335#explanations

Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017). The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417718261

Enders, A. M., Uscinski, J. E., Seelig, M. I., Klofstad, C. A., Wuchty, S., Funchion, J. R., Murthi, M. N., Premaratne, K., & Stoler, J. (2021). The Relationship Between Social Media Use and Beliefs in Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation. Political Behavior, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09734-6

Grimes, D. R. (2020). Health disinformation & social media. EMBO Reports, 21(11). https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202051819

Mari, S., Gil De Zúñiga, H., Suerdem, A., Hanke, K., Brown, G., Vilar, R., Boer, D., & Bilewicz, M. (2021). Conspiracy Theories and Institutional Trust: Examining the Role of Uncertainty Avoidance and Active Social Media Use. Political Psychology. Published. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12754

Marcellino, W. (2021). Detecting Conspiracy Theories on Social Media Improving Machine Learning to Detect and Understand Online Conspiracy Theories. RAND CORP SANTA MONICA CA.

Min, S. J. (2021). Who Believes in Conspiracy Theories? Network Diversity, Political Discussion, and Conservative Conspiracy Theories on Social Media. American Politics Research, 1532673X211013526.

Stuttaford, A. (2021, March 2). ‘The Nature of Conspiracy Theories’ Review: The Truth Is Out There. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-nature-of-conspiracy-theories-review-the-truth-is-out-there-11614640961

Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.

The Future of Marketing in an AI Moderated Digital World

16

Please rate this