3 ms·

That caveat, yikes! >there is some evidence of botting/spamming on the pro-NN side as well (though likely not to the same degree), which is not investigated in

• jobigoud 9y ago
  Yeah, he took a lot of liberties to support the title statement. The fact that many thousands of pro-NN are variations on the same sentences, because the template was provided by J. Oliver, also means implies that part of the anti-NN bulk could have been registered by humans working off a template as well. I would like to know the number of unique sentences and the stats on these. The only sane conclusion from this debacle is that these things are highly unreliable and better ways to get the population opinion are desirable.
  • croon 9y ago
    > Yeah, he took a lot of liberties to support the title statement. The fact that many thousands of pro-NN are variations on the same sentences, because the template was provided by J. Oliver, also means implies that part of the anti-NN bulk could have been registered by humans working off a template as well. I agree that it's possible, but seeing as the anti-NN template was used 440k times, and the top pro-NN template was used 26k times, I think it's fair to say that it's highly unlikely. Think about how viral that John Oliver clip/story got, and it doesn't even contain a template (IIRC), and then try to think of an anti-NN template that somehow got 17 times more viral/engagement. It's also relevant to consider who benefits from what side.