3 ms·
how would you prove the inverse of this? i.e cambridge analytics didn't have any material impact. I think most are basing it on the assumption that CA with the
by nojvek 7y ago
how would you prove the inverse of this? i.e cambridge analytics didn't have any material impact.
I think most are basing it on the assumption that CA with the help of Facebook could target millions of americans in a personalized way and display ads that would nudge them to a certain political candidate.
No way to say it's a guaranteed method, but it's as effective as bill board marketers proving their ads change people's opinions about a brand.
That's where most of the presential election fund raises go to anyway right? to reach out to people and sway their opinion?
- xibalba 7y ago> how would you prove the inverse of this? I don't know, but that alone isn't a convincing argument. > ...ads that would nudge them to a certain political candidate > ...that's where most of the presential election fund raises go to... Perhaps. The question is, what is the effect? I would wager it is very small to nil.
- nojvek 7y agoAs nil as Coca-Cola’s billboard/tv marketing ? When I still had FB, their ads/propaganda was super convincing about Hillary and her hacked email server yada yada. It was quite a genius marketing method to reach millions.