3 ms·
There were large numbers of comments on both sides made by people who denied writing them when asked. WSJ found thousands of people who denied writing a particu
by ikeboy 6y ago
There were large numbers of comments on both sides made by people who denied writing them when asked. WSJ found thousands of people who denied writing a particular pro-NN message with their names attached.
- takeda 6y agoThe idea was to spam the comments forum so FCC can just ignore the comments altogether. Majority of genuine comments were pro NN[1][2]. [1] https://medium.com/ragtag-notes/bot-or-not-verifying-public-comments-on-net-neutrality-8c77ee54a02e https://medium.com/ragtag-notes/bot-or-not-verifying-public-... [2] https://medium.com/@csinchok/an-analysis-of-the-anti-title-ii-bots-463f184829bc https://medium.com/@csinchok/an-analysis-of-the-anti-title-i...
- ikeboy 6y agoFrom your first link: >Based on this analysis, we estimate that 91% of all anti-net-neutrality submissions, and 79% of all pro-net-neutrality submissions, came from bots. Their survey data is mostly inconsistent with the WSJ data. See https://archive.fo/sp9Q7 https://archive.fo/sp9Q7. WSJ had multiple orders of magnitude higher sample size, so I'd go with their numbers.