3 ms·
What a headline. No, the article isn't about bots voting. It actually says: > individuals that...are more exposed to the automation shock are significantly [a
by leereeves 5y ago
What a headline.
No, the article isn't about bots voting. It actually says:
> individuals that...are more exposed to the automation shock are significantly [about 3%] more likely to vote for a radical right party.
> individual exposure to the automation shock leads to poorer perceived economic conditions, lower likelihood of having a permanent contract, and lower satisfaction with the government and democracy.
- the_af 5y agoThanks for the clarification. The disconnect between the title and the content is very puzzling, I was really expecting this article to be about some kind of experiment with AI choosing seemingly far right policies from an array of options. Or about voting bots.
- kome 5y agoThe headline was quite good IMHO, I understood immediately what it was meant, even before clicking - and I found it quite smart. But, of course, is not to be read literally.
- notahacker 5y ago3% sounds a surprisingly small and uninteresting percentage as well, given that "exposed to the automation shock" is basically "works in a list of mostly low paid occupations with less educated workforces we've highlighted as susceptible to automation". Right wing populist parties have always been more popular with low income, low education workers. So have populist left wing parties and the abstract indicates the authors' model is specified so it find no such correlation with left wing support, but this sounds suspiciously like p-hacking...