Exhibit A of social media as outrage merchants:
I share a lot of academic research on Chinese social media and frequently find that in the comment section, offensive one-liners get ranked higher than sincere discussions even though the former has fewer likes (see screenshot).
Weibo’s comment section has a Reddit-like nested structure, and the ranking algorithm takes into account **all** likes garnered by the parent comment and its children.
You can imagine how this kind of algorithm amplifies resentment and distorts our perception of public opinion.
I share a lot of gender-related research online.
Usually the top-ranked comment would be something offensive and unhelpful: “All women are...!”
This comment would then attract lots of counter-punches, making it even more attractive from the ranking algorithm’s perspective.
In the screenshot, the lower-ranked comment (123 likes) comes from an econ prof who thoughtfully engaged with my post.
The higher-ranked comment (53 likes) is much shorter and dismisses my post without giving a reason. It’s ranked higher bc many people came to criticize him.
It seems like almost all platforms amplify extreme, outrage-inducing content because it attracts counter-punches, which then boost the platforms’ engagement numbers.
Does this kind of ranking algorithm make us perceive less consensus and more polarization than there actually is?
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.