Thread by @CSMaP_NYU

Platforms have troves of research studying their societal impact. The recent FB revelations, and today's whistleblower hearing, show why it's critical for govt to open that data to outside researchers, @j_a_tucker & @Jonathan_Nagler write in @NYDailyNews

nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-ope…

At @CSMaP_NYU, data is the foundation of everything we study. Often, the data will tell us something different than the anecdotal evidence circulating in the media and online.

For example, in 2016, stories claimed fake news was a widespread problem. In fact, our study found less than 9% of Americans shared links to fake news sites on FB, and this was disproportionately common among people over 65.

smappnyu.wpcomstaging.com/wp-content/upl…

The results were similar on Twitter. Researchers at @Northeastern found fake news accounted for nearly 6% of news consumption, but it was heavily concentrated.

hks.harvard.edu/publications/f…

We often find ourselves between two competing arguments. On one hand, available data highlight how platforms enable spread of misinformation & extreme content. On the other, platform execs claim these reports employ incomplete data (while withholding it).

Academic work is hampered by this lack of transparency, which limits research investigating the relationship between our democracy and the evolving digital information environment.

Lawmakers and the Biden admin recognize this need. In May, @RepLoriTrahan & @USRepKCastor introduced the Social Media DATA Act, which would deliver some of the information we need. trahan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/…

The bill is an important first step to ensure scholars can produce research that benefits the public, enables evidence-based policymaking, and supports our democratic institutions.