Perils and Challenges of Social Media and Election Manipulation Analysis: The 2018 US Midterms

One of the hallmarks of a free and fair society is the ability to conduct a peaceful and seamless transfer of power from one leader to another. Democratically, this is measured in a citizen population’s trust in the electoral system of choosing a representative government. In view of the well documented issues of the 2016 US Presidential election, we conducted an in-depth analysis of the 2018 US Midterm elections looking specifically for voter fraud or suppression. The Midterm election occurs in the middle of a 4 year presidential term. For the 2018 midterms, 35 Senators and all the 435 seats in the House of Representatives were up for re-election, thus, every congressional district and practically every state had a federal election. In order to collect election related tweets, we analyzed Twitter during the month prior to, and the two weeks following, the November 6, 2018 election day. In a targeted analysis to detect statistical anomalies or election interference, we identified several biases that can lead to wrong conclusions. Specifically, we looked for divergence between actual voting outcomes and instances of the #ivoted hashtag on the election day. This analysis highlighted three states of concern: New York, California, and Texas. We repeated our analysis discarding malicious accounts, such as social bots. Upon further inspection and against a backdrop of collected general election-related tweets, we identified some confounding factors, such as population bias, or bot and political ideology inference, that can lead to false conclusions. We conclude by providing an in-depth discussion of the perils and challenges of using social media data to explore questions about election manipulation.

[1]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Measuring Emotional Contagion in Social Media , 2015, PloS one.

[2]  F. Mosteller,et al.  The Pre-Election Polls of 1948. , 1950 .

[3]  Jürgen Pfeffer,et al.  Population Bias in Geotagged Tweets , 2015, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.

[4]  D. Lazer,et al.  Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election , 2019, Science.

[5]  A. Gelman,et al.  The garden of forking paths : Why multiple comparisons can be a problem , even when there is no “ fishing expedition ” or “ p-hacking ” and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time ∗ , 2019 .

[6]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Quantifying the Effect of Sentiment on Information Diffusion in Social Media , 2015, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[7]  Sam Jackson,et al.  Automated Diffusion? Bots and Their Influence During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election , 2018, iConference.

[8]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Arming the public with AI to counter social bots , 2019, ArXiv.

[9]  Evaggelia Pitoura,et al.  On Measuring Bias in Online Information , 2017, SGMD.

[10]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Detection of Promoted Social Media Campaigns , 2016, ICWSM.

[11]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Bots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory content in online social systems , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Analyzing the Digital Traces of Political Manipulation: The 2016 Russian Interference Twitter Campaign , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[13]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Online Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization , 2017, ICWSM.

[14]  Daniel Gayo-Avello,et al.  No, You Cannot Predict Elections with Twitter , 2012, IEEE Internet Comput..

[15]  Daniel Gayo-Avello,et al.  "I Wanted to Predict Elections with Twitter and all I got was this Lousy Paper" - A Balanced Survey on Election Prediction using Twitter Data , 2012, ArXiv.

[16]  Suhang Wang,et al.  Fake News Detection on Social Media: A Data Mining Perspective , 2017, SKDD.

[17]  David G. Rand,et al.  Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning , 2019, Cognition.

[18]  T. Wang The Politics of Voter Suppression: Defending and Expanding Americans' Right to Vote , 2012 .

[19]  Daniel Gayo-Avello,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of State-of-the-Art Electoral Prediction From Twitter Data , 2012, ArXiv.

[20]  M. Gentzkow,et al.  Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election , 2017 .

[21]  Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia,et al.  The spread of low-credibility content by social bots , 2017, Nature Communications.

[22]  Panagiotis Takis Metaxas,et al.  How (Not) to Predict Elections , 2011, 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Social Computing.

[23]  Lorraine C. Minnite The Myth of Voter Fraud , 2010 .

[24]  Sinan Aral,et al.  The spread of true and false news online , 2018, Science.

[25]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Who Falls for Online Political Manipulation? , 2018, WWW.

[26]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Early detection of promoted campaigns on social media , 2017, EPJ Data Science.

[27]  Malcolm R. Wilkey Help America Vote Act , 2017 .

[28]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Manipulation and Abuse on Social Media , 2015, ArXiv.

[29]  Joshua A. Tucker,et al.  Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook , 2019, Science Advances.

[30]  Kyumin Lee,et al.  You are where you tweet: a content-based approach to geo-locating twitter users , 2010, CIKM.

[31]  Hernán A. Makse,et al.  CUNY Academic Works , 2022 .

[32]  N. Persily The 2016 U.S. Election: Can Democracy Survive the Internet? , 2017 .

[33]  M. Williams,et al.  Crime sensing with big data: the affordances and limitations of using open source communications to estimate crime patterns , 2016 .

[34]  Sree Priyanka Uppu,et al.  E-Cigarette Surveillance With Social Media Data: Social Bots, Emerging Topics, and Trends , 2017, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[35]  Sune Lehmann,et al.  Understanding the Demographics of Twitter Users , 2011, ICWSM.

[36]  Lindsay Nielson,et al.  Voter Identification Laws and the Suppression of Minority Votes , 2017, The Journal of Politics.

[37]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  BotOrNot: A System to Evaluate Social Bots , 2016, WWW.

[38]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[39]  Piotr Sapiezynski,et al.  Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots , 2017, PloS one.

[40]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  'Senator, We Sell Ads': Analysis of the 2016 Russian Facebook Ads Campaign , 2018, Advances in Data Science.

[41]  David G. Rand,et al.  Cognitive Reflection and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election , 2018, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[42]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Deep Neural Networks for Bot Detection , 2018, Inf. Sci..

[43]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  The rise of social bots , 2014, Commun. ACM.

[44]  Daniel Gayo-Avello,et al.  Don't turn social media into another 'Literary Digest' poll , 2011, Commun. ACM.

[45]  Lars Backstrom,et al.  ePluribus: Ethnicity on Social Networks , 2010, ICWSM.

[46]  Marina Azzimonti,et al.  Social Media Networks, Fake News, and Polarization , 2018, European Journal of Political Economy.

[47]  B. Highton Voter Registration and Turnout in the United States , 2004, Perspectives on Politics.

[48]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[49]  Panagiotis Takis Metaxas,et al.  Limits of Electoral Predictions Using Twitter , 2011, ICWSM.

[50]  R. Guilbeault No . 2017 . 5 Computational Propaganda in the United States of America : Manufacturing Consensus Online , 2017 .

[51]  Taylor W. Brown,et al.  Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[52]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Social Bots Distort the 2016 US Presidential Election Online Discussion , 2016, First Monday.

[53]  D. Ruths,et al.  Social media for large studies of behavior , 2014, Science.

[54]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  "Manipulation and abuse on social media" by Emilio Ferrara with Ching-man Au Yeung as coordinator , 2015, SIGWEB Newsl..

[55]  B. Highton,et al.  Estimating the Effects of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 , 1998 .

[56]  D. Lazer,et al.  The Parable of Google Flu: Traps in Big Data Analysis , 2014, Science.

[57]  Huan Liu,et al.  Is the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose , 2013, ICWSM.

[58]  Jacob Ratkiewicz,et al.  OSoMe: The IUNI observatory on social media , 2016, PeerJ Prepr..