Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
#ExpertSpots: AI, Deepfakes and Elections
The election in November is coming fast. And with voters divided and with what could be a small margin of Americans deciding who wins or loses in the race for the Whitehouse - the worry over misinformation and election interference has never been higher. It's why Dr. Craig Albert is here to break down just how AI and deepfakes might be used against any of the candidates leading up to November 05. Craig Albert, PhD, is director of the Master of Arts in Intelligence and Security Studies at Augusta University. He is a leading expert on war, terrorism and American politics. AI and the upcoming election is a serious topic. Albert is available to speak with media – simply click on his name to arrange an interview today.
How misinformation spreads online and shapes behavior
With the Internet as a font of information, particularly during a major crisis or conflict, a simple Google search can produce a stream of conjecture, conspiracy and alternative facts. Then there’s the firehose of “news” flooding social media feeds. By headlines alone, it’s near impossible to separate wheat from chaff. Coupled with that user frustration is a vulnerability to bad actors who push agendas under the guise of news. Indeed, on its worst days, the internet is a disinformation machine. Understanding that dynamic and its impact on our moods and behavior is NJIT’s Julie Ancis, a behavioral psychologist who’s a pioneer in the field of cyberpsychology. Her research examines how disinformation spreads and shapes how we act online and in person. As she explains on her blog for Psychology Today: “The speed and flow of information online has enabled information to be transferred on a mass global scale, galvanizing social movements such as the Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street and #MeToo. In short, the ways in which we consume information and communicate with others both locally and globally have fundamentally changed.” To interview Ancis, click on the button below.
International Fact Checking Day | Media Advisory
In today's digital age where information spreads rapidly and misinformation can have profound consequences, International Fact Checking Day stands as a beacon of truth and accountability. This day matters to the public because it highlights the critical importance of discerning fact from fiction in an era where misinformation can sway public opinion, influence elections, and even endanger lives. The event emphasizes the role of media literacy and critical thinking in combating the spread of fake news, fostering a more informed society, and preserving the integrity of democratic discourse. Story angles of interest to a broad audience may include: The rise of misinformation in the digital age and its impact on society Case studies of successful fact-checking initiatives and their effectiveness The psychology behind why people believe and share misinformation The role of social media platforms in amplifying false information and efforts to combat it The challenges faced by journalists and fact-checkers in verifying information in real-time Strategies for individuals to identify and avoid falling victim to fake news and misinformation campaigns. Connect with an Expert about International Fact Checking Day For journalists with questions or looking to cover International Fact Checking Day, misinformation and the importance of the truth, here is a select list of experts. To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com Gretchen Chapman Professor and Department Head · Carnegie Mellon University Jennifer Manegold, Ph.D. Expert in organizational behavior · Florida Gulf Coast University David Barrett, PhD Professor of Political Science | College of Liberal Arts and Sciences · Villanova University Michael Prietula Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management · Emory University, Goizueta Business School Nina Amir Chief Inpiration Officer · Pure Spirit Creations Photo Credit: Hartono
2024 presidential and Michigan state elections: MSU experts can comment
MSU experts can discuss national political issues to the Supreme Court and constitutional issues to Michigan's state politics and races The 2024 presidential election is in full swing. As President Joe Biden is set to cruise to the Democratic nomination and former President Donald Trump is likely poised to receive the Republican nomination, 2024 is setting up to be a rematch of 2020. Michigan’s primary is now earlier on the calendar, Feb. 27, with the Republicans holding a caucus to award their remaining delegates on March 2. Despite being a presidential election year, Michigan has important statewide elections. An open U.S. Senate seat, vacated by retiring Sen. Debbie Stabenow, could tip the balance of power in the Senate, potentially deciding which party holds the majority. Michigan’s seventh and eight congressional races have incumbents leaving office, making those set to be some of the most nationally watched and funded races nationally. The state House currently has an exact bipartisan split, setting up races with very high stakes. Michigan State University experts are available to comment on many issues of the presidential election including: political parties and their evolution, campaign strategy and polling, Trump’s legal troubles and the U.S. Supreme Court, political diversity and messaging and local elections and voting. Additionally, several of these experts can comment on Michigan’s federal and state elections. General presidential and Michigan election issues Corwin Smidt is an associate professor of American politics and research methods in the Department of Political Science in the College of Social Science. He can comment on national elections and polling for the presidential election as well as statewide elections. Contact: smidtc@msu.edu "Michigan continues to trend toward being a battleground state, but right now it looks like a battle of attrition. Donald Trump's poll numbers really haven't improved as much since 2021 as Joe Biden's have declined, but Governor Whitmer's popularity remains high. The state Republican party continues to have fights over its management and will have a contested and possibly divisive Senate primary. Despite this, Republicans have a chance to pick up seats in the US House and state legislature because of Democratic retirements and ongoing redistricting changes." Matt Grossmann is the director of MSU’s Institute for Public Policy and Social Research and a professor of political science. He is an expert on a broad range of topics surrounding the 2024 election, including political parties ,campaigns and elections. He also oversees survey research, candidate development and legislative training at MSU. Additionally, he can discuss Michigan’s primary and elections. Contact: grossm63@msu.edu “The presidential nomination process evolved out of reforms to the delegate selection process for those conventions, which now means delegates are overwhelmingly selected based on presidential primary results. From the voters’ perspective, it often looks like any other election where you select your preferred candidate. But the parties still have power to coordinate their rules and selection procedures. Michigan has an opportunity to set the terms for future elections, showing that it can become engaged, with diverse interests, and earn the right to vote early in the process in 2028. Since Michigan does not have party registration, voters will be able to participate in the primary of their choice, which has provided an incentive for individuals to vote in the contest that presents the most uncertainty.” Read more from Grossmann on MSUToday. Dante Chinni is a research specialist in MSU’s School of Journalism and is the director of the American Communities Project in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences. He can discuss polling and changes in the parties over time, as well as the voting patterns among groups in specific places. He can also comment on various Michigan political issues. Contact: chinni@msu.edu “In Michigan, and in other states, the 2024 election will be determined by the margin of victory in different kinds of places. Can the Democrats get what they need out of the big city and college town communities, like Wayne, Ingham and Washtenaw counties? Can the Republicans get the numbers they need out of blue-collar middle suburbs, such as Macomb? The turnout and margins in those kinds of places, and others, will determine who wins in November.” Constitutional issues and the Supreme Court Jordan Cash is an assistant professor of political theory and constitutional democracy in James Madison College. He can comment on general requests about the presidency and national elections as well as issues surrounding the Supreme Court. Contact: cashjor1@msu.edu “The 2024 election is already shaping up to be one of the most unusual elections in American history, but one of the most unique aspects is the role that the judiciary is likely to play in the process. With former president and likely Republican nominee Donald Trump facing indictments at both the state and federal levels, the election season is as likely to be punctuated with legal news and updates as it is with campaign speeches and negative advertising. Moreover, the Supreme Court will be critical as it has heard or will likely be hearing cases surrounding whether states can disqualify Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment and whether he has absolute immunity from when he was president. When we also consider that President Joe Biden is facing his own investigations from House Republicans, the election seems poised to not only raise the political stakes but also considerable constitutional and legal questions.” Read more from Cash about presidential elections on MSUToday. Brian Kalt is a professor of law and the Harold Norris Faculty Scholar in the College of Law. He can comment on 20th Amendment issues, the electoral college and presidential prosecution and immunities. Contact: kalt@law.msu.edu “A lot of constitutional law questions that seemed purely theoretical are now front and center in our election campaign. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will move quickly and provide some clarity and certainty on these issues so that when November rolls around, voters can make a fully informed choice.” Ryan Black is a professor of American politics in the Department of Political Science in the College of Social Science, and a faculty affiliate in the College of Law. His expertise includes public opinion and the Supreme Court, and he can speak to appointments and vacancies. Contact: rcblack@msu.edu “Results of the 2024 election have the potential to profoundly shift the center of gravity in the politics of appointments to the federal judiciary, which includes, most importantly, the Supreme Court. There is no doubt that a president's most enduring legacy is who they put on the High Court, but confirmation politics today make the partisan makeup of the Senate a prominent roadblock in a president’s path to success.” Erica Frantz is an associate professor of comparative politics in the Department of Political Science in the College of Social Science. She is a specialist on issues and themes relating to authoritarianism. Contact: frantzer@msu.edu “Today’s democracies typically fall apart at the hands of their elected leaders, such that elections are critical focal points for understanding democratic trajectories. Importantly, research shows that where leaders come to power backed by personalist parties – or parties that are synonymous with the leader’s persona – the risk of democratic erosion increases substantially. For the U.S., this implies that the more the Republican Party becomes indistinguishable from Trump, the more American democracy is vulnerable to collapse from within should Trump return to the presidency.” Political messaging and diversity Dustin Carnahan is an associate professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences. His work focuses on how exposure to political information influences people’s attitudes, beliefs and decisions. His recent research focuses on how people come to encounter and believe misinformation and the effectiveness of messages designed to correct misinformed beliefs. Contact: carnaha9@msu.edu “While research suggests that political misinformation does not have a profound impact on voters’ decisions, the proliferation of misinformation can have more subtle effects on voters and elections – such as fostering toxic discourse around issues and candidates, promoting political polarization and distracting from more substantive matters. Concerns around misinformation are likely to be of great interest during the upcoming election cycle as advances in AI technology pose significant challenges to voters’ ability to identify what is real and what is fake.” Eric Juenke is an associate professor of American politics in the Department of Political Science in the College of Social Science. He can comment on issues relating to minority candidates, specifically the candidacy and election of minority candidates. Additionally, he teaches in the Chicano/Latino Studies program. Contact: juenke@msu.edu “While we do seem to have a rematch at the top of the ticket, with a vice president who is a woman of color and another vice president who has yet to be announced but could also be a woman candidate, we will be seeing a continued diverse candidate pool this cycle, I expect. It’s still early yet in the congressional races, but there should be a number of high-profile races in the country and in Michigan that should highlight a more diverse candidate pool. While the parties still have a long, long way to go in recruiting and supporting women and racial and ethnic minority candidates to run for office, the trajectory is positive.” Daniel Bergan is an associate professor and the director of master’s studies in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences, who also has an appointment in James Madison College. His research focuses on constituent communications with policymakers. Contact: bergan@msu.edu “When communicating with a policymaker, especially one with whom you disagree, you want to prevent them from discounting your opinion. One way to do this is by citing quality evidence to support your position. When contacting a policymaker about an issue, be aware that they may discount your opinion if they disagree. But note also that carefully crafted communications can convey your position without being written off — and could improve how accurately the policymaker understands public attitudes about public policies.” Read more from Bergan on MSUToday. Importance of local elections Sarah Reckhow is a professor of American politics in the Department of Political Science in the College of Social Science. She can comment on topics related to education policy in the presidential election. She is a specialist on local elections and school board elections. Contact: reckhow@msu.edu “Partisan polarization is having a growing impact on education politics, and we can see growing disagreement between Democrats and Republicans on key issues such as school choice and curriculum. This polarization is playing a role in elections, even nonpartisan school board elections, and it will be an important trend to watch in 2024.” Erin Kramer is the community liaison coordinator for MSU Community and Student Relations. She also advises MSUVote to support students and the local community voting. She can comment on efforts to promote voting efforts and resources that can be offered by universities and municipalities. Contact: kramere6@msu.edu “Michigan State University is home to MSUvote, an Initiative that strives to support students in their civic engagement. Student participation in voting is both a right and a responsibility. MSUvote is committed to getting out the vote,getting out the vote, reducing barriers to registration, and supporting all educational initiatives. Over the years, Michigan State has been fortunate to work with the East Lansing, Lansing, Meridian Township, and Bath Clerks to support our students in exercising their right to vote. Participation is foundational to the function of democracy, and we are committed to supporting students in that activity. MSUvote has hosted registration rallies, absentee parties, and worked to facilitate awareness of elections through multiple campus channels over the years to support participation and education. This year, the MSU STEM Building will be home to one of East Lansing’s Early Voting Centers, it will be operating Saturday Feb. 17 through Sunday Feb. 25.” Top issues for voters David Ortega is an associate professor in the Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, where he is also a faculty laureate. He can comment on consumer, producer and agribusiness decisions that affect the agricultural and food sectors, including the cost of food, which remains a concern for many Americans. Contact: dlortega@msu.edu “Persistent high food prices are a constant reminder of the economic difficulties facing voters. Although overall inflation has cooled and grocery price increases have moderated, food costs 25% more today than it did four years ago. And given the frequent nature of grocery shopping, food costs have a disproportionate impact on how voters perceive inflation.” Robert Brathwaite is the associate dean for research and an associate professor with a specialization in international relations in James Madison College. He can comment on foreign conflict and relations, including how it will impact U.S. policy and the presidential election. Contact: brathwa1@msu.edu “As the war between Russia and Ukraine approaches it two-year mark, the political and economic ramifications of this conflict are becoming more profound. Some political dynamics to watch this year associated with this conflict include changes in NATO’s military posture, political unity of the European Union, deepening Sino-Russian strategic cooperation, and the 2024 US presidential election. This conflict will also impact important global economic trends this year that include global energy supplies, food security, technology export controls, and the role of the US dollar in the global economy. More importantly, this ongoing conflict is a catalyst to evolving changes in the global security architecture with costs and consequences that are unknown.” Jason Miller is the interim chairperson of them Department of Supply Chain Management and the Eli Broad Professor in Supply Chain Management in the Broad College of Business. He can comment on various supply chain issues such as the impact of Suez Canal diversions on disruptions and inflation as well as the impact of tariffs on U.S. firms and consumers, as foreign conflict and trade are top of mind this presidential election. Contact: mill2831@broad.msu.edu “Business leader across industries ranging from manufacturing and mining to retailing are closely watching the 2024 election cycle, as the outcome could substantially shape the business landscape in the form of tariffs, foreign policy toward China and Russia, and the extent of military escalation in the Mideast. All of these policies affect strategic, long-term decisions regarding global sourcing, market entry strategies, and capacity and demand planning.” Antonio Doblas Madrid is an associate professor in the Department of Economics in the College of Social Science. He can comment on the economy and the effect of inflation, which remains a top issue for voters this year. Contact: doblasma@msu.edu “The economy and inflation is an issue on the minds of many Americans.Forecasters and market-based measures of expectations both predict that inflation is likely to continue falling gradually in 2024, to about 2.5%. Thus, the inflation shock that hit the economy is expected to continue fading, although it may take some time to go that last mile from 3% to 2%. The Fed also appears to be quite optimistic on inflation, given its latest forward guidance.” Read more from Doblas Madrid on the economy and inflation on MSUToday.
Expert Insight: Fake News, Fake Reviews: Building Trust with Online Shoppers
Online customer reviews have become a critically important cog in the sales conversion process in recent years. Studies show that 97 percent of consumers read product reviews and ratings, and that positive reviews can almost triple the likelihood of making a purchase. As customers do more and more of their shopping online, they are turning in droves to the likes of Yelp, TripAdvisor, and Google Reviews to seek out opinions, recommendations, and feedback from other users before pushing through the final part of the sales funnel. As a result, these third-party review sites have experienced exponential growth. But there’s a caveat: and it’s trust. The success of Yelp and its competitors is wholly contingent on how trustworthy their users perceive them to be; on the transparency and authenticity of the content published and the sources of that content. In an era of disinformation with fake reviews and AI mass-generated content precipitously on the rise, securing—and keeping—user trust is paramount. The Five Keys to Fighting Fakery Goizueta Business School’s Sandy Jap has some suggestions. Together with colleagues Ben Beck of Brigham Young University’s Marriott School of Business and Stefan Wuyts of Penn State’s Smeal College of Business, Jap, who is the Sarah Beth Brown Professor of Marketing, put together a series of studies to test the kinds of measures and mechanisms that platforms can deploy to win user confidence. And it turns out there’s one tactic that works more effectively than any other: actively monitoring the authenticity of user reviews. That and being open and transparent about doing so. Jap and her colleagues scoured the latest research and data on marketing, governance, and identity disclosure to pinpoint the mechanisms that best mitigate online fakery, while simultaneously building trust among platform users. They identified five. “We worked through the literature and were able to whittle these down to five core practices that are robustly effective at building trust,” says Jap. “They are monitoring, exposure, community building, status endowment and identity disclosure. Doing these five things can signal to your users that you are committed to being a guardian of their trust, so to speak.” Monitoring or evaluating reviews for their authenticity and exposing firms that pay for and propagate fake content are mechanisms directed at the rogue firms that spread fakery and misinformation, explains Jap. Meanwhile community building and status endowment focus on reviewers. Community building is about enabling authentic, transparent interactions between consumers and reviewers. An example of this might be allowing consumers to ask questions and reviewers to respond directly. “Status endowment is where a platform verifies and acknowledges the credibility or helpfulness of a reviewer in some way. Yelp and others use things like badges or reviewer ratings which are earned over time and which make it hard for fake reviewers to game their systems,” says Jap. Identity disclosure is the practice of having reviewers provide personal information—their name, picture, or location, for instance—before they can post content. And while this approach can keep fabrication and false profiles in check, it also raises certain tradeoffs, says Jap. “Anonymity online has long been understood as something of an un-inhibitor—a factor that enables users to speak more freely and openly. It can be democratizing in the sense that it removes or lessens prejudice and bias around things like race, social class, or physical appearance,” she says. “Of course, having people share personal data on your platform can also open up a can of worms around privacy and identity theft which are major considerations; so there’s a balancing act needed with this.” To test the efficacy of all five trust building policies, including identity disclosure, Jap and her colleagues ran a series of experiments and studies. They invited volunteers to rate how the presence or absence of these mechanisms impacted the trustworthiness of a platform. One study saw them parse things like domain authority and traffic across 25 online review sites against how many (or few) of the five mechanisms each deployed. Elsewhere, the team used surveys to assess how users ranked the different mechanisms in terms of platform trust, above and beyond other factors such as the quantity of reviews published say, or the expertise of different reviewers. The Bottom Line: Bust Bogus Reviews After crunching the data, Jap and her co-authors found that while all five trust-building mechanisms were valued and important to platform users, the practice of monitoring for fake reviews and reviewers—and broadcasting the fact clearly—was by far the most effective. “Doing all of these five things—monitoring, exposing, community building, status endowment and ID disclosure—are important if you want to earn and keep the trust of your users,” says Jap. “We found that the more of these mechanisms that platforms incorporate, the better their domain authority, Alexa site ranking, backlinks, and organic site traffic.” Based on our findings, monitoring your content and communicating that you’re doing this is by far the most powerful cue that you are trustworthy. So that’s where we’d say platforms might want to focus their spend. Many of the biggest review platforms have already taken note of these insights. Yelp recently shared a post to its official blog welcoming the finding that of the 25 sites analyzed in Jap’s study, theirs is one of two platforms that actively implement all five mechanisms. “After examining 25 review platforms, the study found that Yelp is one of two platforms that applies all five mechanisms and as the research states, has become a guardian of trust for review information.” Meanwhile, Jap stresses that these findings should be relevant to any business that is focused on “combating online review fakery.” “All businesses today face the challenge of managing their word-of-mouth reputation. Any firm interested in sharing and leveraging points of view around its products or services, be it a small online retail store or an Amazon, is going to want to go the distance—and be seen to do so—in going to war on fakery and disinformation.” Are you a journalist interested in learning more about the importance and trustworthiness of online reviews? Sandy Jap is available to speak with media - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Finding Truth among the Tweets. Our expert weighs in on the role social media has during war.
With the Israel-Hamas war raging on, social media provides a source of information for many individuals to stay up to date. Across platforms there are reliable sources but there are also those with an agenda to spread false truth, blatant lies and sew doubt with doses of 'mis' and disinformation. It's a topic Goizueta Business School professor David Schweidel is watching closely. "We are seeing once again the need for the regulation of social media platforms," says Schweidel. " Platforms have a financial incentive to serve up the most provocative and arousing content and content moderation is often at odds with financial goals." Social media is being flooded with content, much of it misinformation, and social platforms are unwilling or unable to effectively moderate what’s being posted. "Beyond the likely reduction in revenue, implementing content moderation at scale is expensive and difficult. If viewed from a short-term financial perspective, allowing for a free for all is less costly and will result in more user engagement, which drives revenue," Schweidel adds. And it is not as if legislators and lawmakers are not aware. As of today, social media platforms aren’t liable for the content posted on them (under the FCC’s Section 230). Two recent lawsuits sought to challenge section 230, but the Supreme Court declined to take such action. These challenges were based on platforms actively promoting content through their algorithms, thereby going beyond simply being intermediaries providing access to content posted online by others. Some, such as the ACLU, view this as allowing for free speech online. There's a lot more to know, such as: The challenges in identifying real vs. fake content Which platforms are being effective in moderating content How US and EU laws vary in terms of regulating misinformation on social media platforms And that's where we can help. David A. Schweidel is Professor of Marketing at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. He's a renowned marketing analytics expert focused on the opportunities at the intersection of marketing and technology. David is available to speak with media regarding this important topic, simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
In this day and age, people of all ages are often on social media. While most of the platforms can be engaging for the good, there are always bad actors out there passing along misinformation. That’s the type of content younger students need to be aware of, according to an Augusta University faculty expert. Stacie Pettit, PhD, program director of the Master of Education in Instruction in the College of Education and Human Development, suggests there needs to be more media literacy and awareness of social media taught to students. With so many videos and posts claiming to be informative, how is one supposed to discern what is factual and what is not? Pettit feels people need to be more aware of how to tell when something is legit as opposed to something that is inaccurate. “Knowing what legitimate research is and what’s not, especially in this political climate, it can be tough to tell,” said Pettit. “More can be done in them understanding how deep it goes and what you search for, you’re going to get things that are skewing your mind to what you already want to believe. I feel like that component can be deeper.” Pettit realizes younger students know how to use social media, but using it in a responsible way can be just as important. People may post videos claiming one thing, but without fact checking, it may be inaccurate and can be a dangerous tool to mold a younger person’s mind. “If you already have your mind made up about something, you’re going to find things. It’s like the old phrase, ‘If you’re looking for a yellow cab, you’re going to find a yellow cab.’ This may be your context, your culture that you’re coming from, but put yourself in this place, how might they feel? Knowing there isn’t just one way to think about something, it’s not just a black and white answer to all these critical issues is important,” Pettit added. She knows it’s of the utmost importance for students to realize that every talking head they see in a video on social media isn’t always speaking the truth. Fact checking, finding another source to support a view and paying attention to the source in the first place can be key pieces of the puzzle students can use to find out the legitimacy of a post from the start. Amid all the misinformation, there are still plenty of legitimate uses for social media platforms. “There’s definitely educational and helpful things on YouTube. I encourage my kids a lot to go there because I’m trying to teach them to be more independent. She’s often like, ‘I don’t know how to do that’ but I tell her to find a video; this is what you’re going to have to do in college,” she said. If you're a journalist covering education and the impacts social media has on students, then let us help. Stacie Pettit, PhD, is a respected leader in middle level teacher education and meeting the needs of marginalized young adolescents. She's available to speak with media; simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
AI-Generated Content is a Game Changer for Marketers, but at What Cost?
Goizueta’s David Schweidel pitted man against the machine to create SEO web content only to find that providing an editor with bot-generated content trounces the human copywriter every time. Good news for companies looking to boost productivity and save cash, he says. But could there be other hidden costs? In December 2022, The New York Times ran a piece looking back on the year’s biggest consumer tech updates. The review was mixed. Ownership shifts in the world of social media garnered special mentions, but hardware innovations had been largely “meh,’ mused the Times. There was one breakthrough area that warranted attention, however: AI-powered language-processing tech capable of generating natural-looking text, the same technology that powers familiar chatbots. And one such technology could well be poised to “invade our lives in 2023.” Earlier in December, AI research lab OpenAI, released the latest update to its Generative Pre-Trained Transformer technology, an open source artificial intelligence. It’s latest iteration, ChatGPT, immediately went viral. Here was an AI assistant that sounded intelligent. Not only could it answer any question thrown its way without supervised training, but when prompted, it could also write blog posts, as well as find and fix bugs in programming code. ChatGPT could draft business proposals and even tell jokes. All of this at a speed that beggared belief. Since its first release in 2020, OpenAI’s GPT technology has powered through a slew of updates that have seen its capabilities leap forward “by light years” in less than 24 months, says Goizueta Professor of Marketing, David Schweidel. For businesses looking to harness this rapidly-evolving technology, the potential is clearly enormous. But aren’t there also risks that industry and consumers alike will need to navigate? Schweidel is clear that the academic community and initiatives such as the Emory AI Humanity Initiative have a critical role in asking hard questions—and in determining the limitations and dangers, as well as the opportunities, inherent in tech innovation—because, as he puts it, “these things are going to happen whether we like it or not.” Man Versus Machine To that end, Schweidel and colleagues from Vienna University of Economics and Business and the Modul University of Vienna have put together a study looking at how well natural language generation technologies perform in one specific area of marketing: drafting bespoke content for website search engine optimization, better known as SEO. What they find is that content crafted by the machine, after light human editing, systematically outperforms its human counterparts—and by a staggering margin. Digging through the results, Schweidel and his colleagues can actually pinpoint an almost 80 percent success rate for appearing on the first page of search engine results with AI-generated content. This compares with just 22 perfect of content created by human SEO experts. In other words, the AI content passed to a human is roughly four times more effective than a skilled copywriter working alone. Reaching these findings meant running two real-time, real-world experiments, says Schweidel. First, he and his colleagues had to program the machine, in this case GPT 2, an earlier incarnation of GPT. GPT relies on natural language generation (NGL), a software process that converts manually uploaded input into authentic-sounding text or content—comparable in some ways to the human process of translating ideas into speech or writing. To prepare GPT-2 for SEO-specific content creation, Schweidel et al. started with the pre-trained GPT-2, and then let the machine do the heavy lifting: searching the internet for appropriate results based on the desired keyword, scraping the text of the websites, and updating GPT-2 to “learn” what SEO looks like, says Schweidel. We partnered with an IT firm and a university to run our field experiments. This meant creating SEO content for their websites using GPT-2 and actual human SEO experts, and then doing A/B testing to see which content was more successful in terms of landing in the top 10 search engine results on Google. So this was an opportunity to put the AI bot to the test in a real-world setting to see how it would perform against people. The results point to one clear winner. Not only did content from GPT-2 outperform its human rivals in SEO capabilities, it did so at scale. The AI-generated content scored a daily median result of seven or more hits in the first page of Google search results. The human-written copy didn’t make it onto the first result page at all. On its best day, GPT showed up for 15 of its 19 pages of search terms inside the top 10 search engine results page, compared with just two of the nine pages created by the human copywriters—a success rate of just under 80 percent compared to 22 percent. Savings at Scale The machine-generated content, after being edited by a human, trounces the human in SEO. But that’s not all, says Schweidel. The GPT bot was also able to produce content in a fraction of the time taken by the writers, reducing production time and associated labor costs by more than 90 percent, he says. “In our experiments, the copywriters took around four hours to write a page, while the GPT bot and human editor took 30 minutes. Now assuming the average copywriter makes an annual $45K on the basis of 1,567 hours of work, we calculate that the company we partnered with would stand to save more than $100,000 over a five-year period just by using the AI bot in conjunction with a human editor, rather than relying on SEO experts to craft content. That’s a 91 percent drop in the average cost of creating SEO content. It’s an orders of magnitude difference in productivity and costs.” But there are caveats. First off, there’s the quality of the machine-generated content to consider. For all its mind-boggling capabilities, even the newly released ChatGPT tends to read somewhat sterile, says Schweidel. That’s a problem both in terms of Google guidelines and brand coherence. Human editors are still needed in order to attenuate copy that can sound a little “mechanical.” “Google is pretty clear in its guidelines: Content generated by machines alone is a definite no-no. You also need to factor in the uncanny valley effect whereby something not quite human can come off as weird. Having an editor come in to smooth out AI content is critical to brand voice as well as the human touch.” Asking the Big Questions Then there are the moral and metaphysical dimensions of machine learning and creativity that beg an important question: Just because we can, does that mean we should? Here, Schweidel has grave reservations about the future of ChatGPT and its ilk. The potential of this kind of technology is extraordinarily exciting when you think about the challenges we face from productivity to pandemics, from sustainable growth to climate change. But let’s be very clear about the risks, too. AI is already capable of creating content—audio, visual and written—that looks and feels authentic. In a world that is hugely polarized, you have to ask yourself: How can that be weaponized? At the end of the day, says Schweidel, the large language models powering these generative AIs are essentially “stochastic parrots:” trained mimics whose output can be hard to predict. In the wrong hands, he warns, the potential for misinformation—and worse—could well be “terrifying.” “Shiny new tech is neither inherently good nor bad. It’s human nature to push the boundaries. But we need to ensure that the guardrails are in place to regulate innovation at this kind of pace, and that’s not easy. Governments typically lag far behind OpenAI and companies like them, even academics have a hard time keeping up. The real challenge ahead of us will be about innovating the guardrails in tandem with the tech—innovating our responsible practices and processes. Without effective safeguards in place, we’re on a path to potential destruction.” Covering AI or interesting in knowing more about this fascinating topic - then let our experts help with your coverage and stories. David Schweidel is the Rebecca Cheney McGreevy Endowed Chair and Professor of Marketing at Emory University's Goizueta Business School. Simply click on David's icon now to arrange an interview today.
UConn Expert, 10 Years after Sandy Hook, on the Lies that 'Plague the U.S.'
UConn professor and journalist Amanda J. Crawford considers the misinformation that spread like wildfire after tragic school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School to be "the first major conspiracy theory of the modern social media age." Ten years after 26 young students and school staff were killed in the massacre, the impact of that day in 2012 continues to reverberate in America today. On this solemn anniversary, Crawford writes about the aftermath of Sandy Hook misinformation in a new essay for The Conversation: Conspiracy theories are powerful forces in the U.S. They have damaged public health amid a global pandemic, shaken faith in the democratic process and helped spark a violent assault on the U.S. Capitol in January 2021. These conspiracy theories are part of a dangerous misinformation crisis that has been building for years in the U.S. While American politics has long had a paranoid streak, and belief in conspiracy theories is nothing new, outlandish conspiracy theories born on social media now regularly achieve mainstream acceptance and are echoed by people in power. Recently, one of the most popular American conspiracy theorists faced consequences in court for his part in spreading viral lies. Right-wing radio host Alex Jones and his company, Infowars, were ordered by juries in Connecticut and Texas to pay nearly $1.5 billion in damages to relatives of victims killed in a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School a decade ago. Jones had falsely claimed that the shooting was a hoax. As a journalism professor at the University of Connecticut, I have studied the misinformation that surrounded the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 14, 2012 – including Jones’ role in spreading it to his audience of millions. I consider it the first major conspiracy theory of the modern social media age, and I believe we can trace our current predicament to the tragedy’s aftermath. Ten years ago, the Sandy Hook shooting demonstrated how fringe ideas could quickly become mainstream on social media and win support from various establishment figures – even when the conspiracy theory targeted grieving families of young students and school staff killed during the massacre. Those who claimed the tragedy was a hoax showed up in Newtown and harassed people connected to the shooting. This provided an early example of how misinformation spread on social media could cause real-world harm. Amanda J. Crawford is a veteran political reporter, literary journalist, and expert in journalism ethics, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the First Amendment. Click on her icon now to arrange an interview with her today.
Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics (AIFL) is part of the project to infer authorship of uncredited documents based on writing style AIFL’s Professor Tim Grant and Dr Krzysztof Kredens are experts in authorship analysis Applications may include identifying counterintelligence risks, combating misinformation online, fighting human trafficking and even deciphering authorship of ancient religious texts. Aston University’s Institute for Forensic Linguistics (AIFL) is part of the AUTHOR research consortium which has won an $11.3 million contract to infer authorship of uncredited documents based on the writing style. The acronym stands for ‘Attribution, and Undermining the Attribution, of Text while providing Human-Oriented Rationales’. Worth $1.3 million, the Aston University part of the project is being led by Professor Tim Grant and Dr Krzysztof Kredens, who both are recognised internationally as experts in authorship analysis and who both engage in forensic linguistic casework as expert witnesses. In addition to their recognised general expertise and experience in this area, Professor Grant has specific expertise in using linguistic analysis to enhance online undercover policing and Dr Kredens has led projects to develop authorship identification techniques involving very large numbers of potential authors. The AUTHOR team is led by Charles River Analytics and is one of six teams of researchers that won The Human Interpretable Attribution of Text Using Underlying Structure (HIATUS) programme sponsored by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA). The programme uses natural language processing techniques and machine learning to create stylistic fingerprints that capture the writing style of specific authors. On the flip side is authorship privacy - mechanisms that can anonymize identities of authors, especially when their lives are in danger. Pitting the attribution and privacy teams against each other will hopefully motivate each, says Dr Terry Patten, principal scientist at Charles River Analytics and principal investigator of the AUTHOR consortium. “One of the big challenges for the programme and for authorship attribution in general is that the document you’re looking at may not be in the same genre or on the same topic as the sample documents you have for a particular author,” Patten says. The same applies to languages: We might have example articles for an author in English but need to match the style even if the document at hand is in French. Authorship privacy too has its challenges: users must obfuscate the style without changing the meaning, which can be difficult to execute.” In the area of authorship attribution, the research and casework experience from Aston University will assist the team in identifying and using a broad spectrum of authorship markers. Authorship attribution research has more typically looked for words and their frequencies as identifying characteristics. However, Professor Grant’s previous work on online undercover policing has shown that higher-level discourse features - how authors structure their interactions - can be important ‘tells’ in authorship analysis. The growth of natural language processing (NLP) and one of its underlying techniques, machine learning, is motivating researchers to harness these new technologies in solving the classic problem of authorship attribution. The challenge, Patten says, is that while machine learning is very effective at authorship attribution, “deep learning systems that use neural networks can’t explain why they arrived at the answers they did.” Evidence in criminal trials can’t afford to hinge on such black-box systems. It’s why the core condition of AUTHOR is that it be “human-interpretable.” Dr Kredens has developed research and insights where explanations can be drawn out of black box authorship attribution systems, so that the findings of such systems can be integrated into linguistic theory as to who we are as linguistic individuals. Initially, the project is expected to focus on feature discovery: beyond words, what features can we discover to increase the accuracy of authorship attribution? The project has a range of promising applications – identifying counterintelligence risks, combating misinformation online, fighting human trafficking, and even figuring out the authorship of ancient religious texts. Professor Grant said: “We were really excited to be part of this project both as an opportunity to develop new findings and techniques in one of our core research areas, and also because it provides further recognition of AIFL’s international reputation in the field. Dr Kredens added: “This is a great opportunity to take our cutting-edge research in this area to a new level”. Professor Simon Green, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, commented: “I am delighted that the international consortium bid involving AIFL has been successful. As one of Aston University’s four research institutes, AIFL is a genuine world-leader in its field, and this award demonstrates its reputation globally. This project is a prime example of our capacities and expertise in the area of technology, and we are proud to be a partner.” Patten is excited about the promise of AUTHOR as it is poised to make fundamental contributions to the field of NLP. “It’s really forcing us to address an issue that’s been central to natural language processing,” Patten says. “In NLP and artificial intelligence in general, we need to find a way to build hybrid systems that can incorporate both deep learning and human-interpretable representations. The field needs to find ways to make neural networks and linguistic representations work together.” “We need to get the best of both worlds,” Patten says. The team includes some of the world’s foremost researchers in authorship analysis, computational linguistics, and machine learning from Illinois Institute of Technology, Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and Howard Brain Sciences Foundation.
