Social media users probably won’t read beyond this headline, researchers say | Penn State University
www.psu.edu
In an analysis of more than 35 million public posts containing links that were shared billions of times on the social media platform between 2017 and 2020, the researchers at Penn State found that around 75% of the shares were made without the posters clicking the link first. Of these, political content from both ends of the spectrum was shared without clicking more often than politically neutral content.

A new study of 35 million news links circulated on Facebook reports that more than 75% of the time they were shared without the link being clicked upon and read

  • @KintarianEnglish
    59•17 hours ago

    I don’t read 90% of the articles because they’re mostly crap.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppetEnglish
      2•8 hours ago

      And there are a bajillion of them, and all completely random. You could read for the rest of your life and not get through a single day’s worth of shared articles. That said, you really should read something before sharing it. That part is just stupid.

    • TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏEnglish
      27•16 hours ago

      This article is about sharing links without having read the content, not just scrolling past or commenting without reading first

      Edit: a more accurate headline would be

      Facebook users probably won’t read beyond this headline before sharing it, researchers say

      • @KintarianEnglish
        1•13 hours ago

        At first the author states:

        The findings, which the researchers said suggest that social media users tend to merely read headlines and blurbs rather than fully engage with core content, appeared today (Nov. 19) in Nature Human Behavior. While the data were limited to Facebook, the researchers said the findings could likely map to other social media platforms and help explain why misinformation can spread so quickly online.

        This implies all social media users. Later it mentions sharing information.

        If I cared , I would read the paper. I think the author didn’t do a very good job from headline on.

        • TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏEnglish
          5•12 hours ago

          I know they think it might generalize to other platforms, but there’s little evidence to say so, and I doubt the percentage is nearly as bad on other platforms, especially Lemmy (which is the only social media I use, so the only thing relevant to me and many others here)

          There’s likely also a high percentage of people who form opinions about and comment on headlines without reading the content, but that’s not what this paper measured

      • @KintarianEnglish
        1•13 hours ago

        Oh, ok. It seemed they were talking about people only reading the headlines, then sharing with people who only read the headlines.

    • @TropicalDingdongEnglish
      3•16 hours ago

      Right? Do you expect me to click on 90% of articles?

      Social media is a filter. I’m using it to figure out what is worth clicking on.

      • @KintarianEnglish
        3•13 hours ago

        Politics, sensationalism, click bait, fear mongering. A lot of content is useless to me.