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

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 days 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.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 days 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.

    • TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏ@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days 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

      • Kintarian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

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

      • Kintarian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days 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Ⓐʀʏ@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          13 days 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