Social media users probably won't read beyond this headline, researchers say

[erronis]

https://phys.org/news/2024-11-social-media-users-wont-headline.html

Congratulations. Reading this far into the story is a feat not many will accomplish, especially if shared on Facebook, according to a team led by Penn State researchers.

In an analysis of more than 35 million public posts containing links that were shared extensively on the social media platform between 2017 and 2020, the researchers 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.

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, were published 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.

"It was a big surprise to find out that more than 75% of the time, the links shared on Facebook were shared without the user clicking through first," said corresponding author S. Shyam Sundar, Evan Pugh University Professor and the James P. Jimirro Professor of Media Effects at Penn State.

Not just social media but also MSM print purveyors. The "hed" (headline) is all many readers ever look at. Even if the body of the text - even the first paragraph - belie the headline.

[ms liberty]

1. It's epidemic. It happens here, too.

[jimfields33]

5. Yep it does and I'm definitely guilty from time to time.

[ms liberty]

12. Me too; I am just as guilty as anyone else. Ugh.

[LizBeth]

2. This is what I am saying. Throw in scrolling all day and night, being directed what to see

and 1000's confirming, agreeing with bullshit and you have brainwashing. When no other info is being provided but only rw bullshit and a bunch of rwers agreeing with lies and shit it is going to mess with the brain. The whole male leaders/protectors alpha bullshit is HUGE on the feeds and I see why so many young people are being messed up. My sons dont do social media, nor do their friends and they have not heard any of this shit. But a lot of people are watching these "influencers" and apt word because they are doing just that.

[Kid Berwyn]

3. Sad.

tl;dr

[jfz9580m]

4. Glad to be the first rec

I do think the internet is wreaking havoc on our attention spans and brains.

On a related note I am a big fan of Nicholas Carr’s work on the topic and frequently post links to his site:
https://www.roughtype.com/

https://www.roughtype.com/?p=8724

https://www.roughtype.com/?p=5145

https://pages.ucsd.edu/~mboyle/COGS11/COGS11-website/pdf-files/Phones-hijack-mind-WSJ.pdf


Based on your posts, I think you would enjoy some of his work erronis (if you are unfamiliar with it that is) .

I still use my phone but I am more aware of the hazards.

Now I am self regulating my use of it more: it should be a fun without being a waste of time and informative without being a source of terror or work-related distraction. I have found it has mixed utility re: work in science.

I also generally dislike the style of a lot of social media posts.

[erronis]

6. Thank you, again, for your enlightening responses.

Again, I will dig in.

I don't read anything on my phone, even DU! I do receive texts, phone calls, see that emails have arrived, etc.

But I need a real screen to get the content and context and a keyboard/pointy-thingee to be able to respond if I need to.

When I'm out for a walk in the woods I try to not consult the ever-present GPS and maps on the phone - letting myself get a bit lost even with some "interesting" outcomes.

[Intractable]

8. "I need a real screen to get the content and context"

You haven't lived until you have accessed DU on a 43" monitor.

One can see the whole thread!

[jfz9580m]

20. Heh

But I need a real screen to get the content and context and a keyboard/pointy-thingee to be able to respond if I need to.

I wish I was there. Would certainly save me some time wasted on the phone .

[Jspur]

7. I have a Youtube page I created in

which I talk about the NBA. One thing I have noticed the last several months is when I post videos talking about a subject, I get comments of people complaining that in my video that I didn't talk about a certain topic when in reality I did talk about it but they didn't watch the full video. I definitely believe people suffer from ADD and don't want to engage in the content fully but want a shortcut to get the information which is them being lazy and just looking at the headline instead of diving deep into the content to get the information.

[LearnedHand]

9. I've been thinking about this a lot

We have become government by headline AND the headline editors write headlines guaranteed to get max clicks and eyeballs. It's a horrible situation.

[Sympthsical]

10. Surprising no one at all

Pretty much a daily occurrence to watch people read the headline, respond and react, and then I read the article and realize no one actually bothered.

This is a thing on Reddit as well. All the top comments end up being people who have no idea what the article actually said.

For all the "Never trust the media!" there is an awful lot of trust involved when people just assume something says what they're told it says without ever bothering to check for themselves.

Works on all kinds of things. Articles, polls, out-of-context quotes. I saw an OP headline yesterday with a claim that the C&P'ed body of their own post contradicted. And no one responding said a word. They just took the headline as a salient fact.

Was kind of hilarious.

[UTUSN]

11. I often Rec based on the thread Title and/or the Poster and sometimes don't read the whole post.

Or Reply on my own wave length without reference to what the content actually was. This, in no way means I will stop this.

[erronis]

18. A well-written headlilne (or title) can convey a lot of information. Unfortunately, too many are content-free.

[chowder66]

13. I would rec things on Twitter and they would be mistaken that I didn't read the article because I read it here

at DU or elsewhere.

I killed my Twitter account so I won't be confusing the issue anymore.

[Skittles]

14. add to that the proliferation of rightwing hack "news"

and this very much explains why people are so uninformed:

The researchers found that these links were shared over 41 million times, without being clicked. Of these, 76.94% came from conservative users and 14.25% from liberal users. The researchers explained that the vast majority—up to 82%—of the links to false information in the dataset originated from conservative news domains.

[DSandra]

15. And this is why the Right keeps on eating our lunch

They study these things, after all sooo many of them come from the business world, where marketing and psychology studies are widely common and essential for competing in markets.

[erronis]

19. Cambridge Analytical comes to mind.

While the tools and knowledge are available to anyone on the political spectrum, the RW knows how to weaponize them.

[taxi]

16. I'm not sure about other places, but here in Florida it is not uncommon for a ballots Amendment title to be misleading.

Someone casting their vote according to what appears on the ballot without researching is no different than what is described in the OP.

[Figarosmom]

17. Not just social media

Newspapers too. That's why so many newspapers have headlines that don't match the content of the story. Headlines are not written by the reporter, they are added later.