Coverage of the 2020 U.S. presidential election will mark the beginning of gerrymandered news coverage, as hyper-personalization and geotargeting are applied at scale in news apps and in mobile push notifications.
Personalization and social filtering have both been widely leveraged to maximize user engagement with digital news. The communication of unique messages to specific audiences has capitalized on various personalization strategies that target individuals within populations based on: the channel or platform; behavioral information, such as click history; social network information; and users’ self-identified preferences. Location-based personalization is also common in targeting specific consumers, yet has only recently emerged in a news context.
The 2018 midterm elections provided a first glimpse of location-based targeting in journalism, with major news apps and aggregators using location data to personalize push notifications. This was most prominent in the Florida gubernatorial race: National news outlets provided not only different push notifications at different times to local and national audiences — they also fragmented the state, with different alerts sent to users in Orlando and Tallahassee, Miami and Fort Myers.
For example, following the primary elections nominating Republican Ron DeSantis and Democrat Andrew Gillum, some locations only received alerts from NBC News about one party’s candidate — no matter the ideology or previous reading behavior of the user:
In Miami: DeSantis wins Florida GOP primary for Governor, will face Democrat Andrew Gillum after upset. (August, 29, 2018, 6:13 AM)
In Orlando and Tallahassee: Andrew Gillum wins Florida Democratic governor primary. (August, 29, 2018, 6:37 AM)
National: Bernie Sanders-backed Democrat Gillum to take on Trump-endorsed Republican DeSantis in Florida gov race, NBC News projects. (August 29, 2018, 5:05 PM)
Local elections can have national interest and implications, making election coverage applicable to multiple audiences based on their location. Push notifications about these stories increasingly frame the same topic in ways that are unique to local and national audiences, often even when they link to the same story. Personalizing to different local audiences could have the measurable outcome of impacting name recognition for candidates in particular districts.
This location-based personalization, however, is distinctly different from historic differences between local and national news coverage. Local affiliates have traditionally provided further details on stories that may impact local audiences, and smaller news outlets have provided more coverage than national organizations for local-specific stories. While the use of geo-location targeted push notifications has parallels to the nested models of local affiliations and national organizations, the human-information interactions and overall implications — particularly relative to how this applies to communications around elections — are very different.
Personalized push notifications are somewhat unique in that, while the majority of them are paired — with frames for local and national audiences, but pointing to the same story — there’s no guarantee that a user ever taps on the alert to read the story. That means the tailored frame might be all that the user sees. As a result, geo-targeted notifications have the potential to manipulate the information environment, even through subtle choices about detail or sentiment, potentially exacerbating social-geographic fragmentation and gerrymandering understanding of elections.
In a 2018 study we conducted, we found that location-based personalization had only recently emerged, with hundreds of examples in a few states related to political news — a very small subset of push notifications overall. In some cases, this personalization was not only harmless but also highly useful and effective. In other cases, however, it had the potential of amplifying problems like filter bubble, manipulation, and loss of readers’ trust.
Given the preview provided by the 2018 midterm elections, we anticipate that location-based information will be used to send alerts with different frames for the same story; at different times, based on relevance; selectively, with different details, based on local relevance; and from local affiliates, using a national platform.
Recent studies have cast doubts on the extent to which filter bubbles generate completely different perceptions through news coverage. But push notifications present unique personalization opportunities, in terms of location and of the controlled capture of behavioral patterns. We believe that, even if some concerns about filter bubbles have been overstated, location-based personalization of push notifications could present a different and more significant challenge in this context — especially given the hyper-partisan geographic divides in the United States.
Madelyn Sanfilippo is a postdoctoral research associate at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy. Yafit Lev-Aretz is an assistant professor of law at the Zicklin School of Business of CUNY’s Baruch College.
Coverage of the 2020 U.S. presidential election will mark the beginning of gerrymandered news coverage, as hyper-personalization and geotargeting are applied at scale in news apps and in mobile push notifications.
Personalization and social filtering have both been widely leveraged to maximize user engagement with digital news. The communication of unique messages to specific audiences has capitalized on various personalization strategies that target individuals within populations based on: the channel or platform; behavioral information, such as click history; social network information; and users’ self-identified preferences. Location-based personalization is also common in targeting specific consumers, yet has only recently emerged in a news context.
The 2018 midterm elections provided a first glimpse of location-based targeting in journalism, with major news apps and aggregators using location data to personalize push notifications. This was most prominent in the Florida gubernatorial race: National news outlets provided not only different push notifications at different times to local and national audiences — they also fragmented the state, with different alerts sent to users in Orlando and Tallahassee, Miami and Fort Myers.
For example, following the primary elections nominating Republican Ron DeSantis and Democrat Andrew Gillum, some locations only received alerts from NBC News about one party’s candidate — no matter the ideology or previous reading behavior of the user:
In Miami: DeSantis wins Florida GOP primary for Governor, will face Democrat Andrew Gillum after upset. (August, 29, 2018, 6:13 AM)
In Orlando and Tallahassee: Andrew Gillum wins Florida Democratic governor primary. (August, 29, 2018, 6:37 AM)
National: Bernie Sanders-backed Democrat Gillum to take on Trump-endorsed Republican DeSantis in Florida gov race, NBC News projects. (August 29, 2018, 5:05 PM)
Local elections can have national interest and implications, making election coverage applicable to multiple audiences based on their location. Push notifications about these stories increasingly frame the same topic in ways that are unique to local and national audiences, often even when they link to the same story. Personalizing to different local audiences could have the measurable outcome of impacting name recognition for candidates in particular districts.
This location-based personalization, however, is distinctly different from historic differences between local and national news coverage. Local affiliates have traditionally provided further details on stories that may impact local audiences, and smaller news outlets have provided more coverage than national organizations for local-specific stories. While the use of geo-location targeted push notifications has parallels to the nested models of local affiliations and national organizations, the human-information interactions and overall implications — particularly relative to how this applies to communications around elections — are very different.
Personalized push notifications are somewhat unique in that, while the majority of them are paired — with frames for local and national audiences, but pointing to the same story — there’s no guarantee that a user ever taps on the alert to read the story. That means the tailored frame might be all that the user sees. As a result, geo-targeted notifications have the potential to manipulate the information environment, even through subtle choices about detail or sentiment, potentially exacerbating social-geographic fragmentation and gerrymandering understanding of elections.
In a 2018 study we conducted, we found that location-based personalization had only recently emerged, with hundreds of examples in a few states related to political news — a very small subset of push notifications overall. In some cases, this personalization was not only harmless but also highly useful and effective. In other cases, however, it had the potential of amplifying problems like filter bubble, manipulation, and loss of readers’ trust.
Given the preview provided by the 2018 midterm elections, we anticipate that location-based information will be used to send alerts with different frames for the same story; at different times, based on relevance; selectively, with different details, based on local relevance; and from local affiliates, using a national platform.
Recent studies have cast doubts on the extent to which filter bubbles generate completely different perceptions through news coverage. But push notifications present unique personalization opportunities, in terms of location and of the controlled capture of behavioral patterns. We believe that, even if some concerns about filter bubbles have been overstated, location-based personalization of push notifications could present a different and more significant challenge in this context — especially given the hyper-partisan geographic divides in the United States.
Madelyn Sanfilippo is a postdoctoral research associate at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy. Yafit Lev-Aretz is an assistant professor of law at the Zicklin School of Business of CUNY’s Baruch College.
Jonas Kaiser Russian bots are just today’s slacktivists
Imaeyen Ibanga Let’s take it slow
Joanne McNeil A return to blogs (finally? sort of?)
Simon Galperin Journalism becomes more democratic
Don Day Respect the non-paying audience
Whitney Phillips A time to question core beliefs
Nicholas Jackson What’s left of local gets comfortable with reader support
Joni Deutsch Podcasting unsilences the silent
Bill Adair A Nobel Prize, a Brad Pitt film, and a Taylor Swift song
Nico Gendron Make better products if you want to reach Gen Z
Christa Scharfenberg It’s time to make journalism a field that supports and respects women
Richard Tofel A constraint of the reader-revenue model emerges
Stefanie Murray Charitable giving goes collaborative
Mario García Think small (screen)
Moreno Cruz Osório In Brazil, collaboration in a time of state attacks
Annie Rudd The expanded ambiguity of the news photograph
Knight Foundation Five generations of journalists, learning from each other
A.J. Bauer A fork in the road for conservative media
Lauren Duca The rise of the journalistic influencer
Jeff Kofman Speed through technology
Masuma Ahuja Slower, quieter, more measured and thoughtful
Jennifer Brandel A love letter from the year 2073
Meredith Artley Stronger solidarity among news organizations
Juleyka Lantigua A changing industry amps up podcasters’ ambitions
Cristina Kim Public media stops trying to serve “everybody”
Errin Haines Race and gender aren’t a 2020 story — they’re the story
Hossein Derakhshan AI can’t conjure up an Errol Morris
Talia Stroud The work of reconnecting starts November 4
Sonali Prasad Climate change storytelling gets multidimensional
Julia B. Chan We 👏 take 👏 breaks 👏
Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper Power to the people (on your audience team)
Jim Brady We’ll complain about other people living in bubbles while ignoring our own
Francesco Zaffarano TikTok without generational prejudice
Sue Robinson Campaign coverage as test bed for engagement experiments
Mike Caulfield Native verification tools for the blue checkmark crowd
Peter Bale Lies get further normalized
Jasmine McNealy A call for context
Raney Aronson-Rath News deserts will proliferate — but so will new solutions
Seth C. Lewis 20 questions for 2020
Kourtney Bitterly Transparency isn’t just a desire, it’s an expectation
Cindy Royal Prepare media students for skills, not job titles
Doris Truong The year of radical salary transparency
Elizabeth Dunbar Frank talk, and then action
Logan Jaffe You don’t need fancy tools to listen
Sarah Stonbely More people start caring about news inequality
Nushin Rashidian Are platforms a bridge or a lifeline?
Sarah Marshall The year to learn about news moments
Candis Callison Taking a cue from Indigenous journalists on climate change
Ben Werdmuller Use the tools of journalism to save it
Emily Withrow The year we kill the news article
Mariana Moura Santos The future of journalism is collaborative
Anthony Nadler Clash of Clans: Election Edition
Meg Marco Everything happens somewhere
Geneva Overholser Death to bothsidesism
Felix Salmon Spotify launches a news channel
John Keefe Journalism gets hacked
Dannagal G. Young Let’s disrupt the logic that’s driving Americans apart
Greg Emerson News apps fall further behind
Barbara Gray Join local libraries on the frontlines of civic engagement
Cory Haik We’re already consuming the future of news — now we have to produce it
Rachel Glickhouse Journalists get left behind in the industry’s decline
Jakob Moll A slow-moving tech backlash among young people
Margarita Noriega The platforms try to figure out what to do with single-subject newsrooms
Mira Lowe The year of student-powered journalism
Sara K. Baranowski A big year for little newspapers
Tanya Cordrey Saying no to more good ideas
Gordon Crovitz Fighting misinformation requires journalism, not secret algorithms
J. Siguru Wahutu Western journalists, learn from your African peers
Rachel Schallom The value of push alerts goes beyond open rates
Monica Drake A renewed focus on misinformation
Alfred Hermida and Mary Lynn Young The promise of nonprofit journalism
Carl Bialik Journalists will try running the whole shop
Matt DeRienzo Local broadcasters begin to fill the gaps left by newspapers
Ståle Grut OSINT journalism goes mainstream
Matthew Pressman News consumers divide into haves and have-nots
M. Scott Havens First-party data becomes media’s most important currency
Jeremy Gilbert and Jarrod Dicker A call for collaboration between storytelling and tech
Monique Judge The year to organize, unionize, and fight
Alexandra Borchardt Get out of the office and talk to people
Joshua P. Darr All that campaign cash will make the media’s problems worse
Rick Berke Incoming fire from both left and right
Brenda P. Salinas Treating MP3 files like text
Nathalie Malinarich Betting on loyalty
Eric Nuzum Podcasting finally creates another mega-hit show
S. Mitra Kalita The race to 2021
Catalina Albeanu Rebuilding journalism, together
Heidi Tworek The year of positive pushback
Jake Shapiro Podcasting gets listener relationship management
Tonya Mosley The neutrality vs. objectivity game ends
Linda Solomon Wood Everyone in your organization, moving toward a common goal
Craig Newmark Formalizing newsrooms’ battle against disinformation
Elizabeth Hansen and Jesse Holcomb Local news initiatives run into a capital shortage
Tom Glaisyer Journalism can emerge newly vibrant and powerful
Rachel Davis Mersey The business of local TV news will enter its downward slide
Laura E. Davis Know the context your journalism is operating within
Helen Havlak Platforms shine a light on original reporting
Kathleen Searles Pay more attention to attention
Madelyn Sanfilippo and Yafit Lev-Aretz News coverage gets geo-fragmented
AX Mina The Forum we wanted, the forum we got
Michael W. Wagner Increasingly fractured, but little bit deliberative
Colleen Shalby Journalists become media literacy teachers
Brian Moritz The end of “stick to sports”
Logan Molyneux and Shannon McGregor Think twice before turning to Twitter
Bill Grueskin Our ethics codes get an overhaul
Pablo Boczkowski The day after November 4
Kerri Hoffman Opening closed systems
Kevin D. Grant The free press stands against authoritarians’ attacks on truth
Tamar Charney From broadcast to bespoke
Sarah Alvarez I’m ready for post-news
Lucas Graves A smarter conversation about how (and why) fact-checking matters
Alice Antheaume Trade “politics” for “power”
Josh Schwartz Publishers move beyond the metered paywall
Rasmus Kleis Nielsen The business we want, not the business we had
Sarah Schmalbach Journalist, quantify thyself
John Garrett It’s the best time in a century to start a local news organization
Kristen Muller The year we operationalize community engagement
Fiona Spruill The climate crisis gets the coverage it deserves
Ernie Smith The death of the industry fad
Beena Raghavendran The year of the local engagement reporter
Irving Washington Leadership isn’t something you learn on the job
Zizi Papacharissi A president leads, the press follows, reality fades
Heather Bryant Some kinds of journalism aren’t worth saving
Victor Pickard We reclaim a public good
Alana Levinson Brand-backed media gets another look
Joe Amditis Collaborative journalism takes its rightful place at the table
Steve Henn The dawning audio web
Dan Shanoff Sports media enters the Bronny era
Carrie Brown-Smith Engaged journalism: It’s finally happening