Facebook

Facebook Paying Users To Shut Down Their Accounts For Science Ahead Of The 2020 Election

With the Cambridge Analytica scandal still–and likely forever–hanging over its head, Facebook has spent much of the past year hyping its efforts to preserve electoral integrity ahead of the 2020 presidential vote.

Now, as part of those efforts, it’s offering to pay users to shutter their accounts during the leadup to the election.

According to screenshots of a notice Facebook sent to some users, the social network is surveying people about how much they’d need to be compensated to temporarily deactivate their Facebook and/or Instagram accounts. Users who received the notice are asked to indicate whether they would accept $10, $15, or $20 per week their accounts are offline.

Subscribe for daily Tubefilter Top Stories

Subscribe

The notice (tweeted out by Washington Post reporter Elizabeth Dwokin and spotted by The Verge) is part of Facebook’s newly launched research initiative to “better understand the impact of Facebook and Instagram on key political attitudes and behaviors during the U.S. 2020 elections.” Announced this week, the program involves numerous Facebook researchers, 17 external academics, and nonpartisan data science institution NORC

at the University of Chicago. They anticipate involving 200,000 to 400,000 Facebook/Instagram users in a “diverse set of studies,” the company said.

Users who participate in the shutdown study will have their accounts shuttered in late September for either one week or six weeks. After their deactivation period is over, they’ll answer a postmortem survey, for which they’ll also be compensated.

Liz Bourgeois, Facebook’s director of strategic response, responded to Dwokin’s tweet, saying that payment is “fairly standard for this type of academic research.”

Findings from this and other studies in the initiative aren’t expected until mid-2021. Facebook said it hopes to investigate a range of areas, including “whether social media makes us more polarized as a society, or if it largely reflects the divisions that already exist; if it helps people to become better informed about politics, or less; or if it affects people’s attitudes towards government and democracy, including whether and how they vote.”

Share
Published by
James Hale
Tags: facebook

Recent Posts

Have you heard? Kurzgesagt is not AI, John Nellis goes dancing, and Baby Shark’s K-pop idol.

Each week, we handpick a selection of stories to give you a snapshot of trends,…

4 hours ago

As social media lawsuits move forward, is Section 230 facing an existential threat?

In 2026, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 is celebrating its 30th birthday. At…

5 hours ago

The World Cup put creators on the broadcast. Can KSI replicate that strategy for the club he co-owns?

When Greater London soccer club Dagenham & Redbridge FC begins its campaign for the 2026-27 season,…

8 hours ago

Spotify is cracking down on AI slop, but prompters can still post their generated music if they build a personal brand around it

Spotify is adding its own "seems like AI slop" button. Like YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, and…

21 hours ago

OnlyFans investor says it will “never use AI in any capacity to disrupt creators”

OnlyFans' newest investor is talking up his future plans for the platform--including promising that it…

23 hours ago

Influencer endorsements have created a campaign finance loophole. A proposed law would close it.

At this point, it's become clear that social media creators will play pivotal roles in…

1 day ago