You are on page 1of 40

 

Contemporary Communications  

NO BiaS. - Filter Bubbles 


RMIT COMM2676 
 

 
Link for report website  

https://s3747991.wixsite.com/mysite 

*No bias website is still in its storyboard phase 

 

 
 

1. Executive Summary 
NO BiaS is a first of its kind website that will provide users with a comparison between their 
personal filtered searches and a completely unfiltered search. In partnership with media 
juggernaut VICE, we will effectively engage our target audience and provide VICE with 
ground breaking content on this issue, ahead of the 2019 Australian Federal election and 
the 2020 U.S.A. Presidential Election. Both landmark events that could potentially be 
affected by filter bubbles. 

A filter bubble is an algorithmic bias that skews or limits the information an individual user 
sees on the Internet. The bias is caused by weighted algorithms that search engines, social 
media sites and marketers use to personalise user experience​ (Rouse, M. n.d.). Filter 
Bubbles pose a potential threat to politics and society by isolating users in a personalised 
bubble. The ‘bubble’ is often hard to penetrate, as the more we connect and input our 
personal data into the net, the more the bubble is magnified. 

There is no definitive research into how this affects society, socially or politically, in the long 
term. With this lack of long-term empirical data, our goal is to communicate what filter 
bubbles are and to give web users a tool to see how their searches are filtered. Through 
our research, we have decided to target politically engaged youth between the ages of 
18-29. Research shows that this audience is more active and politically engaged online than 
any other demographic. 

Being more politically active online allows filter bubbles to amplify, echoing user’s ‘likes’ and 
interest back at them via filtered content. This demographic will benefit the most from our 
proposed communication solution, and will be the most receptive to it online.   

 
 

 
 

 
 

“The global village that was once 


the Internet, has been replaced by 
digital islands of isolation that 
are drifting further apart each 
day.
The internet that helped elect 
Barack Obama in 2008, is different 
from the internet that led to 
Brexit and the election of Donald 
Trump” 

 
Mostafa M. El-Bermawy 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Table of Contents 
1. Executive Summary ………………………………………………………………………………….. P 2

2. Team introduction and roles ……………………………………………………………………….. P 5

3. Research insights ……………………………………………………………………………………. P 6

4. Key terms ……………………………………………………………………………………………… P 7

5. Communication problem …………………………………………………………………………… P 8

6. Unique Selling Point ………………………………………………………………………………… P 9

7. No Bias’ goal …………………………………………………………………………………………. P 10

8. Why No Bias is different …………………………………………………………………………… P 10

9. Proposed solution ………………………………………………………………………………….. P 11

9.a Partnering with VICE and the benefits ………………………………………………. P 11

9.b Why a website is the best solution ………………………………………………….. P 12

10. Target Audience …………………………………………………………………………………… P 12

11. Media story - Website operation ………………………………………………………………... P 14

12. Creative advertising campaign …………………………………………………………………. P 16

13. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………. P 21

13.a Class feedback …………………………………………………………………………. P 21

13.b End user feedback …………………………………………………………………….. P 22

14. Appendix …………………………………………………………………………………………... P 23

14.a Research ………………………………………………………………………………… P 23

14.b Survey Results ………………………………………………………………………… P 28

14.c Pitch, scripts, minutes, team charter ……………………………………………… P 30

15. References …………………………………………………………………………………………. P 39

 
 

 
 

Team introduction and roles 


 

Zarina Borland - Director of advertising, report writing duties and creative 


content  

Huw Ward - Research manager, report writing duties and website design 

Sarita Knight - Public relations and pitch, research duties and report Manager 

Hannah Seddon - Report writing and website design 

  

 
 
 

 
 

Research insights 
The NO BiaS team conducted extensive research into the filter bubbles problem, the 
context of the issue and the engagement of potential target audiences. A fully descriptive 
annotated bibliography is available to read (see ​appendix A) f​ or background. 
 
To sum our research regarding the social and political issue of ‘Filter Bubbles’, we have 
found that the term ‘filter bubble’, coined by Eli Praiser, is 7 years old. However, concerns 
about the bubble effect date back to Negroponte in 1995, who said that the World Wide 
Web would produce a “kind of newspaper, printed in an edition of one” (Negroponte, 1996: 
153) 
 
Research into the influence of social media, namely Facebook, on our lives suggests that 
Facebook can impact opinion and influence real life behaviour. B ​ ond, R.M.​ et

al. (2012), 
launched a study on the 2010 US elections, in which they released a call to vote to 61 
million Facebook users. T​he results s​ uggest that the Facebook social message increased 
turnout directly by about 60,000 voters and indirectly through social contagion by another 
280,000 voters, for a total of 340,000 additional votes. That represents about 0.14% of the 
voting age population of about 236 million in 2010​. ​This study is just one example that 
shows how targeted Facebook messaging can directly influence real-life behaviour. The 
findings from this research can be directly applied to filter bubbles. With social media feeds 
becoming filtered and biased, the potential effects of this content on real life behaviour 
becomes concerning.  
 
Other studies into search personalisation by Hannak, A., et al. (2013), found that when 
concerning ​Google Web Search, on average, 11.7% of results show differences due to 
personalisation​. 
 
Additionally, Flaxman, et al. (2016) looked for filter bubbles in news flowing through social 
media. They started by analysing the web-browsing behaviour of 1.2 million US-located 
users for the 3-month period, concluding ​that​ ‘news articles found via social media or 
web-search engines are indeed associated with higher ideological segregation than those 
an individual reads by directly visiting news sites’ (Flaxman et al., 2016: 318). 
 
These findings, among with a large collection of other research we discovered and 
conducted, found in appendix A, act as the groundwork for establishing our 
communication problem.  

In terms of researching potential target audiences, we look at reports from the Pew 
Research Centre (2015) which found that 60% of millennials use Facebook as their primary 

 
 

 
 

news source, whereas, only 39% of baby boomers find news on their Facebook feed. Nearly 
a quarter (24%) of Millennials who use Facebook say that at least half of the posts they see 
on the site are related to government and politics, higher than both Gen Xers (18%) and 
Baby Boomers (16%). With the biggest filter bubble concerns relating to politics and the 
effects of bias information, millennials are most susceptible to being caught in a bubble. 
More time online and more interaction with politically charged content ultimately means 
that bubbles will be magnified. These findings were key in deciding on a target audience 
and creating profiles for our targeted advertising.  

Key Terms 
Filter Bubble - ​a term coined by Internet activist Eli Pariser – is a state of intellectual 
isolation that allegedly can result from personalized searches when a website 
algorithm selectively guesses what information a user would like to see based on 
information about the user, such as location, past click-behavior 

Algorithm​ - a
​ process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving 
operations, especially by a computer. 

VICE - I​ s a youth media channel focusing on investigative journalism and enlightening 


videos. 

NO BS - ​stands for No BiaS - engagement advertising 

Millennials - ​ also known as Generation Y or the Net Generation, are the demographic 
cohort that directly follows Generation X. The term Millennials is usually considered to 
apply to individuals who reached adulthood around the turn of the 21st century. 

Contact hypothesis - I​ n psychology and other social sciences, the contact hypothesis 
suggests that intergroup contact under appropriate conditions can effectively reduce 
prejudice between majority and minority group members. 

 
 

 
 

POI - Eli Pariser -​ ​Eli Pariser is the chief executive of Upworthy, a website for "meaningful" 
viral content. He is a left-wing political and internet activist, the board president of. Author 
of the book ‘​The filter bubble and what the internet is hiding from you.’ 

Communication problem 
Internet users typically know filter bubbles exist, however there is a lack of awareness with 
regards to how they work and how they affect us. Current communication and research 
around filter bubbles is aimed at a mature demographic and misses our target audience of 
politically minded youth between the ages of 18-29. 

Eli Praiser’s preliminary ‘Filter Bubbles’ TED talk was targeted at industry professionals; he 
panders to Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, and other creators of Google and the Internet. His 
goal was to create change at the source, however lacked any direction towards general 
public and our target audience. 

 
 

 
 

Unique Selling Point 


Previous attempts at bursting the filter bubble have relied on pre-selected searches, such 
as Wall Street Journal’s ‘Red Feed Blue Feed’ or journalists presenting stories and articles 
that are opposite to what the site would usually broadcast, such as The Guardian’s ‘Burst 
Your Bubble’. 

NO BiaS is a unique first of its kind website, giving users a platform to see a side-by-side 
comparison of their filtered feed and an unfiltered feed. 

Based on our research our target audience are the most politically engaged online 
compared to any other audience with their primary news sources being sites such as 
Facebook. By creating an interactive website this will be something our target audience will 
be able to actively engage in rather than just read about filter bubbles, which is almost all 
that is offered at this point. By enabling a real side-by-side comparison it will educate and 
inform users of the filter bubble effect, showing how it is affecting their personal feeds, 
while allowing them to explore and learn more as they progress through the site. 

Through our research we found that some filters were extremely useful, for example 
location was a major one. NO BiaS will also allow users to have the choice to customise 
their own filters. Unlike other websites and search engines NO BiaS’ users will have the 
option to activate a filter. They will be able to choose what they want filtered in or out, 
based on things such as gender, interests, preferred political parties and many more. 

 
 

 
 

NO BiaS’ goal 
Hoping to partner with VICE, NO BiaS is a first of its kind website. It aims to increase 
awareness of Filter Bubbles in politically minded people between the ages of 18-29. NO 
BiaS will offer a unique platform for information with a goal of creating a site that fosters 
the growth of informed and well-rounded members of society. Ultimately, NO BiaS will 
increase Contact Hypothesis in our users, allowing them to be more sympathetic, aware 
and unbiased in their social, political and personal lives. 

Why NO Bias is different  


This is not a alternative search engine. This is a website that helps you compare your own 
searches and customise filters to see how much results can vary. The way this site will work 
is that once they have agreed to sharing their data (mainly their personal google search 
history and what they have liked on Facebook and instagram) they can click through their 
own previous searches and compare what their own filtered and unfiltered versions. No 
other website gives this option. 

 
 
 
10 
 
 

Proposed solution 
9a. Partnering with VICE and the mutual benefits

The target audience of NO BiaS was identified to be the same demographic as that 
of VICE. Our ethos aligns with their emphasis on ‘empowerment’, ‘opposing apathy’ 
and ‘embracing disruption’ (Suroosh Alvi). The partnership between VICE and NO 
BiaS will bring traction to both accounts. As a new website starting out, running the 
campaign through VICE’s platforms will allow NO BiaS to establish its own presence. 
NO BiaS will be the only website users can go to see both their usual feed as well as 
an unfiltered and also have the option of customising their own filters. VICE will be 
the first major company to support NO BiaS, promoting the relevant and 
contentious topic of filter bubbles. 

Our research highlighted the effects filter bubbles have on politics, with specific 
reference to the 2016 U.S election. Filter bubbles isolate users, feeding them 
tailored and often biased information such as political pages and news articles, 
which overall can hinder their views. The outcome of the Trump election shocked 
many citizens. For example democrats had seen an overwhelmingly positive 
response through their social media and therefore felt no pressure or urgency to 
vote, believing Hillary Clinton would win by a landslide. However, in reality they were 
only seeing the information inside their filtered bubble and reality was quite 
different. 

In partnership with NO BiaS, VICE will contribute to promoting a healthy balance of 
news and increase contact hypothesis from a platform that gives well-rounded 
unbiased views from all sides of the web. 

 
 
11 
 
 

9b. Why a website is the best solution

NO BiaS​ ​was chosen to be a website as the target audience identified are the most 
prominent web users. Their primary news sources being Facebook and other 
algorithmic sites, therefore making a website the most beneficial and accessible 
platform.  

NO BiaS finds its origins in what we identified as our communication problem. It 
does not aim to completely dismantle the filter bubble framework, however the 
website will bring awareness to the issue and gives users a platform as well as the 
tools they need to break out of their ‘filter bubble’. 

In addition to the unbiased feed, which is our primary goal, we discovered that not 
all filters are negative. For example geographical filters allow your feed to be more 
relevant to your location. End-users had interests in other pre-selected filters that 
rely on gender, age, interests or political beliefs. This led us to adding in a 
customisable filter option. Users can customise the unfiltered feed based on a set of 
filters that adjust results. 

Target audience  

With our extensive research into which demographics are more active online, and most 
engaged with politics online in mind, we conducted a targeted market survey​*​, of audiences 
18-29. This survey returned results that confirmed our concerns. Out of 42 respondents, 
75% did not know what a Filter Bubble was. When the term was explained to them, 98% 
believe they exist, and further, 80% believe filter bubbles are a potential problem to society. 
Of course, this data cannot be generalised as the sample is relatively small, but it gives us a 
good insight into the minds of our Target Audience. 

In addition to reports that confirm 18-29 year olds are most active online, and more 
engaged with politics online, we found that news outlets that currently host programs that 
try to give users a tool to see past their bubbles, potentially miss our target audience. ​The 

 
 
12 
 
 

Guardian​ and ​Wall Street Journal​ are two sites which have functions that provide content 
direct to audience that may be in opposition to their political beliefs and values. The Wall 
Street Journal’s primary audience is aged 30-49 years (Statista, 2018), and further, these 
two sites are not in the top 10 most popular media websites for millenials (Wibbitz, 2018).  
 
 

* Appendix B 

Because  everyone  who  uses the Internet is affected by the personalisation of algorithm, No 


BiaS  has  a  very  broad  market  that  this  campaign  could  be  targeted  to.  No  BiaS  wants 
advertising  to  reach  as  many  people as possible as the website works best when a range of 
uses input their data to help correlate better filter options. 

In  saying  this,  No  BiaS  wants  the  advertising  campaign  to  work  well,  so  have  narrowed 
down  to  a  smaller  target  market  and  then  narrowed  again  and  chosen  three  particular 
profiles to aim the advertising at. 

​Target Market 

No  BiaS’  market  is  18-29  year  old  Australians  who  are  educated  and  politically  engaged. 
They  are  high  users  of  social media and tend to get most of their news from Facebook. Our 
target audience also aligns with or proposed stakeholders main demographic.   

The  ​three  profiles  of  NO  BiaS’  target  audience  are  listed  below  under  the  advertising 
campaign, next to the adverts that are directed at them.  

 
 
13 
 
 

Media story - Website operation 


The  NO  BiaS  website  is 
aesthetically  geared  towards 
our  target audience. We have 
been  heavily  influenced  by 
data  and  web  coding  codes 
and  conventions  and  have 
created  a  modern  eye 
catching  page.  It  is  easy  to 
use  and  highly  interactive  - 
aspects  that  our  end-users 
stated  as  highly  important  to 
them.  

The NO BiaS welcome page greets 


users to the site, briefly explains the 
filter bubble effect and how NO BiaS 
operates. Users have the 
opportunity to accept or decline 
terms and conditions.  

Declining the T&Cs will leave the site 


unoperational.  

Accepting T&Cs allows users to 


progress to the search function where they are free to compare their feed with an unbiased 
feed. NO BiaS’ terms and conditions centre around the approval of our interface having 
access to the user’s previous search history, and potential cookies and filter bubbles active 
on their searches.  

 
 
14 
 
 

User’s have the opportunity to search absolutely anything through NO BiaS. A search for 
‘Kim Kardashian’ for example may be negatively biased based on a user’s previous click 
history, however an unbiased feed may provide more comprehensive information about 
the celebrity’s recent charity efforts, for example. 

NO BiaS is also a useful tool for political searches. Political results are often filtered, based 
on user’s previous activity online. NO BiaS allows users to see beyond their bubble, which is 
extremely helpful to forming a well-rounded and educated political opinion.  

Additionally, to the right of the 


page is a ‘customise filters’ 

option. Users have the ability to activate select 


filters on the unfiltered side to see how other people would see the same search. In the 
example given to the right, a geographical filter for ‘France’ has been activated. All the 
results given on the right panel of the screen are filtered for a French audience.  

Finally, to arm our users with informational about the issue at hand, we have a drop down 
menu, clickable on the top left of the screen. Links from this menu provide information 
about NO BiaS and the partnership with VICE, give users the opportunity to explore the 
issue of filter bubbles further, and educate themselves and also included are a selection of 
VICE links that further engage and 
educate our audience.  

 
 
15 
 
 

Lastly, the terms and conditions of the website are available in full via this menu. 

Creative advertising campaign  


The  advertising  campaign  for  No  BiaS  will  be  run  on  three  main  platforms,  Instagram, 
Facebook  and  the  potential  stakeholder  VICE  Australia’s,  main  website.  As  NO  BiaS  has yet 
to  build  followers,  the  hope is to use VICE’s internal Instagram and Facebook for promotion 
of  NO  Bias’ website and by this partnership, grow NO BiaS’ social media following. The third 
platform  will  be  on  VICE’S  main  website  and  this  advertising will be in the form of a feature 
article which aligns with VICE’s structure and style. 

NO  BiaS  has  chosen  Instagram  and  Facebook  for  advertising  platforms  because  from 
extensive  research,  (see  appendix  A)  the  target  audience  of  19  -  29’s  interact  with  social 
media  and  the  ad’s  will  reach  the  desired  demographic  with  NO  BiaS’  targeted  advertising 
campaign.  The  third  platform,  VICE’s  website  has a significantly larger target market for the 
campaign to reach so the advertising will have to take a broader approach. 

One  thing  to  note with VICE, is that it has 15 different affiliated sites, such as ​Broadly​, ​Noisey 


and  ​Viceland​.  ​For  the  sake  of  this  project,  NO  BiaS  will  only  be  targeting  VICE’S  main  site, 
which  does  not  have  any  obvious,  advertising.  This  means  the  promotion  of  NO  BiaS’ 
website,  will  be  done  through  a  feature  article.  NO  BiaS  will  ask  for  the  feature  story to be 
‘pinned to the top’ on VICE’s Facebook and their website to generate interest. 

The  publication  of  this campaign will coincide with Australia’s federal election, and run for a 


few  weeks  before  voting  day.  It  will  be  a  useful  way  to  link  awareness  to  the  filter  bubble 
issue  with  an  event  of  national  significance.  The  plan  is  to  go  live  and  publish  on  all 
platforms  in  a  saturated  media  release. The main social media targeted advertising (i.e. the 
sponsored  or  paid  advertising)  will  go  for  4  weeks. Other dates that No BiaS feel links to its 
objective is Google and Facebook’s birthdays, and other important global elections. 

No Bias is our brand name and should be noted No B.S, is part of our advertising campaign 
as a way of engaging our target demographic. 

 
 
16 
 
 

Facebook - Sponsored Content 

​Ad idea one: The scare tactic - targeted at our first profile  

Target Audience 

Profile one: 

Single  Australian  Male,  born  in  Melbourne 


and  27  years  of  age.  Has  completed  a 
university  degree  and  now  works  full-time. 
Is  politically  engaged,  swinging  liberally  as 
he  is  now  in  the  corporate  ‘white  collar’ 
workforce  and  is  trying  to  climb the ladder. 
He  shares  his  views  online  but  only  with  in 
his  friends  list.  He  enjoys  travelling  and 
camping  with  his  friends  on  his  weekends 
off.  He  watches  the  news  regularly,  mainly 
channels  7  and  10.  What  he  is  aware  of  is 
what  he  has  been  exposed  to  through  his 
demographic  and  filters.  He  has  Googled 
the  ‘labor’  but  due  to  his  filter  can  only  see 
negative press about them.  

This  profile  would  benefit  as  he  would  be 


able  to  see  search  results  that  are  positive 
or  less  biased  (as  his  filter and locked them 
out  of  sight)  which  enables  him  to  gain  an 
understanding  of  the  labors  policies,  which 
will  in  turn  make  him,  second  guess  the 
conservative  news  he  has  been  sharing  on 
social  media.  As  he  enjoys  learning,  the  idea  that  he  is  not  seeing  everything will push him 
to engage with the advert and in turn No BiaS’ website. 

 
 
17 
 
 

Instagram sponsored content  

Ad idea two: The FOMO one - targeted at our second profile 

​Profile two: 

25-year-old female and is in a 


long-term relationship with her 
boyfriend. She still lives at home and 
works as a beautician. She loves her 
family and friends and her dog. She is 
aware of things happening in Australia, 
but is limited to what she sees on 
Facebook, as she follows ‘9 news’ and 
predominantly gets her news solely 
from this source. Politically she votes 
labor, as that is what her family has 
voted for in the past. She loves keeping 
up with what her friends are doing and 
hates missing out on events. and wants 
to be more environmentally conscious 
in the future, as she has seen recently 
kids protesting climate change and 
feels she needs to be more active in 
that area. She has searched for ideas, 
but due to her filter is getting a limited 
and biased result. 

  This  profile  would  benefit  from  using 


B.S  site,  as  she  will  be  able  to  compare 
searches  and  find  more  environmental 
sites  to  help  her  on  the  way.  She  hates 
missing  out,  and  the  idea  that  there  are  things  she  cannot  see  prompts  her  to  click  and 

 
 
18 
 
 

interact.  She likes to stay on trend, and since the being sustainable is becoming popular will 
benefit from seeing an unbiased result. 

Ad idea three: Take over of VICE’s Instagram  

The idea is to have a ‘takeover’ of VICE’s instagram 
to  raise  awareness  to  the  campaign  and  to  have 
more  people  stop  and  pay  attention.  This  sort  of 
advertising  breaks  convention,  and  if  released 
over  a  day  won’t  disrupt  their  feed  too  much.  It 
ties  in  with  the  scare  tactic  mentioned  in  profile 
one  and  will  hopefully  gain  traction  and 
interested into the story and the NO BiaS website.   

  

 
 
19 
 
 

VICE Website  

Idea one: Feature article about filter bubbles - targeted at our 3rd profile   

Profile three: 

20-year-old  male  who  is  at  University,  studying  an  arts  degree.  Enjoys going out and works 
in  a  cafe  on  the  weekends.  He  lives  in  a  share  house  and  is  environmentally  conscious, 
teaching  his  housemates  about  the  importance  of  sustainability,  which  he  learnt  about 
from  his  parents  and  from  all  the  pages  he  follows  online  such  as  ‘Sea  Shepherd’  and  ‘Eco 
Warriors’.  He  votes  for  the  Greens,  and  follows  them  exclusively.  He  gets  his  news  on 
Facebook  from  ABC  and  SBS  pages.  What  he  is  aware  of  is  what  he  has  been  exposed  to 
through  his  demographic  and  filters.  Hasn’t  attempted  to  Google  different  political  views 
and is very much stuck in his bubble. 

This  profile  would  benefit  from  using  the  No  BS  website,  because  it  will  allow  him  to  see 
other  parties  and  news  that  he  has  deemed  unworthy,  in  an  unbiased  light  as  his  filters 
have  warped  his  search  results  and  newsfeed.  Would  be  more  likely  to  click  on  an  article 
that explains how filters work/affect him rather than click bait type ad. 

 
 
20 
 
 

Conclusion 
Overall, the constructive feedback we received from Ella and our peers was pivotal in 
further developing our project. Specifically when introducing our target market of young 
people ages 18-29 we were advised either narrow this audience or justify why our target 
audience was so broad. Furthermore, instead of looking at how our target market interacts 
with the internet we limited it to media platforms which are most commonly used by 
millenials for example VICE. To give our research credibility we conducted a survey which 
ensured we weren't just assuming that “millenials aren't aware of filter bubbles” which was 
supported by our survey.  

Class Feedback 

From the pitch, the feedback received from the class is outlined below.  

Tutor - Ella Chorazy  


● Need to avoid reading from slides (even if it is a quote) and be careful about shifting 
feet/posture. Articulation was ok, but more tonal variation is needed to make your 
vocals more dynamic/engaging. 
● Too much info setting up context for Vice – needed to make this more “audience” 
appropriate 
● Nice coordination between speaker and presentation. 
● Concise and well timed, but the set up of your target audience between this and 
your project wasn’t strong – not sure re the structure of your info? 
● Needed an introduction to your team (i.e. who you are) and framing of content 
needed to be more strongly connected to Vice as to who you’re pitching to. 
● Lacked positioning as a strategic pitch to Vice. Also not clear what you want the 
partnership with Vice to look like. 
 

Overall 
What are the best 2 aspects of the project and presentation? 
 
1. Coding style of the presentation, quite engaging  
2. well timed, informative and good interactivity with the audience in such a short 
space of time 
 

 
 
21 
 
 

What 2 suggests do you have to improve the project and/or 


presentation? 
 
1. The reading at the first slides, it would be much engaging with saying it without 
showing the text. 
 
What NO BiaS has taken from this feedback has helped significantly and helped push the 
project into the right direction. The positive feedback spurred on and aided in presenting 
pleasing aesthetics and the critical feedback has helped tighten ideas about the mutual 
benefits for the partnership with VICE   
 
End user feedback 

As the site is not live, as it will need a dedicated website designer for full functionality ( this 
is a tech solution whereas NO BiaS is a communication problem) there has been no solid 
concrete end user feedback.  

What has been gained is talking to people from the target audience and showing them the 
website prototype. They all loved the design, the idea, and the drive to burst peoples filters 
and help drive change online.  

 
 
22 
 
 

Appendix  
a) Research 
 
A f​ ilter bubble​ is an algorithmic bias that skews or limits the information an individual user 
sees on the internet. The bias is caused by the weighted algorithms that search engines, 
social media sites and marketers use to personalise user experience​. The term ​Filter Bubble 
was coined by Eli Praiser, an internet activist, who in 2011, presented his ideas at a 
landmark TED talk. Praiser went on to release a book about this issue titled, ​The Filter 
Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You.​ In this book, Praiser write “​Democracy requires 
citizens to see things from one another’s point of view, but instead we’re more and more 
enclosed in our own bubbles. Democracy requires a reliance on shared facts; instead we’re being 
offered parallel but separate universes. […] Personalization filters serve a kind of invisible 
autopropaganda, indoctrinating us with our own ideas, amplifying our desire for things that are 
familiar and leaving us oblivious to the dangers lurking in the dark territory of the unknown.” 
This quote sums up the crux of the filter bubble issue well; the main dangers of the issue 
are concerning damaging political infrastructure, and bias ultimately reducing ‘Contact 
Hypothesis.’  

‘Contact Hypothesis’​: Developed by psychologist Gordon Allport as a way to understand 


discrimination, it is widely seen as one of the most successful tools for reducing prejudice 
and increasing empathy. It is a measurable and time-tested way of helping people get 
along. It has shown that prejudice is reduced through extended contact with people that 
have different backgrounds, opinions and cultures than ourselves.  
Essentially, Filter Bubbles reduce contact with people and ideas different to that of each 
individual, eradicating the potential for Contact Hypothesis​.​ Without the potential of 
exposure to ideas different to one’s self, personal beliefs are amplified and radicalised.  
 
With these concerns about filter bubbles in mind, we conducted thorough research on the 
issue, our findings are below: 
 
- In 1995, Negroponte predicted that the World Wide Web would amplify bubbling. He 
called it the ‘daily me’ effect – that produces a ‘kind of newspaper printed in an 
edition of one’ (Negroponte, 1996: 153) 
Negroponte N (1996) Being Digital. London: Coronet Books 
 
- Flaxman et al. (2016) looked for filter bubbles in news flowing through social media. 
They started by analysing the web-browsing behaviour of 1.2 million US-located 

 
 
23 
 
 

users for the 3-month period between March and May 2013, and eventually, they 
focussed on 50,000 users who actively read the news.  
They conclude, ‘news articles found via social media or web-search engines are 
indeed associated with higher ideological segregation than those an individual reads 
by directly visiting news sites’ (Flaxman et al., 2016: 318).  
Flaxman SR, Geol S and Rao JM (2016) Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news 
consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly 80(S1): 298–320. 
 
- Dantenspende BTW17: ​People at A ​ lgorithm Watch​ (Germany) rana crowdsourcing 
project on the filter bubbles issue called ​Datenspende BTW17​. The project is 
supported by six “Landesmedienanstalten”, the regulatory authorities for new 
media in the German federal states of Bavaria (​BLM​), Berlin-Brandenburg (​mabb​), 
Hesse (​LPR Hessen​), Rhineland-Palatinate (​LMK​), Saarland (​LMS​), Saxony (​SLM​), as 
well as the ​University of Kaiserslautern​. Through a browser plugin, users donate 
their search results to the project. The plugin does not collect ​actual s​ earches of 
users, but automatically conducts searches for a fixed list of 16 terms. The results 
are then sent back to AW’s servers. This approach creates a high degree of 
comparability. If two users with similar browser settings and location search for the 
same phrase (say “Angela Merkel”) at the same time, shouldn’t they receive identical 
(or at least very similar) results?  
On the Google search engine, when searching politicians on average only one or two 
links differed. The search results for parties are less overlapping with an average of 
three to four different links. Since the vast majority of participants received the 
same links, according to the authors of the study Eli Pariser's much-discussed theory 
of filter-bubbles could not be supported by the results of this study. 
Media Policy Lab 2018, ‘#Data donation Project: Event on the Study of Prof. Dr. med. 
Katharina Zweig and AlgorithmWatch’, blog post, 1st of March 
<https://mediapolicylab.de/blog/news-details/projekt-datenspende-event-zur-studie-von-pr
of-dr-zweig-und-algorithmwatch.html> 
Puschmann, C. 2017, ‘How significant is algorithmic personalization in searches for political 
parties and candidates?’ blog post, 2nd of August 
<https://aps.hans-bredow-institut.de/personalization-google/> 
 
 
- This study involves a randomized controlled trial of political mobilization messages 
delivered to 61 million Facebook users during the 2010 US congressional elections.  
The study displayed political messages to Facebook users, uring them to vote in the 
2010 elections. The results ​suggest that the Facebook social message increased 
turnout directly by about 60,000 voters and indirectly through social contagion by 
another 280,000 voters, for a total of 340,000 additional votes. That represents 
about 0.14% of the voting age population of about 236 million in 2010​.  

 
 
24 
 
 

The messages directly influenced political self-expression, information seeking and 


real-world voting behaviour of millions of people. Furthermore, the messages not 
only influenced the users who received them but also the users' friends, and friends 
of friends.  
Bond RM​, F​ ariss CJ​, ​Jones JJ​, K
​ ramer AD​, ​Marlow C​, ​Settle JE​, ​Fowler JH​. 2012, ‘A 
61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.’ ​Nature: 
International Journal of Science​ 2012 489(7415): 10.1038 
 
 
- Web search is an integral part of our daily lives. Recently, there has been a trend of 
personalisation in Web search, where different users receive different results for the 
same search query. The increasing personalisation is leading to concerns about 
Filter Bubble effects, where certain users are simply unable to access information 
that the search engines’ algorithm decides is irrelevant. Despite these concerns, 
there has been little quantification of the extent of personalisation in Web search 
today, or the user attributes that cause it. In light of this situation, we make three 
contributions. First, we develop a methodology for measuring personalisation in 
Web search results. While conceptually simple, there are numerous details that our 
methodology must handle in order to accurately attribute differences in search 
results to personalisation. Second, we apply our methodology to 200 users on 
Google Web Search; we find that, on average, 11.7 % of results show differences due 
to personalisation, but that this varies widely by search query and by result ranking. 
Third, we investigate the causes of personalisation on Google Web Search. 
Surprisingly, we only find measurable personalisation as a result of searching with a 
logged in account and the IP address of the searching user. Our results are a first 
step towards understanding the extent and effects of personalisation on Web 
search engines today. 
Hannak, A, Sapiezynski, P, Kakhki, AM, Krishnamurthy, B, Lazer, D, Mislove, A & Wilson, C 
2013, Measuring Personalization of Web Search. in ​Proceedings of the 22nd international 
conference on World Wide Web.​ Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 527-538, 22nd 
international conference on World Wide Web (WWW 2013), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 
13/05/2013. 
 
- Stroud (2010) used representative American election survey data to show that 
Americans who adopt a homogenous partisan news diet become more extreme in 
their views during the campaign.  
Stroud, NJ. 2010, ‘​Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure’, ​Journal of 
Communication,​Volume 60, Issue 3, Pg 556-576 
 
- Price, Cappella, and Nir (2002) investigated the effects of being exposed to 
information in the mass media that contradicts existing attitudes and beliefs. They 
found that people who regularly encounter diverse opinions in the media are not 

 
 
25 
 
 

only better able to provide reasons for their own political choices; they also have a 
better understanding of what motivates the perspective of others. 
Price, V, Cappella, JC. Nir, L. 2002 ‘Does Disagreement Contribute to More Deliberative 
Opinion?’, ​Political Communication​, 19:1, 95-112,  
 
- A study conducted by Facebook in response to Eli Praiser’s TED talk.​ Facebook 
claims to have found that the filter bubble effect is smaller than we have come to 
think (and smaller than Eli Praiser had guessed.) On average, you’re about 6% less 
likely to see content that the other political side favors. Who you’re friends with 
matters a good deal more than the algorithm. T ​ he relative effect of the algorithm in 
filtering news is stronger for liberals than conservatives. For liberals, the effect of 
what you click is about 6%, whereas the algorithmic effect is 8%. For conservatives, 
the filter bubble effect is about 5% and the click effect is about 17%.  
Bakshy, E. Messing, S. Adamic, LA 2015, ‘​Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion 
on Facebook,’ ​Science​ ​Express​, ​vol. 348 issue 6239 
 
- Interestingly, filter bubbles do not just occur on the internet. Jacob N. Shapiro 
provides an example from a decade ago of TV shifting the results of elections: A 
2007 study by DellaVigna and Kaplan found, for example, that whenever the 
conservative-leaning Fox television network moved into a new market in the United 
States, conservative votes increased, a phenomenon they labeled the ‘Fox News 
Effect’. These researchers estimated that biased coverage by Fox News was 
sufficient to shift 10,757 votes in Florida during the 2000 US Presidential election: 
more than enough to flip the deciding state in the election, which was carried by the 
Republican presidential candidate by only 537 votes. 
Farnam Street, n.d. ‘How Filter Bubbles Distort Reality: Everything You Need to Know,’ blog 
post, n.d. 
<https://fs.blog/2017/07/filter-bubbles/> 
 
- “We have minimal concrete evidence of exactly what information search engines 
and social platforms collect. Even SEO (search engine optimization) experts do not 
know for certain how search rankings are organized. We also don’t know if sites 
collect information from users who do not have accounts.”  
Farnam Street, n.d. ‘How Filter Bubbles Distort Reality: Everything You Need to Know,’ blog 
post, n.d. 
<https://fs.blog/2017/07/filter-bubbles/> 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
26 
 
 

-Pew Research Centre found, in a millenial news study that, Among Millennials, 
Facebook is far and away the most common source for news about government and 
politics. When asked whether they got political and government news from each of 
42 sources in the previous week (​36 specific news outlets​, local TV generally and 5 
social networking sites), about six-in-ten Web-using Millennials (61%) reported 
getting political news on Facebook. That is 17 points higher than the next most 
consumed source for Millennials (CNN at 44%). 
Millennials’ reliance on Facebook for political news is also almost exactly on par with 
Baby Boomers’ reliance on local TV (60%). In fact, Baby Boomers and Millennials 
demonstrate nearly inverse habits when it comes to local TV and Facebook. Among 
Millennials, 61% got political news on Facebook and 37% from local TV. Among Baby 
Boomers, it’s 39% from Facebook and 60% from local TV. Gen Xers fall in the middle 
for both, with 51% getting political news on Facebook and 46% doing so from local 
TV. Millennials are also more reliant than other generations on Google News. A third 
(33%) get political news there. 
Mitchell, A. Gottfried, J. Matsa, KE. 2015, ‘Facebook Top Source for Political News Among 
Millennials’, ​Pew Research Centre​, 1st of June 
 
 
- In another study, Pew Research Centre investigated technology use across 
generations. More than nine-in-ten Millennials (92%) own smartphones, compared 
with 85% of Gen Xers (those who turn ages 38 to 53 this year), 67% of Baby Boomers 
(ages 54 to 72) and 30% of the Silent Generation (ages 73 to 90), according to a new 
analysis of Pew Research Center data. Similarly, the vast majority of Millennials 
(85%) say they use social media. For instance, significantly larger shares of 
Millennials have adopted relatively new platforms such as Instagram (52%) and 
Snapchat (47%) than older generations have. 
Nearly a quarter (24%) of Millennials who use Facebook say that at least half of the 
posts they see on the site are related to government and politics, higher than both 
Gen Xers (18%) and Baby Boomers (16%). 
Jiang, J. 2018, ‘Millennials stand out for their technology use, but older generations also 
embrace digital life’, P​ ew Research Centre Fact Tank,​ 2nd of May, 
<http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/02/millennials-stand-out-for-their-technol
ogy-use-but-older-generations-also-embrace-digital-life/> 
 
- Pew Research Centre conducted a study into news broadcast and consumption via 
social media in 2017. For the first time in the Center’s surveys, more than half (55%) 
of Americans ages 50 or older report getting news on social media sites. That is 10 
percentage points higher than the 45% who said so in 2016. On YouTube, about a 
third of users now get news there (32%), up from 21% in 2016. And news use among 
Snapchat’s user base increased 12 percentage points to 29% in August 2017, up 
from 17% in early 2016.  

 
 
27 
 
 

Overall, Facebook outstrips all other social media sites as a source of news; YouTube 
now reaches second highest percentage. Specifically, about two-thirds of Americans 
(66%) use Facebook, and a majority of those users get news on the site, (45/66%) 
Shearer, E. Gottfried, J. 2017, ‘News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2017’, ​Pew Research 
Centre​, 7th of September 

B) Survey Results 

Q: A 'Filter Bubble' is when a website algorithm selectively guesses what information a user would like to see based
on information about the user, such as location, past click-behavior and search history. Do you believe Filter Bubbles
exist?

 
 
28 
 
 

 
 
 

Book review: ‘Your computer is like a one way mirror reflecting your own interests while 
algorithmic observers watch your every click’  
This is a fascinating book about when our ‘personalised’ google searches started (2009) and 
what that meant for our society. It starts off with a very startling example of the Deep 
Water horizon BP oil spill of 2010. The author asked two people with a similar background 
to google BP, one got Ad’s for investment, while the other got news on the disaster. They 
even received different numbers of page results.  
 
At the beginning of the internet, Pariser reflects, felt that there was an opportunity to 
redemocatise society and governments would be held accountable, but now with the 
personalisation of the internet search this has become less so. The author also explains 
how seeing less of what his conservative friends were sharing meant that his views 
becoming more streamlined and less open-minded.  
 
- Notes, do we want our project to be politically/environmentally/socially minded?  
- Is personalisation making us dumb?  
- Immigration  
- Rampant hate speech a problem - cuz thats all they see their friends doing??  
 

 
 
29 
 
 

I feel that it was a tool designed to help us, but what its done is closed us off things that 
might profoundly change the way we see the world.  
The links given are very politically driven, maybe we should explore how it affects us 
socially, as consumers? Yes we get personalised ad’s now, but is that making us buy into a 
stereotype because thats all we see? Subconscious brainwashing….  
*create a website that is like google but with no filter?? 
 

c) Pitch 
This is the script for what was in the slides that were presented for the pitch to vice. (Most 
images on the slides are seen already through this report) The slides we decided not to add 
in this report as it would compromise the readability as there were so many of them. 

“The global village that was once the Internet, has been replaced by digital islands of 
isolation that are drifting further apart each day. 
The internet that helped elect Barack Obama in 2008, is different from the internet that led 
to Brexit and the election of Donald Trump” 
  
In 2018, your internet use is tracked, collated and regurgitated via algorithms and metrics, 
that ultimately decide w ​ hat​ you see and w
​ hen​ you see it. Most people are unaware that 
the information they are seeing online is tailored and often bias. The effect of this bias 
information is called a f​ ilter bubble. 

If you didn’t know what a filter bubble was- Don’t worry 


Based on our primary and secondary research we found that 
  
● 75% of people did not know what a ‘Filter Bubble’ was. 
  
● However when the term was explained to them, 98% believe they exist. 
  
(Who here thinks filter bubbles are a potential problem to society- interaction???) 
● 80% believe they are a potential problem to society. 
  
  
So filter bubbles do exist but no one knows to what extent, how they work or how they 
affect us. 
  
NO B.S. is a first of its kind website. A place where users can go to see a side-by-side 
comparison of their filtered feed verses an unfiltered feed. 
  

 
 
30 
 
 

*Website features, take them through the site * 


  
 
- Users first agree to our terms and conditions, then can freely search any term via our 
site, and compare their own filtered search against an unfiltered. 
 
  
So why is this important? 
We found our target audience (18-29 year olds) 
- 61% are now getting their news from Facebook, 
  
- More millennials see political and government news on their facebook feeds. 
  
- And follow political pages on facebook than any other generation. 
  
However with these filter bubbles it is giving them a very one-sided view. 
 
We identified our target market, as politically inclined, 18-29 year olds. Research shows that 
this audience is more active online than any other, uses Facebook and algorithmic sites as 
their primary news source, and are more engaged with politics online compared to other 
demographics.  
18-29 year olds have the most to gain from NO BIAS. 
 
 
Now filters aren’t all bad, sometimes we need them and they can be extremely helpful. 
  
No B.S. will also allow our user to customise their own filters. They will be able to choose 
what they want filtered in or out based on things such as location, interests, political views 
etc.  
  
 
We’ve identified that our target audience is the same demographic as that of Vice, our 
ethos aligns with their emphasis on empowerment, opposing apathy and embracing 
disruption. 
  
In partnership with Vice we will run our media campaign across three main platforms. Our 
own social media sites, Facebook and Instagram, as well as do a complete Vice instagram 
takeover for one week, where we will be pushing a series of posts each day creating hype 
around NO BiaS. (Feature article?) 
  
Our site will enable an unbiased platform of information fostering the growth of informed 
and well-rounded millennials. 

 
 
31 
 
 

  
We owe it to ourselves to be more informed and live in a time where there is no excuse not 
to be, we have too much to lose. So don’t buy into the BS and check NO BiaS. 

Minutes 
22nd of November  
 
- Established topic 
- Figured out research  
- Narrowed in on idea 
- Answered slide questions 
 
Tuesday 27th of November 
 
- Discussed research from over the weekend 
- Decided points for Thursdays presentation  
1. Research on topic and demographics 
2. Survey 
3. Target audience/ stakeholders: 18-29 year olds- ​most prominent web users, 
61% source their news from facebook/ social media platforms. We want to keep it 
broad to have a range of different views/opinions etc, if it were to be too narrow 
we would risk creating a filter bubble within our website.The more people we have 
the better it is. 
4. What our communication problem is- Filter bubbles exist, but no one knows 
to what extent and how they work. 
5. USP- Show people the extent and side by side comparison 
6. Story and advertising ideas- interactive website 
 
* Research guardian and wall st journal demographic 
 
- Discuss ideas with Ella: end user testing- have a chat to end user and what they 
want/think 
- Think about making a ​statement​ eg our research shows there is a lack of 
awareness… we aim to show… 
- 18-29 year olds is a target market not target audience, need to narrow down to a 
T/A 
 

 
 
32 
 
 

- Targeting our audience specifically within our demographic: 3 specific ‘profiles’, who 
are interested in our campaign/product.  
 
Thursday 29th of November 
 
Bounce off potential presidential election 2020: Based off last time, do not you want to see 
an unfiltered search? 
 
Plug-in? 
Educational tool? 
 
 
Brainstorm Names for website: 
  
Words to play with; Balance Clarity Compare Gamut scope Expand Omni Sans 
  
Tag line? You filter your photos, why filter your feed? 
  
Algorithm based pun?  
 
Algorithm Assassin 
UnFiltered “UnFilter your Feed 
  
NOBS – no bias 
  
We could partner with RMIT and education (research who) 
Educate first year Uni students about how filters can affect their searches and create 
biased research for assignment. Download with canvas so that you can fact check your 
work ‘on the go’. 
 
 
For the ​pitch​ ideas: Pitching to RMIT University (​Research Innovation and 
Entrepreneurship)​ ​WHO DO WE WANT AS A STAKEHOLDER??​ Could we maybe partner 
with google themselves??  
 
Maybe start with anecdote of when my partner and I had an argument, (OR uni students 
debating a topic ) went to google for the answer and realised we had different search 
outcomes. This turned into research about algorithms and what exactly filter bubbles were 
and then about how as uni students we might get different/filtered results which could 
create bias. - this is how NOBS was born. We want to create and app that you can custom 
filters so you can learn more and gain perspective. We want to open minds and help create 
a less biased world. Engage, inform, advertise.  

 
 
33 
 
 

 
What resistance/challenges might your audience have to your idea? 
How can this be integrated into our courses? Academically helpful? 
How does it benefit RMIT as a university/corporation? 
What’s the long term? How does this effect RMIT ethos? 
That its a non-problem; Lack of understanding 
Political issues? 
 
Who are we? 
NO BS is a product not an organisation :(  
A socially conscious team who are concerned with the effects of the next gen being close 
minded and bias.  
Eli Praiser fans <3  
 
Elevator Pitch 
 
When we google things we believe what we’re being shown is correct? Right? 
Wrong. 
In 2018, your internet use is tracked, collated and regurgitated via algorithms and metrics, 
that ultimately decide what you see and when you see it. Most people are unaware that the 
information they are seeing online is often biased. 
NO BiaS. is a website that shows users both sides to a search. Our user can see their 
filtered, bias searches against a NO B.S. search, for the same query.  
 
Decide: 
Who we are pitching to VICELAND -​ they share our target audience 
Setting up context: frame story  
Complete the loop: Clearly tie creative solution back into the clients’. 
 
What is your communication problem? Awareness about filter bubbles 
Who is your target audience? Young - 18 - 29 - politically minded, educated engaged.  
What is your communication solution? Create a site to show side by side filters 
What is your USP?  
 
 
Who are you pitching to?  
VICE 
1 in 3 18-35 year olds visit VICE. 
70% aged 18 to 34 
60/40 male to female ratio 
78% has a higher education degree 
55% works full-time 

 
 
34 
 
 

1 in 6 loves everyday luxury 


 
VICE ‘Culture’ :​The young person’s guide through the world. 
 
What is the context? What tone will you use? 
Commenting on a social and political issue that VICE would potentially take interest in, to 
further serve their audiences, and further help them “​understand the world around 
you.” 
 
How will you illustrate your ideas to make your pitch engaging 
for the audience? 
Mark Zuckerberg, a journalist was asking him a question about the news feed. And 
the journalist was asking him, "Why is this so important?" And Zuckerberg said, "A 
squirrel dying in your front yard may be more relevant to your interests right 
nowthan people dying in Africa." And I want to talk about what a Web based on that 
idea of relevance might look like.  
 
How do you know that your solution works, is relevant, and will connect with your 
target audience? HINT: how can your research and end-user testing support your 
rationale? 
 
Tuesday 03/12 
Advertising: 
Campaign to be run through our social media sites, as well as VICE’s Instagram- feature 
story. 
Align campaign with Google’s Birthday? 
Over a 2 week period. 
Taking over VICE for a week making it a number one priority.  
Hype action, trigger effect on other networks- will spark the conversation. 
 
Publications to pitch to. 
VICE AU 
VICE USA 
SBSxVICELAND 
VOX 
ID magazine- they have youth articles about youth politics etc (online and in print) 
Broadly 
Broadsheet- more review style, review of the website 
Motherboard- tech publication (part of vice) 
Vanity Fair- long form/ feature article 
New York Times “ “ 

 
 
35 
 
 

 
Thursday 6th of December 
 
- Pitch rehearsal 10am-11am 
- Edit slides 
- Discuss report, edit sections and decide on our template 
- Assign sections of report 
- Go over all project, what we need/ have done/ need to do 

 
 
 

Team charter  
Group members:

Hannah Seddon
● s3747991@student.rmit.edu.au

Sarita Knight
● s37475822@student.rmit.edu.au

Huw Ward
● s3724065@student.rmit.edu.au

Zarina Borland
● s3579321@student.rmit.edu.au

1: Team member strengths, needs, expectations, challenges/weaknesses

Hannah: photography, writing and ideas

Huw: Creative ability, media production, video editing

Zarina: Good at organising, creative, writing, photography. Weak at presentations.

Sarita: Creative ability, presenting, organisation/communication/time management.

 
 
36 
 
 

2. Team Purpose
Our topic is about the filters that are placed on our newsfeeds, and Internet searches. There is
no real research into how this affects us socially, politically and what it means for the choices we
make. Are we unconsciously consuming ideas that are turning us into less aware people. Our
‘bubble’ can be sometimes hard to penetrate, as the more we connect and input our
personal data into the web/net, it creates a network that only is useful to us individually.

We want to communicate and ramp up awareness to a certain target audience that we have
found through research that interacts with the internet most, but also has voting power ergo; are
politically engaged youth (18-29). With the filter bubble reflecting our likes more than our
dislikes, that who we follow politically will only be shown, meaning that our views and opinions
are very one-sided.

3. Team Roles - Timeline


- As a group we will all under take research for the first part of our assessment. We will
play to our strengths over the course of the project and will allocated tasks accordingly.

Class 6 ​Date: Tue 27 Nov


- Make sure all research is noted and tidied up, that target audience has been identified and all
work is up to date.
- Flesh out final idea in class, and organise roles for the presentation.
- Do we want to focus on the advertising today?
- Finalised team charter (which might be assessed)
-

Class 7 ​Date: Thu 29 Nov


- WIP presentation due
- Create a target PERSONS maybe make 3 different people from broad spector- explain why you
want to keep it broad- not a market -
- Create slide for presentation DONE
- Create storyboard for website (or prezi)
- Report - add research and flesh out all parts
- Create advertising campaign for website (aim to pitch to stakeholder - buzzfeed or viceland)

Class 8 ​Date: Tue 4 Dec


- Finalise pitch presentation

 
 
37 
 
 

- Finalise websites x 2
- Agree on advertising ideas
- Make sure we are all on the same page

Class 9 ​Date: Thu 6 Dec *Early finish


- Finalise project report
- Make sure both websites are functional
- Make sure everything is communicated
Asmnt 2 – Research & Storytelling Project
Due: Sunday 9 Dec

4.Team Values
- Communication techniques and responsibilities
For now our group we will be meeting at our tutorial time and place of on Tuesdays and
Thursdays and another time outside of this may need to be added. We will communicate
via group messaging on Facebook outside of our allocated times so that we keep
connected while working on the project.
- Meeting procedure
To keep a track of everything we will take minutes during class. Possible use of a google
doc to be accessible for everyone. Maybe rotate this duty throughout the project. This
way as a team we can keep track of our brainstorming sessions and ideas.
- No idea is a bad idea
Our ideas are put forth the the group with no judgment, and to explore ideas.

4. Dispute resolutions procedures:


Clarify what the disagreement is and then establish a common goal for both parties. Figure out
a compromise so that common goal/s can be met. Agree on the best way to make sure
everyone is happy and that the job needs to be done. If matters still cannot be resolved bring up
issues with our tutor (Ella)

 
 
 
38 
 
 

References  

Alvi, S, ‘About VICE Impact. Advocacy by VICE’, 2018, 


<​https://impact.vice.com/en_us/page/about-impact> 
 
Bakshy, E. Messing, S. Adamic, LA 2015, ‘​Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion 
on Facebook,’ ​Science​ ​Express​, ​vol. 348 issue 6239 
 
Bond RM​, F ​ ariss CJ​, ​Jones JJ​, K
​ ramer AD​, ​Marlow C​, ​Settle JE​, ​Fowler JH​. 2012, ‘A 
61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.’ ​Nature: 
International Journal of Science​ 2012 489(7415): 10.1038 
 
Farnam Street, n.d. ‘How Filter Bubbles Distort Reality: Everything You Need to Know,’ blog 
post, n.d. 
<​https://fs.blog/2017/07/filter-bubbles/​> 
 
Flaxman SR, Geol S and Rao JM (2016) Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news 
consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly 80(S1): 298–320. 
 
Hannak, A, Sapiezynski, P, Kakhki, AM, Krishnamurthy, B, Lazer, D, Mislove, A & Wilson, C 
2013, Measuring Personalization of Web Search. in ​Proceedings of the 22nd international 
conference on World Wide Web.​ Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 527-538, 22nd 
international conference on World Wide Web (WWW 2013), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 
13/05/2013. 
 
Jiang, J. 2018, ‘Millennials stand out for their technology use, but older generations also 
embrace digital life’, P ​ ew Research Centre Fact Tank,​ 2nd of May, 
<​http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/02/millennials-stand-out-for-their-technol
ogy-use-but-older-generations-also-embrace-digital-life/​> 
 
Mitchell, A. Gottfried, J. Matsa, KE. 2015, ‘Facebook Top Source for Political News Among 
Millennials’, ​Pew Research Centre​, 1st of June 
 
Media Policy Lab 2018, ‘#Data donation Project: Event on the Study of Prof. Dr. med. 
Katharina Zweig and AlgorithmWatch’, blog post, 1st of March 
<https://mediapolicylab.de/blog/news-details/projekt-datenspende-event-zur-studie-von-pr
of-dr-zweig-und-algorithmwatch.html> 
Puschmann, C. 2017, ‘How significant is algorithmic personalization in searches for political 
parties and candidates?’ blog post, 2nd of August 
<​https://aps.hans-bredow-institut.de/personalization-google/​> 

 
 
39 
 
 

 
Pariser, E., 2011. T​ he filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you​. Penguin UK. 
 
Price, V, Cappella, JC. Nir, L. 2002 ‘Does Disagreement Contribute to More Deliberative 
Opinion?’, ​Political Communication​, 19:1, 95-112,  
 
Statista, 2018, ‘Share of readers of the Wall Street Journal in the past 2 weeks in the United 
States in 2018, by age’, Statista 
<​https://www.statista.com/statistics/229986/readers-of-the-wall-street-journal-daily-edition
/​>  
 
Stroud, NJ. 2010, ‘​Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure’, ​Journal of 
Communication,​Volume 60, Issue 3, Pg 556-576 
 
Shearer, E. Gottfried, J. 2017, ‘News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2017’, ​Pew Research 
Centre​, 7th of September 
 
Wibbitz, 2018, ‘Top 10 millennial media companies… for now’, Wibbitz 
<​https://www.wibbitz.com/blog/top-10-millennial-media-companies-for-now/​> 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
40 

You might also like