arXiv subjects

Levi Kaplan

Publications and source records attributed to Levi Kaplan.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

When 'For You' Isn't For You: Measuring User Agency in TikTok's Algorithmic Feed

The short-form video-sharing service TikTok has become an important platform in the social media landscape, with much of its popularity owed to its algorithmically-driven "For You Page" (FYP). This feature serves as the "home screen" for the platform and provides a personalized feed of content for each user. Unlike other social media services-where new users start their journey by explicitly signaling whom they choose to friend or follow-the TikTok FYP algorithm instead begins making inferences based on implicit signals, such as how long they watch particular videos. As a result, users have less explicit control over what content they see, and concerns have been raised about the impact on users (e.g., the delivery of potentially harmful content). In this work, we investigate the extent to which users have control over the content they see on the FYP on TikTok. We first develop novel techniques to study the TikTok mobile app, introducing a new avenue for conducting controlled experiments that enable us to send both explicit and implicit signals on the app. We then use these techniques to study the FYP algorithm based on accounts we control. We find that the FYP algorithm is sensitive to both types of signals, changing the amount of personalized content the account sees. However, we find that users may have difficulty convincing the FYP algorithm to stop showing content the user wishes to no longer see: the most effective explicit signal-marking a video as 'Not Interested'-is unintuitively buried in the interface. Worse, we find that once accounts cease to indicate disinterest in a topic, many find their feeds dominated by such content again.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

On the Use of Proxies in Political Ad Targeting

Detailed targeting of advertisements has long been one of the core offerings of online platforms. Unfortunately, malicious advertisers have frequently abused such targeting features, with results that range from violating civil rights laws to driving division, polarization, and even social unrest. Platforms have often attempted to mitigate this behavior by removing targeting attributes deemed problematic, such as inferred political leaning, religion, or ethnicity. In this work, we examine the effectiveness of these mitigations by collecting data from political ads placed on Facebook in the lead up to the 2022 U.S. midterm elections. We show that major political advertisers circumvented these mitigations by targeting proxy attributes: seemingly innocuous targeting criteria that closely correspond to political and racial divides in American society. We introduce novel methods for directly measuring the skew of various targeting criteria to quantify their effectiveness as proxies, and then examine the scale at which those attributes are used. Our findings have crucial implications for the ongoing discussion on the regulation of political advertising and emphasize the urgency for increased transparency.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2022

Algorithms that "Don't See Color": Comparing Biases in Lookalike and Special Ad Audiences

Researchers and journalists have repeatedly shown that algorithms commonly used in domains such as credit, employment, healthcare, or criminal justice can have discriminatory effects. Some organizations have tried to mitigate these effects by simply removing sensitive features from an algorithm's inputs. In this paper, we explore the limits of this approach using a unique opportunity. In 2019, Facebook agreed to settle a lawsuit by removing certain sensitive features from inputs of an algorithm that identifies users similar to those provided by an advertiser for ad targeting, making both the modified and unmodified versions of the algorithm available to advertisers. We develop methodologies to measure biases along the lines of gender, age, and race in the audiences created by this modified algorithm, relative to the unmodified one. Our results provide experimental proof that merely removing demographic features from a real-world algorithmic system's inputs can fail to prevent biased outputs. As a result, organizations using algorithms to help mediate access to important life opportunities should consider other approaches to mitigating discriminatory effects.

cs.CY↗