IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0299977.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shaping opinions in social networks with shadow banning

Author

Listed:
  • Yen-Shao Chen
  • Tauhid Zaman

Abstract

The proliferation of harmful content and misinformation on social networks necessitates content moderation policies to maintain platform health. One such policy is shadow banning, which limits content visibility. The danger of shadow banning is that it can be misused by social media platforms to manipulate opinions. Here we present an optimization based approach to shadow banning that can shape opinions into a desired distribution and scale to large networks. Simulations on real network topologies show that our shadow banning policies can shift opinions and increase or decrease opinion polarization. We find that if one shadow bans with the aim of shifting opinions in a certain direction, the resulting shadow banning policy can appear neutral. This shows the potential for social media platforms to misuse shadow banning without being detected. Our results demonstrate the power and danger of shadow banning for opinion manipulation in social networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Yen-Shao Chen & Tauhid Zaman, 2024. "Shaping opinions in social networks with shadow banning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-30, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299977
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299977
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299977&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0299977?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brendan Nyhan & Jaime Settle & Emily Thorson & Magdalena Wojcieszak & Pablo Barberá & Annie Y. Chen & Hunt Allcott & Taylor Brown & Adriana Crespo-Tenorio & Drew Dimmery & Deen Freelon & Matthew Gentz, 2023. "Author Correction: Like-minded sources on Facebook are prevalent but not polarizing," Nature, Nature, vol. 623(7987), pages 9-9, November.
    2. Jan Lorenz, 2006. "Consensus Strikes Back in the Hegselmann-Krause Model of Continuous Opinion Dynamics Under Bounded Confidence," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8.
    3. Sinan Aral & Paramveer S. Dhillon, 2018. "Social influence maximization under empirical influence models," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(6), pages 375-382, June.
    4. Sinan Aral & Paramveer S. Dhillon, 2018. "Publisher Correction: Social influence maximization under empirical influence models," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 707-707, September.
    5. Corentin Vande Kerckhove & Samuel Martin & Pascal Gend & Peter J Rentfrow & Julien M Hendrickx & Vincent D Blondel, 2016. "Modelling Influence and Opinion Evolution in Online Collective Behaviour," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, June.
    6. Nicolas Guenon des Mesnards & David Scott Hunter & Zakaria el Hjouji & Tauhid Zaman, 2022. "Detecting Bots and Assessing Their Impact in Social Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 1-22, January.
    7. Brendan Nyhan & Jaime Settle & Emily Thorson & Magdalena Wojcieszak & Pablo Barberá & Annie Y. Chen & Hunt Allcott & Taylor Brown & Adriana Crespo-Tenorio & Drew Dimmery & Deen Freelon & Matthew Gentz, 2023. "Like-minded sources on Facebook are prevalent but not polarizing," Nature, Nature, vol. 620(7972), pages 137-144, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Le & Luo, Xin (Robert) & Li, Han, 2022. "Envy or conformity? An empirical investigation of peer influence on the purchase of non-functional items in mobile free-to-play games," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 308-324.
    2. Alex Chin & Dean Eckles & Johan Ugander, 2022. "Evaluating Stochastic Seeding Strategies in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1714-1736, March.
    3. Shane T. Mueller & Yin-Yin Sarah Tan, 2018. "Cognitive perspectives on opinion dynamics: the role of knowledge in consensus formation, opinion divergence, and group polarization," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 15-48, January.
    4. Giulio Pecile & Niccolò Di Marco & Matteo Cinelli & Walter Quattrociocchi, 2025. "Mapping the global election landscape on social media in 2024," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Eugen Dimant & Fabio Galeotti & Marie Claire Villeval, 2024. "Motivated Information Acquisition and Social Norm Formation," Post-Print hal-04199140, HAL.
    6. Aarushi Kalra, 2025. "Hate in the Time of Algorithms: Evidence on Online Behavior from a Large-Scale Experiment," Papers 2503.06244, arXiv.org.
    7. Ni, Xuelian & Xiong, Fei & Pan, Shirui & Chen, Hongshu & Wu, Jia & Wang, Liang, 2023. "How heterogeneous social influence acts on human decision-making in online social networks," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    8. Max Falkenberg & Fabiana Zollo & Walter Quattrociocchi & Jürgen Pfeffer & Andrea Baronchelli, 2024. "Patterns of partisan toxicity and engagement reveal the common structure of online political communication across countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Bertrand Jayles & Clément Sire & Ralf H J M Kurvers, 2021. "Crowd control: Reducing individual estimation bias by sharing biased social information," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-28, November.
    10. Sarah Gelper & Ralf van der Lans & Gerrit van Bruggen, 2021. "Competition for Attention in Online Social Networks: Implications for Seeding Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 1026-1047, February.
    11. Beknazar-Yuzbashev, George & Jiménez-Durán, Rafael & McCrosky, Jesse & Stalinski, Mateusz, 2025. "Toxic Content and User Engagement on Social Media : Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1543, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    12. Benjamin Cabrera & Björn Ross & Daniel Röchert & Felix Brünker & Stefan Stieglitz, 2021. "The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1331-1355, November.
    13. Bertrand Jayles & Ramón Escobedo & Stéphane Cezera & Adrien Blanchet & Tatsuya Kameda & Clément Sire & Guy Theraulaz, 2020. "The impact of incorrect social information on collective wisdom in human groups," Post-Print hal-02991100, HAL.
    14. Falkenberg, Max & Cinelli, Matteo & Galeazzi, Alessandro & Bail, Christopher A. & Benito, Rosa & Bruns, Axel & Gruzd, Anatoliy & Lazer, David & Lee, Jae K. & McCoy, Jennifer, 2025. "Towards global equity in political polarization research," OSF Preprints 3wzfq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    15. Jayles, Bertrand & Escobedo, Ramon & Cezera, Stéphane & Blanchet, Adrien & Kameda, Tatsuya & Sire, Clément & Théraulaz, Guy, 2020. "The impact of incorrect social information on collective wisdom in human groups," IAST Working Papers 20-106, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    16. Marius Dragomir & José Rúas-Araújo & Minna Horowitz, 2024. "Beyond online disinformation: assessing national information resilience in four European countries," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    17. Dong Jiang & Qionglin Dai & Haihong Li & Junzhong Yang, 2024. "Opinion dynamics based on social learning theory," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 97(12), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Bertrand Jayles & Ramon Escobedo & Stéphane Cezera & Adrien Blanchet & Tatsuya Kameda & Clément Sire & Guy Théraulaz, 2020. "The impact of incorrect social information on collective wisdom in human groups," Post-Print hal-03019820, HAL.
    19. Beknazar-Yuzbashev, George & Jiménez-Durán, Rafael & McCrosky, Jesse & Stalinski, Mateusz, 2025. "Toxic Content and User Engagement on Social Media: Evidence from a Field Experiment," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 741, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    20. Patrick Groeber & Frank Schweitzer & Kerstin Press, 2009. "How Groups Can Foster Consensus: The Case of Local Cultures," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(2), pages 1-4.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299977. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.