Category: social dilemma

As it currently stands, social media is a domineering force in society. The internet has gone through a process akin to that of capitalism in that the necessity for small businesses has dwindled. The maintenance of a social media site is reliant upon both combining a functional one-stop-shop for a multitude of services enjoyed by users, as well as preying upon human weakness. This human weakness is targeted in a multitude of ways, and primarily in the case of social media, it turns the use of the site into an addiction. Notifications that can be perceived with both sight and sound are capable of inciting a Pavlovian effect that keeps people looking in hopes of receiving something positive. Likes offer a short-form validation without needing a single bit more input from a user on the opposing end but a tap or a click on a button. This leaves people coming back for more validation consistently through the platforms.

For many, social media can function as a prime alternative to many different websites and purchasable services. With only a wi-fi connection, you can access a website that allows for you to communicate with anyone you know, anywhere in the world, instantly, at any time. Instant messaging is a social media standard, and the options it allows for range from simple text based messages to photos and videos to voice messages. There are so many options within the few tech giants controlling social media that it gives many little reason to explore anywhere else on the internet outside of these select few websites. This contrasts with the early stages of the internet during and following the Dot Com Boom, which was a world that needed search engines in order to find the specific sites you might be looking for. It was a much more varied internet that allowed for many more inventive ways to have an individual web experience. However, this is lost today in the current internet landscape. While many of the positives are very good, giving a select few companies with exclusively profit motive full range of control over the attention of nearly 2/3rds of the world population with internet access.

Algorithms have been designed to better cater to the interests of users as well, which start out niche, but due to the lack of complexity in these bits of code, they eventually push toward an extreme direction. While starting off, a person may only look at a site like YouTube for certain kinds of videos, they may slowly be grouped into a greater overlapping niche that requires less work on the end of the algorithmic functions. Videos are linked into the system and are sent out to millions who have been placed into a specific category of person that is no longer in their own, individual, niche corner, but makes up a large population who is being fed the same exact information. This becomes incredibly dangerous once the factor of fear is included. Titles that shout an extreme inspire fear or outrage in an individual, and it becomes much more likely that a person will click on those. Even a single click onto one of these articles, videos, or likes on an account can lead to a streamlined page of content feeding into a precise ideology that preaches a world that is irredeemable and plagued by a certain group of people.

With youths specifically involved in social media, it can be extremely dangerous on their impressionable minds. However, a group of people that seems to lack quite a bit of discussion as they often trust that they are free from naivety is the massive crowd of boomers and gen x’ers using Facebook and repeating information that could be outright lies as if that’s the reality they’re living in. I believe a large scale example of such an event was during the capital riots, in which we most frequently saw grown adults in their 40s as opposed to the youths that can be started at most urban protests. Working in retail and food service has given me an especially personal look, with older Americans reciting details of Communist takeovers through credit cards, vaccines containing the mark of the beast (causing all who receive it to be sent to hell), and two week long meat shortages purportedly being attempts at global starvation, to which they will respond by cannibalizing their neighbors rather than pursuing farming or any method humans have used for tens of thousands of years in the past.

Government regulation can only go so far when the government in itself is too easily avoided by a company. Amazon can avoid spending billions of dollars in a multitude of taxes based on their involvement in the government as well as playing with a few of the loopholes in tax laws regarding intellectual property. In addition, they receive billions in tax exemption every year. The days of muckraking are long gone, and a few lone companies have prevailed on top, leaving small businesses essentially as legal mercy so that they can still be justified under the law. Social media has offered quite a bit of freedom to business owners in maintaining a monopoly over internet users sheerly based on the plethora of websites that exist being able to counter the argument that their existence makes up such a massive part of market share, and only within the last two years has been brought into questioning regarding their control.

With the thought of government regulation in mind, it would be within the best interest of these companies that free capitalist laws are continuously enforced, making it incredibly convenient that these are the types of beliefs that spread like wildfire on social media, transfiguring an egomaniac child rapist born into billions of dollars of wealth like Donald Trump into the savior of the small man. The rights of monopolistic business owners are being upheld specifically on account of the algorithms of social media over the individual, and there is being little done to combat it. Social media has allowed for simple defenses that people once had against the shackles of people like Jeff Bezos to become synonymous with extremist ideologies and Communism, rather than basic common sense. It’s a machine that feeds itself, trapping people into a bubble of never-ending fear, sacrificing their rights in favor of becoming militant members of a violent business government.

The greatest responsibility of social media is to their users, as any government has. However, to turn social media into something humane rather than something disgustingly human in a way that encourages man’s greatest vices would require an incredible restructuring. At the same time, considering these, it brings to question how much of user content can be blamed on the site itself. The algorithms achieve what is ideal for the company, and it uses specifically user content. In the end, I find myself puzzled and greatly without answer. There are extreme changes required that could restructure notifications, algorithms, the placement of advertisements, and the amount of control businesses have over what you see, but then what? What could be done with user content? The same collections of lies with sprinklings of verifiable truth can still flourish. Perhaps there is a greater problem with the state of technology altogether that can be put to questioning.

There’s no doubt about it; Big Tech controls our minds and lives. Within my lifetime, Facebook has gone from not even existing as an idea, to being the most influential corporation in history. The amount of power we grant to Google through our usage shouldn’t be treated lightly. At one point in the documentary, someone mentioned how 25 guys in a room in Silicon Valley have the power to make decisions that affect and control humanity. As terrifying as this thought is, it doesn’t seem to be far off from the grim reality that faces us. It doesn’t seem to be an original thought to make the statement “social media = bad”, but I don’t think this makes it any less true. Whether it is feeding us misinformation that spreads like a wildfire or capitalizing on people’s fear, there is no doubt that the profit driven business models of these internet services can cause immeasurable harm.

The statistic about the increasing rate of suicide and self harm amongst adolescent girls since the inception of the internet was particularly alarming. Occasionally, I will open the augmented reality filters on Snapchat and several of them are particularly weird and funny, just perfect to send to friends. However, when I click on one of the beauty focused ones and then tap back to the regular camera view, I am startled by how “off” my own face looks. Imperfections are drastically highlighted in the contrast between the altered view, and reality. I experienced this in just a few moments of using my phone, so it’s not hard to imagine some of the more extreme cases of body dysmorphia that could occur through constant use of these filters.

In my opinion, companies should absolutely have regulations regarding their habits of data collection and the ways that they use said data. In a world where I don’t care to remember what I ate for lunch three days ago, it’s bizarre to think that an audio clip of me saying “Hey Google” when I was 13 years old still resides on a server somewhere, and likely still will long after I am dead. In general, I don’t think most people realize just how much of their data has been and continues to be farmed, as well as just how inescapable it all is.
Since the first time that I watched this doc last year, I have been much more conscious of my own interactions with my phone. I have aggressively analyzed and deleted apps that I no longer use, and removed many permissions from the apps that I do use. I disabled notifications for pretty much anything that isn’t a direct text message. Every time I check my phone, I try to do it with intention. If I unlock my screen, I already have a goal of what I am going to accomplish so that I don’t just swipe aimlessly checking things out of boredom. A smartphone is still something that can provide a lot of utility to us and it can be hard to live without, but by being aware of the powers it has over us, we can begin to reclaim a bit of our lives. As a whole I think the documentary makes a very compelling argument for at the very least being more cynical about the workings and intentions of large internet companies. As our real world and the online world become increasingly the same, we have to continue to adapt and always stay vigilant.

I had a history teacher in high school who claimed that America has the most beautiful economic system because there is not a clearly defined one. Despite many Americans labeling our system as purely capitalistic, we also incorporate socialist practices to ensure safety and education for every American. The only reason there is a discussion around limiting the free market is that the hungry algorithms designed by large social media companies are threatening the safety and education of Americans. What these corporations are selling is information on an individual’s behaviors, often without the explicit consent of its users. Oftentimes, consent is given through the terms and conditions of the apps, and companies claim that users have the choice of whether or not to use their apps. In present times it is impossible to interact with others normally, function in school, and perform in the work environment without the use of these companies. Because we cannot function without these technologies, presenting consent to their terms as an ultimatum should be considered to be coercion and therefore illegal. This being said, social media companies are simply functioning as they are designed for, which is to create the most profit. The responsibility for public safety needs to be entrusted to the United States government, and these growing issues need legislation that can pose a framework that social media companies can flounder to gain profits within. That way all systems are functioning within their intended function rather than constantly swaying in public opinion. This solution can look very different depending on the ideas of many legislators and the millions of voices that, ironically, echo through social media.

My thoughts on The Social Dilemma, despite a particularly clear standpoint on the responsibilities of the businesses mentioned, are incredibly mixed. While I’m happy that it brought a more prominent light to the serious issues that social media represents, it doesn’t offer very much else. It refuses to touch on a large portion of the causes, as it seems to fear it might get too political and touch on how big businesses become governments all to their own, refuse to treat people justly, and will use any loopholes possible to exploit human nature in favor of profit. It also contrasts what should be a deeply serious topic with a particularly poorly acted and melodramatic dramatization. The conclusion in itself doesn’t offer any answers to all of the questions, but it’s built in such a structure that has you convinced, particularly through the dramatization, that this problem is already being solved by the sheer realization alone that these things are incredibly negative. Still, after this movie has had its moment in the spotlight, these issues are more prominent than ever and are hardly being solved.