Social interactions have shifted from avoiding political and religious discussions to embracing them, as people now surround themselves with like-minded individuals. Social media platforms enable users to mute differing opinions, reinforcing their existing beliefs. We need to consciously engage with diverse viewpoints rather than allowing technology to further entrench tribal behaviors.
Over the past five years, the internet has seen the growth of large technology platforms in various sectors, leading to concerns about competition. Social media and aggregator platforms create a lock-in effect, where users and suppliers feel compelled to join popular platforms, leading to potential monopolies. Traditional competition law views monopolies as harmful, but these platforms challenge this view by improving consumer choice and service quality. However, this shift in market dynamics may harm smaller suppliers, suggesting a need for regulatory protection for these market participants.
The modern internet has become centralized and controlled by a few powerful corporations, deviating from its original vision of an open and decentralized platform. Tim Berners-Lee, the founding father of the internet, is working on a project called Solid to restore power to users by allowing them to store personal information in personal data stores (PDS) under their control. That said, universally accepted standards for electronic consent and true social graph portability might be a more effective way to balance convenience and data protection.
The psychology of hate and dehumanization shows that a lack of social contact between different groups can lead to radical biases. The internet’s role in social interaction has eroded empathy and increased division, leading to a rise in hate and violence.
Historically, false news has influenced major events, from anti-Semitic libels to the Spanish-American War. With the rise of social media, exposure to unregulated, biased news has increased, exploiting human tendencies like implicit and confirmation biases. This creates echo chambers, reinforcing beliefs without exposure to differing views. The evolution of fake news now includes realistic audio and potential video fabrications. Addressing this, technology, not regulation, might offer solutions, such as a “FactRank” algorithm to assess news accuracy, akin to Google’s PageRank for search results.
There are parallels to be drawn between Martin Luther’s use of printing technology and modern communication technologies. Technology has historically accelerated the dissemination of ideas and we need to adapt that understanding to new mediums like the internet.
Social media news algorithms represent the future of news dissemination. However, the need for personalization, driven by advertising revenue, creates ‘filter bubbles’, limiting our exposure to a diversity of information sources. We need to implement software oversight: open-source algorithms auditing newsfeeds for bias, maintaining algorithm secrecy while ensuring objectivity.
There is a transformation in the dissemination of news now that it takes place through social media platforms and smartphones. As a result user-generated content has started to shape modern journalism. As a result there is a shift in the role of social media companies that raises new questions about the protection and support for this new form of citizen journalism.
