In a world of mass protests like BLM and the Arab Spring, digital social activism plays a big role in perpetuating ideas about current issues. Even though this can be a positive force of change, the threat lays in the way these social changes come into existence in a hyper digitalized society. It is no secret that social media played a catalytic role in the uproar around George Floyd’s death in May 2020. Content on any social media platform finds its user (or consumer) through algorithmic filter bubbles. These filters analyze which users with specific user characteristics like/comment on which type of content. This leads to people becoming stuck in so-called ‘bubbles. All the while they are continuously fed with the same information. This may sound great at first, as people can find their ‘folk’; people they relate to in many regards of life. However, looking at recent phenomenon especially concerning Covid-19, the US elections and fake news on the internet, the extremely problematic areas of these algorithmic filter bubbles are highlighted. Users find themselves in a loop of positive feedback regarding their thoughts and opinion without being exposed to any counterarguments. This leads to people only believing what they have been spoon-fed by these social network algorithms. Users appreciate seeing their thoughts being validated. At the same time, digital platforms monetize from users staying on their platforms. Keeping users that create content and consume the same content through these algorithms is highly profitable as seen with Twitter, which has a total market capitalization of $47.76 billion as of October 2021 (Companiesmarketcap, 2021). Besides Twitter, the mega-conglomerate Google also benefits from these algorithms. However, Google tends to play a more direct role as it shows search results based on the payments of advertisers. It is relevant to think about the societal impact of a world that is digitalizing by the second, as it is in our hands to decide where we want to go as a species without forgetting our universal core values and objectivism.
Great topic Rabia! Its definitely crazy to think about what content we are shown based on our own personal ‘algorithm’ and to what extent this content might be affecting our opinions, biases and views of the world that surrounds us! Like you said there are positives in finding similar minded people and content and at the same time negatives in how this can push against others. I think with any topic related to digitalization we need better governance about what these large media companies can and can’t do.
Hi Rabia, thanks for the post! I often think about the concept of the filter bubbles, especially how annoying they sometimes can be on Instagram where I am shown the same type of content all the time. Of course on one hand this is convenient for me because it is the content I like to see, but on the other hand I would like that the algorithm would push me out of my comfort zone and to view new content. Although I do agree that filter bubbles exist in the social media and digital world, I do think that to some extent, we as humans like to surround ourselves with people that are like minded. I think even before social media was the giant it is today, people surrounded themselves in “bubbles” of people or communities that were similar to them in their values and opinions. I feel like it is a deeply psychological human trait. I am sure to some extent social media and algorithms do further that positive feedback loop, but I have a feeling that without social media, things wouldn’t be so different.
I also do think that, if used wisely, social media does expose us to a wide range of sources and more information than years ago that could (potentially) challenge our own opinions and make us more open minded. But maybe I am too optimistic about it.
What do you think?
– Aurora