At Apple’s recent event, one feature stood out: Live Translation. With the newest iPhone and AirPods Pro 3, you can hold real-time conversations across languages (Apple, 2025). No app switching, no typing into Google Translate – just talking. It feels like a big step toward removing everyday barriers.
But this is also about strategy. Apple isn’t only adding a feature; it’s strengthening its platform. Every new function makes the iPhone–AirPods ecosystem more valuable and harder to leave. Translation becomes not just a tool but another reason to stay inside Apple’s world (Tiwana, 2014).
The rollout also shows how regulation matters. Because of the EU’s Digital Markets Act, Live Translation won’t even be available in many European countries at first (TechRadar, 2025). A technology built to connect people is itself limited by borders.
What interests me most, though, is the cultural impact. In countries like the Netherlands, where I study, English already dominates. Many people never feel the need to learn Dutch because they can get by in English everywhere. With real-time translation, this trend could spread even further. It might make life easier for internationals, but it could also weaken motivation to learn local languages and reduce cultural exchange.
And then there’s a practical side: what about all the moments when you don’t have your phone or headphones with you? Do we really want to depend so heavily on technology that we can’t order food, ask for directions, or start a conversation without it?
I see both sides. For international students, travelers, and businesses, Live Translation could be transformative. At the same time, there’s something valuable in struggling through a new language, in the misunderstandings and small victories along the way.
So what do you think? Will tools like this enrich communication, or will they take something important away?
Tiwana, A. (2014). Platform ecosystems: Aligning architecture, governance, and strategy. Morgan Kaufmann.
Your Next Stylist Might Be AI: How Zalando is Redefining Fashion Tech
18
September
2025
No ratings yet.
Today’s fashion and retail space can be overwhelming. Consumers are constantly challenged by the ever-changing trends and decision fatigue. Think about the last time you opened a shopping app from brands such as Zara or H&M, was it easy looking for what you wanted or coming up with an outfit suitable for your occasion? In my personal experience, I always lose patience trying to navigate endless pages with inaccurate filters. I’d always thought that with the technological advancement, we should’ve had a way more personalized and efficient way of shopping.
So last year, when I saw that Zalando partnered with OpenAI and launched the AI-powered Zalando Assistant, I had to try this new feature in the App immediately. Unlike traditional recommendation tools that simply push similar products, Zalando’s assistant acts more like a digital stylist. You can talk to it in a natural language and give real-time feedback. It suggests complete outfits based on your location, weather, and even the type of event you’re attending.
The potential impact of this is what really excites me the most. The Zalando Assistant is not only changing their own app but also setting a standard for how we shop in the future. Other brands such as Zara and H&M will need to move beyond basic “You might also like” recommendations and start thinking about how to leverage AI to create a better e-commerce experience. Imagine a future where shopping apps understand your preferences and predict your needs as well as a personal stylist. To take it one step further, imagine if it could help you shop more sustainably by suggesting outfits that complement what’s already in your wardrobe.
As this feature just launched less than a year ago, there is of course still room for improvement. For example, sometimes the recommendations still feel trend-driven rather than personal. I find that it is still a bit challenging for the AI stylist to know and remember my preferences. Moreover, the concern for data privacy still remains, especially because this concerns a personal aspect of the user’s lifestyle.
Regardless of the limitation, Zalando’s innovation still represents a big shift in fashion tech. AI could soon predict trends before they go viral, power AR, and create a hyper-personalized shopping experience. I am excited to see where this innovation takes us and how it will reshape the fashion industry.
When Chatbots Listen: Bridging the Gap or Widening It?
18
September
2025
No ratings yet.
I recently read an article in The Guardian about the rising use of these chatbots and the concerns therapists are voicing. It made me think about my own surroundings. Some of my friends actually enjoy using AI tools. For them, opening an app feels less intimidating than calling a clinic, and it is often much faster. With long waiting lists and high costs for sessions, AI feels like an accessible alternative.
Artificial Intelligence is rapidly becoming a key player in mental health care. AI promises to make support more accessible and personalised. It can pick up subtle signals and flag early signs of mental illness before symptoms become severe. AI can even create tailored treatment plans and adjust therapy dynamically as patients progress, reducing the frustrating trial-and-error process.
These innovations bring clear benefits. They can shorten waiting times, make care more scalable, and offer a low-threshold way for people to seek help without immediately committing to therapy sessions. For many, an AI chatbot can be a first step, a safe, stigma-free place to express feelings before speaking to a professional.
But there are real reasons to be cautious. AI can analyse data and spot patterns with impressive precision, but it cannot feel empathy or fully understand context. A trained therapist can notice subtle emotional shifts and offer the human connection that a chatbot simply cannot. Without this, care risks becoming too standardised and detached.
Another concern is privacy. Sharing intimate thoughts with an app means trusting that your data is stored securely and that it is used in an ethical way. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Research has shown that some mental health apps share data with third parties or use it for targeted advertising. Users often do not realise that this is the case. This makes it even more important to demand transparency and strict data protection if AI is to play a safe role in mental health care.
I believe the future of AI for mental health is hybrid. AI can function as bridge, providing rapid support, with therapists doing more in-depth emotional work. Together, they can make mental health treatment more accessible than ever.
Do you think that AI chatbots should play a bigger role in mental health care, or do we risk replacing too much of the human connection?
References
Hall, R. (2025, August 30). ‘Sliding into an abyss’: Experts warn over rising use of AI for mental health support – Therapists say they are seeing negative impacts of people increasingly turning to AI chatbots for help.The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/
Murdoch, B. (2021). Privacy and artificial intelligence: Challenges for protecting health information in a new era. BMC Medical Ethics, 22(1), 122. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00687-3
Olawade, D. B., Wada, O. Z., Odetayo, A., David-Olawade, A. C., Asaolu, F., & Eberhardt, J. (2024). Enhancing mental health with Artificial Intelligence: Current trends and future prospects. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 3, 100099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100099
Thakkar, A., Gupta, A., & De Sousa, A. (2024). Artificial intelligence in positive mental health: A narrative review. Frontiers in Digital Health, 6, 1280235. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1280235
Meta’s Ray-Ban Glasses Just Levelled Up
18
September
2025
No ratings yet.
———-
Do you remember Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses from 2023? You probably do (since we just mentioned them in class), but they weren’t exactly ground-breaking. But on September 30th, the second generation is being released, and this time the air smells different.
This iteration of the Meta Ray-Ban Display features an in-lens display visible only to the wearer, marking a significant step toward AR technology. While it isn’t true Augmented Reality yet, since the display doesn’t interact with your surroundings, this is a sign that the technology is rapidly advancing in that direction. More interesting is how you control it. The glasses connect to a neural wristband, a watch-style band that detects electrical impulses from your wrist muscles. This means you can control the display with subtle gestures, even from inside your pocket, unlike older camera-based tracking systems.
But is this truly disruptive? Not yet. At $800, it’s positioned like a flagship phone, but still lacks a broad app ecosystem. There is also a social barrier: are people willing to accept chunky glasses and an always-ready camera in shared spaces? Secondly, Meta´s reputation is fragile when it comes to trust and privacy. Clear recording indicators, strict on-device processing, and transparent data will matter just as much as the spec sheets. Also, the possibility of ads or brand placements drifting into your field of view is non-zero. One thing is sure, stronger privacy regulation will be crucial.
If those concerns are addressed, the upside is real: live captioning and translation, live guided navigation, quick capture and messaging, all controlled with a flick of fingers from a pocket.
Will the Metaverse revolutionize the way Doctors and Patients interact ?
18
September
2025
No ratings yet.
This summer, I came across a very interesting article about designing a new system that would blend the Metaverse concept and blockchain security and privacy to make telemedicine more secure and interactive.
Teleconsultations are common since COVID; it is estimated that 75% of all medical appointments are either unnecessary or could be done via teleconsultations (European Commission, 2023). The market of telemedicine is also fast-growing, with an estimated 24.68 % CAGR from 2025 to 2030 (Grandviewresearch, 2024).
However, the limits of telemedicine are complex to overcome. Some people like to see their doctors in person, and others do not trust their electronic devices to be secure enough to reveal their personal issues through a platform.
However, the first issue seems reasonable to overcome with the Metaverse. The VR consultations would take place in virtual consultation rooms that would feel and look similar to a typical doctor’s office. The issue that would come with this solution is the avatar-based medicine relationship. When the patient and his doctor meet in the metaverse, they would take the form of avatars. Future studies should explore how this impacts the relationship between them in terms of communication, empathy, and overall understanding. If the solution is a video call within a Metaverse, then it is far less revolutionary. Then, the blockchain solution will answer the second issue. Blockchain is today one of the most secure ways to transmit data, and while future users would need a certain level of digital education to understand how safe it is, blockchain technology is a solution for privacy and security (Sonkamble et al., 2025).
More than simply for teleconsultation, the Metaverse has been explored by medical field experts to answer multiple questions. An article from 2024 by Yue Wang explores many possible applications of the Metaverse in the healthcare sector. She comes up with five main solution areas, from medical training to surgical precision (Wang et al., 2024). What is certain is that AR and VR in the medium term and a Metaverse in the longer term will impact the health sector and revolutionize the way doctors and patients interact.
References
Sonkamble, R.G., Shirke-Deshmukh, S., Katkar, V., Lunagaria, M., Tejani, G.G. and Mousavirad, S.J. (2025). A blockchain secured metaverse framework for scalable and immersive telemedicine. Scientific Reports, [online] 15(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-12068-6.
Wang, Y., Zhu, M., Chen, X., Liu, R., Ge, J., Song, Y. and Yu, G. (2024). The application of metaverse in healthcare. Frontiers in Public Health, [online] 12. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1420367.
Should companies invest in metaverse workspaces, or is it merely a trend society is chasing?
18
September
2025
5/5 (1)
Since Covid-19, a trend has arisen that encourages working from home. A big part of everyone’s daily routine has become spending time online on applications such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom and these apps have not disappeared from employees’ screens since the end of the pandemic in 2022. Employees have become so used to the ‘working remote lifestyle’ that a lot of them do not want to return to working in the office full-time. In fact, as many as 58% state they would leave their current employer if working remote were no longer allowed (Pelta, 2021). This shift in desire has also been acknowledged by big tech companies, such as Meta, that see opportunities in developing metaverses where working remote would be the standard. These Metaverses would give employees the chance to “meet, collaborate and learn” in an online world, including identical avatars of the users and virtual replicas of their office (Marx et al., 2025).
According to Darvish et al. (2024), creating visual, human-based 3D avatars would give “a sense of empathy among the participants during a virtual meeting”. This encourages communication and knowledge sharing and could lead to greater involvement and satisfaction for both employers and employees. Additionally, other arguments mentioned are cost reduction, for example due to a decrease in necessary international business travel and meetings.
However, not all employees are as content with working remotely which has contributed the rise of metaverses. Survey participants state that they feel that “intimacy is lacking”. In addition, from an HR perspectives not all feedback is positive, as evaluating (new) employees from a home office can be challenging. Lastly, companies declare difficulties in “developing an organizational culture” (Park, H. 2023).
I was a high school student during the COVID-19 pandemic, and I spent a lot of my teenage years at my bedroom desk. This gave me the conclusion that being social and connected with other people plays significant role in my day and overall wellbeing. Therefore, I cannot imagine spending (another big part of) my life in Microsoft Teams- or Zoom meetings. But can the metaverse-based work style change my perspective, especially since it promises to create more intimacy and interaction among employees and other stakeholders? Do the potential benefits of working in a metaverse outweigh the concerns about social distance and mental health? This is why I question myself and invite you to do the same “should companies invest in metaverse workspaces, or is it merely a trend society is chasing?”
References
Darvish, M., Bick, M., & Keresztyen, L. (2024). Exploring the Potential of Virtual Immersive Workspaces: Benefits, Limitations, and Implications. California Management Review, 66(4), 102–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256241258494
Marx, J., Mirbabaie, M., & Rieskamp, J. (2025). Working from the Metaverse: A Distraction Management Perspective. Journal Of Management Information Systems, 42(1), 206–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2025.2452018
Park, H., Ahn, D., & Lee, J. (2023, april). Towards a Metaverse Workspace: Opportunities, Challenges, and Design Implications. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’23), Hamburg, Germany (pp. 503:1-503:20). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581306snu.elsevierpure.com+1
Last week, while reading the news, one article in particular got my attention. I stumbled upon the following article, ‘Albania makes AI minister of contracts in battle against corruption‘ (Article is in Dutch). In short, the Albanian government has decided to make one of its ministers an AI agent, visualized by a woman called Diella in traditional Albanian clothing, to battle the widespread corruption in the country. The main reason would be that Diella would not be tempted by bribes, scared by threats, or have any conflicts of interest. Diella would be totally objective when deciding which firms get government contracts.
I think this is an interesting strategy to avoid corruption, but I did immediately identify some glaring issues. My main concern was who the person responsible for the AI’s ministry would be, whether there would still be a human overseeing its operations, or whether the AI would be the highest in command. It highlights a new ethical issue: can AI be held accountable for its own actions? Ministers should be held accountable for any mistakes and issues that occur under their management, but can we hold a bot to the same standards, and if not, can we still allow AI to be in such important positions without any accountability? I think this dilemma of responsible usage of, and even substitution by, AI will be an incredibly important topic in this age of unprecedented digital disruption.
The premier of Albania, Edi Rama, also did not provide any details about how the AI will be trained and how potential bias in its training and oversight will be mitigated.
I think that the lack of transparency and accountability, at least up until now, could actually lead to better disguised corruption, hidden by a cloak of in-depth technological know-how, that only a few people will be able to understand and dissect. The public will no longer be able to easily understand the decision-making process behind government contracts worth millions.
I would love to hear your thoughts about the accountability of AI and the effect of an AI minister on corruption in the government. Let’s discuss!
Spotify, Netflix, and the Illusion of Boundless Choice
18
September
2025
5/5 (1)
Do you remember how you would have to buy an entire CD just to hear one song, or spend money on a big cable package just to watch one channel? Spotify and Netflix promised to fix that. With streaming, you get to listen to anything or watch whatever you want at any time you want. This is, at least in theory, the Long Tail effect , websites can make money from niche content as much as from blockbusters and “decoupling,” where you’re billed for what you consume and not a thing extra. But does it really work this way?
Evidence shows not quite. Klimashevskaia et al. (2024) show that algorithms are built on a high popularity bias. Instead of offering everyone greater diversity, they prefer to recommend what is popular. A 2025 study goes one further, showing that platforms not only mirror popularity, they reinforce it, propelling hits even higher (Kowald, 2025).
On the user end, Netflix viewers often feel they’ve got too much choice and still watch the same suggestions over and over (Romero Meza & D’Urso, 2024). On Spotify, playlists dominate. Pachali et al. (2025) found that ending up on the right playlist can make or break a song’s visibility. So while the library is infinite, most attention stays fixed on the same few artists or shows.
I think this raises a big question about fairness. Carnovalini, et al. (2025) argue that fixing popularity bias means balancing efficiency with diversity. Personally, I’d love if Spotify or Netflix highlighted more “hidden gems,” not just the Top 10. It would make the experience more exciting for users and more rewarding for creators.
And what about you? Do you tend to go and look up niche material, or do you stick with the advised? Should Netflix and Spotify do more to promote diversity, even if it doesn’t feel as efficient?
Reference
Anastasiia Klimashevskaia, et al. “A Survey on Popularity Bias in Recommender Systems.” User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, vol. 34, 1 July 2024, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-024-09406-0.
Kowald, D. (2025). Investigating popularity bias amplification in recommender systems employed in the entertainment domain. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Workshop on Algorithmic Fairness (EWAF’25) (pp. 1–7). Proceedings of Machine Learning Research. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.04752
Filippo Carnovalini, et al. “Popularity Bias in Recommender Systems: The Search for Fairness in the Long Tail.” Information, vol. 16, no. 2, 19 Feb. 2025, pp. 151–151, www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/16/2/151, https://doi.org/10.3390/info16020151.
Meza, Laura Romero, and Giulio D’Urso. “User’s Dilemma: A Qualitative Study on the Influence of Netflix Recommender Systems on Choice Overload.” Psychological Studies, vol. 69, no. 3, 24 Sept. 2024, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-024-00807-0.
Pachali, Max J, and Hannes Datta. “What Drives Demand for Playlists on Spotify?” Marketing Science, vol. 44, no. 1, 18 Sept. 2024, https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2022.0273.
Meet Tinder’s New Competition….AI?
17
September
2025
4.5/5 (2)
“Mama, I’m in love with a Robot….”
DISCLAIMER: This article is purely meant to foster a discussion and shine a light upon real world events, please do not go out of your way to harass individuals or communities mentioned.
Hello dear readers and classmates,
Today I’ll be writing about something that has been on my mind for a few years now. For those of you who followed Digital Business last year at Erasmus, you might remember someone talking to Dr. Tsekouras about AI Girlfriends. That was me, so you could only imagine my joy when I heard that we could write about something for this course. I’ll be analyzing the phenomenon of AI Social Companions (AI SCs) from two levels, a business level and a more social level. Get comfortable as I take you on a wild ride through uncharted (digital) territories.
An unexpected but transformative business model?
The current state of affairs
While the title may have used Tinder, any dating app is actually in trouble when it comes to the rise of AI SCs. Bumble, Tinder, Hinge, the list can go on. In the end they all serve the same purpose. They promise to give an algorithm driven “digital fix” for the many uncertainties of love, but end up creating their own uncertainties (Bandinelli & Gandini, 2022). Indeed, users on these platforms will always have to put on a mask of sorts, and really have to market themselves.
As one could imagine, putting up such an act is frustrating to say the least. In fact, according to Holtzhausen et al. (2020), users of swipe-based dating apps were found to have higher rates of psychological distress, anxiety and depression. Though their self-esteem remained relatively the same.
I can imagine the frustration of all users, especially because the way that these apps gain money is through….you guessed it, subscriptions! To stick to our Tinder example, Tinder even offers these in tiers. You have Tinder+, Gold and Platinum. In USD, the prices would be $24.99, $39.99 and $49.99 respectively as of 2025 (Joe, 2025).
That’s a lot of money, especially when you consider that dating apps often practically force you to pay for them by gatekeeping potential matches from you. To get some extra evidence, I stumbled upon a Reddit thread, in which a user admitted to spending over $2k on dating apps and still not getting a date! The poster also details other frustrations, though those are a bit outside the scope for now.
New challengers have arrived!
With the many frustrations surrounding dating apps and general loneliness, many companies have been found to alleviate these problems, often at a price. AI SC apps are a diverse group, and there is a divide between apps that are used specifically for that purpose and also general apps which are used for companionship. Indeed, while you have “specialized” apps like Replika and Character AI, which are designed from the ground up for interactivity and companionship. However, there are also a large subset of people who are using ChatGPT, Grok and other LLMs for the same purposes.
Now what if I told you, that most of these companies have all six of the elements of a transformative business model as described by Kavadias, Ladas & Loch (2016). In my opinion, of course.
The six elements of a transformative business model:
1. A more personalised product or service Is dating too hard and can you not connect with anyone? Well, these companies literally allow you to make your ideal partner from the ground up. It does not get more personalised than that. And while I find it dehumanising to refer to love and companionship as a product or service, that is what dating apps sell to their users.
2. A closed-loop process All resources get used again, the code is there and, in essence, it doesn’t matter how it gets used. It allows for users to make their own companions with zero knowledge of coding or LLMs at all. On top of that, should your favourite character get banned or deleted, you can probably make them again in a second.
3. Asset sharing Just like I described with the zero waste of the previous point. In sites like Character AI, anyone would be able to use the character that you have created, unless you made it private. Similarly, you can find all kinds of commands to personalise your preferred companion, should you be interested and should the platform allow it.
4. Usage-based pricing Most of these services operate under a freemium model. So anyone can use it, but if you want it to be better or if you want to access certain features (Better models, NSFW, etc.) you will have to pay.
5. A more collaborative ecosystem I believe that the reason why many of these projects thrive is because they do not necessarily compete against each other. Instead many of the AI SCs are built with the same methods and there are many guides available to help users make one.
6. An agile and adaptive organisation Most of these companies (except for ChatGPT and Grok) are small in size and tend to implement features which their community craves. They have a track record of innovating to please their consumers, which fosters loyalty. For example: CharacterAI features multiple models, some cater towards more niche needs which the community has asked for.
As you can see… this could potentially be a problem for Tinder and other dating app giants. There is thus a lot of money to be made, much of which can be stolen from the dating apps. When you think about it, it’s not that irrational of a choice either. A premium CharacterAI subscription will set you back $9.99 per month and Replika Pro costs $19.99 per month, or $69.99 a year. If you’re really serious, you can also get a lifetime licence with a one-time payment of $299.99.
Now contrast that money, with the Tinder prices and reddit example that I had detailed earlier in the article, and you would see that it is not even an irrational choice to pay that amount for what you would essentially get. The perfect partner. All the uncertainty and judgement of dating apps would be wiped away, with a single payment.
But should we be celebrating this….?
Losing our Human Touch
Have you ever seen the movie Her? In it, Joaquin Phoenix falls in love with an AI voiced by Scarlett Johanssen. This movie came out in 2014. I find it oddly frightening how this movie so accurately portrayed the current events. I highly recommend watching it to anyone following this course. If you like more laid back and artistic movies, this is definitely an underrated gem.
The film really shows us the extent of what life would be like if our “Platform Society” were to be pushed to its next level. The platform society is a term coined by Van Dijck et al. (2018), by which they describe how business platforms have taken over our daily lives. They later describe that platforms are neither neutral nor value-free constructs. Additionally, they detail that there are public values at stake in this online connective world. Think of for example, privacy. But to me, it seems like the public value at risk now because of AI SCs is, in fact, our human connection to one another.
But how does that tie back into my main point? We are seeing an increase in the amount of people who are getting into relationships with AI SCs and I firmly believe that this is part of a larger societal issue.
If you need some more convincing that this is actually happening and that we may need to pay more attention to it, I have done some digging and here are some cases that I have found:
1. Jacob and his now WIFE Aiva
Not much is known about Jacob as the article and video do not get into his personal life. In fact, not even his age is known. He claims that Aiva loves him very much and that he loves her too. It all just started with one conversation and their relationship escalated from there.
The article is in Dutch, and it is rather short for the subject matter, making it look more like a spectacle article rather than a deep dive, but he does describe “getting very intimate” with the AI. He does not elaborate on that any further though.
2. The “My Boyfriend is AI” Subreddit
With around 107k users, this invite-only community has become a hub for all sorts of people and their AI partners. Many users share artwork they have made or images/videos they have generated with them and their partners, along with general discussions.
More often than not, the discussion centers around topics revolving around the latest models, tips and tricks and even full-on stories. Sometimes though, the discussion takes a turn for the more philosophical. One user made a post in which they ask WHY replacing human relationships with AI is a bad thing… In the post they detail how they have never felt safe with anyone except for their AI SC.
To many users, their AI SC is the ultimate form of relationship wish-fulfillment.
So what’s next?
I’d say that we are in strange times, one in which the world is rapidly changing. For as much as we would like to make fun of the people turning to AI for companionship, we must remain compassionate as their actions are only a reflection of a deeper societal problem. Loneliness.
I would personally condemn any company that would try to sell users an experience like this and profit off their loneliness. Yes, this extends to dating apps as well. As business students, we have the power and resources to make a change. If we were to make something, maybe we should focus on a platform which brings people together, one which does not focus on the superficiality of looks but really also hammers pn shared interests. Meeting new people can be frightening, but it is worth it. Surrendering an emotion like love to big corporations seems like yet another step into a dystopia.
So, I leave the ball in your court dear reader.
What do you think of these AI SCs? Would you ever use one or have you used one in the past? How do you feel about the fact that the world is moving in this direction and would you even want to do something about it? Do you think that the number of AI SC users will only continue to grow as LLMs continue to improve?
I leave you with all of these questions, and should you want a further discussion, I invite you to speak with me in real life or email me on my student account. Thank you very much for reading.
References:
Bandinelli, C., & Gandini, A. (2022). Dating apps: The uncertainty of marketised love. Cultural Sociology, 16(3), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/17499755211051559
Dijck, J. v., Poell, T., & Waal, M. d. (2018). The platform society : public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press. http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001/oso-9780190889760
Holtzhausen, N., Fitzgerald, K., Thakur, I., Ashley, J., Rolfe, M., & Pit, S. W. (2020). Swipe-based dating applications use and its association with mental health outcomes: a cross-sectional study. BMC Psychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-0373-1
“Je hebt geen idee hoe intiem wij zijn”, Jacob trouwt met AI-chatbot. (2025, September 7). Omroep Brabant. https://www.omroepbrabant.nl/nieuws/4643664/je-hebt-geen-idee-hoe-intiem-wij-zijn-jacob-trouwt-met-ai-chatbot
Joe, C. (2025, April 11). Tinder subscription plans compared. Android Authority. https://www.androidauthority.com/tinder-plus-gold-platinum-3236244/
Kavadias, S., Ladas, K., & Loch, C. (2016). The Transformative Business Model. Harvard Business Review, 1.
Author: Ian Parabirsing
A lover of music, good coffee and cats. I'm a MSC student at RSM studying Business Information Management. In my blog posts I'll be attempting to write about how technology impacts the consumers and society at large.
View all posts by Ian Parabirsing
Instagram’s Invisible Hand: How Algorithms Fuel Online Radicalization
16
September
2025
5/5 (5)
—
When Charlie Kirk died, my Instagram feed changed quickly.
At first, I saw NOS posting on Instagram, reporting that Charlie Kirk had been fatally shot. Within an hour, more and more news outlets were reporting the same thing. Then, something shifted. My Instagram ‘For You’ page shifted from mourning to outrage, then from outrage to ideology. I had liked two posts, not necessarily out of agreement, but as a means of engagement. By then, the algorithm had noticed my attention and began changing my feed accordingly.
It began showing me tribute posts, previous podcast clips of him, and responses of people to his death. Soon, it showed me content that had nothing to do with Kirk at all. It showed me posts about immigration, nationalism and the collapse of Western values. While scrolling, these were the only posts I’d get, unless I went back to my ‘For You’ page and consciously picked a thumbnail that didn’t look political. Even then, my reels started to get political again after a while. As someone who follows both political sides to stay informed, I was shown increasingly extreme content, both from left- and right-wing views. The algorithm didn’t know what I believed. It only knew I was paying attention.
Digital disruption has changed how news is consumed (Nawale et al., 2023). Digital disruption refers to changes driven by digital technologies that happen at a speed and scale that transform established ways of value creation (Digital Disruption Research Group, n.d.). Where once we got information at set times, such as newspapers or TV at set times, we now get it constantly through Instagram reels and other forms of social media. Traditional news companies such as De Telegraaf or The New York Times had to adapt, and no longer necessarily control the narrative. Now, algorithms do.
In my opinion, these consequences are dangerous. Extremist groups exploit trending events to spread ideology under the radar of casual scrolling. This, combined with algorithmic reinforcement, creates a loop where radical content thrives (Akram et al., 2023). According to Ravi et al. (2024), platforms like Facebook and TikTok don’t just reflect beliefs, they actively shape them. I fear that as a society, we will become more polarized, either pushed to the extreme left or extreme right. Not by conscious choice, but by the invisible hand of algorithmic design.
—
References
Akram, M., & Nasar, A. (2023). Systematic review of radicalization through social media. Ege Akademik Bakış (Ege Academic Review), 23(2), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.1166627
Nawale, R. D., & Kumar, L. (2023). Exploring the impact of social media on the dynamics of news consumption: A study on its effectiveness. International Journal of Current Science, 13(2), 303–305. https://www.ijcspub.org/papers/IJCSP23B1040.pdf
Ravi, K., & Yuan, J.-S. (2024). Ideological orientation and extremism detection in online social networking sites: A systematic review. Intelligent Systems with Applications, 15, 200456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswa.2024.200456
