Social Technology

At times my writing seems to be anti-technology. I can sound like an old curmudgeon. Just screaming into the void, ‘Back in my day we didn’t have do-hicky-McGadgets in our pockets that consumed our lives. Instead we went to work, played outside, and had bad backs by our forties.’ I’m not against technology, but I do not celebrate it with abandon either.

I understand that modern tech is an incredible tool that can enrich life and make it easier. I’m coming from a position of skepticism because the tech we are using and developing is vastly under-scrutinized. Seems our default attitude toward any and all new technology is that it is good.

We’ve become accustom to technology being a net benefit. Since the 1950s we’ve had a constant stream of consumer goods that have added time and leisure to our lives. A washing machine made life easier, and there was little chance that it was going to hijack our political sensibility. The idea that technological advancement could come with a negative element isn’t something we are familiar with.

This history of net positives from our consumer goods has lulled us into a sense that all technology is good technology. The new technologies of social, search, and streaming media put our ego directly at the center of their product. So not only are we accustomed to not being critical of new technology, but this technology can also gives our egos a nice little massage.

These new forms of media cater directly to our most base desires. They show us what we want to see and reaffirm our sense of self-importance. There is also an addictive element to these new forms of media. We start to crave the ‘likes’, ‘shares’, and ‘retweets’. In extreme cases self-worth is derived from how our carefully curated identity is perceived by our digital social network.

New tech even calls its consumers users. Almost directly pointing out that it has the addictive qualities of a drug. The creators and designers of this new tech are reluctant to allow their kids to use it. They are aware of its capacity to manipulate the thoughts and actions of its users.

The ability to manipulate the thoughts and actions of its users is actually the business model. Social and streaming media is being marketed as a place where the free flow of ideas is possible. It is presented as a space where you can stay connected with old friends, and also find new friends that share your interests. According to their ridiculous marketing you can join a world-wide group of yo-yo or kazoo enthusiasts – should that be your thing.

In reality the business of this new social, search, and streaming technology is to more precisely market to you. Gather information about your personality and habits so that they can sell that information to anyone willing to buy it. Some still see this as a net positive. It makes shopping easier because they are only being advertised the products that they would really want anyway. I can understand that perspective, but the issue is that it isn’t always a physical product being sold. We are often being sold an identity or ideology.

The core objective of this tech is not too keep you informed or connected. It is to keep your attention so it can be monetized. The major tech firms do this by presenting to you content that is most likely to keep you there. For some people this is innocuous cat videos, but when given the opportunity it selects for that which is extreme and outrageous.

These platforms present this extreme and outrageous content because they know our psychology better than we do. They’ve built models of us and analyzing those models is a better predictor of what we want than our own conscious mind. We apparently crave what excites or angers us. They know what will keep our attention, and they will use it with complete disregard for our well-being or safety.

The truly nefarious aspect of this in my perspective is that there really isn’t even anyone at the helm. It is all being done by algorithm. It almost adds an element of plausible deniability when we try to place blame on a single platform or its creator. The people that built some of these algorithms aren’t even entirely sure how they work. So in some cases we are truly at the mercy of technology no one understands.

The large tech companies also hide behind the cover of being a ‘Platform’ and not a ‘Publisher’. There are pretty clear and strict laws that dictate what a publisher can and can’t say or publish. The new social, search, and streaming companies identify as ‘Platforms’, which absolves them from being responsible for what is being presented on their sites.

I do not demonize the creators or purveyors of this new technology. If it wasn’t them specifically then it would be someone else. So the names and the individuals matter very little. This has been a useful shift in my perspective. It can be easy to blame the big names associated with this big tech for the problems of big tech.

Just like other businesses their incentives are based solely on profit. Facebook’s motto is ‘Move fast and break things’. At its inception that was clever and borderline cute. Now that we are about twenty years down the road we have a pretty clear idea of what it is breaking. But if it wasn’t for Facebook breaking those things then we wouldn’t have been fully aware of the fault-lines and weak spots of our society. If it wasn’t Zuckerberg it would have been someone else.

I often lament Jeff Bezos for being a modern day Lex Luthor. A wealthy business villain with nothing but greed and domination as his motivation. He gained his wealth by creating and managing an online store where you can buy anything and everything. That is pretty low-hanging fruit as far as ideas go, but he was the one to pull it off in America. If it wasn’t for him it would have been someone else. So why get angry at Jeff?

What the Bezoses and Zuckerbergs have done is play the game according to the rules that have been set before them. It is a game they are playing, and this game has very real consequences. They are using the general population as largely unknowing guinea pigs. Again, if it wasn’t them doing it then it would just have been someone else.

In a business environment mostly devoid of ethics it is up to the people and the government to set the parameters. If Jeff or Mark one day decided to start operating on anything other than what the market dictates then they’d get buried by the next company in line that doesn’t make such concessions.

The men and women at the helm of these companies are pulling at the social fabric and exposing weak stitches. It is our job to fix those popped seams. I am not sure how we do that, but the more people made aware of the nefarious side of modern tech the better.

Being aware of how these companies operate and how they collect, use, and monetize our lives is the most important thing we can do as individuals when it comes to big tech. This will allow us to recognize the good ideas coming down the pike on how to better use this tech – how to use this tech as a tool for good. I cannot predict as to where these ideas will come from or how they’ll be implemented or enforced. All I can do is have a healthy skepticism towards it, and do my best to convey that skepticism to others.

I greatly appreciate your attention and hope you found value in this.
Thanks for reading.