(Anti)Social Media

The status quo is ordered so that social media platforms are incentivized to promote socially destructive content for the sake of profit.

Globalization is about the increasing interconnectivity of people across geographies and, by extension, the increased transmission of goods, culture, and ideas. An integral driver of globalization’s social interconnectivity is digital technology, particularly social media.

Using social media, we can communicate with friends on different continents in real-time. We can follow events overseas with such play-by-play precision that it surpasses the capabilities of governments just 20 years ago. We can form virtual communities of people from diverse ethnic, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds. I can’t begin to count how many times I’ve had a friend on the opposite side of the planet keeping me sane as I pulled all-nighters.

But something has changed over the past decade.

The same social media outlets once used to promote political reform in the Middle East are now propaganda platforms for ISIS.

Are outlets for revenge porn.

Undermine the mental health of a generation.

Enable the spread of fake news and conspiracy theories.

And increase political polarization.

Furthermore, tech giants like Facebook openly admit that 64% of all extremist group joins are due to Facebook recommendations.

Just consider the aftermath of the frightening events of January 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol Building. While much has been said about Parler’s role in the attack upon the Capitol, much less has been said about the role of Facebook, Twitter, and other apps in fomenting the violence. In the runup to January 6, Facebook showed ads for military gear next to the posts of extremist groups.

How did the internet and social media become such a wretched hive of scum and villainy? Simple. One click at a time.

Social media companies are unique compared to most industries in that the services they provide are free. So how do social media companies make their money? Ads. Just as TV and radio makes money by selling ads, so too does social media. Except with social media, these ads are supercharged.

It all comes down to these things called cookies. To grossly oversimplify, cookies track what you do on a website - how much time you spend on it, what you click on, etc. Some cookies even track what you do on other sites. This creates a digital footprint of everything you do on the internet. Cookies are what give advertisers the information they need to tailor their ads to consumers.

What do cookies have to do with social media? Everything.

When you’re sharing that dank meme or those hot pics from your latest vacation, social media companies are gorging themselves on those cookies like they were the Cookie Monster. Companies are so good at using cookies to create tailored consumer profiles, they can even predict when a woman is pregnant. The reason social media is free is you’re the product. Social media companies know everything about you from your dating history, your food preferences, your favorite hobbies, and even your preferred route to work. Just ask Siri.

By the way, if you ever wonder why you waste so much time mindlessly scrolling and can’t seem to quit, that’s by design. Yes, that’s right. Social media is designed to be addicting. Since social media makes its money off ad revenue, then the best way for companies to make money is to maximize the time people spend on those sites. Maybe there’s something Silicon Valley knows that we don’t when they ban their kids from using the very platforms they design.

Although it is widely celebrated within the circles of professional-class elites that “the social responsibility of business is to increase profits", this view neglects the fact that corporate profits can sometimes be at odds with the greater good of society. Since social media is profiting from cookies, this means that user engagement is key. Doesn’t matter if that engagement comes from extremist propaganda, rape videos, or drug trafficking, it’s all about those cookies.

Given the terrible impacts of social media, why are companies allowed to build trillion-dollar empires that so shamelessly profit from humanity’s darkest urges? The answer is a little known law called Section 230. This law dates to the mid-1990s and outlines that content platforms are not responsible for what is posted by users. Works great when internet communications are a bunch of chat rooms and random forums, it’s a bit different when the internet is dominated by clicks and cookies.

The cycle works as follows: People want “clicks” - aka “likes” - because that’s a sign of approval. Popular posts get greater visibility according to social media algorithms. The more clicks a person gets, the more visibility they get, the more clicks they get, etc. There’s even a monetary incentive game the system. Some individuals have so mastered social media algorithms they can make over a million dollars for a sponsored post.

There’s a downside to the algorithms though. All that matters is popularity. Doesn’t matter if the post is accurate. Doesn’t matter if the post is moral. All that matters are those sweet, sweet clicks. And the more controversial and lurid a post, the more likely it is to go viral and generate clicks. But with Section 230, social media platforms bear none of the consequences of socially harmful posts.

Consider the following. Say a legacy media outlet publishes a malicious and clearly libelous statement, then that media outlet can be held liable for slander. But if that same statement is published on a social media platform by the same author and the malicious content goes viral, the social media platform has no legal culpability. This is the case even though the malicious content can obtain a greater reach on social media compared to legacy media outlets.

It's bad enough that social media is profiting off the worst impulses of humanity, but sadly the damage to society runs far deeper. 48% of Americans get their news from social media - it’s even greater in developing countries. This means that billions globally are basing their lives on information derived from platforms that actively profit from fake news. The negative impacts of social media are someone else’s problem. To make matters worse, ad revenue that once went to reputable news outlets is now going to tech giants. Consequently, news outlets are now desperately vying for cookie producing clicks with articles that spin a narrative rather than report the straight facts.

All of this data points to an uncomfortable truth: the status quo is ordered so that social media platforms are incentivized to promote socially destructive content for the sake of profit.

To counter the anti-social impacts of social media, drastic reform is needed. Section 230 must be amended so that social media platforms experience some sort of liability for promoting already illegal acts such as sex crimes, terrorist executions, and racially motivated violence. Opponents to altering Section 230 argue that such actions would utterly destroy the internet as we know it. But given the toxic cesspool of the internet these days, is that an entirely bad thing?

That’s not to say that proposed reforms to Section 230 should not be carefully weighed. There is certainly a possible danger of the government creating undue burdens to free speech. However, Section 230 already covers legacy media outlets. If Section 230 as it currently exists is obtrusive to free speech, then it ought to be amended accordingly. However, to hold legacy media outlets to established standards of editorial decency while exempting social media platforms is arbitrary and hypocritical. If anything, given the heightened reach of social media outlets, there’s an even greater need to curtail the most socially damaging aspects of such platforms.

Preventing the further creation of social division and discord by social media sites requires government bodies - particularly elected government representatives - openly and transparently debating possible reforms. The free market alone can’t fix the problem since government policy created a regulatory framework that incentives profit over all else. It was bad government policy with Section 230 that created this mess and it will take a reform to Section 230 to begin cleaning up the mess.

As 2021 lurches forward, a stark reality about social media is becoming obvious: the very technology that once promised to connect and unite humanity is now dividing it. Indeed, this is a trend repeated across systems. The institutions responsible for globalization are now causing it to unravel. Social media is just the canary in the coal mine.