“Social media”: root of all evil of 2010s
Damn technology. It gets everywhere in our lives and it only seems to bring problems. Out of the latest blights that technology, the internet and social media have brought us, my favourite have been: information overload, fake news and making us live in a bubble.
Humans can’t handle so many screens and news and noise!!
Except… if you think about it, it’s not so much that we have more information, it’s that we are more aware of how much information there is… since we can actually access it, for once.
And YES, this comes with the unfortunate realisation that we are utterly incapable of processing it all. We can’t be blamed for naturally shutting down sources due to exhaustion, classifying them as unreliable, biased or just plain boring.
However, if we blame technology for providing us “too much information” what we’re actually doing is blaming reality for being so complex instead of trying to improve our capacity to handle it.
Some argue that our brains still have to evolve to this new reality, while others claim that too much choice is actually worse for us. While we’re swarmed with options and data… technology also gives us the tools to deal with it.
Why we’re post-fact? The internet, of course!
“Thanks to social media, fake news spread like wildfire.” — “Do your part, check your source before sharing.” — but of course, your conservative friend from high school just shared the latest lie correlating migrants and rape, disaster striking in front of you. Never before did this happen!
Actually, I remember quite well my office colleagues all agreeing at lunch time (perfect example of groupthink) that no one actually gets to enter North Korea without being invited as a journalist or some sort — while I, hesitating for my sanity, slowly remembered a few of my friends who’d actually been, pulling up a relevant Wikipedia article to prove my point. How many of these situations happened before Wikipedia (considered as reliable than renowned & expensive encyclopedias)? Before the internet? How much ignorance remained because there was no accessible way to fact-check — and so at the next social moment the lie repeats itself (“I’m not sure if it’s true, but I’ve heard plenty of people saying homosexuality is contagious…”)?
And for another example, consider the Eva Bartlett, who quickly passed from viral critic of western media to RT-sponsored spokesperson. Would this have been possible to ascertain so quickly without such a technologically enabled network?
Technology puts us in easily manipulable bubbles !
Some “experts” claim Trump won because of analytics and big data. Never mind that that can’t actually be proven and that Hillary had access to the exact same technology. However, it is true to say that technology has made it even easier to shut down people or topics we don’t like: our main platforms actually build a filter bubble based on your preferences. And this is definitely something worth looking into, debating if our social media overlords are trying to be as good/presidential as they preach — or instead are finding ways to “care” for their users in a mind numbing fashion.
But were we really better off before we all got connected? Is the “real world” free of filter bubbles?
I could personally give so many examples of how being connected to a wider world (note: not the wider world) enriched me and so many others into different cultures, different ideas, different communities — a learning experience miles further, but not dissimilar, to the experience libraries provided in their day.
But, more importantly, I question this argument based on observation: when, in the real world, do people really listen to those who are different from them?
Are we not, in general, always sticking to the same social circles? Is it not considered real privilege by most of us to not have to interact with certain layers of society?
Are we not naturally gravitating towards self reinforcing groups? Hell, if we didn’t, we’d be constantly be arguing or feeling alone. All kids who are different resonate with this — never mind kids, all ADULTS. Trying to fit is part of being human and it’s already damn hard to find a group where we belong and come out reinforced. Some of us never do and others only find this group online or in a way that physical presence is rare.
This effect is even further reinforced by the taboo to discuss politics or anything that causes conflicts within most groups, which has led to many situations where individuals were surprised to find their peers opinions even in very black and white scenarios (as these couples breaking up after the Trump vote). In fact, even if you can’t “mute” people in real life, our brains are astoundingly good at turning their voices into noise.
It is very enriching and admirable to make an effort to get out and meet different people, empathise with ways of living that by consequence, design or chance are so foreign to our existence, be it different social classes, different cultures of time as well as different ways to interpret concepts of family and relationships. But one can’t constantly be out of a bubble and be stable emotionally.
So, counter argument is: we’ve always been in a bubble. Technology exacerbates it.. or it can be an easier way out. In other words: technology gives you the ability to choose… if you know how to.
Now, seriously — Can we handle this without turning off our phones?
Humanity has always been learning how to filter and process information. The nostalgic approach to “turning off our phones” and “disconnecting”, while it might be good from time to time, is not a sustainable way to deal with an ever-evolving reality.
If you don’t watch news on TV or your social media anymore — you’re wholly reliant on the people you see on a daily basis to pass on whatever might be relevant. So you will only be able to discuss current events as far as your network is able to filter it for you. Not a big deal, perhaps. But if you don’t keep up with what’s going on in certain topics such as far away regions, economics or health trends, you’ll be taken by surprise when such shocks affect your daily life. You’ll be unaware of alternatives. In a representative democracy this puts you in a very weak position to defend your self interests. You’ll be more likely to vote wrong or to simply take a political stance that works against you in the bigger picture.
So staying fully informed is a great idea — but that’s only humanly possible by picking the right filters, likely a combination of personal contacts and curated information sources, validated by a variety of experts, people you respect and that you constantly re evaluate, taking into account a good balance of values, cultural and otherwise. This requires changing the way you think, of course.
The big take away here is the real and urgent need to learn collectively how to use these new tools and adapt to these new realities — keeping in mind that they’ll only be changing ever faster.
This ends up being about education — how it needs to change. How “digital skills” should mean more than “coding” and using “office” — instead learning practical skills such as how to search intelligently, how to fact check, how to manage hundreds of inputs — as well as soft skills such as how to maintain a healthy attitude to notifications and synchronise your online and offline life. And this requires a change in mentality, not just a change in content. We’ll need to keep learning through all our lives — what we learned in school should be our basis, not our “bible”. How we learn should depend less and less on authority figures holding the truth, but facilitators guiding us through what is known.
One can only wish such a future will come — bearing much less phobias to all change and all that is new. For now, I’ll make do with speaking out against technophobia and silly nostalgia.
