I found this to be an interesting story. The reporter has set up five fake “Americans” with varied interests and political leanings. They never post, but she has “them” respond to likes and suggestions to see what happens. I think it’s interesting with respect to how the social media companies quickly push what their algorithms determine you want to see and keep you engaged.
The ethical debate on this is interesting too. I can see both arguments. Some consider the use of fake info to get fake info to be unethical. The BBC, however, doesn’t see it as violating their policies. I tend to lean toward this being simply an unbiased experiment to learn something, so I’m pretty much OK with what she’s doing here. More people need to see how they’re just getting fed what they want to believe, and then read it all accordingly and make efforts to broaden their information base. (We know they won’t, but I can dream.)
Interesting read. I think she skates along the border of ethical and unethical. Mostly staying within the ethical due to the imaginary creation of the accounts in question. She does do a good job of raising questions. I was reminded, EVERYONE has an agenda. We can look at the “Yellow” journalism that seemingly pushed for the Spanish-American War, with the bold headlines talking about the USS Maine in Havana Harbor.
Although I suspect the better area to question is just how ethical the big companies are that spread information around. Notice I didn’t say good or bad information, or dis/mis-information. Information/data is just that until someone interprets it. So, who decides what is dis or mis information? You? Me? Someone at Google, or FB, or TikTok, or someone in the government (pick your level)?
Could be semantics, but information does have a definition. Some examples:
facts provided or learned about something or someone
what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things
knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instruction
intelligence, news
facts, data
So, one could argue that opinions, lies are not information but it is open because it could be conveyed by a sequence of words, hence your true point that there has to be some interpretation. But that is the battle of the day - what is fact (and how can it be proved) or what is ‘truth’ (not just someone’s ‘truth’, but real truth). Real meta thinking.
In any case, it’s a proof of algorithmic biasing that feeds echo chambers and divisiveness. Easy to put any claim out there and hide behind general anonymity. These ‘social media’ companies (which you could argue are anti-social and not media in some cases) claim they are just the platform and are not responsible for any content. Well, unless it gets really bad, then … but maybe not because people should say what they want … but hate speech …
Yes, my true point was and still is interpretation. Who gets to decide? Personally I’m in favor of having “too much” information and making decisions based on that, vs too little and making decisions that way. I realize that both can lead to poor decisions, and both can lead to good decisions.
Yet, I want the “end” user to make the decision. I don’t want some anonymous 3rd party deciding what I should or should not know.
It happens here at Utefans all the time. They won’t admit it, but I know that RockerUte and LAUte created their own algorithm that decides what I see, and when. Some examples:
I’m a child of the 60’s and 70’s, so I hardly ever see an posts with music from any other era.
It’s now my duty to inform you that the board’s Committee on Review of Appropriate Posting (CRAP) has now been assigned to all of your activities here: posting, comments, star awards, attendance at UF.net tailgates, activities while wearing UF.net gear in public, and conduct (including consumption of concession offerings) while in Utah Athletics venues, to name a few. Also, please do not be surprised if your posts are edited to assure correct thinking, and do not change any such revisions. Please govern yourself accordingly.
P.S. @salUTE: We’re going to assign the CRAP Grammar And Spelling Police (GASP) to all your posts until further notice. You may not believe you need this, and if so you are right. The purpose behind this assignment has nothing to do with your grammar and spelling. We just want you to know we’re watching.
You bring up an interesting point, idea, or thought on echo chambers. Perhaps I’m in the minority, but I despise echo chambers. Yes, my politics lean to the conservative, but I don’t like just getting news from conservative folks. I want to know what and why from the liberal/progressive side of things.
IMO echo chambers lead us to where everyone is the “other” to someone and therefore easy to demonize. Getting on my soapbox, get out and talk to those who hold different views than you. Odds are you’ll find we all have more in common than not. I’m off my soapbox. Thank you for your time.
I’m glad to hear that. I’m also willing to bet that you have seen that we all have far more in common than not. I think discussions amongst the “people” is a good thing. Now if we could just get politicians, both major parties, to actually listen, and have real discussions. The vitriol has to stop somewhere.
